New debate.org website (version 3) will probably not be online till June 2008!

Greetings. First, I'd like to thank my opponent for initiating the debate. Second, although I expect people to vote on this as if it were a poll, I'd ask that you vote on who provided the better arguments rather than what you personally believe. With that said, let us proceed carefully onto the highway that is my opponent's case. First, I will be maintaining the position that the new version of the website is possible rather than probable. Upon looking at this topic, one thing stands out. The PRO insist that new version of debate.org will PROBABLY not be online till June 2008. My opponent's evidence for this claim is none other than the posted claim found here: http://www.debate.org... Since my opponent insists that this claim is probable, he is no doubt using probable evidence. According to the 2007 version of Black's Law Dictionary, probable evidence is defined as: "Evidence deemed sufficient to establish another fact unless discredited by other evidence." In other words, all I have to do is discredit the claim provided by debate.org with other evidence in order to win this debate. I will do just that. #1: As stated by the Webmaster, Debate.org was originally going to be released late February or early March (within a few months of the version two update). As you all can tell, the Webmaster was unable to keep his word due to far more important issues which came up as well as a all of the ideas which the debate.org staff is attempting to introduce. This tells us that just because the Webmaster insist something concerning the website, it doesn't make it likely to happen. Like us, the webmaster is human. #2. The reason the website update got pushed back was due to two important factors. A: The webmaster ( Crystal and Philip Ferreira) is expecting to become a parent and is utilizing his/her time to prepare for that. As one may or may not know, parenthood takes plenty of time and running this website will only become more difficult with that time being upheld before it. What the webmaster has stated is merely an estimate of when version 3 will be operational, and given that his/her child will be his/her FIRST son, one could suggest that the webmaster doesn't quite have enough experience to make an accurate deduction concerning the amount of time that will be used in preparing for the new website. B: The webmaster insinuated that all of the new suggestions was part of the reason the staff had to hold off on the new website. Given that the webmaster encourages us to continue sending these suggestions, who is to say that new demands from the debate.org community don't further prolong the amount of time the new update will require? #3. The debate.org staff wishes to uphold the wishes of the community. One of their concerns is getting the updates at the users' convenience. As they realize, many will see this setback as an inconvenience. Thus, the debate.org staff could consider hiring extra staff members to help in the updates. This would insure that the new version of the website was released much sooner than anticipated. #4. My opponent is not a member of the debate.org staff (nor does he have any kind of formal affiliation with them) and therefore does not have the credibility required to make this claim. Like us, all he can do is base his conclusions off of the "word" of individuals whom he knows next to nothing about. These four factors not only discredit my opponent's only piece of evidence, but lead us to the conclusion that version 3 will POSSIBLY (rather than PROBABLY) be online by June 2008. It is the PRO's burden of proof to prove the admin's claim to be probable. Of course, there is also the fact that just because users can't access the new version of the debate.org, it doesn't mean that it isn't online (after all, the staff would need to often test its online performance before releasing it to members). At any rate, PRO cannot win this debate. Vote CON! Your move!