The Instigator
mimibrightzola
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
MentallyDefunctNoob
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should People Take Responsibility for what they do online? AKA no anonymity

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 1 vote the winner is...
mimibrightzola
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/4/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 744 times Debate No: 51663
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

mimibrightzola

Pro

It is well known that many social media online have a anonymous or semi-anonymous function which lead to many people saying the most cruel things that they would probably never say in real life. Many people have been hurt by these so called "internet trolls" and some have even committed suicide due to the harsh comments online. For example, if you are on Omegle just trying to meet new people, all of a sudden someone starts harassing you about your life and looks. Then that person tells you to "go kill yourself". Some of these words are hurtful and I can't believe someone hasn't tried to do something about it yet. My point is that I believe that we should know the actual identity of the people we're talking to and that they have consequences for what they comment. Not exactly like being legally penalized for what they say, just having their identity online just as if they were talking to someone offline.
MentallyDefunctNoob

Con

How will people like Prince Charles be able to troll the interwebz?

I mean what if Putin gets bored and wants to post a porn vid of him wanking his 2 inch cock for the humiliation comments that he gets off to without eveyrone knowing it's him?
Debate Round No. 1
mimibrightzola

Pro

I do get that some famous people may want to talk to people on a normal scale without being made a big deal of. Although I don't agree with your examples because the point of this was to stop trolls and such people from hurting others. Perhaps people can still retain semi-anonymity although they still should take responsibility for what they do. Let's say Prince Charles "trolls" of harasses another person on the Internet (not implying anything about Prince Charles), he should take responsibility for what he has done even though it may affect his reputation. The whole point of this is to not allow people to say such harmful things if they wouldn't say it in real life.
MentallyDefunctNoob

Con

But if we don't allow people to insult others then this happens --------------------------------->



Debate Round No. 2
mimibrightzola

Pro

Well of course enforcing my idea will take a lot of work and legal pains-in-the-necks, yet is it not worth it to make the online-community a more pleasant environment? I agree, many people will abuse their rights to report others, but that can be fixed too, on clarifying the qualifications for those privileges, and the actions that will get those privileges revoked.
MentallyDefunctNoob

Con

You're so cute.

;
Debate Round No. 3
mimibrightzola

Pro

Thanks, I try.

Anyways I do understand that the idea I am imposing is almost near impossible at this moment, but every idea has to start somewhere right. And I believe something should be done about Internet trolls.
MentallyDefunctNoob

Con

MentallyDefunctNoob forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
mimibrightzola

Pro

mimibrightzola forfeited this round.
MentallyDefunctNoob

Con

MentallyDefunctNoob forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
mimibrightzolaMentallyDefunctNoobTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con doesn't really make any arguments