Debaters that have been online two or more years ago should be deleted.

Reasons for voting decision: Con attacked based on semantics, when based on the OP, the intent of the debate was clear. As such, that costs conduct, and since he never made any argument, nor refuted the argument made by Pro, he loses the arguments. I would actually vote 4 - 0 in favor of Pro, however, due to WriterSelbe votebombing (7 points) to tip the debate in how he see fit (there is no reason for anyone to get the source points), I will cast a 7 counter. Should his vote be made with integrity, I will change mine.

Reasons for voting decision: I am a bit confused why Pro even has points. True, neither side actually argued but Pro had the burden of proof to justify his resolution, which he misinterpreted by stating that debaters who have NOT been online. Honest mistake or not, Pro failed to demonstrate a single shred close to the resolution and fulfill his BOP, though I award him a point of conduct since Con decided to exploit Pro's little mistake in his one and only argument.

Reasons for voting decision: Whoever voted for Pro is an imbecile. It doesn't matter if it was an 'honest mistake.' Once the resolution is stated, the resolution cannot be changed, so obviously the winner is Con because Pro conceded to Con in the first argument.

Reasons for voting decision: lol I agree with con, but pro made more sense, also he made a good point, if people aren't on for 2 years then chances are they won't come back. So I believe pro overall did better. If you dislike my RFD message me.

Reasons for voting decision: Con's argument was clearly taking advantage of an innocent mistake, as weirdman pointed out, and neither debater truly deserves a win, as 000ike pointed out.

Reasons for voting decision: Win to Con for an essentially semantic argument(my favorite kind). Pro's argument rested solely on members who had not been online in the last two years even though the resolution frames the debate as regarding members who have been online in the last two years, most of us.

Reasons for voting decision: Conduct because PRO failed to type the resolution correctly and made this a 1 round debate...

Reasons for voting decision: Counter to weirdman's vote. I don't think either member deserves the win. Pro made no case in favor of his position, nor did Con. On top of that, pro made a 1 round debate and mistyped the resolution. If anyone should even have a shot at winning its Con. But again, this should be a tied debate.

Reasons for voting decision: I vote pro because of the resolution. Con read Pro's argument first and notice the changes, If he did not like these changes, then he shouldn't have accepted. the fact that he accepted means that he agreed to Pro's change of rules and should debate accordingly.