The 16kadams Trial

We accept your opening stance. Note that the prosecution team has worked together for this opening argument. OPENING ARGUMENTS1) On the charge that 16k used his grandfather's DDO account (Angelo) to vote on his own debates and vote in his favor. That conflicts with Rule G in the Terms of Service which states that "Users will not impersonate any person or entity, including without limitation Debate.org officials, staff, and/or Members."Âï¿½2) On the charge that 16k convinced friends and family members to join DDO just to debate them, This conflicts with Rule R which states "Users will not use the Service in any way that violates the terms of this Agreement, or that aids, encourages, or purports to authorize anyone else to violate the terms of this Agreement."Âï¿½ Since 16k is using people close to him to have them establish accounts on DDO, that allows him the potential to exploit or impersonate those accounts. Forcing people to get accounts that he could potentially impersonate or exploit conflicts with Rule G which violates the TOS, meaning that forcing people in his family to get into DDO aids in 16k exploiting those accounts and violate the TOS, which goes against Rule R.3) On the charge that the IP address of 16k was the same as Angelo, this implies that he has logged on under Angelo and misused that account, which conflicts with Rule G4) On the charge of multiaccounting, this again conflicts with Rule G.5) On the charge of exploiting his ever changing IP address and having instructions for changing his IP address, that could be exploited to allow him to impersonate other members, which conflicts with Rule G6) The final charge of poor voting where 16k was accused of voting improperly on debates almost always in favor of the conservative side.... The second clause of Rule T states that all members must agree to "No personal attacks against other members or a member's opinions." Votebombing a debate in favor of the conservative side of any issue is a personal attack on the debater representing the liberal side of the issue. Since 16kadams is corrupting the voting process in favor of his own opinions rather than the quality of the arguments in the debate, this violates Rule T.Charge 1) Angelo engaged in 16kadams in 3 debates and lost each one. Whats more concerning is the fact that Angelo voted in favor of 16kadams 11 out of 11 times. Here are all several debates that Angelo voted on for 16Khttp://www.debate.org...^ at the time angelo's vote gave 16k the leadhttp://www.debate.org...^ no effect on the outcomehttp://www.debate.org...http://www.debate.org...^ 7 POINT VOTE BOMB WHICH GAVE 16K THE WINOf the debates that Angelo voted on, 2 directly resulted in 16k winning and a third resulted in tying one. Several others resulted in lead changes in favor of 16kThis suspicious voting behavior was recognized by the others and soon after, Angelo had terminated his account. 1 week later an IP check was run by Innomen which revealed that 16k and Angelo had the same IP address. This means that Angelo was using the same IP address as 16k when his account closed, suggesting that the account was under the influence of 16k.Charge 2) 16k stated numerous times that DJmooshy was not a multiaccount but a friend of his whose account was unjustly closed. 16k also admitted to making his little sister get a DDO account to debate her "alex1018". Other known friends of 16k include his grandfather and "elephaunt"who 16k knows in real lifehttp://www.debate.org......Making friends get DDO accounts leaves them more vulnerable for 16k to use them himself for his own gain, which violates Rule G and Rule RCharge 3) Proof for Charge 3 comes from the fact that 16k and Angelo's IP address were the same about 2 weeks ago, a full week after Angelo had left, suggesting that 16k manipulated Angelo's account before it closed after it was revealed that he voted in favor of 16k 11 times.Charge 4) Evidence here revolves around the account chainmachine, a recent member who in his first few days on the site debated 16k 3 times, lost horrifically in all 3, but in other debates uses a debating style identical to that of 16k.This is the argument style of chainmachine against 16khttp://www.debate.org......This is the argument style of chainmachine against anybody else.http://www.debate.org......Chainmachine is also suspected of being a multi account of 16kadams because of its original similarity to Angelo's early account, Angelo: Socialist, Profile pic was of a Chinese Flag even though he is not Asian, supports ObamaChainmachine: Communist, Profile Pic is of a Communist Russia Flag, also supports Obama.More evidence about chainmachine being a possible multiaccount of 16k came in the forums. Chainmachine, who had no forum posts before, happened to go to the forums, happened to find the forum implicating 16k, and posted this"No I am not 16kadams. I admit he is a superior debater than me, also debate.org has little to no people who share my far left opinions. Also if you notice all my arguments with 16kadams are issues that are very one sided voting wise because of the political views of the majority of the users. I don't know about these other accounts but I think 16kadams is perfectly valid and is just a human debater like the rest of us."http://www.debate.org......The parts in bold show superficial dialogue spoken by chainmachine ,but the underlined part shows knowledge of DDO that no 4 day old account could have known. This suggests that chainmachine could be a multi account of someone else who has a deep knowledge of DDO, but it leans towards 16kadams since chainmachine just happened to go to the exact forum MINUTES AFTER HIS NAME WAS MENTIONED to defend 16k.Charge 5) 16kadams prior to the trial sent this link to imabench,http://whatismyipaddress.com......Here is the PM he one of the prosecutors. All of that shows how 16k could be using a variety of tools to manipulate his ever changing IP address to use other accounts on DDO. In the second picture near the top, there is actually a tab that if you click it allows one to VIEW INSTRUCTIONS FOR HOW TO CHANGE ONES IP ADDRESS..The last piece of evidence was another IP check that revealed that 16k's alternate IP address was a number that traces to Pennsylvania. Normally if one were simply getting a new IP address every time they logged on, that IP address would still be concentrated to near where 16k was living. However this alternative IP address suggests that 16k is using proxies since Dynamic IP Addresses DO NOT JUMP ACROSS STATE LINES like 16k's does.The final charge of votebombing debates would chew up what few characters I have left, If possible I will post some of those votebombed debates in later rounds.The evidence is very clear taht 16kadams is guilty. Unto the defense.