Who ever accepts ties the debate

Sorry, I thought I was Con, and accepted. I'll try to do my best at Pro though. "Whoever accepts ties the debate" I noticed that you reiterated many times that I thought that this Debate should be a tie. You also claimed that I was supposed to argue that this would be a tie. I think there's a huge misunderstanding between the title of the topic mentioned here. Based on the title of the Debate, I'll not be arguing "for this being a tie", and also not thinking that this Debate should be a tie. Instead, I'll be Debating about whether when I accepted this Debate WOULD be a tie. Allow me to refute your statements and claims. I never thought that this Debate should be a tie, and whilst you are correct in the fact that I cannot rebut your argument by stating that you should lose, I am not meant to "argue that this will be a tie". (I'm at my wit's end, can't think up of anything to rebut against your argument, please PLEASE go easy. 2nd time debating fyi) I think I should win. Yet, I believed that this Debate would end in a tie the second I accepted it. Why? The answer is simple. There are 3 outcomes of a Debate. Win, Lose, Tie. While I am not a seer, future teller or a fortune teller or whatsoever, simple deduction, elementary Mathematics and calculation would prove that there has been the most amount of ties in all the outcomes of the past Debates. Go check and see for yourself if you don't believe it. Moreover, voting for a Debate requires the voter to have certain requirements, and I doubt many people would meet that requirement, (I myself have not met that requirement and I'm trying to earn that requirement now) let alone bother to come and look, read everything that I've posted so far, and then painstakingly judge us on our Grammar, Punctuation, Vocabulary, Conduct, and other trivial things. No, most of them wouldn't bother reading these long sentences I'm typing right now(and I might be typing this long deliberately, who knows? ;) ), and they might vote randomly. For your info, most of the past Debates so far have ended in 0-0 points. Go check, and provide a Ratio. This Debate could either end with Con winning and Pro losing, or Pro winning and Con losing. Ultimately, both of us want to win. Neither of us wants a draw; that itself is certain in your argument in Round 2 and my argument in Round 2. The title does not state that whoever accepts WANTS a draw, it says that whoever accepts will TIE the Debate. You also stated that you would argue that a tie was unsettling, and since you would make a better point, you would win. Making a better point does not help you win; it is merely something to make the voters vote for you. The voters out there don't give 2 hoots about whether you made a better point or not, most of 'em just vote randomly. Take my word for that. And now your "better point" isn't really good anymore. Allow me to reiterate: I can rebut your argument by stating you should lose. It was your loss to not provide a specific meaning to the title of your Debate, or defining what your title meant. Vote Pro. Please. 2nd Debate here, don't be so heartless. I did not bother looking through by argument after typing it; it may contain some misunderstanding.