Red Lumas have trust issues.

"First, my opponent suggests that since he has stated something, then it must be true." My opponent's example is using a statement that is logically false. I have a better example. If I say in Round 1 that the debate will be in LD format, is the debate in LD format? Yes. If my opponent then does not go in LD format, I would point out that the debate is LD format, and ask for him or her to try again. This example is more appropriate for comparison; rather than being a statement that is probably meant to support an argument, it is a statement that sets up the debate under certain condition. I apologize for the misquoting. I though that you were referring to the debate I made in the original post. I thought that you were contrasting the two debates. "If my opponent meant to make the resolution 'there is not enough proof for one to conclude that Red Lumas have trust issues,' then he should have made that the resolution..." That was what the statement "PRO has the Burden of Proof" was supposed to accomplish. The proposed resolution is long and complicated. It is much simpler to have a simple resolution, and then establish that PRO has BoP for the debate. Plus, even with that resolution, I would have to prove that there is not enough proof, which would mean analyzing every bit of possibly relevant information about Red Lumas and showing that it does not support the idea of Red Lumas having trust issues. Therefore, I believe that my opponent still has the Burden of Proof. "First of all, my opponent provides no conclusive evidence for either scenario, only assumptions. There is nothing that suggests that the other Luma know the secret, not is there any evidence suggesting that Rosalina knows the secret. Thus, without concrete evidence, how can we say that the Luma definitely has no trust issues?" As the Burden of Proof is on my opponent, this statement becomes irrelevant. "The Red Star powerup, which is allegedly 'protected' by the Red Luma, is thus a powerup that is relatively useless in the game, opening up only a few trivial things that are not of much importance to the plot." However, Mario probably was not disappointed in being able to fly around the Comet Observatory, as it made transportation and obtaining the many scattered 1-Ups much easier. http://www.wiichat.com... "[I]t[']s pretty cool and helps you out on the purple coin missions." See? This player agrees that it was cool. "The fact that the Red Luma is placed in charge of something so insignificant while still announcing with such pride that it has 'a secret,' is essentially a pathetic cry for attention and respect." Taking pride in what you have is pathetic? Note that the Red Star is used to get the red Power Star, so it is not insignificant. "Other Luma[s] are seen to provide much more in the game, thus the Red Luma may possibly be an outcast of sorts due to its lack of skill in any other area." Most of the Lumas fly around the Comet Observatory chit-chatting without really doing anything for Mario. Others just inform Mario where he is, or of random facts that don't have any relevance to anything whatsoever. How do you know that Red Lumas can't do anything besides provide Red Stars? Plus, the Red Stars are more useful than, "This couch is the comfiest!" http://www.myspace.com... (The caption underneath the Luma picture is a quote from Super Mario Galaxy, where a Luma serves no purpose other than to inform Mario of couch "comfiness.") "This feeling of inadequacy led to hyperinflated egoism." Does the Red Luma ever say that it has an important secret? No. All it does is say that it has a secret. It never lies about its importance. "The 'trust' isn't being earned at all." Yes, it is. Mario earned the Luma's trust by showing that he was capable of using the Red Star. The Red Luma probably knew that only the worthy could use the Red Star, so it knew that it could trust Mario from then on. "Since Mario was being established as a hero and recognized by Rosalina, the Red Luma had no choice but to join in, any way possible." The Red Luma could have done nothing, like all of the Yellow and Blue Lumas that can be seen aimlessly floating around in the Comet Observatory. "The Luma *does* have trust issues, but not in unfairly keeping Mario from its secret, its trust issue is basically a pathological, unjustified trust in his own self worth." It never said that it had a lot of self worth. It just said that it had a secret, and it wasn't telling. The Red Luma eventually was able to test Mario and find that Mario was trustworthy, at which point, it gave Mario access to Red Stars. "We must then wonder whether or not this poor soul has the mental capacity to trust at all." It trusts Mario at the end. Of course it has the mental capacity to trust. "It would probably confide its secret in anyone who he thinks would find it useful and boost its self esteem." No. If it did, it would have told Mario immediately. Instead, it waited to find out if Mario really was trustworthy, which is not a problem at all, but instead, is rational thinking. Now, I'd like to point out two things before I let my opponent take over: 1. The Red Luma is a child. It was mentioned by Rosalina in her penultimate speech that the Lumas were still growing up. This implies that the Red Luma is a child, and thinks like a child. Children generally take pride in things of less importance than what adults would. For example, a child might be proud of the fact that he has a really cool-looking rock. A Red Star is much more useful and important than a cool-looking rock. The point is, it is completely normal for children to take pride in having seemingly irrelevant things. It is not a problem. 2. We probably haven't seen the full power of the Red Star. http://www.mariowiki.com... It is quite likely that the Red Star will be seen to have more use in Super Mario Galaxy 2's sequel. In that case, the Red Star would have been a very important secret for the Red Luma to guard. We've only seen a limited use of the Red Star, when it is probably more important than we think it is. This would justify the Red Luma's guarding the Red Star. I would also like to point out that my opponent did not respond to my question at the end of Round 2. In conclusion, all of the Red Luma's actions are justifiable, and we have no reason to diagnose the Red Luma with trust issues. Vote CON. Thank you for this debate, Kleptin. I wasn't expecting so much psychoanalysis.