Personally, I think we should have the unfettered right to respond to the askers and the answerers . . . . and by name too . Restricting that freedom, leaves many good debatable issues 'dead in the water' , at least if you actually follow Guidelines . I've seen this suggestion on other sections of Y/A too . Logical rational people explaining that some sections require only one or two true answers, and others like this one, can have a myriad of answers. . . . mainly because of opinion and also because new ideas are worth exploring .
What would you change ?
2007-04-30 03:35:36 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Heidi - I'm referring to using their 'screen names'.
2007-04-30 03:46:06 · update #1
Ms CitrusFruit - What they 'intended' and what is 'reality' are 2 very different things . Improvement requires change. . . isn't that what Liberals always try to tell us !!
2007-04-30 03:48:03 · update #2
I like your concept but there would have to be some way to eliminate the trolls and spewers of hate. The whole discussion thing on the news section collapsed because of trolls and paid posters that had multiple accounts and just plugged the boards with their propaganda.
That is becoming a problem here in politics. It is getting hard to find good questions and on some questions 90% of the answers are just spewing their hate.
The one thing I would change if it is possible is to shut out the hate spewers.
2007-04-30 06:56:05 · answer #1 · answered by rmagedon 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree with a previous user, that even though these questions end up being in debate form, anybody that is exchanging ideas/philosophies is a good thing.
The thing I would definitely change though, are the people asking really important questions such as legal/financial/health advice. I think like other sites, you should register your background to be able to answer these questions. And if your expertise isn't there and you are just an informed consumer and it has happened to you, it should be labeled as such. There are too many people giving wrong advice in those areas and their answers are just plain wrong. In the area of politics, there are so many differing opinions and fact to back up thoughts that is a different thing. But there are real people out there looking for answers to their problems getting BAD advice. There has to be a way to police that. I know for a fact other sites make you list your credentials in a particular area so it is in plain view for the asker to see.
2007-04-30 08:15:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have to echo others who said that this site is not really designed as a debate site. The "question and answer" format, with multiple PS and editing capabilities, seems more designed for factual inquiries.
The old "discuss" option attached to Yahoo news stories allowed people to set up topic "questions" or rhetorical points, which could be responded to by ALL, including the first poster, as crearly marked response posts in the thread. You could see who was responding to whom, and more importantly to what post they were responding.
But they got rid of it last December, probably because the sites were never well policed and contained little other than insults, vulgarity, etc.
This board works fairly well - any site that allows interaction works - so I have made do. :)
2007-04-30 03:58:48 · answer #3 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I don't think people should be forced to give there info out if they don't want it.
although some allow ims and e-mail maybe answers could have its own private ims (to protect the users from spam and harrassment).
I'd say something closer to a forum could work- but I think it would prove to be too chaotic.
thats just my opinion. I know people who can deal with 200+ disscusion board posts a day with ease.
I don't like chatting with more than 3 people at a time.
2007-04-30 05:22:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
an actual debate forum. With typical rules of debate.
People can debate or challenge others to a debate.
One on one online. But...each side should have to argue both
Pros and Cons of a subject. Might as well open some minds while we're at it.
2007-04-30 04:17:28 · answer #5 · answered by Chrissy 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Dude... If yahoo intended this to be a Q/A forum, they should never have put in a politics section. I see about 2 valid questions on here a day.
It would be nice to be able to use this site without being reported for debating with people. But what do I know, I prefer surfing dude.
2007-04-30 04:50:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Another way of prolonging a debate on an issue is by emailing the person directly. As for the guidelines, I think Cheney is behind the restrictions portion.
2007-04-30 19:45:37 · answer #7 · answered by gone 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
This is not a chat room or a place for debate ..it's primary purpose is "questions" and "answers".
There are plenty of places on the internet for those who want to debate....this just isn't one of them.
The only change I would like to see - is impossible. I wish there was someway to keep the trash-mouthed, empty headed teeners and adolescents off....or provide a new category in Yahoo/A for them. It can't happen of course, the internet is anonymous.
Some of them are so ignorant....
2007-04-30 04:00:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bring back the discuss option. This way you can actually get a discussion. This is a bunch of editorials that you cannot actually ask a question to the poster once them question is asked. In my estimation this is worse then the discuss option.
2007-04-30 03:42:35 · answer #9 · answered by ken 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I like the idea of being able to reply to each poster, not just the person who poster the question. There should be a reply button beside each response.
Be Blessed in Christ Jesus !
Minister..........( Outraged )
2007-05-01 03:47:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋