What Is Love?

i will add my point of view.

there are many types of love, but each love has a nature, a certain way of acting.
one could say love is how the soul/spirit expresses its self.

however. both of you were referring to God's love, agape.
which is God. scripture declares God is love.

if either of you sufficiently proved How God is love, you would have met the burden of proof in my eyes.
but ONLY because you were referring to scripture and GOD'S love.
if you had not used scripture, i would have been forced to look at arguements dictating it as either
freewill
caring for the necessity of others.

If I vote as a tie, is that good or bad for the "mutual forfeit"?

Mutual forfeit has been agreed upon

This argument reads spiritual vibes. It’s more like my opinion vs your opinion instead of which is objectively more true.

Skipper presents better arguments and established his version with more conviction.

Liam’s “rebuttals” only bring the convo to an impasse.

1.)
a.) "No person would be able to love without free will. Love can't be love, unless someone is choosing to love. " this is a bold claim to make due to free will and
its nature still being debated amongst scholars to this very day, a lot more premises would need to be provided to back such a claim.
b.) " Love can't be love, unless someone is choosing to love" if this were true, how then can sayings such as "love at first sight" or "I couldn't help falling in
love" exist?
2.)
a.) "Tell me, if you truly love someone, then you would do anything for them correct? And Love contains doing, nice things for others perse. " you are making
the same mistake your opponent made in regard to mistaking correlation for cause, acts of wickedness can be done under the banner of love,

My first issue with your opening argument, the topic of this debate is "What Is Love?" not "what does the bible say love is ?" meaning for you to use the bible as a referencing point you would either have to
1.) mutually agree that the bible can be used as a referencing point
or
2.) establish premises showing why the bible can be used as a referencing point
without either of those, any premises provided referring to the bible simply hold no weight, what if your opponent is not a believer of the bible?

My second issue with your opening argument has been stated by your opponent which is the fact that you describe things attributed to love, however, that would be mistaking correlation with cause to assume because those things usually accompany love they are love or attributes that can be used to describe love, further premises showing such a relationship would be needed.

What is your point?

You specifically said "WHAT is love", meaning there could be infinitely many sides as human knowledge goes.

"We don't know your view here."
I do not know my competitors view either. We start on equal ground

Love=Free Will

"What is love? You choose your side and belief of the topic."

This is like picking a blind box. We don't know your view here. You are vaguely setting a trap, even.

Baby don't hurt me