Resolved: The user known as Kleptin will not accept this debate on balance.
First round is acceptance
Wylted forfeited this round.
Kentucky Fried Forfeit! I'll be taking that conduct point now! Oh yeah and I'm going to kick this debate off with three arguments. Should you buy even one of these arguments, you are obligated to vote CON.
Contention #1: Light Punch!
I am Kleptin! As my many enemies have long suspected, Kleptin and I are the same person. Here's me arrogantly confessing it in the comment section, believing I'd never get caught! The reason I don't access my Kleptin account is because I forgot all of the account information. To retrieve it would take too long.
Contention #2: Medium Punch!
As a member of the Kleptin group known as "The cleaners" (evidence which I shall present if doubted), even if I weren't Kleptin (and I most certainly am!), I am Kleptin's agent and can thus speak and act on his behalf. I accepted this debate, therefore Kleptin accepted this debate.
Should my agency powers be doubted for some reason, I can eventually regain access to my Kleptin account and have him publicly ratify my decision to accept on his behalf. Even if you don't believe I'm Kleptin, since we're pals, he'll do it anyway the next time he's around. The instigator has no way of proving that it's more likely than not that Kleptin won't ratify my acceptance on his behalf, thereby accepting this debate at a later date.
Contention #3: Heavy Punch
It's possible that you the voter are Kleptin, Wylted, and every other user on DDO. I say this because it is very well possible that you are a brain in empty jar and that this all one big imagination cirlce jerk. If that's the case, Wylted and I are figments of your subconscious imagination. Essentially, even if you for some reason you don't believe I'm Kleptin, we're all part of you. Because of that,you are Logical-Master and Kleptin, making Logical Master and Kleptin the same person (YOU!). Logical Master accepted this debate, therefore YOU accepted this debate, therefore Kleptin accepted this debate!
Unfortunately, this other figment of your subconscious imagination has no way of proving that it's more likely than not that you aren't a brain in an empty jar as reality is premised upon assumptions. Feeble human senses are too restricted and too easy to manipulate, therefore there's very little we can confirm as being more likely than not at this time. What we can say is that it's merely POSSIBLE the user known as Kleptin will not accept the debate, completely negating the full resolution.
And that's all for now!
I'm actually relieved that my opponents arguments suck, which gives me a better chance of winning. I was afraid he'd use the many worlds theory to beat me or something. I mean I suck at science that would've probably worked.
No time for copy and pasting, but I will refer back to a couple of things I caught while half reading my sexy opponent's arguments. I'd say that regardless of whether my opponent is actually Kleptin or not, that is another point entirely from whether Kleptin was likely to accept the debate or not.
Let's look at it this way, neither him or Kleptin have been on the site in over a year, and though there was a chance of either returning at any point, there was a low chance of them actually returning for the specific ten day period that debates remain in the challenge period. What's the chances of one returning on the exact 10 g'day period this challenge (aka reverse noob snipe) was posted. By the way, I'd like to point out as master of the reverse noob snipe that my opponent is a dick for accepting this debate, seeing as how it was meant to expire or be a reverse noob snipe. Anyway, moving on.
My opponent has contradicted himself by stating that he is Kleptin and that he is best friends with Kleptin or some other such thing. He isn't Kleptin, but more on that in a minute. His contradiction means he's full of crap and all his contentiona should be dropped as a result.
We know that logical master isn't Kleptin for two reasons. One is that Kleptin is a good debater, and we'll take a look at my opponents arguments thus far. The other reason we know this is because it is against the terms of service to multi account and therefore it is impossible to do so. Logical master can't be Kleptin, because both accounts are open, and I'd appreciate if he is Kleptin, if he'd close the Kleptin account so that I may move up one spot on the leaderboard. Thanks.
With that was hard, 7 minutes left. Must reread some crappy arguments to see what else I can pick apart. Oh yeah, I think he argued for solipsism or some crap. Well solipsism even if true doesn't mean we're figments of your imagination and that you're also Kleptin. We could also be a brain in a vat and have signals fed to us, which makes more sense. It doesn't appear as if we can control incoming stimuli, so it's more likely that we are being fed signals than giving those electrical stimuli that control sight sound and whatever to ourselves.
Also ignore my forfeited round and give conduct to me if you give logical master the argument point, by giving him the argument point you acknowledge that he is breaking rules of multi accounting and thus I win.
So I’m sitting here eating a burger, onions, lettuce, ketchup, mayo, Caribbean jerk seasoning the works. And I’m half-heartedly listening to so-called Republican strategist Karl Rove flap his gums about Jed Bush again and am wondering if this guy is ever going to shut up. No lie . . . even when I hit the mute button, it’s like I can still hear him droning on. Weird stuff there. So anyway, I tune out after 30 seconds to check up on this super special awesome debate I accepted. You know, to see if my opponent is going to entertain us with super special awesome arguments.
Imagine my surprise when I see him whining about me accepting his seemingly impossible to win debate in the first place. At first, I’m thinking . . . wow, is this guy for real? Like . . . bro, you saw me displaying interest in the comment section. It’s like we’re at a party, there’s one eggroll left on the eggroll platter, the host asks if anyone wants the last eggroll, PRO doesn’t say anything, I take the eggroll and then he blows up at me . . . passive aggressively of course! Like what the fudge?!? Can I say fudge here? Fudge. Fudge. Fudge. Fudgy. Fudge. Fudgity. Fudging. Fudge. Yeah, looks like I can.
Then it hits me. Like, how did I not see it immediately? PRO has been drinking. And not a sip or cup or anything. No. Binge fudging drinking. I mean that’s the only explanation here. Now don’t get me wrong. I love the sauce as much as the next guy and would like to think there’s a debate equivalent to drunken fists, but debating under the influence can lead to some serious repercussions if not done responsibly and with consenting adults. Oh yeah, and something about choice. Anywho, I’m a nice guy, so please don’t weigh the above round against PRO in your decision. He’s not in the right state of mind. No culpable mens rea!
PRO tells us that “regardless of whether my opponent is actually Kleptin or not, that is another point entirely from whether Kleptin was likely to accept the debate or not.” False. Look no further than the comment section. Prior to accepting the debate, I made my presence readily known and implied that I’d accept the debate. Even going by PRO’s alcohol laced reasoning, at that instant the probability of me, Kleptin, accepting the debate skyrocketed. Rather than cancel the debate, PRO allowed it to stay in place, insuring his defeat!
He further says that I can’t be Kleptin since I’m not a good debater and because I’d be banned if I were Kleptin. On that the first claim, I don’t think I’ll be able to prove I’m a good debater until I get some—well---good arguments to refute. Ball is in PRO’s court on that one!
However, PRO is clearly mistaken on the second claim. Simply by responding on two separate computers on two different internetz, one can easily get around admin detection. And I’ve decided to reveal myself because I feel guilty about my 7 year ruse and have decided confess my DDO sins. Should the admin remove me now, I accept full punishment for my crimes. Nevertheless, you are still to vote CON regardless. My crimes have nothing to do with determining the outcome of this debate.
PRO tells us that “My opponent has contradicted himself by stating that he is Kleptin and that he is best friends with Kleptin or some other such thing. He isn't Kleptin, but more on that in a minute. His contradiction means he's full of crap and all his contentiona should be dropped as a result.” When PRO sobers up, he can read my words in which I say “As a member of the Kleptin group known as "The cleaners" (evidence which I shall present if doubted), even if I weren't Kleptin.” I anticipated any and all notions that I wasn’t Kleptin and responded hypothetically. A good debater covers his bases! ;)
PRO tells us that solipsism is crap because “we could also be a brain in a vat and have signals fed to us, which makes more sense.” and “ It doesn't appear as if we can control incoming stimuli.” However, this response is unpersuasive simply because any notions of us being unable to control incoming stimuli are entirely result of conclusions drawn with the five human senses, each of which are readily easy to mislead. Fudge, we may as well say that because we know brains can’t survive in jars, solipsism is refuted. Just no. So as it stands, from this vantage point, it’s possible that Kleptin won’t accept this debate, not likely.
Minutia: Sucker Punch
PRO demands that you give him conduct because I’ve confessed my greatest sin. I agree that I’m in need of some punishment, but me being Kleptin has no bearing on the conduct I’ve shown in this debate. Clearly, a more effective and relevant means of punishment is in order. What you need to do is get theLwerd/Danielle, give her skin tight black leather and a paddle, send me to a dungeon (henceforth called the DDoungeon), chain me up and have her personally issue out my punishment for my DDO insolence. That is the only way to teach me a lesson and I demand I be punished this instant. I've been a really bad boy after all!
Oh and this reply took me 9 minutes and 33 . . . no 35 seconds. Back to you, PRO!
Now the voting mods on this site have made it clear that troll debates won't have their votes modded, so anybody who gives me a 7 point vote bomb does not have to worry about their vote being removed or being chastised for it.
I make this offer to voters; If I win this debate, I'll put all the people who voted for me's name in a hat and draw out a name, whoever' name I draw out, will receive $20 from me, no change that to $10, everyone who loses the drawing will get a special gift mailed to them absolutely free, and it will only cost them $20 shipping and handling within the continental USA, outside of the USA, different rates may apply.
Members of DDO, this has been a very compelling debate. I feel my opponent and I have thoroughly fleshed discussion on all angles on this grand monumental issue before us. Now I understand he made an offer that you might not be able to refuse. $10 to $20 for voting PRO is a very tempting offer. Just the other day, I went to see Mission Impossible 5 and bought a medium popcorn. With $10 to $20, you can almost afford half a medium bucket of popcorn at the movie theater.
His offer is so sweet that I'm almost tempted to give into it myself However, the contract PRO is proposing is virtually unenforceable. If he doesn't hold his end of the bargain, you're basically taking him to court over $10 to $20 dollars. Not only will you lose more than $20 of time and money in simply taking him to court, but the judge will probably laugh at you and make you pay $200 in court costs.
Nothing much else to say!
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|