My DDO username is NiamC

I don't need to rebut your r2 as stated, its irrelevent when you argue for one thing but you meant the other. In this case, NiamC vs. is NiamC.Continuing on with your argument, you provided me with a link to purdue owl of which you provide no further reference, thus making me scroll through the 15 different rules to assume which one you wanted me to look at. First of all, you could have at least saved me the trouble of refering to which case. You'll notice that I was able to provide a link and a location to my argument within the link provided. You, on the other hand, clearly tell me to refer to these pages and to this person on what I am assumed to be a member of DDO. After looking through the 15 rules, I've come to realize that your link supports my argument. 6. Use commas to separate two or more coordinate adjectives that describe the same noun. Be sure never to add an extra comma between the final adjective and the noun itself or to use commas with non-coordinate adjectives.Seems to me you conceded to my argument. Also, theres no point to ask CJKallstar when the link YOU provided conceded to my argument. Again from what I stated in R2, the quotation marks can be read as part of the username when used in conjuction with the comma. i.e. your username is: "NiamC" instead of NiamC. Additionally, seeing how it's a username and not of a legal name, quotation marks could be used as a sign of uniqueness in a username. i.e.e 1337 vs Leet. I had also used the comma before “is” as a clause separation and would therefore not be a vocative case.What Are Clauses? (with Examples) A clause is a group of words that includes a subject and a verb. Read more at http://www.grammar-monster.com...I'm sorry I didnt know "is NiamC" was a complete sentence. If people agree with the fact that "is NiamC" is a complete sentence, then I will agree, it is not used in a vocative case. If people disagree with the statement that "is NiamC" is a complete sentence, then my statement that the comma was used as a vocative case stands. My argument (NiamC's arugment) Because I was able to refute my opponent’s rebuttals, I will use my arguments from the previous rounds (which were not rebutted at all). I will summarise my argument from the last round: 1) I was successfully able to show that my DDO username is NiamC logically. 2) To prove that “NiamC” was my actual argument, I provided evidence that the account with the User Id of NiamC was mine. For this I provided a screenshot. 3) To help prove that the account with the User Id of NiamC was mine, I provided a screenshot of an account verification email, proving that I am once again the only owner of the account with the user Id of NiamC. 4) I then provided evidence about why it would make sense for why my username for DDO to be NiamC- my name is Niam.I rest my case. Rebuttal1) Yes, you did show that your name was NiamC, but the argument was about your name being, is NiamC. That is why I didn't bother rebutting your arguments when you were stating about something completely different and irrelevent. 2) See 1. 3) See 1.4) See refutations above.Yes, Pro rests his case in acknowleding that he hasn't proved his BOP that his name is, is NiamC. Instead, he went on to attack me on the basis that I didn't rebut any of his arguments made in R2, of which, we all know that his arguments were irrelevent to this debate. Furthermore, his refutations to my arguments made in R2 were weak in that he provided "evidence" by providing me with a link to 15 comma rules without refering to what he was talking about. To me, this shows that he doesnt actually understand the rules but was just hoping that he can appeal to higher authority and long pages to win this debate. ConclusionI find it comical that NiamC is complaining about the debate about what HIS OWN NAME IS. I find it hilarious that he had the courage to personally set up a debate about his own name, one that is usually impossible to accept, and then complain that con is using semantics to try to win this debate. To be fair, I wouldn't have used semantics if this debate wasn't so ridiculous in nature. However, in no way did he say semantics was not allowed in this debate. I'm not even going to post a thing about voting for con or summarize my arguments. To me, this was more of a troll debate just by the absurdity of the topic. All I want the voters to take home is to realize what this guy is doing. He made a debate topic aruging that his own name is NiamC. Seems to me he is looking for free wins. In conclusion, you don't have to vote for me (con), but definitely dont vote for pro. You would only feed the troll.