You should not be given points for using sources on DDO

Thanks to my opponent for their arguments. I'd like to state a few things:When I listed my four reasons why sources can be useful, Pro responds by listing six, making his seem more viable by the sheer number of alternatives he has.However, looking over opponent's arguments, I'm noticing a trend. Opponent chooses scenarios where it is not necessary to use sources, but sources CAN be used.See: 1, 2, 3Just because you can get by without sources being used doesn't mean they aren't important in these topics.Scenario 1: This is just false. No matter how smart the person debating the topic may be, they MUST have sources to back up their claims where sources are necessary. The judges have no indication that this person knows everything. Sources are always good here, and not citing anything appears as a lack of care to the debate. Those with a brain like that know full well how important sources are, so leaving them out isn't valid here.Scenario 2: In some instances only the definitions will be listed and no source point should be awared for that. But in a debate such as the PS4 being better than the Xbox One, which appart from its specs has a lot of opinion around it, will need sources to back up the specs. "Red is better than yellow" may even have some sources with it, depending on how deep the debate between red vs. yellow actually is.Scenario 3: Accepted. Though sources may still be used here depending on what the philosophy is on. But I should point out your example is a fallacy. "X is moral than Y" can't possibly be debated as moral is subjective. For example, it may be wrong to you but I find it completely fine. So this type of argument isn't really valid.The other ones are easily solved:See: 4 & 5Scenario 4: tinyurl or bit.ly. If a person was truly invested in a debate and wanted to make theirs good, they would have known they needed room for sources. A lack of is just careless on the debater's half. It's a very poor excuse for no sources.Scenario 5: Just leave this blank for debates that don't need it. Sources can also be left blank if both parties provides sources adequate enough to support their argument.Also, I'd like to note this comment:"Although sources can be extremely important in certain debates..."If sources are unimportant in certain debates, just leave sources blank. Opponent has listed some reasons why sources should not be used in a debate, however in a professional, formal debate, sources are an absolute NECESSITY. Opponent himself states that sources are very important. When talking about statistics, any sort of article, or the like, sources should always be used. DDO has many informal debates but also its fair share of normal ones. Why should sources be removed due to some informal ones or ones with philosophy and punish those who need sources?Pro also provides a solution to the sources issue, but there's a much simpler option: leave sources points blank. Don't award any. That's better than removing the system entirely.Scenario 6: This is a very rare scenario, and it's common knowledge you shouldn't focus too much on sources, rather the whole of your argument. If a person becomes overwhelmed with sources and focuses on them more than the argument, not to offend anyone who would do that, but it's poor priority management and that person deserves to lose just by not putting full attention to the debate.Now to respond to qualms about my arguments.Voter Integrity: This is why the "Judges" system is in place, or even the ELO limit. If you don't trust random members of DDO to adequately vote on your debate, elect fair judges, or only allow members that have experienced their fair share of debates to vote. Of course this can be abused by the instigator choosing bias judges. But if we were focusing on pure debate quality, quality judges must be important as well."Bias does not necessarily mean that the source is wrong or bad." Not necessarily, you are correct. But I was referring to the bias that intentionally skews data and results to fit a certain party's desires, even if the end result of the data is false.Overall, Pro is stating that source points should be removed entirely because of a few debate scenarios, most of which I've covered. Should all source points be removed for only a few kinds of debates that most of the time are informal, such as opinion debates? It doesn't make sense and that ideology is flawed on Pro's behalf. It's similar to teachers punishing the entire class for one or two students' mistakes. It's unjust to those who actually did behave (and in this case, unjust to those who put in the time for sources). If in doubt, LEAVE SOURCES BLANK. It's much simpler and much more effective than removing source points. Tying in sources to "better argument" would just make it extremely similar to the already intact "select winner" style of voting, but with grammar/conduct attached as well.Also, if one person has a better argument around their sources but their sources show bias, who would get the point?Point being (no pun intended), the 7 point system is fine as is. It doesn't need tweaking, especially for sources. There are many instances where sources are useful and leaving them out hurts your debate. If sources aren't necessary, the sources point can just be left blank and it doesn't need to be acounted for. However, for some other debates that require statistics and other analytical information, or just an important need for sources, that's why the sources point is awarded and present, even for debates that don't need them.I await Pro's response.