You Just Lost The Game

Well, here we are at the end. My opponent put up a brilliant campaign, and I respect him immensely for his persuasive attempts, but this cannot be denied:"The whole synonyms thing has nothing to do with the debate; I'm not going to argue about it."So why did you bring it up in the first place? My opponent clearly was just looking for something to trip me up on, something he admits was insignificant."P2: "I have indeed thought of The Game," (My opponent's statement)"Stating the obvious isn't really a good debate skill.http://www.losethageme.com...Every time you think about The Game, and hence lose, you must say so.(This is the only rule that can be broken, but do you really need to cheat..?)My opponent: "says that you don't have to follow rule three to lose."My opponent appears to suffer from short term memory loss, why remember how earlier he said: "If you don't follow a rule, what are you? That's right: a cheater."Anyway, when it says "can be broken", this rule means that it's the only rule of the three that depends on your own voluntary actions. Don't believe me? Let's run down the list: "You are playing the game". (Most versions claim every one in the world is. Obvious.) "Every time you think about The Game, you lose." (This, the first step towards a total loss (I'll explain later), is beyond your control. For example, if I mention the fact that there's a 1997 movie with Michael Douglas called "The Game"..., you must proceed to rule 3... "Losses of the game must be announced." (If they must be announced, then I must ask my opponent why he thinks that they don't play a part in losing.) All my opponent has done so far is shown that he doesn't understand what he's read in Rule 3 -- his entire argument is crashing down around him. "Did he follow rule three? No. So he disregarded it." For the third time: I have simply not proceeded to rule 3 yet. I am in between rules 2 and 3. Rule 3 exists. Goodness, my opponent appears to have an extremely thick skull. And one last thing. Rule 1: I am playing the game. Passed. Rule 2: I thought about the game. Passed. And now, just now, with Rules 1 and 2 passed, can I officially lose the game, not just by thinking about, but by proceeding to rule 3, which my opponent's evidence explicitly states I MUST FOLLOW... I have to say. I LOST THE GAME. There. I just lost five seconds ago. Not at the start yesterday. FIVE SECONDS AGO. You know why? Because I followed Rule 3. ----------------------- And now, my final address to our dear voters, summing up my final argument. My opponent does not appear to follow his own advice. He criticizes me for continuing the synonyms argument, even though he himself dismisses their signifigance. He uses "evidence" that destroys him, namely http://losethegame.com.... P.S. Oh, and one more thing. "If I have to say that one more time, I can't be held responsible for what I'm gonna do to this guy." Not much, I'm guessing, since we're separated through a screen... physical contact... and we have no clue where each other live. Resorting to quasi-humorous rage statements doesn't really do much for you either way, but show that you can't remain cool during a debate.