I will not break a rule

Normally the probable loser of this debate would begin with rebuttals, but now the probable loser of this debate will bring up new violations of rules to start. Doing a quick skim of Pro's last response the probable loser of this debate counts 25 violations of rule #33 where Pro refers to himself in the first person, a violation of rule #34 in that Pro did not use any words greater than 13 characters. The probable loser of this debate notices that he violated rule #21 by not using the word temporize in the post; he has also violated rule #20, #28, and foundation rule #6 by not posting rules. There are. also very. numerous. violations. of rule. #22 throughout. Pro's round. 4 and 5. posts. The probable loser of this debate is now moving on to rebuttals as it would be pointless to point out any more violations. "CON Rule #11 (violated in round 1)" [The probable loser of this debate still maintains that the probable loser of this debate did not violate this rule because changing punctuation does not change how effective one's argument is in a debate where rule #8 is in effect. Even if the probable loser of this debate took away proper punctuation Pro still has sufficient power to state arguments and does not even need to limit word choice.] "PRO Rule #24 (violated in round 3)" [Rule #24 did not command me to give cannabis to lizards, it commended the probable loser of this debate to want to give cannabis to lizards which is adequately stated in round 3.] "PRO Rule #25 (violated in round 3)" [In his argument to validate this violation he states that the probable loser of this debate could have complimented his eyes. The probable loser of this debate does not understand this argument, nowhere in the rule does it mention anything about Pro's eyes. The probable loser of this debate will quote the portion of the rule here: "...the possible winner of this debate must thrice compliment me, by telling me that the probable loser of this debate have a body as hot as a 100 degree temp-or-ize as blue as the sea." Nowhere in this statement does the rule say anything about eyes. The probable loser of this debate has no idea what an 100 degree temp-or-ize is, but the probable loser of this debate do know that paraphrasing was not possible and that the probable loser of this debate only sees one possible compliment here.] The probable loser of this debate will now conclude by saying that we both had violations in round #3, him with the making of rule #25 and the probable loser of this debate with violations of rule #17. The probable loser of this debate opponent's violation occurred before mine chronologically but as a voter you might see them as happening at the same time because they were in the same round. In this instance both violations cancel each other and the first real violation was of rule #23 in round 4. As the voter you decide who wins this debate, but as the probable loser of the debate the probable loser of this debate urges a vote to the probable loser of the debate's position. 35.) Please post in comments What you meant by the eyes thing It is confusing 36.) Pro should have a nice Vacation from some school for The holiday break 37.) Pro should observe this Day with remembrance of what Happened to Harbor