Pro Should Have Won the Referenced Debate

On the one argument in this debate still under dispute - over whether the arguments vote should have gone to Pro or been tied - there are two subsections to my opponent's rebuttal, and so I shall deal with them under separate headings: === THAT PRO'S "UN-SUBSTANTIVE ARGUMENT TOPS AN INVALID ONE" === Firstly, I'd like to clarify my use of the word 'substantive' - as can be seen in previous debates of mine on this site, I tend to use the words 'substantive' and 'argument' interchangeably, and sometimes together unnecessarily. (. http://www.debate.org...) I apologise that this linguistic imprecision seems to have led my opponent to believe that I was implying something - namely, that Pro provided argumentation - which I was not. I believe, however, that despite this it was clear enough through my analysis that I was implying no such thing. The essence of my point was that Pro provided no argumentation in either of his two rounds: the first round set out the debate and made an assertion, and the second round clarified a query and re-phrased the debate resolution. If it were a vote for "how well someone outlines the resolution", then Pro would win easily – but it is actually a vote for argumentation, and Pro did not provide any in either of the rounds. For this reason, he didn't deserve that vote to fall on his side. === THAT EVEN IF WE ACCEPT THE LAST ROUND ARGUMENT AS VALID, THE VOTE SHOULD STILL GO TO PRO === My opponent and I both agree that Con's last round argument should not be taken into consideration when it comes to distributing points. Nonetheless, my opponent provides what I call an "even-if" argument, which says that even if the argument WERE valid, Pro should still get the arguments vote. To support this argument, my opponent says that I "may try and make [Con's] opposing opinion imply dismisal, but in reality it is indirect contestation of the point whih does not imply dismissal. " However, this does not appear to be the case, and I would like my opponent to clarify what he means in saying this. For as he pointed out, Pro claimed that "Nick owns the number", and Con rebutted this by arguing that "No-one [i. e. neither Nick nor Mike] owns the number". (. http://www.debate.org...) It is clear that these two scenarios are mutually exclusive: it is not possible both for Nick to own the number, and for neither Nick nor Mike to own the number. To accept both is to say that Nick both does and doesn't own the number, which is clearly a logical contradiction. Therefore, any argument for one scenario also functions as an argument against the other scenario, implying a dismissal of that scenario. In other words, if we accepted Con's argument as valid, then his arguments (however insubstantial) naturally trump the non-existent arguments on Pro's side, meaning that Con would've won the arguments vote, and consequently the debate as a whole. It is only because (for the reasons my opponent provided in his opening round) Con's arguments are invalid, that he does not do so. Given this, neither side argued their case to satisfaction, and so the points for argumentation should have remained undistributed. === CONCLUSION === My opponent has given two scenarios in which Pro should have won the arguments vote: 1) Because Pro's assertion trumps Con's invalid argument 2) Because even if Con's argument was valid, Pro should still have won the arguments vote. I have shown both of these scenarios to be inaccurate. Pro's assertion was precisely that, and not an argument that made any attempt to convince voters that his side was preferable; and accordingly, if Con's arguments were taken into consideration, they would naturally trump Pro's lack of arguments. For both of these reasons, Pro should not have won the arguments vote, and it is only because Con's arguments are inadmissible/invalid given their context in the debate that Con doesn't deserve the vote either. Consequently, the arguments vote should have been tied, the final result should have been 6-6, and the debate should have been tied. I await my opponent's response.