Success is unlikely without attending high school.

"My oppoent has decided to try and defend his argument. Which is sad, because there is no defense that can be made to excuse his blatant disregard for the rules and his pathetic semantics ploy."Not semantics. I should not have to infer what the definition is. Take laws, should the law abider have to infer what the law means? No. The law stating someone should not kill another person is rather clear."As I said, I inferred my purpose when I correlated success with making money and gaining employment."See above....which you never actually refuted."Success does not mean achieving Nirvana. Success does not mean having a wife and kids. In a capitalist society where "success" is defined by money and power and achieved primarily through school, we shouldn't have to negotiate over such definitions."Bare assertion fallacy. Once again, how do you know? Do monks who take vows of poverty not exist in capitalist societies? Can they not believe their lives are successful? We should have to negotiate, because, as I stated above in my opening argument which has never actually been argued against, success is personal."Are you really justifying yourself here as well?"Yes."People would accuse me of cheating. There are other forums on the internet."You have cheated once (see your debate with Danielle), why would I think you would not cheat again?"I made the thread after you posted your round."Bingo. Which suggests to me you wanted arguments."I have previously said that I hated school in the forums."And...your point?"There was no point in making this debate other than to gain advice."So the forum with 100+ posts was not enough? You are grasping at straws here. If you just wanted advice, the forum would have been enough, you should not ask people who look for an honest debate to waste their time forging an argument. You are grasping at straws. "I have already asked the question of what to do after leaving school"And...go on...the point being?"I thoroughly expect to be votebombed..."You cannot predicte the future. And you still have not presented a case as to why it was semantics. You cannot expect your opponent to infer a definition. That is quite simple. You have to blantatly state this is what x is defined as. (Hint: cursing at the voters is not a good way to get votes)."I wanted multiple, unbiased statistics. I didn't get them on the thread." Then why did you not ask? Or research it for yourself? Not waste a potential debaters time creating a useless debate."I wouldn't even be mad if not for the idiotic cheating accusations. Should have thought about it a little harder before doing that, am I right?"That does not justify cursing at me and insulting me. Fine you may be angry, but you are typing, not speaking, you have time to review your words. Remember, what is here stays here, forever. Also, past behavoir predicts future behavior. You have exploited the site in the past to potentially win debates, why would I not expect you to do so here?"My opponent has failed to justify his actions whatsoever."Really? The last two rounds are dedicated to me "justifying" my actions. My opponent has simply said that he expects me to "infer" from his round the definition of success. I do not have to twist my opponents words so that the definition suits their case.The definition was never established to begin with (you cannot expect me to infer something from your statement). So the rest of my opponent's rant is irrelevant.I would simply like to say that even with my opponent's objections to the case, it could have been an actual debate. I did not define success in such a way that made it impossible for my opponent to win. They still could have debated but, they opted out. For absolutely no reason at all. This is a debate site. If my opponent did not wish to debate what success is, they should have clearly stated "success is defined by X." They failed to do so, allowing me to define success. It is not that difficult to understand that you cannot expect your opponent to twist your words and infer meaning from another statement.