We describe a pilot study in using argumentation frameworks obtained from an online debate to evaluate positions expressed in the debate. This pilot study aims at exploring the richness of Computational Argumentation methods and techniques for evaluating arguments to reason with the output of Argument Mining. It uses a hand-generated graphical representation of the debate as an intermediate representation from which argumentation frameworks can be extracted, but richer than any existing argumentation framework. The intermediate representation can provide insights for benchmark sets derived from online debates.