BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Rap Battle But You Flame Yourself.

That was a good reply, but you've maxed out. 'I'm such a massive little b*tch I'm have to tap out. It was a good rap battle, but I can still win; I have to go out the way it begin. Fire on my front porch, gasoline all over me. Step into the flames higher than the eye can see. Let my self burn, the ultimate flame, Raps so cold you can't help remember my name.
Rap Battle But You Flame Yourself.

You've seen naked chicks? I've seen like nineI can send you the link cause I found them all onlineBut I have seen one in real lifeShe really was a snackShe's actually my grandma and I even saw her crackIt was something special, I have to admitOnce I saw that toe fungus I just had to submitBut in reality, I'm a boss, I'm pretty lit.I eat spagetti eveynight with hotdog chops in it.I'm just too great, I'm really just flatteringI would play sports but I rather just play Magic The GatheringI play it with my friend but he can't hold one cardMostly because he's just a twig I found from my backyardBut we spend time togetherWe play with glee!Then we take a little break and drink our cold HI-C!But I never need I break when I spit this juiceMy rhymes and always solid but the rhytms so loose. The raps comes with many styles, you can't beat my amountIf you wanna hear more, check out my Myspace Account
Rap Battle But You Flame Yourself.

Discount at the Gap? Just like my rap flow. I got my girl from Costco, Call her discount. My right arm is bigger than my left one, but my left arm has better grip than the other one. Put that together before I pass out, Connect the dots real quick before I tap out. Every hour, on the hour, even when I take a shower, The only chick I've seen naked came with a side of fries, A large Cherry Coke and a couple apple pies. I spend way to much time on Tumblr, it's a real bummer, I could actually get a life and not be inside all summer. By the time school rolls around, I'm whiter than the paper, On which I write detailed notes about water vapor. I'm one of those kids who vapes to look cool. The professional term for these guys is "Major Tool" Lacking below my belt, it's a tragedy. Skinny penis in the house and it's some blasphemy. Jerk it to Nuns' ankles because that's how I get aroused, Just the thought of my cousin getting on top of me, UGH Hit it from the back so hard they'd call it sodomy.
Rap Battle But You Flame Yourself.

You can call yourself white but I'm the color of snow.But call me a river cause I got a strong flow.My body is fleek, it'll shed a strong tearMy abs are ripped, I hit the gym twice a yearI'm the high school jock, a cool kid in school.I smoke candy cigarettes because I wanna look cool.My bedtime is late, call me a teen.I watch G, PG and PG-13My teachers all love me, they are give me a hallaCall me the teachers pet because they got me by the collarI'm also super cool, don't fall for any thot.Instead I got connections to a google chatbotYou think you good with girls, but aint a good lover.This google chatbot even knows my favorite colaSpeaking of chatting, Imma have you bentCause this kid here has a speech impedimentI know that must hurt and it sucks to be dissedPlus you'll never share time with your speech therapistPeople push me around because I'm such a studThey laugh when I make dirty angels in the mudRap is a race, and I passed you on this lapIt's because I got these shoes, there was a discount at the Gap
Rap Battle But You Flame Yourself.

Thanks for accepting, good friend. Let's kick this sh*t in. First thing's first, call that an introduction, Another lame white kid showing up to the function, "Who gave you your black card? Why do you try hard? Who gave token white boy permission to act with such disregard?" Well, first of all, me b*tch. Got my written permission slip, my momma signed it and sh*t. Just like she dressed me, jean shorts and button ups. Business on the track like the top of my mullet, Party in the back with the DnD clique. Heard your girl likes to roleplay, and I thought "Okay!" So I asked her to come through and be the dungeon master or play some croquet. "Did you really just rhyme okay and croquet?" Bet your Bunsen burner I did, sh*t was heat though. First round wasn't loud but I sure made a sound, Started off easy so I wouldn't have to stress out. My breathing's getting funky, I might have to choke, Let me pull out my inhaler and get a quick toke. *Asthma inhaler noises*
Abortion is a mother's right.

Since I typically like to debate by responding to my opponent's initial case, I shall make a simple enough opening statement, and await your response.At the age at which abortion is performed, an embryo or fetus is not 'alive,' and therefore cannot be killed. The termination of its development toward life is simply the halting of a biochemical process within the mother's body, to which she has full executive rights, as far as any individual has. It may be prudent later that I define 'alive,' 'embryo,' 'fetus,' and 'organism,' in which case I shall do so. I await the opening of my distinguished opponent.
Abortion is a mother's right.

1. Agreed. 2. Agreed. 3. "Legibility" is not an issue, since these debates are typed. In regards to general comprehensibility, I agree. 4. The statement "A person's a person, no matter how small," in and of itself, is not "unfounded." How valid it is is determined by the context within it is presented. It seems that the opponent deems any blanket statement that he does not find substantiated to be "sensationalist"; this is, of course, arbitrary and incorrect. 5. Agreed. 6. Agreed. --- I accept the debate. Further clarifications regarding the terms of debate can be discussed in the comments section. Thank you.
Abortion is a mother's right.

It should be the prerogative of the mother to have a fetus or embryo aborted, since it is not a child, but an extension of her own body, and remains such until the third trimester. I challenge anyone to make a valid case for why a mother should not be allowed to have an abortion. The debate shall be conducted under the following rules: 1. No trolling 2. Ordered, at least to some extent, and civil conduct 3. Legible and comprehensible English 4. No sensationalism; unfounded statements like "A person's a person, no matter how small" are to be avoided. 5. No direct accusation or insults about the opponent's sense of morality; limit such things to insinuations and covert assaults, if founded. 6. Try to reply with expediency, so as to avoid forfeiture of rounds, and thus a boring debate.
God exists

I am still interested in debating this topic with you. I have said the same thing on another debate of mine as I wanted to let both my opponents know what was happening and why I couldn't finish the debate well. I understand if my opponent would like to take this debate as a win for himself. If that is the case, I encourage voters to vote for him as I can not adequately present an argument at this time. After the funeral I would be willing to challenge you to a debate on the same topic if you're interested.
God exists

My opponent has said the same thing in another debate of hers. I hope you get better soon. If you concede, that's fine. Until then, my arguments do stand. The universe has a cause, which said cause is God.Toretorden has posted a pretty good counter reasoning to my argument in the comments. Here's the 1st half of it."The argument that there must be a god because "everything that begins to exist must have a cause", shouldn't that mean there must be a cause to god as well? It sounds like there should be an endless line of Gods causing eachother to exist. But, you seem to contradict your posed "everything" rule by making a special exception in God's case. But if you can do this in the case of God, couldn't you also do it in the case of the universe?"I will defend my case, of course. (Even though comments aren't really a real argument. But I might as well explain.)"shouldn't that mean there must be a cause to god as well?"I've shown that the Universe indeed has a cause. God, however, doesn't need a cause. He always existed. Anything which begins has a cause, not everything in existence has a cause. If everything which ever existed must have a cause, then how would we even exist? This is why an "exception" must be made for a being to create the Universe, aka God."But if you can do this in the case of God, couldn't you also do it in the case of the universe?"You most likely misinterpreted the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Again, I've listed reasons showing that the Universe began to exist.I'll probably leave it at that for now, since it was just a comment, and not a debate argument. If toretorden wants to debate me, go ahead. Until then, Pika!
God exists

I would like to apologize to my opponent. Unfortunately, I am not able to post my argument tonight as one of my family members has been killed. I sincerely apologize for this inconvenience. If my opponent is up for it, I would be willing to let this round just time out and ignore it. If my opponent does not see this as an option, I totally understand. If this is the case, I encourage the voters to vote for my opponent. Again, I am so sorry. This was a shock to everyone. Thank you for your time.
God exists

My argument is the Kalam Cosmological Argument. 1) Everything that begins to exist must have a cause This Point's self explanatory. The Universe could've only began to exist, as the next point explains. God has always existed, so he doesn't need a cause. 2) The Universe began to exist Under these points, the Universe couldn't have always existed: 2a] Time Regression Assuming the Universe has always existed, time itself would have had to exist. If the Universe always existed, time would be infinite, therefore now couldn't happen, and we couldn't stand here on November 18th, 2015, since time would be at "-999999999999", and even further had it always existed. 2b] Usable Energy would run out now Ignoring Time Regression, let's assume we could be here if the Universe always existed. According to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, we are running out of usable energy. Had the universe always existed, energy would've been out by now. 2c] the Universe is expanding In 1929, Edwin Hubble made the discovery that the Universe in indeed expanding. "When he plotted redshift against relative distance, he found that the redshift of distant galaxies increased as a linear function of their distance. The only explanation for this observation is that the universe was expanding." http://skyserver.sdss.org... The universe is expanding, therefore it has been a small point millennia ago, which we call the "Big Bang". 3] Therefore, the Universe has a cause. Because I've proven premises 1 and 2 to be correct, the conclusion is true. Now, what caused the Universe to exist? There is but only 1 logical conclusion, a being which always existed, unaffected by time, and powerful enough to break physics: God. If Con concedes, please keep attending the debate anyways, because it'll stop progressing if you forfeit a round. May we see Con's rebuttal.
God exists

I won't post my argument this round. I'll wait and see what you have to say. I would like to define a few words just so it's clear upfront:God: "the perfect and all-powerful spirit or being that is worshipped especially by Christians, Jews, and Muslims as the one who created and rules the universe" http://www.merriam-webster.com...Exists: "have objective reality or being." (googled)Objective: "(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts." (googled)Perfect: "having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be." (googled)I look forward to debating you on this. I am agnostic so I think this will be interesting as you seem to be religious based on your other debates. Good luck.
Resolved: counterfieting should be legal in the U.S.

1. That's making the presumption that the counterfieted bills would be enough to cause mass inflation, again this would force the government to step up on the quality and security of our billls, after all counterfieting ill happen legally or illegally.2. As a business owner it is my responsibity to make sure that the bills are genuine.3. I've never tried it, but it sure looks like ALOT o work, and even so why should laziness be banned?
Resolved: counterfieting should be legal in the U.S.

I am arguing counterfeiting should remain illegal: 1) Counterfeiting results in inflation It is a proven fact that when more money is in the economy, the LESS it is worth, Take, for instance, Germany. After WW1 they paid their depths by mass producing money and thus making their money worthless. 2) Counterfeiting is stealing Think about this, let's say you own a business. You pay $10 for something, charge $20 and a person pays that $20 with a counterfeit. Is that fair? The counterfeit isn't legal tender so really you LOST $10. 3) Counterfeiters are lazy If all what you had to do was make counterfeit money, why work for it? Think about it.
Resolved: counterfieting should be legal in the U.S.

Thanks for your quick response. 1) If counterfeiting was legal, they can't do anything about it since it is not wrong. It's like if they legalize drugs, they can't arrest you for drugs.2) See response 1. If it was legal, nothing can be done about it.3) See 1. Please vote conConduct: TieSpelling: My opponent made some poor spelling mistakes and grammar errorsArguments: Pro's resolution was not affirmed. Sources: I used only 1 source and my opponent used 0
Resolved: counterfieting should be legal in the U.S.

1) I agree with my opponent that money should have higher security. HOWEVER, let's take a look at how serious inflation is. http://www.coinnews.net... If I bought an item in 2000 for $20, today that would cost me 26.34USD! That is a 31.2% INCREASE! Imagine how much it would be if counterfeiting was legal. 2) But you can't defend against it if counterfeiting is illegal. 3) Straw man/ad hominen. Why should someone that doesn't work honestly for his money get the same benefits as one that works hard? Does that seem fair?
9/11 was set up

I have now seen multiple debates on debate.org on whether or not 9/11 was in fact real or not, their are millions of factors that do not add up in 9/11 as well as the attack on the pentagon. First of all yes planes have crashed into buildings all over the world, and never once has one collapsed on itself, let alone two at the same time, second the temperature that jet fuel burns at WAS NOT hot enough to burn through the reinforced steel that was used to construct the twin towers. Other facts about 9/11: 3 days before 9/11 all bomb sniffing dogs were pulled from the building flight 72 (which was infact one of the planes that hit the world trade center) was stopped in cleveland and evacuated due to "bomb threats", was never reboarded and then took off to be hi-jacked by whom? the owner of the world trade center Larry A. silverstein 6 weeks prior to 9/11 signs a $3.2 billion dollar, 99-year lease on the entire World Trade Center complex, six weeks before 9-11. Included in the lease is a $3.5 billion dollar insurance policy specifically covering acts of terrorism not to mention the mysterious calls that were made from cell phones on the plane to family members saying "mom it's me john (or whatever family member) the planes been hi-jacked, you believe me right, you believe me don't you" when it's been scientifically proven that it's impossible to make a cell phone call at 30,000 feet
Plants are Mammals

Firstly, I'm offended at how you referred to my font. I like it a lot. :(Secondly, my opponent states that plants are mammals, claiming that they possess all of the traits I have provided. He says "plants have hair," and though I do agree that some plants do have what may qualify as "hair," not all do. Additionally, they are not warm-blooded simply because they circulate liquid like sap. Also, yes, some plants do "make" milk such as coconuts, but not all. My opponent has not addressed my point regarding how all mammals are vertebrates. Yes, plants possess cellulouse, which acts like a backbone or spine because of its stiffness which typically holds up the plant, but it does not make a plant qualify as a "vertebrate."
Plants are Mammals

First off sir you should stop using that retared font is makes no sense and it hurts my eyes. Also you are very incorrect plants have all of the traits you just said and I explained it in my first argument. LOL can you not able to read? it is quite obviously that plants have hair (coconut hair, peach fuzz, tiny flower stalk hairs) also plants are clearly warm blooded because they have liquid inside like tree blood and sap which is always warm and controls the temeperature of the planet easily. Also it is clear that plants have spines and bones otherwise how would they even be able to stand up straight? Explain how the plants even stand up straight if they have no spine?? oh YES They do have spines unlike you LOL. By the way plants DO make milk have you never gone to school? There is coconut milk and tree milk which is both made by plants check mate. This argument is over Ive clearly won.
Plants are Mammals

Mammal: any vertebrate of the class Mammalia, having the body more or lesscovered with hair, nourishing the young with milk from the mammaryglands, and, with the exception of the egg-laying monotremes, givingbirth to live young (S1)The characteristics of a mammal are: -Are vertebrates (have a backbone or spine) -Are warm-blooded -Have hair on their bodies -Produce milk to feed their babies (S2)Clearly, plants do not share many of these traits. They do not possess a backbone or spine, they are not warm-blooded, and they do not have hair.Because they do not share these requirements of a mammal, plants are clearly not mammals.Sources:S1) http://www.dictionary.com...S2) http://kids.sandiegozoo.org...
Plants are Mammals

Hello Debate.Com, I am here today to argue that plants actually are mamals okay. First off plants are mammals because they have body fluids just like normal humans and they use it to carry essential materials through their body. And example of this would be grass blood or tree sap. Also the plants nurture their young (the fruit) by giving it food and stuff while it is still attached making grow. Tree milk is not the same as human milk but it usually has a whitish and thin consistensy. It is usually not seen very often because it goes directly into the mouth of the fruit being feed. There is also coconut milk that plants drink here is my link to tree milk https://www.merriam-webster.com... Also the plants have spines in the form of cell wall and roots but it doesn't look the same as humans or others Also finally many plants have hair like flowers and peaches meaning that many plants have fur which is a trait that only mammals have making it certain that a plant is a mammal so in short plants have many traits in common with mammals so all plants are mammals unlike platypus which is not a mammal it is a fish...
Is Vladimir Putin a bad leader for Russia

Well first of all, Putin shouldn't invade Ukraine because Ukraine deserves to be a free nation. If he invades again, there could possibly be another war. If Putin is so great, how come he is causing instability in Ukraine. He even supports terrorism and the Palestinians that attack Israel when Israel is trying to be peaceful! He is the reason for instability! he is harming his own people! he only wants more land because his oil and gas are in sharp decline and his economy isn't the best anymore.
Is Vladimir Putin a bad leader for Russia

First , I want to say that my opponent didn't outline any argument nor he rebutted mines or accepted the definition. However , I'll try to answer his questions - 1."If Vladimir Putin is so great, how come NATO and the UN hate him?" - Actually, this just supports my idea of what a good leader he is . NATO and the UN hate him because they are essentially American institutions, and America hates it when anybody else threatens their place on the world stage. Mr. Putin's foreign policy goal has been to undermine U.S. interests at every turn. He has sought to stop missile defenses in Europe that are aimed at Iran. He has blocked United Nations action against Syria, armed Bashar Assad, and then leapt on Mr. Obama's political panic over bombing Damascus to guarantee no U.S. attack in return for a promise to remove Assad's chemical weapons. The chemical weapons are still there, and Assad has accelerated his military offensive. 2."His currency is dropping in value and continues to Put his army on the border of Russia and Ukraine." - Mr. Putin's agenda in Ukraine is part of his larger plans to solidify his own authoritarian control and revive Greater Russia. Without Ukraine, the most important of the former Soviet satellites, a new Russian empire is impossible. With Ukraine, Greater Russia sits on the border of the EU. If Ukraine moves toward Europe with a president who isn't a Russian satrap, it also sets a democratic example for Russians. The world is seeing that Mr. Putin will do what it takes to stop such an event, even if it risks a civil war in Ukraine. 3."He made other nations pay for ukraine's oil and gas supplies when Ukraine Couldn't afford the cost." - Russia's armed intervention in the Crimea undoubtedly illustrates President Putin's ruthless determination to get his way in Ukraine. But less attention has been paid to the role of the United States in interfering in Ukrainian politics and civil society. Both powers are motivated by the desire to ensure that a geostrategically pivotal country with respect to control of critical energy pipeline routes remains in their own sphere of influence. 4." China is a communist country so they obviously like Putin." - Russia isn't Communist and Russia and China have never particularly liked each other . 5."Putin may be a good leader but he has bad policies and has bad ways of government." - At the end , you admitted that he is a good leader and that's what this debate is all about.
Is Vladimir Putin a bad leader for Russia

If Vladimir Putin is so great, how come NATO and the UN hate him? He has invaded Ukraine and put many sanctions on many things and people, like Canadian meat and Important people. His currency is dropping in value and continues to Put his army on the border of Russia and Ukraine. He made other nations pay for ukraine's oil and gas supplies when Ukraine Couldn't afford the cost. China is a communist country so they obviously like Putin. Putin may be a good leader but he has bad policies and has bad ways of government.