Plagiarism Should be Penalized on DDO

Con keeps tossing around a weird logic that every time something is not responded to, it's an outright concession, even while admitting he "hadn't enough space to get it all." Were his logic sound, he would have conceded every single line he did not directly respond to (including that "the best solution to avoid this problem brought on by your own actions would be to not plagiarize and instead 'actually think about your response'"). There is a huge difference between dropped and conceded arguments. "pro and con always have the same ability to [plagiarize]." By the very setup of debates, this is obviously untrue. Once the instigator has not plagiarized, the contender has one more round to unfairly use better people's unaccredited words. Plus the whole final round awkwardness. "Plagiarism ... does no damage to an actual debate." Except it often does, as seen with how often plagiarizers drop out once the argument they may or may even understand challenged, thereby ruining debates [9]. "surely neither side will want to use plagiarisms until they run out of rounds" Except they already do, in a weird disjointed manner, often showing little sign of having read what they're responding to [10]. "...function cannot be reduced by plagiarism" It already is, as shown above. "increasing the amount of real debating going on" Con has already insisted that "the real debate" is the non-plagiarized portions, which self-refutes the claim that filling the character limit with plagiarism, increases the "real debating going on." "big mistake by dismissing these advantages." Con's argument that there are only advantages (to include a list of claimed ones), was clearly self-refuted with his claim that there is "no advantage" (if his logic regarding any confusion of the CP is held, then the same logic must apply to the rest of the debate, leaving his own case insisting plagiarism has "no advantage" even while he's stated harms). "Ragnar conceded them" I dropped some, but conceded little. I did concede the CP endorsed by my opponent, which calls for punishing plagiarism (via deleting all debates containing it), thereby affirming the resolution in my favor. A plan to which my opponent insists anyone who disagrees with him should default to. A plan designed to stop to not hypothetical problem, but "the actual, real, societally illegal theft committed on the website," something most the rest of his argument left in place, along with the claimed consequences. To be fair, it may be said that he has only conceded to every voter who disagrees with him. "taking down these debates is a form of penalization is simply incorrect" Censorship as a consequence imposed due to action, is regardless of intent, penalizing said action. "...we would also be penalizing the person who did not plagiarize" Correct. The innocent often suffer for the actions of the guilty; just look at lengthy airport security. TOS: First of all, in terms of cross examination, when requested my opponent has been unable to find a quote to support his claims of the intent of the TOS, yet continues to insist upon them. "I meant not to say that rules doent partain to words, but that they don't partain to unauthorized use of words." It stipulates such things as "permission from the Content owner" and breech thereof being a "violation of another person's rights" [3], plus the need for ownership in order to cede said ownership to DDO. "Altough impersonate and immitate sounds similar, they are different things" From Merriam-Webster "to pretend to be (another person)" and "to copy (someone's behavior, sound, appearance, etc.)" two words that are synonymous, con is now claiming they are unrelated without any evidence to support his request for changes to the English language. "theft of ideas is not theft of identity, its really just trying to bolster your own identity really." As my opponent has no evidence of this, I shall provide a fine example of plagiarism on this site, the user SamHarris, as shown in the comment section on one of his failed debates, outright claiming to be the author of Sam Harris' books [12]. To the audience, if he merely posted Sam Harris' work without calling himself SamHarris, and claimed to have spent years of effort writing it, would that still be pretending to be the author of said works? "Theft... His case solely relies on imperonation now" It relies on the contract every user agreed to, in addition to the dropped fact that it's bad sportsmanship (which alone calls for a conduct penalty from voters). If plagiarism is outright legally theft or not, is unimportant to my case. Posting plagiarized material here is still attempting to cede ownership, regardless of if they really can or not. With the potential consequence my opponent pointed out of DDO's use of it being "revoked," that means the debate (or at least a portion thereof) is gone, thereby penalizing the plagiarism. "Ragnar concedes the whole counterplan" My opponent is again stressing the importance of his CP, which calls for penalizing plagiarism. At best con could say I turned his CP's major harms into a part of my case; in addition to other harms already listed throughout my argument, any of which cause greater harm than the effort of "admitting it came from elsewhere." "Ragnar concedes all of my claims that even if he is right, plagiarism should be an exception because it is harmless" An outright lie. I have stressed multiple harms. From outside the CP: It removes the "reason to have debaters involved," it's on par with "piracy, fraud, falsification, and various other bad things" it causes debates of a "disjointed nature" it provides an unfair advantage (see Mikal vs vi-spex), and another claim from my opponent I've capitalized on it "lowers the quality of voting." As my opponent insists none of these are in any way harms, they are unchallenged, to be left to the voters to determine if any of them do cause harm to the site and/or community thereof. ... Even if my opponent were correct on plagiarism in some general sense as his arguments reach for, his BoP (which he insisted on taking) calls for DDO specifically. Please check back through his sources to see if he's provided enough relevant evidence for DDO. Sources are quite overwhelmingly in my favor. My opponent so far has been unable to even show so much as a single debate here which benefited from plagiarism, or even a quote from the TOS to suggest a basis for his interpretation of it. A few key things for voters to weigh: If pretending to be the author of a work, falls under impersonation in the English language? Is deleting someone's debate in any way a penalty? Would posting Mikal's previous arguments give an unfair advantage? If the answer is yes to all three, voting should be an easy choice. Sources: [10] http://www.debate.org... [11] http://www.debate.org... [12] http://www.debate.org...