You should not be given points for using sources on DDO

If my opponent read my argument and understood it properly he/she would have noticed that the reason that the reason that I made rubuttals was because it would have been unfair on me if you used rebuttals and I didn't. Since you failed to follow the debate structure you had already lost. IN order to continue the debate fairly I followe the structure that you chose. My opponent has also provided an alternative debate structure although it is unacceptable to suggest a new debate structure in the closing rounds of a debate and expect that it is alright to follow by this structure. My opponent claims that they would have been a whole round behind if the rebuttals had been done in round 3 however the rebuttals made by me in round 2 were in response to the argument posed in round 1 by my opponent. I did not have an argument in round 1. If I did pose an argument in round one then it would have been acceptable for rebuttals by my opponent but since my opponent started with an extra round it is only fair that I get to refute it. If I did not then the round allocated to rebuttals would have been increasingly complex since I would have to refute both arguments from round 1 and round 2 in that round.Conclusion Opponent: Sources are not used in every argument, but they are vital enough to be a separate section apart from arguments. They should still count as their own separate point. "Just because sources are not used in all debates does NOT mean that they are not important enough to warrant their own point. Tying them into arguments would leave too many points into one category, and, as I said before, be extremely similar to the already existing “Select Winner” system. The reason the two styles exist is for a variety of voting choices, one is for the overall content of the debate, and the other is for separate factors that tie into why a person won. Also, they do nothing to serve for a more “convincing argument”, so that argument falls flat."I respond: 1) I never said that they aren't important - I merely pointed out that they do not need to have points for the usage of them. Of course if they are completely neccessary and they are not used then the argument is clearly not a very convincing one - and therefore they should not be awarded the convincing argument point.2) There wouldn't be too many points into one more category because I never suggested that we add the sources points onto the arguments points - I just stated that when voting on convincing argument sources should be considered. 3 points would still be awarded for convincing argument it would be harder to receive convincing argument points simply because voters will be looking for sources as well as good arguments (in certain debates). You say:"Another thing that I don’t like about my opponent’s arguments is his constant belittling of voters’ ability, even going as far to say that I “concede” by presenting the idea of judges, which help for more fair voting when it comes to all topics. He constantly states how voters will vote for one person because they provide one source such as a definition and the other doesn’t, and the like. As I’ve stated in my R2, if you do not trust random people with little or no debate experience to adequately vote on a debate, set an ELO limit. I don’t understand how this is a concession because it doesn’t provide a solution to Pro’s issue. It just makes it so that you will receive quality votes and voters will truly understand how little significance a definition source really is. Also, they are far more likely to look at and weigh sources, which is really what we’re discussing right now."1) Your role in this debate is to prove that sources points should be kept when voting. Providing a solution to it indicates that you have run out of arguments and are relying on alternatives to keep your argument looking longer and looking like you have more points to offer.2) Not everyone can find willing judges to vote on their debates. It is difficult to find a sufficient amount of voters who will vote without bias on your debates. On certain topics it is unclear what the judges opinions on the topic are and therefore it is difficult to work out who to pick to judge your debates. 3) You have attempted to provide an alternative (which is not your role in this debate) and even after you hae done this you have still failed to provide me with any convincing reasons to why sources should be kept as part of the voting criteria on debate.org.You say: "Opponent commonly addresses the idea of “If one person provides more sources, they win source points” which is false if both parties provide sources of quality value. It’s not about the quantity of the sources, it’s more so the quality that awards. If someone provides 5 quality sources VS someone provides two, sources will be left blank as both parties have provided quality sources. In the debates I’ve seen and been in, if both parties use sources then sources is often left in the middle." 1) Whilst it is true that more experienced debaters and voters check the reliability of sources the average voter does not bother to check every source to check its individual reliability.You say: "Then opponent will continue to ask “what if one person uses a source and another doesn’t?” If it’s just a definition or some term, it is not enough to warrant source points alone. However, in a debate that would require sources, one person cites one valid source (apart from a definition or term) and the other doesn’t, points SHOULD go to the first person." 1) This is your opinion and this is how you would vote - however, not everyone believes what you do. Some people (when voting) will look at the voting criteria - see the sources points - look at the debate argument - see that only one debater has used sources and immediately choose the debater who used sources. This applies to the average voter on debate.org. Avoiding my opponents concession and failure to abide by the rules of this debate I have still won.Conduct - TiedArument - MeSpelling and Grammar - MeSources - TiedReasons: Aruments should go to me since the only valid things that my opponent has stated are alternatives. My opponent has also failed to provide any reason to why sources shouldn't just be considered as part of the more convincing argument section other than an opinion ("valid enough"). Spelling and grammar should go to me since my opponent has included full capitalizations of words. e.g but sources CAN be used. My opponent has also made spelling mistakes.e.g In some instances only the definitions will be listed and no source point should be awared for that. I think that in the second example my opponent meant to say awarded but there may have been a little spelling mistake or a typo. Overall, for these reasons and mroe I believe that I have won this debate and I hope that the voters agree with my reasons and vote Pro!NOTE My opponent must forfeit the next round - as explained in the first round.Sourceshttp://sourcesarenotimportantreasonsthisisatestforvoters.com...