Abstract
We propose a ranking-based semantics to sort the arguments in an Abstract Argumentation Framework, according to their level of acceptability. This approach is based on a two- criteria method and is a direct extension of the classical three-level justification status of arguments into more layers. Then, we compare such a semantics with the literature, by showing which of the classical properties of ranking-based semantics hold. This leads us to rediscuss some of the existing properties: Self Contradiction and Non-attacked Equivalence.