0.999... = 1

Pro was the only one to attempt an argument, and it was based on sound mathematics. Con did not really attempt to rebut, accused pro of 'spitting hairs,' and then forfeited.

rFd In CoMmEnTz

Arguments: Pro established a sound mathematical proof which supported his claim that 0.999... = 1. Con did not offer any proof to assert that this was not true, nor did Con offer any evidence to refute any of pro's arguments (the only thing Con said was "It's splitting hairs... literally!")

Conduct: Con forfeited final round

See previous vote, with the following expansion to S&G (I stand by the original, but I am not against amending since two users had a problem):

Con had a complete absence of the correct punctuation, missing capitalization on gibberish sentences which seemed to be lacking at least their first parts, and more...

An important thing is that this is not a case of "one or two minor spelling mistakes." This is a case of the magnitude as a percentage of arguments. Con makes a case that there is "a bit" floating somewhere, but never attempts to be comprehensible by explaining where it is, or even what it is in terms of values (very important on a math debate). He even calls the very existence of the number one, nonsense: "Nonsense 1." With a comma in between, the term "nonsense" would be separate, thus referring maybe to pro's argument, instead of referring to the single most basic number in any counting system.
Con proceeds to proclaim that this debate was not about numbers at all, but about "hairs," which is incoherent already, but they were even more incoherently being "split" in some undefined 'literal' way never hinted at.

Remember, S&G is not just spelling, but grammar as well. If every one of your sentences make no sense in relation to anything else, there's a good chance the grammar of word choices have failed.

1 arguments: pro presented a mathematical argument as to why 0.999r = 1, other than calling it nonsense, con did not offer an argument.

Conduct to pro for cons forfeit.

Conduct: Forfeit

Arguments: Pro was the only one to really provide arguments for their side. Con's main argument was "Nonsense 1 is greater than anything less than one even by a bit." Pro countered this by using sound mathematical equations that prove that 0.999.... is, in fact, equal to one. Finally, con completely dropped pro's points. Con failed to respond to the mathematical equations provided, thus pro wins.

Con forfeits 2 Rounds, laughs at his opponent 'splitting hairs' and clearly doesn't try at all. Thus, conduct to Pro.

Only Pro used sources, one helped clarify how to get decimals from fractions, the other helped verify that he is using a genuine, respected proof of 0.9r(ecurring) being equal to 1.

I want us to take note that 0.1r * 9 clearly is not equal to 1, just to make it clear why both equations abuse 10*variable and 9*variable situations and neither works backwards to get the other, between 0.9r and 1. Thus, I want it to be crystal clear that Pro is incorrect if we analyse the logic fully, I say this for the sake of clarifying that Con lost due to not trying, not due to the opponent having very strong arguments. Because Con's only arguments were that 1 can only be equal to 1 and that Pro is splitting hairs, without slightly touching on Pro's logic it therefore follows that Pro was handed the win.

Pro relays several equations that prove 0.999...=1. Con fails to demonstrate how this is false, merely saying that Pro is "splitting hairs", and 0.999... is smaller because it must be even if only by a small amount, con doesn't back this up with any equation and doesn't provide me with a single reason why I should believe him.

So nem is the only one to provide me with any evidence at all to support his case.

Conduct to pro because of cons forfeiture.