I will not break a rule.

(Rule 11 does not seem obvious. My opponent has used a similar rule, the way I interpreted it, in his previous debate with wjmelements. It's like the following situation: A man has a slice of pie. He asks his friend, "Do you not want this slice of pie?" If his friend says, "No," he will interpret it as he doesn't want a slice of pie. If his friend says, "Yes," he will interpret it as he does not want the slice of pie. His friend can't win. It could be interpreted in two different, contradictory ways. I do need logic to make rules. It takes a very, very small amount of logic to realize that pressing different keys causes different letters to appear on the screen, but it still exists. This means that the rules contradict each other. It takes logic to make an argument, a rule, or anything else using the mind. source: a book, statement, person, etc., supplying information. http://dictionary.reference.com... I'm a person. I supply information by typing and posting on this website. I always use logic. Your rule contradicts this, so it is null. My opponent knows that he finds himself not in Iraq. He knows that he didn't play MKW on a boat, beating Shaq, on his head, with a rubber shirt. Also, if he got shot, he would have gotten hit. Instead, his shirt got shot. He may have gotten shot at, but he did not get shot. Thus, he should have started his sentences with "Mongeese must." http://en.wikipedia.org... My opponent's statements seem too unreasonable to have a chance of possibility. My opponent can't find "olgjoyeq" in the dictionary. I have given enough proof. I did assume for a few seconds that my opponent had those qualities, but I quickly changed my mind. I did not break rule 14. Rule 18 became void. My opponent has broken the following rules: 26. He's not in Iraq. He has not followed my restrictions. 27. He didn't change his avatar. He's not on an umiaq. 28. He hasn't started his phrases with "Mongeese must." He's never gotten shot by a tranq gun. 29. My opponent claims that he doesn't know that he's in the U.S. 30. He didn't post his rules backwards, and he did not beat Shaq in MKW. 31. He never claimed to have broken a rule. 32. He never took burden of proof. 33. Again, he didn't change his avatar. 34. He didn't change his profile.) 35. Mongeese must use every letter of the English language and no numbers in each of his individual sentences, unless he's not the instigator or the sun explodes within 30 seconds of this post, and the word "psodfsajjfporijeq" appeared in the eyes of every person on earth, colored red, in cursive. 36. Mongeese must post the lyrics of a song written by one of his favorite artists in the last round unless his name's "Ubeq" and he's not the instigator. 37. Mongeese must not use any of the following words in his argument for the last round, if he's the instigator: cheese, rule, GHQ, Madagascar, if, but, unless, magic, proof, I, lost, the, game, a, an, chicken, potato, rule, hoop, Obama, hope, change, Mario, Link, Jimmy, Buffett, contender, instigator, capitalism, rule, break, broke, might, burden, camera, victory, win, rule, mongeese, mongoose, letter, Debate.org, DDO, MKW, claim, or rule. "(I would like to explain the way that rule 11 can be confusing. By saying that I do the things that I restrict, it can be seen as either that I am not allowed to do them, or that I must do them. It can be interpretted either way. I felt that which way it was followed was my choice, because otherwise it means two opposite things at the same time, thus being impossible. I have followed all restrictions that I have placed on mongeese. In this way, I have not broken rule 11, and I do know all that I said that the rest of the world knows. My opponent goes on to claim that I may not use logic. This is impossible, as I must use logic to make any rules. Thus, the rule must be voided. My opponent then cliams that my rules may not be logically contradictory. This contradicts iteslf with rule 18, which forbids logic. This rule requires logic. Both rules are void. My opponent claims that I have burden of proof. He seems to assume that we are in dispute of where he is, but we are not, as we both, as long with the rest of the world, KNOW that he is wrong, so there is no dispute. Thus, I don't need proof, but I will provide it anyway. http://www.debate.org...... He is in America. He is not in the Middle East.. In addition, one cannot post while playing Mario Kart Wii. Shaq is not here. I don't know if he has ever played Mario Kart Wii. But really, he is not here. http://en.wikipedia.org...... There are not really umiaks in the Middle East, you can't really play Wii while on it, especially while you are on your head, and still win, especially if shot by a tranquilliser gun. http://en.wikipedia.org...... He broke rule 30, by not posting his rules backwards. He never found 'olgjoyeq' in a dictionary. http://www.merriam-webster.com...... http://dictionary.reference.com...... http://en.wikipedia.org...... So he broke rule 31.) 32. CNN on it announces and, post this of seconds 30 within Oquama Baraq to name his changes Obama Barack unless, claims he that statements any for proof of burden take also must mongeese. 33. Tsaddiq a be to claims Obama and, hat a wearing Buffett Jimmy have not does and, square perfect a is, blue color the contains which, opponent his by used currently on the besides, Buffett Jimmy of picture a of that to avatar his changes mongeese unless, marks quotation in, well as 4 round in 3 round in posted he that everything post must mongeese. 34. 'Dogs Killer the of Attaq The' is movie favorite his and, cupcakes loves he, 92 is he, Ohio in lives he that say to profile his want I and, life to back comes Washington George unless, be to it wants mongoose whatever to profile his edit must mongeese."