This debate will not be interesting.

Three important issues were brought up in the last round: 1) My opponent says he is not interested in this debate, but rather the outcome. 2) He says I should easily get your vote. 3) He says that his concession in the previous round was a typo and that this debate clearly did not have a hold over his attention. I will respond to these issues accordingly and then tell you why your vote must unanimously go to CON. 1) Interest in the outcome: Let us refer back to a question which the instigator proposed in round 3: "Also, is it not the goal of all debaters to win by any means necessary?" This was in response to me establishing that PRO intended to argue regardless of the evidence I provided. If he weren't interested in winning, he would have responded accordingly. The fact of the matter is that my opponent had only declared a lack of interest in winning on round 5 (and incidentally, this was brought up directly after I pointed out that "wanting to win" would factor into being interested in this debate. Plus, in the previous rounds, he had set up burdens and arguments that were created to work against my position. 2) I should easily get your vote. Although I do believe that your vote should go to CON, I must contest PRO claiming this. This is merely a further attempt to persuade you into believing that PRO isn't interested in this debate, but rather merely the outcome. If PRO believes I should easily get your vote, why would he attempt to negate one of the claims I made in the last round? Why not just drop this point (like the others)? PRO is still putting up a fight, thus there's no real reason to believe his claim. 3)No hold over attention. PRO had ample opportunity to refute my arguments in favor of this claim. The fact that he repeats his claim without providing arguments for it or refuting the arguments I provided against it gives you no reason to vote in favor of his claim. WHY TO VOTE CON: -As PRO even states, he dropped most of my arguments. Although this was strategically done to get you to believe the he isn't interested in these arguments, you cannot ignore the fact he did drop my arguments. -Specifically, my claims concerning Youtube and all-caps-text went uncontested. The logic behind these claims was that those pages had received thousands/millions of comments/views; my rounds contained information which millions of people were interested in, hence this debate contained information which millions of people were interested in. Even if you disagree with this logic, PRO didn't respond to it when he had the opportunity to respond, thus concedes it over to my side. -I've proven multiple times that PRO was interested in this debate. Not only that, but I've even countered the logic of him being interested in the outcome. -PRO failed to uphold his side of the resolution; he never managed to explain how this debate was uninteresting. He said he'll do it after the debate. Well unfortunately for him, you cannot consider any information presented AFTER the debate is over. Even on the unlikely (and I do mean UNLIKELY) chance he manages to prove that this debate was somehow uninteresting PERIOD, he failed to do this during the debate (he never utilized the 5 rounds he had used to do this), so he loses by default. -A user passed the "test" which PRO had set up during the round. According to the conditions he created in round 3, merely someone passing his test would make me the winner by default. There are other specific reasons to vote CON which are located in the round, but I feel that these were the most important. I thank my FalseReality for debating and I thank audience for "reading." Till next time.