beem0r is a dreamer

Numerical response mode, activate! ==== Response to point #1 ==== My opponent suggests that Klep/Me/Yraelz/LM/SG hacked into the debate. org server to get his email address, to send him emails. Yes, this is a possiblity as far as you, the audience is concerned. However, my opponent has failed to give you proper reason to believe that we in fact did ever send him harrassing emails. Why would we do such a thing? My opponent gives you a possiblity that requires something very implausible - that we hacked the debate. org database. Like most of his points, he fails to give us positive reason to believe his claims, as he simply suggests possibilities. ==== Response to point #2 ==== I'm not a troll usually, I simply admit that I trolled myself. Either way, this has no bearing on whether or not I have all 5 of the accounts my opponent claims I do. ==== Response to point #3 ==== My opponent fails to make a point with this point. At least any point I can even remotely detect. ==== Response to point #4 ==== As I said, I don't even know if it was jokingly, I can only assume, since that makes the most sense given the context. I SPECIFICALLY said that I was not sure whether he was joking. ==== Response to point #5 ==== How would he have produced 100% evidence? That's not possible over the internet. Also, even if Yraelz, Klep, and L-M are the same person [which I doubt], this does nothing to show that I am another of their accounts. This point once again fails to affirm the point my opponent wants to make. ==== Response to point #6 ==== I don't lose this point. My opponent lost that other debate; his points were utterly invalid and irrelevant, just like they are in this debate. The other guy has no burden to respond to whatever things my opponent said in the comment section. Also, if he wanted the points to count in this debate, he should have posted them. ==== Response to point #7 ==== If I just wanted a bunch of votes, I would make a bunch of sock accounts, use different proxy servers or different computers for each one, and just have a few non-serious debates on them. As I pointed out, Yraelz, Me, L-M, and Klep are some of the most active debaters on the site. This makes absolutely no sense when you think that we're all the same person. The motive just isn't there. If someone wanted to control the outcome of most of the debates, there are much easier ways, especially if said person can hack the debate. org web server, as my opponent claims I can. ==== Response to point #8 ==== Yes, that's a possiblity. But it is still implausible. Here's my opponent's case: A retired person, who can hack web servers, who wants to control the majority of the votes on a debating website, spends 100 hours a week using separate accounts on said website [controlling at least 4 of the most active accounts], using each of these accounts to have a massive number of debates. HE HAS DONE NOTHING TO BACK THIS CASE UP. HE HAS SIMPLY SUGGESTED THE POSSIBILITY. If all we have to do is show possibility to prove our cases, allow me: It is possible that we are each separate people, each spending a few hours on the website a day. Since we are rather active on this site, we tend to socialize very much, pick up each others' good debating tactics, etc. THIS ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE. So my opponent has shown an implausible possiblity, I have shown a possiblity that makes complete sense. ==== Response to point #9 ==== I had 4 votes when I posted it. ==== Response to point #10 ==== See #8, I guess. ==== Response to point #11 ==== If I was seriously as bent on not getting caught, I would have to make sure that each of the accounts used a different IP address. Which using multiple browsers does not accomplish. Once again, my opponent is only suggesting a possiblity, and has nothing to back up his arguments. ==== Response to point #12 ==== More lack of anything to back up my opponent's version of events. Disagreeing with each other is simply something that is common in people who like to debate and talk to each other. ==== Response to point #13 ==== No, it's not. Yraelz being a facebook friend of mine, if anything, means that we are different people. As I said, I have 73 friends on facebook. Is this evidence that I have 73 other identities? No. More baseless conjecture from my opponent. ==== Response to point #14 ==== I actually know the poeple on my facebook, which is evidenced by the fact that they're mostly from my area, and many of them post on my wall in a way that clearly shows that I know them. For us to set this up too would require another 100 hours a week. It makes complete sense if we look at the situation as if we're each our own person, but it makes little to no sense if we assume that we're different people. It is possible, but it is astoundingly implausible, and there is little to no motive. ==== Response to point #15 ==== I have shown that it is extraordinary. I've shown that my story - the normal, natural to assume one - is entirely plausible, and makes a lot of sense. However, my opponent's story makes no sense. The motive is barely there, if at all, since there are much easier ways to have a lot of votes. Also, we've been fairly unsuccessful, as you've shown by the debate Yraelz lost about Klep, L-M and him being the same person. That would be the last debate someone who was controlling the voting on debate. org would allow to be lost. My opponent's case makes no sense, and he has not backed it up otherthan "Hey, it's possible. " It's possible that you're mother was responsible for 9/11, but possiblity cannot win me the "Your mom did 9/11" debate. I would have to show that it actually happened, and my opponent has not substantiated his case.