The CWO "vote bombed" no one.

I do remind the voters that the CWO being a group means everyone in the group when referred to a CWO. I will take all of my opponent quotes and reply based on order. 1) "by my opponent" "Alright everyone, as you all may know, I got into a heated debate on John McCain picking Sarah Palin was a bad choice, and we all know I got a crushing victory. So today when I logged in I saw that my ranking had dropped about 10 percent. I was "what the"? it said I had won only 2 debates and that I lost 7! !! Yesterday I had won 5 debates and lost 4. So now I realize that ANSmith and JTSmith and their liberal friends all voted every single point for my opponent in all my debates! !! Please vote for me on all my debates to help get them back to the way they were. " 1a) It is obvious to anyone who goes onto my profile, if you haven't please go now. I have not debated "John McCain picking Sarah Palin was a bad choice". At the time when I had debated that Sarah Palin having 5 kids is irrelevant, I had 11 debates, in his lie, I would have had 9. I would like to point out that we are fighting for the truth and that lies should be voted against, this is a disgrace. 2) A corresponding message sent by CiRro: "Link error happened for me too. Anyway, this site is strongly left. Obviously that has to "change" (In the words of B. Hussein Obama). Furthermore, we need to choose a conservative leader, or a conservative council. If we start a conservative group as soon as the group option becomes available, and we have a strong leader, we can easily undermine liberal influence and ideas being spread on this site. " A corresponding message by my opponent: "I would agree with a council of possibly 3? We could easily start a free webs page and lock it to non-members and have a forum in it, I would design if needed. " A corresponding message by another member: "Together we stand separated we fall. I suggest we do this ONLY when the odds are very stacked against us. Liberals feed on lies and tricks, a little taste of there own medicine may be the cure they need. " A corresponding message by my opponent: "I agree with josh" A corresponding message by another member: "We need to talk more and seek out these unfair votes and fight fire with fire. " A message from another member: The lead in my debate Trinity against ANSmith is good enough, thank you for looking at the site but the lead is enough. Thank you very much and let me know if any of you would like me to look at any of your debates. 2a) "this site is strongly left. Obviously that has to "change"", So we decided that we must train newcomers. Notice how my opponent doesn't show the rest of the conversation, or at least the parts that count. "scissorhands7 Completely agree with you aaron. Lets show the liberal entity that we have intelligence. This will not be done by acknowledging the liberal entity's intelligence and following them into their little hissy fight. This will be done by becoming better debators, and voting for who argued better, not whether you agree with the subject prior to the debate. I suggest that all conservatives show bipartisianship and throughout the course of the weak, give a liberal arguer a sincere compliments in their debate, whether you agree with their opinion or not. Thank You, Edward Scissorhands" "Labrat228 Like I said previously, This group isn't simply about voting for other members. It is also about bringing more conservatives to the site and helping other members win debates, not by vote, but by advice. " "Labrat228 I disagree to the fullest extent that the group would vote for members for the heck of it. That would eliminate the purpose of debate. The group will be about Advise and Advertising and help for newcomer conservatives. " "Labrat228 Should this be the decided purpose of the council? To ensure the values of the group. Values being: 1. To help newcomer Conservatives by giving advise and displaying proper debating. 2. To help veteran Conservatives win debates by giving him advise on topics and or how to debate that topic properly. 3. To organize a proper community of Conservatives that will help each other as well as bring more Conservatives to the site. Any other suggestions? Should we have an advisory for each issue such as: EX: Scissorhands7 obviously is skilled in the area of abortion Scissorhands7 - Abortion Adviser. We could have a government. Council being top. Advisers being bottom. " In this conversation the councils purpose was proposed and accepted. the next message from anyone said this: "Sounds good to me" And that came from none other than Scissorhands 3) "1. As is shown above the_conservative (the first leader of the CWO to be appointed) requests that members vote for him. He requests not that they look at the debate and vote for whom they choose. He explicitly requests that they vote for him. Then CiRro (second leader of the CWO), says that he can "guarantee 21 points" 2. This idea of vote bombing is upheld by all three supposed leaders of this group. Additionally members agree. Below if factual testimony. Members state "own medicine [supposed vote bombing] may be the cure they [members with liberal ideology] need" My opponent (third and final leader of CWO) states in response to this message: "I agree with josh" "seek out these unfair votes and fight fire with fire [vote bombing]" 3. For the group to have considered to have "vote-bombed" only one member of this group (especially those in charge of it) had to have voted in the notion suggested above. As is shown this was the intention of several members. 3a) My opponent failed to offer proof of any type. He speculated when he said: 1. "fight fire with fire [vote bombing]" 2. "This idea of vote bombing is upheld by all three supposed leaders of this group. Additionally members agree. Below if factual testimony. " 2a) Where did I agree? What additional members? (The_Conservative was kicked out for lack of being on the site or in any messages after the one quoted) 4) "I would like to thank my opponent for his meaningful debate subject and would like to request that this debate be judged solely on who was the better debate and for the factors listed in voting above, not because any particular member agrees/disagrees with the group C. W. O or myself or my opponent. " 4a) No problem, but I can only ask that you do the same in return. Lieing to smear my name is a shameful tactic and I wish to never see this again. After this debate concludes I will turn my proof into the webmaster that you have more than one account.