The state of modern information. Top post: based on feelings, completely uninformative.

Second, almost half as upvoted: actual answer to question (Which was "Why don't Presidential debates disable the candidates' microphones while it's not their turn to speak?").

No wonder people don't have a clue what they're going to spew when they open their mouth.

Post:

https://politics.stackexchange.com/...

Lol too many retards think with feelings.

To quote Aron flam "your feelings are hurting my thoughts" as opposed to the fairly common notion of "your thoughts are hurting my feelings"(to give some form of context)

All i know is, is that's 90 minutes of brain dead debate I'll never get back.

I didn't watch it.

Expectation: Two children sitting in a sandbox throwing poo at each other...

Reality (based on comments): Pretty much that.

Stack overflow always the second third or later answers are better.

Usually more explanation, context and more options available.

Had the same conversation with my husband. My answer to his posit was, "definitely a good idea to give a bunch of people riding an oppression complex anything resembling validation. Nothing could go wrong with that."

If OP doesn't mark answer as accepted, such algorithms are necessary, also, the score is upvotes-downvotes, if two answers have same score 50 but first is 60 upvotes - 10 downvotes and second is 80 upvotes - 30 downvotes, first is better, it's justified because downvoting answer takes 2 points from downvoter, so, if someone has decided to downvote at the cost if his points, there must be something wrong, so, downvotes tell more about quality than upvotes.

@Frederick but either candidate can interrupt an argument even if their counter argument is worse. That's why you need the interviewer to control who is speaking, and ask for the counter argument afterwards.