The Instigator
1dustpelt
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
vmpire321
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

Debate.org should not have to confirm people's identity with phone.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
vmpire321
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/29/2012 Category: Technology
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,613 times Debate No: 20746
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

1dustpelt

Pro

Debate.org requires people to use a mobile phone to confirm their identity.
1. Debate.org already confirms using email.
2. Some people do not have a mobile phone, so therefore you are limiting the right to vote to only those who have mobile phones? I am not allowed to vote because I do not have a mobile phone. How fair is that?
vmpire321

Con

Well hopefully this will be a fun debate.

I shall first address my opponent's two points.

1. Email confirms almost nothing. It doesn't take much time for a person to create a false or fake email, and make multiple accounts.
2. Most people do have a phone, and cellular devices currently serve as the best mechanism for confirming one's identity. If anything, if you do not have a phone, you can ask to borrow a relative or friend's phone. Essentially, you only need it for, at most, 5 minutes.

Now I shall precede to my own arguments.

Why is confirming a person's identity important?

The method of using a phone to confirm people's identity helps to prevent DDO users from having multiple accounts.

Multiple accounts can be very problematic, especially on a debate website like this.

Users with multiple confirmed accounts can vote for themselves on debates, and inflate their win/loss record.

Users with multiple accounts can vote for their friends on other debates, and making their vote count as the votes of say 10.

Users with multiple accounts can debate themselves and purposely make one account win, inflating their win/loss record.

etc....

There are many obvious disadvantages to abolishing the phone confirmation system.
Debate Round No. 1
1dustpelt

Pro

Hello, thank you for accepting the debate; this is my first debate so I will try my best.
First, my opponent has a point that a mobile phone can confirm that someone does not make multiple accounts to vote. But, there should also be another way to confirm this, like completing five debates. Surely if someone completes five debates; it is not a fake account.
vmpire321

Con

Apparently, my opponents only argument is to suggest that you should complete 5 debates.

However, this doesn't suggest anything. Creating 5 1-round debates won't take that much time, but rather only slow down the multi-accounter by a little bit.

I would also like to suggest another fact. DDO makes it so that if you do not have a phone, you can complete 3 debates and PM an admin. I believe this is how some users have gained voting privileges, (at least I think).
Debate Round No. 2
1dustpelt

Pro

Really? You can PM an administrator if you completed three debates? How do you PM an administrator?
vmpire321

Con

Well. First thing is first, post in the forums.

Innomen is the President here. Just be active, and he will be likely to confirm you...

*But I'm not sure if this has actually happened. My memory is telling me 'yes', but it could be playing tricks on me.... So post in the forums, in the "Debate.org" section.

And I suppose you conceded to my arguments? Vote CON :D
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by RealCS 2 years ago
RealCS
The problem is that no one wants to vote for you, you have 0 votes dammit, and your debate wasn't even a debate, it was a laughable question.
Posted by 1dustpelt 5 years ago
1dustpelt
I know. People like me can't even vote for me because they have no phone.
Posted by GodSands 5 years ago
GodSands
I cannot vote because I live in the UK, and because I live in the UK my phone number does not fit the required digits needed. This is very unfair and should be changed.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
1dustpeltvmpire321Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con actually had a case.
Vote Placed by Zealous1 5 years ago
Zealous1
1dustpeltvmpire321Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: I agreed with Con from the beginning, but that is not the reason for my vote. Not only did Pro pretty much conceded in the last round, but he also changed his position during the debate round. He started off simply stating that no confirmation is fine, then he said that we can use a 5 debate system. You can't change your position mid-round.
Vote Placed by airmax1227 5 years ago
airmax1227
1dustpeltvmpire321Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con makes a reasonable argument in favor of using the current phone system of DDO and cites the alternative. Pro makes no counter arguments.