BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Teachers should use the "long method" in teaching mathematics rather than the "short method"

Thank you for accepting. It's about TEACHING math. The long method teaches us the concept and flow of the lesson at hand whereas the short method simply smacks us the formulas and simply gives us the formula to get the final answer. In teaching mathematics, or rather in being a teacher you should make sure that the students understand the whole lesson even the smallest of things. In teaching Mathematics it surprisingly isn't about knowing the answer it's about knowing the process and HOW to get the answer Furthermore, learning the long method would enable one to utilize formulas, and even create some of their own, thus deepening their understanding of Mathematics. Also, "obviously when a person is solving a question time matters .short methods take less time ,so they are more convenient ." but note that, the topic is with regards to teaching Mathematics. At the end of the day, mastering the concepts of Math which is achieved by learning the long method, would enable one to compute in a short amount of time.
dustbunnies could beat rubber chickens in a fight

voodochild is completely correct jackiechan... you cannot fight the power of the dust bunnies!!! dustbunnies are everywhere... theyre like chinese people!!! if one german kid was against all the chinese... he would lose... german kid=rubber chicken, chinese=dust bunnies. this analogy is a very basic way of eplaining the fight... tho the rubber chicken may be bigger and cooler there just arent enough rubber chickens to take on the unstoppable masses of dustbunnies spread across the world in houses everywhere... you lose
God Is Existent

I have chosen lannan13 for the debate. Full ResolutionGod is likely existent. StructureBurden of Proof (BoP) is shared. Pro presents their opening arguments in R1, and Con presents it in R2. Pro's R2 and R3 are only for rebuttals and defense, and R4 is waived by Pro. Con's R3 and R4 are only for rebuttals and defense. Definitions (Please request any changes or additions before we begin)God - the omnipotent, omniscient, intelligent creator of the universe.Likely - probably. Existent - having being; existing. GuidelinesDeconstruction semantics, trolling and kritiks of the topic are not permitted. All arguments must be visible inside this debate, though sources may be external to it. Changing guidelines, definitions, structure, resolution or any other stipulations should be requested prior to the start of this debate. Voters: When voting, please give feedback on your reasoning, and what would have changed your mind, so as to improve future debates.
Deregulation increases the chance monopolies will form

Debate background;In the forums malcolmxy claimed that deregulation of natural resource industries causes monopolies to form. I refuted the claim, stating that regulations hurt competition and deregulation increases the ability of smaller businesses to compete. malcolmxy responded with the claim that deregulation of the financial industry (a different industry) hurts competition. I responded that it does not hurt competition, but it may increase the chance of fraud.To settle this dispute we started this debateDebate Rules;1.) malcolmxy has the BOP2.) 1st round acceptance only3.) no ad hominem attacks4.) there is the assumption of laissez-faire after deregulationBOP Requirements;The BOP is met only if malcolmxy can successfully argue all of the following claims;1.) deregulation hurts competition2.) deregulation increases the chance that a monopoly will form3.) regulations increase the ability of smaller companies to competition
motherhood is a choice

I will define some terms Motherhood-The state of being a mother; maternity. (1) Mother-Bearing a relation like that of a mother, as in being the origin, source, or protector. (2) Choice- An act or instance of selection. (3) I will be arguing that motherhood is a choice. Sources (1) . http://dictionary.reference.com... (2) . http://dictionary.reference.com... (3) . http://dictionary.reference.com...
motherhood is a choice

In the dialogue about sex equality in the workplace, it is assumed that motherhood is holding women back from equality, and that if only women made different choices in regards to babies and caring for them, then equality could be achieved.^This is not the subject of the debate. I put it here as the context in which all terms are to be defined.The resolution is that motherhood is a choice. I will be arguing that this is wrong. Motherhood is not a choice.
motherhood is a choice

The Breakdown on the story of utahgirl She chose to go out partying when she should be studying She chose to drink beer instead of lemonade She chose to talk to the bad reputation football player She chose to flirt with him She chose not to tell him to wear a condom Then she got pregnant, seems like there was a lot of choices that lead to her pregnancy. That is my point that pregnancy doesn't just happen choices lead to it, maybe utahgirl didn't want to get pregnant, but her choices lead to it. So in doing so she choice to become pregnant. It seems like my opponent is trying to say that being a mother has so much peer pressure that they have to be mothers, but aren't we all taught at an early age to just say no. No one can force another to do something they don't want; if they physically force than it is against the law. While 80 percent is a large number of people that become mothers that still means that 20 percent choose not to become mothers, 1 out of 5 that is a pretty common occurrence. While many of these people do choose to become mothers there is still some that don't want to, but their actions made it happen. My opponent acts like having a child is not equal, well no one is equal. Some are better at things than others and others are better than some, but everyone can be treated equally. Men and woman have separate genders, wants, needs, and thoughts, but they are still equal. Motherhood is a choice because motherhood just doesn't just happen.
motherhood is a choice

Religion It is true if you look at my debate page (1) I am a Christian, but how did I become a Christian is what my opponent failed to answer. I became a Christian because I choose to believe in the Bible and a Heavenly Father. I could also choose to become Muslim if I choose to believe in Islam. But, I won't because of my chosen believes. People change all the time to different religions 4 out of 10 American adults choose to no longer be members of a certain faith,and 1 out of 10 choose to change religions(2). Water,Ice, and Sex While water doesn't choose to be put into the freezer someone had to choose to put it there, and if it didn't want it to freeze than why did they put it in the freezer. Compare that to sex if someone doesn't want to have a pregnancy why choose a situation that could cause it to happen. If they do become pregnant than they have to take responsibility for their choice. That choice becomes motherhood. Adoption It is simple to believe that someone had to choose to follow the standards that adoption has and humans instincts aren't to follow adoption papers. Choice is political No one can force another to work at a job or it turns into slavery which is against the 13 amendment(3). Sex equality isn't about what naturally happens, the term separate and equal comes to play between man and woman both are different, but can be treated equally. Nature doesn't make things equal. Motherhood is a choice, just because someone feels like they have to doesn't mean they actually do. Sources (1) http://www.debate.org... (2) http://www.cnn.com... (3) http://www.loc.gov...
motherhood is a choice

Motherhood is a choice, motherhood like what I defined in the first round is a state of being a mother; and being a mother is being the origin, source, or protector; or what my opponent stated a mother is a female parent. Well there are two ways in which a person becomes a mother or female parent it is by adoption or pregnancy. Adoption Adoption is the most obvious of the two ways to become a mother. First, adoption has certain standards that one has to follow before they can claim a child so if the woman wants the child they have to choose to follow the standards. It is clear by the National Adoption Center (1) of their standards. Adoption is one way that can't be refuted as a choice a woman makes. Pregnancy Now pregnancy is the grey area of a woman's ways of becoming a mother, but it still is a choice. Of course their are some pregnancies that are not by choice such as rape or incest which is very disgusting and a very sad reality, but 0.04% of all pregnancies are caused by rape (2), while this number should be 0% it still is a very small percentage and I would think that my opponent would agree that this should be an exulted from the debate. But, to continue on to my point a woman doesn't become pregnant from accident a choice is made in the process, this choice is having intercourse with a man. The main point of mating is to continue on the species (3) which having sex does. While the woman might not want the child the old saying occurs, you choose your actions, but you don't choose the consequences. This comes into play when someone gets pregnant they choose to have sex and the consequence was getting pregnant, so in a indirect way choose to get pregnant. I would like to address my opponents section on bigotry. All the examples are choices someone makes while they are hard for some they still are choices. Homosexuality, while someone could claim to be born gay they aren't homosexual until they choose to act on those feelings, same goes for heterosexuality and abstinence if someone chooses that sexual behavior they are marked as that as well. Heroin is choice also, no one can become addicted to something until they choose to use it. Islam is also a choice like any other religion if someone wants to leave it they can it might be hard, but it still is a choice. Motherhood is a choice even when they don't want it to be. Sources (1) http://www.adopt.org... (2) http://www.ewtn.com... (3) http://www.christs.cam.ac.uk...
Enter The Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) is a better album than Wu-Tang Forever

I saw Lukas at the weekend, so I'm pretty sure that he is alive and well and I can only conclude that his forfeiture of the previous round represents a profound realisation, nay an epiphany, that he has been arguing a position that he knows he can't win. I believe that my opponent has done some soul searching, looked within and found that he prefers Enter too. He knows I'm right. I suppose that it could be a devious and sly tactic to gain an underhand advantage. Perhaps Lukas intends to lull me into a false sense of security so I don't expand on my position too much in this round, only to kick myself hard when he posts an epic destruction post in the final round that I won't be able to respond to. This wouldn't surprise me in the least but then neither would another forfeit. ___________ To be fair I think I've already given him plenty to respond to if he does choose to post again and I really can't be bothered right now to give a full breakdown of the 27 tracks on Forever. Obviously the ratings I gave in the previous round do merely represent my own opinion and I don't claim to be any ultimate authority on quality but real recognises real and heads (I really can't imagine anyone else taking the time to read this far) know I'm right. I endeavored to be accurate and unbiased in my ratings and almost succeeded. Note for any CD format trainspotters wondering why I missed a track off my analysis of Enter: The Skunk Remix of Method Man is not on the vinyl version. _________ The key observation I would like to make in this my final round is a profoundly superficial one that is nevertheless of critical importance. Enter has much better sleeve note shout-outs than Forever. Both albums had incredibly dull and long shout-out sections but while the Forever shouts were bogged down heavily by cringe inducing clichï¿½s and advertising text for the Wu-Wear clothing brand, the Enter shouts were funnier, introducing people for the first time to amusingly titled Wu associates like Dreddy Kruger and Ugly Man as well as shouts to "all the dustheads, all the method smokers ... all our physicals, all you other motherf***ers". It's all written in a rambling, dictated style including things like "Oh yeah, Ghost wanted to thank the following". The only real highlight of the forever shouts is Ghostface threatening to spit in the face of "f@ggot @ss radio n1ggas who don't support our sh1t". ________ So yeah, extend my previous arguments. Enter The Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) is a better album than Wu-Tang Forever. Thanks. http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com...
why is esports is a sport

First, I"d like to assert that "sport" is a recreational activity whereby a person partakes as an individual or a team to compete against an opposition, in a match of skill, speed, strength, strategy, and tactics. Now let me highlight some characteristics of E-sports which bear some resemblance to real-life sports. Competition: E-sport players have to compete with their opponents to win a match, just like football, racing etc. Skills and activities: E-sport players need a high level of tactical understanding and constant practice to win a match, especially in strategy games like League of Legends and DOTA. And scientists at the German Sports University have conducted a study of E-Sport players and it demonstrates that players are exposed to physical strains similar to those of normal athletes (1). Another study has shown that video game players did significantly better in basic motor skills, such as precision, aiming, speed, dexterity and movement coordination (2). So it's safe to assume that many E-sport players are exposed to physical activities to some extent in training and competitions. Trianing: Players work as part of a team and have tough training regimes. They also worked on things like healthy eating, sleeping enough and daily physical exercises (3). Some teams are trained by sports coaches, and sports psychologists. Rules and Regulations: Just like normal sports, E-sports have its own rules and regulations developed by World Esports Association or WESA. The association brings traditional sports rulings to E-sport. So in conclusion, I believe that E-Sport is a form of sport which shares many characteristics of real-life sports. I hope to see my opponent"s arguments in the next round. (1) . http://www.dw.com... (2) . https://link.springer.com... (3) . https://www.redbull.com...
U.S is superior to Canada

I am arguing in the general sense, that the United States is superior to Canada. While my opponent will argue Canada is superior to the United States.Basically by superior, i mean the following factors (note this is only a few of them)-Politics-Lifestyle -Culture-Education-FreedomSuperior 1. greater in quality, quantity, etc. 2. of high or extraordinary worth, merit, etc. 3. higher in rank or status.a. of higher grade or quality.
is Henderson's Boys books better than cherub books

PRO offers nothing more than an assertion--he basically restates the resolution without providing any substantive argument or reason he believes that to be true, nor an objective criteria by which we can gauge whether one is better. He was affirming that one was better than the other, while in order to win I only needed to negate--I did not need to defend the counter that Cherub books are better, but if that option remained on the table, or if the option that they are equal in worth remains, you vote CON by default.Therefore, you vote to negate because PRO has given us no reason to think that one is objectively better than the other, or that there's any objective means by which to weigh that.
There is a god

There are so many fallacies in your argument, I can't even be bothered listing them. You straight up say that I'm wrong without providing any information, sources, references or even quotes with names. The information you give is therefore irrational and simply exists for argument. The universe is over 14 billion years old, with over 10^24 billion planets, and over 200 billion galaxies in the KNOWN universe. Saying that the universe is not old enough is a useless argument anyway, since the shear amount of opportunities for life to arise in the universe on the amount of planets available is very probable. http://scienceblogs.com... http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov... Also, laws are created by humans, whom have a currently limited knowledge and understanding or how physics work. Laws are given to simplify a pattern among the universe. If a law is wrong, it must be changed. Besides, your argument is irrelevant since I gave you sources as to some theories of how the Big Bang happened. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that the Big Bang happened and how it might of happened. Finally, saying there is no evidence that something doesn't exist is a fallacy. The burden of proof is on you. If you make a claim that God exists, then YOU have to provide proper scientific evidence to back that up, which you haven't. So far, you have provided no sources, nor quoted any scientists. The only evidence your providing is either anecdotal of a factual errors.
There is a god

Ok i get it.... Anyway the universe is neither old enough nor large enough for life to have spontaneously begun on its own, also the very age of the universe requires that an outside force must have at least initiated the process of life in the universe, and the law of cause and effect dictates that the nothing can exist within our universe without the influence of an outside force. To believe that such an outside force is not intelligent or conscious, to me, would require a staggering amount of faith! There are no effects extant without causation.. therefore there must needs to have been one uncaused cause... this does not disprove evolution, but it does show that evolution is caused...even the quantum physics community now reports that "the known universe now appears less like an accident and more like a thought". Through the ages so large, varied and even isolated segments of population Earth, both religionist and non, educated and aborigne, sense this thought/cause and independantly evolve a God concept is evolutionary socio/physical proof that God exists within their physical experiences. Lastly i personally think there is no evidence that god doesnt exist, what you have is all lies you all think are truths...
There is a god

First, read the bible it answers a lot of stuff. Ok lets go...the cosmological argument is an argument for the existence of God that says that God is the First Cause that created the universe. It"s also known as the argument from first cause, the causal argument, or the argument from existence. The argument below is a variant of the cosmological argument, and it states: Premise 1 " Something exists Premise 2 " Nothing cannot create something Conclusion " Something must have always existed There are only two options if we"re following the logic given in the cosmological argument. -Either the universe has always existed or -Something outside the universe has always existed _________________________________________________________________________ -Also discoveries in astronomy have shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the universe did, in fact, have a beginning. There was a single moment of creation. -Advances in molecular biology have revealed vast amounts of information encoded in each and every living cell, and molecular biologists have discovered thousands upon thousands of exquisitely designed machines at the molecular level. Information requires intelligence and design requires a designer. -Biochemists and mathematicians have calculated the odds against life arising from non-life naturally via unintelligent processes. The odds are astronomical. In fact, scientists aren't even sure if life could have evolved naturally via unintelligent processes. If life did not arise by chance, how did it arise? -People of every race, creed, color, and culture, both men and women, young and old, wise and foolish, from the educated to the ignorant, claim to have personally experienced something of the supernatural. So what are we supposed to do with these prodigious accounts of divine healing, prophetic revelation, answered prayer, and other miraculous phenomena? Ignorance and imagination may have played a part to be sure, but is there something more?
There is a god

The distance from the sun to our planet, therefore making it sustainable, was created by pure chance. As unlikely as its seems, it makes sense since there are billions of stars in our galaxy alone, let alone planets and other matter in the whole universe. The chance of at least on planet in this universe being sustainable for life is actually quite probable. http://www.nasa.gov... http://www.space.com... http://www.hawking.org.uk... Secondly, healing the sick by God is only supported by anecdotal evidence or from "Holy Books" such as the bible or Karan, which are thousands of years old. Even modern day healing is due to scientists hard work making medicine for once incurable diseases! http://www.who.int... http://www.mnn.com... Also, if God does truly heal the sick all over the world, why does he let others simply die, such as starving children in Africa? Or why does he allow violence and rape to progress without even a slight degree of resistance? This is cherry picking facts and special pleading. http://www.poverty.com... Finally, you give no sources as to these miraculous "healings". Please give valid, up to date citations please.
There is a god

The complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe, but sustains it today. Nature is actually full of quantifiable miracles. Just consider the fact that the earth is the perfect distance from the sun to support life. If we were any farther away from the sun, we would freeze; if we were even slightly closer to it, we would burn up. It"s obvious God created this home for us! Healing miracles! Also there's miracle healing, thousands of people all over the world are miraculously healed from incurable conditions, after being touched by the power of God.
Speech Should Be Censored (Anti Freedom of Speech)

Unchecked freedom of speech is an outdated, harmful and dangerous concept. I profess that speech should be censored if one wants to attain a safe society. It should be censored reasonably, morally and by democratic vote. Definition, Freedom of Speech: 1. The right to speak without censorship or restraint by the government. Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. Reason: 1. a basis or cause, as for some belief, action, fact, event, 2. a statement presented in justification or explanation of a belief or action. 3. the mental powers concerned with forming conclusions, judgments, or inferences. 4. sound judgment; good sense. 5. normal or sound powers of mind; sanity. Rules 1. First round is for acceptance only and you may present a small opening argument. (as I have done above. ) 2. Semantics and ignoring the intention of the debate will be ignored. 3. No new arguments in the final round. 4. Forfeiting any round results in an automatic 7 point loss. 5. Please review the definitions provided. No new ones will be accepted in the following rounds.
Sexiest Female Rapist Debate

The pictures should be within the articles/videos. This is valerie K from a previous round. https://www.google.com... My russian hairdresser link didn't work last round so i'll fix it http://rt.com... Ok so here are my 3 for this round. We have a case of incestuous and statutory rape. Mother has sex with biological son! She must have been really hot for that to have happened. http://www.cbsnews.com... A few girls rape a boy in this video http://www.ebaumsworld.com... Here is a video of reverse rape in American Horror story Coven series. A male rapist gets raped by a girl cause he raped her friend. http://screencast-o-matic.com...