The DDO debating system is fair

This is the last round, and as usual, there can only be rebuttals. So I will not introduce any new points, only refute my opponent's. Counter Rebuttals1. The Voter who sides with whomever he heard last is unfair, not the system.My opponent repeated the same statement from the last round, "I maintain a system which leads to unfairness is unfair." He has still made no substantial or logical opposition to my conclusion. He proceeded to provide two impertinent examples that showed and demonstrated nothing. If a court room is painted blue, (example 2) and the jury voted with that influence, then the jury is unfair. The duty of a voter is to look at the facts from an unbiased point of view, resist outside influence, and vote on whomever has proved to be correct. This is a VOTER'S responsibility. Should he fail to achieve that mindset and allow himself to be influenced by frivolous factors like last word, and a blue courtroom, then he and he alone is unfair. Readers, my opponent is blaming inanimate factors rather than the people subjecting themselves to their influence. Imagine a chair, neatly tucked under a desk, where it should be, stubbing your toe on it, and blaming the chair. That, in effect, is what my opponent is doing. 2. Someone will inevitably speak last, so it must be the contenderThis was my opponent's reply to this contention:"even if there is no way to make it that no, one side goes last it is possible to make other changes to counter the last word advantage. The following is a sample listing of suggestions proposed:b1)The following was from CD-Host in forums:"I am arguing that the last word is not an advantage by nature. It is only an advantage if an inept instigator or unfair voter MAKES it an advantage. Note that this is my THIRD TIME saying this...once in each round. My opponent has deviated from the subject of this debate. He proceeds to provide examples on how to offset the last word advantage, as if we have both reached consensus that an intrinsique advantage (brought on by DDO's system) exists in the first place. With that in mind, I will disregard his examples and all pertaining to it, and continue proving that an inherent advantage does not exist. 3. My opponent responded to my explanation for his statistics with this:"With such a large gap of nearly twice as many contenders to instigators winning can hardly be blamed on these factors alone. In addition there are some minor factors which would cause instigator to win these include a)more research time. b)instigator more frequently has BoP. Despite these reasons, Contender wins nearly twice as often that can hardly be explained by my opponents reason alone."Now, I mentioned before that Ore_Ele is a member who has received a spreadsheet of ALL debates ever made on this website. This is his explanation for Con's statistics:"The likely reasons are because...1) Instigators are often new members that will not finish their debates (they can also accept debates and never finish them, but it is more likely they'll start one).2) Instigators often start with their arguments in R1, so the potential Contenders will not accept unless they are confident that they'll win because their opponent has revieled their hand.3) Contenders are more likely to find and exploit semantic arguments to get a technical win." (1)I find that on the matter of credentials, Ore_Ele's word heavily outweighs my opponent's, given that he has been on the website for a longer amount of time than my opponent (2), and has seen the spreadsheet of every debate, lending him the basis and experience to make such explanations. This is a "my word versus his word" situation since neither of us have a database of statistics to refer to. So I suggest readers follow my word given the greater credibility of my source. With that said, the refutation stands that my opponent offered faulty and deceptive statistics. 4. ConductAs we recall, I said that many newcomers instigate debates with faulty resolutions, hence making contenders appear to win more often. I provided examples to support this. This was one of those examples. Read its resolution: http://www.debate.org...This is my opponents reply to my source:"1st as an aside I am appalled at the conduct in the debate quoted in source #1. Taking advantage of some kid from India's lack of perfect English is wrong and a practice that should be stooped on ddo, it is unwelcoming and unfair send the guy a message, help him, as you commendably did in #2, but at the very least don't take advantage." Con's fallacious attempt to incriminate a worthy example goes without merit. It was a faulty resolution, so I used it as an example to show the prevalence of new-comer based faulty resolutions. I'm not sure if this is an attempt to gain the conduct point, but regardless, this accusation is vacuous and devoid of reason. 5. My opponent's last few examplesReaders, notice that my opponent's last 3 examples were debates that HE lost. He tried to use those debates to show the contender "advantage." 1. Being that those debates include my opponent, truthseeker, of course he would feel that he should have won them. 2. If you skim through those debates he provided, you will find that truthseeker's opponents provided superior arguments, hence justly lending them victory. 3. These debate examples are without warrant. In ConclusionBack to relevance. Last word advantage does not exist unless an unskilled debator or unfair voter MAKES it an advantage. A voter can be influenced by anything, if he allows it. He could be influenced by whoever spoke first. He could be influenced by who ever wrote more. He could be influenced by whoever took the position of con, and vice versa. He could be influenced by his own stance on the debate topic. This does not mean that the system must infinitely contort itself to counter these obstacles of judgement. It is the voter that must get past such distractions and vote fairly. If he cannot do that, then he is unfair and to blame. The system did not create the unfairness, the voter did.The debate system of DDO, in its allowing the contender to speak last (since SOMEONE must inevitably speak last, and both debators need equal speech), is fair. Vote Pro. Thank you. Sources1. http://www.debate.org...2.http://www.debate.org...