This debate will not be interesting.

ATTENTION VOTERS: Most of my opponent's previous round is a copy/paste of my round with a few minor changes to add in some humor. That said, I STILL IMPLORE YOU TO READ THE ROUND AS HE ATTEMPTS TO HIDE a few crucial points. My opponent even makes this confession in his round. Contrary to my usual method of refutation, I will quote any usable point and respond accordingly. Onto the case 1) FALSE REALITY IS INTERESTED. "Clearly, this debate does have a hold over my attention or has carried my curiosity." My opponent stated this in the previous round, thus he concedes to being interested in this debate. Keep in mind that we had agreed that this would be the criteria used to define interesting. 2) ONLY ONE HAS TO BE INTERESTED "Just because the topic concerns whether or not the debate itself is uninteresting, it doesn't mean that one person approving of it will show that it isn't uninteresting." False. The resolution states that this debate WILL NOT BE INTERESTING. Merely one person showing interest shows that the debate is interesting on some level. "It is only logical that we go by majority to determine what is and isn't uninteresting." And what objective method is there to determine the thoughts of the majority? According to my opponent, one can't really determine whether or not individuals are interested without personally knowing them. Of course, even going by my reasoning (which suggest you can determine interest online), the only individuals who can be examined are myself and my opponent, since we're the only ones presenting in depth input on this debate. "Since my opponent can only show that HE is interested in this debate, me proving that "I AM NOT interested" or that "My evidence for showing that I was uninterested is not flawed" would clearly make me the winner of this debate." This links to the previous point. As you can see, me refuting that previous point makes this conclusion unattainable. 3) WILL NOT "If any segment of this debate is found to be uninteresting, then the final outcome will be that this debate was uninteresting to AT LEAST some degree." Again, the PRO cannot get away with this argument as the resolution does not say "This debate will be uninteresting to some degree." It says this debate will not be interesting PERIOD. Thus, the kind of the argument which my opponent is using only works in my favor. "Of course, if that is needed, then it goes back to my opponent's original claim about being interested in this debate; if relying on his word isn't good enough, then it would only be logical that my opponent present empirical evidence that shows he is interested in this debate." Wrong. If I thought this were the case, I would have cited my own interest as means of victory of this debate during round 1. However, this would be invalid evidence while coming from me, given my goal in this debate. 4) HUNCHES "Furthermore, he did attempted to deceive the audience, by making you think that my debating in a debate is proof of my being interested, when it only shows dedication. If there is any interest from this debate, its only winning. " I've proven why this is not the case in round 3. In response, my opponent simply replaces a few words, but for the most part, drops my argument. 5) INTENT "The fact that he is doing so shows that I don't care about this debate, but am just debating. And to care about something, there has to be some level of interest involved, which there isn't. As I've insinuated previously, this is more evidence that I am uninterested." False. My opponent is debating to win THIS debate, hence, he does care. Also, you can refer back to a comment he made on another debate that had absolutely nothing to do with this one. And not only did my opponent not insinuate this previously, but as show, this is not evidence that he is uninterested. "However, upon this realization, most (with the exception of Yraelz) have skipped this section." This goes about assuming that the people in the comment section were the only people to read this debate. Thus, I demand that my opponent prove this to be the case. Furthermore, as I've pointed out previously, this test won't be any means help my opponent. As long as there is some level of interest (even if it be from merely reading the first round alone) that proves that this debate is interesting. "However, if there is need for another reason of my uninterest from this debate, it is the very fact that I don't think this debate will be interesting." This is not a valid reason. This is merely begging the question. "Now, if the resolution had stated an unneeded specific, this would be a valid point on my opponent's part." I've already explained how it is needed. This goes dropped by my opponent, so dismiss this response for the same reason I provide. ".I will be saving my round 5 for until the debate is 3 spaces down in the Voting Period section, in order to examine the point I hoped to prove as I stated in round 1. " Any point made AFTER the debate is not part of the debate and is hence not to be considered. As you can see, my opponent has dropped most of my case in his recent response and is forfeiting this debate to me by claiming that he will respond after it is over. Whether or not he manages to prove anything in the comment section, the actual debate is done and I am clearly the victor. "So I'll say right now, since I won't be responding in round 5, to vote depending on whether you thought this debate was interesting" No, as a debate, you should vote based on who debated better. Despite the topic, personal opinion has no room here. Finally, I will reveal the purpose of the links and all cap comments which I had made in previous round. Links: From carefully observing these youtube links, you'll notice that they receive high amounts of views. Of course, this doesn't mean that I had to do this. I did it merely to pacify one of the points made by PRO. I presented information which had received thousands of comments/views so that I would be presenting information that MANY were interested in. The best part was that this info could be observed objectively. All CAPS comments: In general, all caps comments are usually perceived as a way of non verbally yelling. What better way to get someone than to yell? All caps comments will likely catch the attention of even those users who merely glance or scroll through debates. Anyway, I now await the final round.