← All dilemmas
📱society
Should courts force social platforms to redesign algorithms if teen mental-health harms are proven?
Vote to reveal how SplitVote voters split.
YOUR CHOICE
OR
Anonymous voting. No account required. Results update in real time.
Why this dilemma matters
Public-good questions surface the trade-offs that aggregate numbers usually hide. Choosing “Yes. Proven harm should change the product itself” prioritises broader fairness; choosing “No. Courts should not design speech platforms” gives more weight to concrete impact on individuals.
Worth asking yourself
- What does this say about what we collectively value?
- Whose interests should count more here, and why?
More Society Dilemmas
- A 90% one-time wealth tax on billionaires could end world hunger for 10 years. Billionaires would still be comfortably rich.
- Completely open borders between all countries — anyone can live and work anywhere without restrictions.
- Every adult receives €1,500/month from the government. Taxes for the top 20% double. Do you support it?
- All drugs are legalized, taxed, and regulated — removing the black market entirely. Portugal's model shows crime drops 50%. Do you support it?