Only the conduct point should be given for a forfiet on DDO

Intro to the actual argument What is important to note about this debate is that it is over where or not a forfeit, that is ‘a’ forfeit (not many forfeits but 1 round) should only be a loss of conduct point instead of losing the whole debate all together. What I mean by should is whether or not this would be better system to adopt. To simply say that we shouldn’t because of past rules is to commit the fallacy of appealing to tradition. And in the classic fashion of Pro’s and Con’s the debate should really be non-other than focusing on the Pros and Cons of adopting such a rule. The rule being: that a forfeit, 1 forfeit should only count as a loss in a conduct point for lateness. My suggestion is such: A Forfeit should count as only a loss of conduct, rather than an automatic loss. And these are my reasons. Mind you it’s a inductive argument not logical, where the premises are based on accumulation of beliefs. P1. Sometimes one person may have better argument in less rounds then somebody else has in all their rounds. -If we adopt this rule people who only miss a round can still have a chance of winning. That is, 1 sound or great argument is better them an infinite sh!tty argument. P2. Some arguments are fatal. If it’s a logical argument and uncertainty is exposed the argument is over anyways. P2. Secondly, we don’t want to be awarding people who don’t deserve it. Many people work hard to move up the ladder. Don’t forget the difference working long is not the same as working hard. P3.I did also forget to mention the criteria of merit. Some people are more skill and equipped with better techniques. The ladder would also better take into account this as well. Simply doing a lot of work doesn’t necessary improve someone’s ab P4. Sh!t happens! And sometime there is nothing we can do about it. That is there are legitimate internet errors and mistakes which people can’t account for. People should still be given a possibility of catching up.It is very often that very good legitimate reasons do come up. Many people are in school, or taking care of others. Someone may be sick , or someone may die. Why so Vs Why not P1 Keep in mind that their opponents will still have a whole round and conduct points from all the voters. That is a lot of advantage to the opposition already. P2. So over all there is only something to gain and nothing to lose, it will only really affect debates where the person with fewer rounds was obviously winning by a landslide all ready. Intention Vs accidental All of my opponent’s examples are worded in a way that presupposes intentional forfeits, where I have been only referring to accidental. Ipse dixit aka bold assertion fallacy F = fallacy. F1.if you drop their points, you are not challenging them because you (presumably) agree with them. ;) F2. If you drop arguments through forfeits, you are not putting in the effort to move up the ladder. ;) F3. In fact, you are hoping to reap the rewards without putting in the effort. ;) F4. . By participating in the discussion even after you continue to drop his analysis, the opponent is putting in extra work. ;) F5. If you forfeit the whole debate besides the first round, your opponent deserves more for their work. ;) F6. What is lost is the expectation that debaters will actually fulfill their obligations to present arguments within proper time constraints. ;) F7. Whether or not you chose to forfeit the debate or your internet connection was bad, the overall result is the same. F8 this system that my opponent is advocating introduces abuse What is lost is the expectation that debaters will actually fulfill their obligations to present arguments within proper time constraints. This system that my opponent is advocating introduces abuse that allows people to have extra time to create refutations to their opponent's arguments. -Ultimately, this system is rewarding hard work and discouraging laziness. -. By participating in the discussion even after you continue to drop his analysis, the opponent is putting in extra work while you are not. -It is unfair for an individual to be able to ignore his opponent's points and win the debate. -Plus, logically, since debate is about refuting your opponent's arguments, if you drop their points, you are not challenging them because you (presumably) agree with them. Votefool