BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
New Pokemon Fighters in Smash Bros

I thank Shake7Bake for attending this debate all the way. It's always nice to see a new debater on the site. And now for my defense against his rebuttal.Defense:Move set; My opponent says because Sceptile isn't poison type, it can't use a toxic gas. This is false, as Sceptile has this exact attack in Pokken Tournament; using detect, then countering with a toxic gas. So the rebuttal falls short. (And I do admit it's difficult to argue against a move set, since it's probably going to be well constructed.)Final Smash; My opponent agrees with Sceptile's Mega Evolution as a Final Smash. However, he states "it does not have too much of a genuineness to it." I'm a bit confused on this sentence. I assume he's saying the Final Smash isn't accurate. "Perhaps if Sceptile's new Dragon typing were utilized it would be better." And how might the Dragon typing come into play, exactly? Mega Sceptile can't fly, so there goes the same idea as Charizard. I feel like a 1.5x power increase is the best for a Final Smash.(Also, recall what I said about Absol's Final Smash; Mega Absol hasn't been shown to fly, making his Final Smash a bit questionable)Sceptile in Pokken Tournament; "Pokken is a completely different game with a completely different style of play than Super Smash Bros." I know that. But that doesn't mean we can add a few attacks from Pokken into Smash, his strong attack could be his Forward Smash, his aerials in Pokken can also be in Smash, and if you didn't know, 3 of the 4 special moves I showed in Round 2 is present in Pokken Tournament.(Also, Smash Bros is welcome to all fighters, no matter they're original play style. Like Ryu from Street Fighter, and Bayonetta.) Typing issues; "Super Smash Bros has already had a grass type pokemon in Ivysaur in Super Smash Bros Brawl on the Wii." But in Smash Bros Melee, we have another Electric type, Pichu.In Brawl, we have the Water type Squirtle. In Smash Bros 4, we have the Water/Dark type Greninja. So theres nothing wrong with repeating types already used."Therefore it would be a better decision to have a typing not used before like Dark type for instance." Did I mention Geninja is also part Dark type? This point just falls short hen you consider a few already repeating types, including the fact that Con's doing the same thing, although perhaps unintentional.Closing Thoughts: This has been an interesting debate. And, once again, I thank Shake7Bake for not abandoning the debate, like a lot of new debaters do. With that, I await his final rebuttals and defenses.
New Pokemon Fighters in Smash Bros

Rebuttal: Move Set Just as my opponent said for the move set I presented for Absol, I do not find much wrong with my opponents moveset. The only true complaint being the Down B counter attack. In my opinion a toxic gas should not be used because Sceptile is not a poison type pokemon. *Also, the fact that all of these attacks are grass type pokemon moves when looking at the actual pokemon games will tie into a later argument.* Final Smash There is nothing necessarily wrong with this final smash, however it does not have too much of a genuineness to it. Perhaps if Sceptile's new Dragon typing were utilized it would be better. Reasons My opponent said that because Sceptile is in Pokken Tournament, it could be an inspiration for the Super Smash Bros game. I do not believe this to be an effective theory because Pokken is a completely different game with a completely different style of play than Super Smash Bros. *Super Smash Bros has already had a grass type pokemon in Ivysaur in Super Smash Bros Brawl on the Wii. Therefore it would be a better decision to have a typing not used before like Dark type for instance.* Closing Thoughts: As I said at the beginning of Round 2, Sceptile is my favorite pokemon ever. So kudos to my opponent (Great minds think alike). It was hard to come up with arguments against it. I look forward to the next round.
New Pokemon Fighters in Smash Bros

Sorry for the late argument. Let's get into this.Rebuttal:Move set: To be honest, it's alright. There's not really any real flaws in the moveset, minus the fact that they're all attacks similar to other characters' moves.Final Smash: However, we're not sure if Mega Absol can fly. Sure, it has wings, but it's still pure Dark type. Levitate isn't its ability either, so the wings could just be decoration.Reasoning: I do agree Smash Bros could use a 4 legged fighter. As for being a fan favorite, I'm not sure, personally. That could be backed up.Closing thoughts:It seems like my opponent chose a really good pokemon for his side. I'll have to step up my game for the 4th round. Let's see what his rebuttal against Sceptile will involve.
New Pokemon Fighters in Smash Bros

Intro I would like to point out before submitting that this pokemon is not my favorite pokemon or even in my top ten for that matter. I just genuinely believe that this pokemon would make a great character in Super Smash Bros. Also Sceptile is actually my favorite pokemon so this will be an interesting debate for me. The pokemon is Absol. Moves Neutral B: A medium ranged slash attack that will deal 13% but leaves Absol exposed for 0.7 seconds. Side B: Absol would have a night slash attack that would give him a lunge towards the enemy. This could do a possible 22% depending on how far away Absol is from the opponent. The further away Absol is from the enemy before he strikes, the more percentage. Up B: Absol would have an up slash that would allow it to get back on the map and/or deal 5% to a character above it. This is mostly for recovery but could possibly be used for a set up. Down B: Absol would have a move that would allow it to charge up an attack and deliver a heavy blow that can do 32% to an enemy. It would need to charge the attack for 3.3 seconds and then would be allowed to walk freely until it delivers the attack. Absol can charge for less than the 3.3 seconds, but the attack will not be as powerful. This attack will leave Absol exposed for 2 seconds if the attack is missed. Final Smash: Finally, the Final smash will be the mega evolution of Absol which will enable him to fly and sweep from left to right hitting the enemies and dealing 45% per hit for 15 seconds. Reasons One reason that Absol is a great pokemon to join the brawl is because Super Smash Bros needs more four legged characters to add to the diversity of the game. Another reason is that Absol is genuinely a fan favorite among nintendo fans and would get a good reaction out of the community. Closing For these reasons, I believe that Absol would be the best fit for the Super Smash Bros franchise.
New Pokemon Fighters in Smash Bros

I thank Shake7Bake for accepting. Let's get into my argument. Move set:Neutral B; Leech Seed: Sceptile shoots seeds in front of himself, sprouting a flower on the opponent's head, damaging him for a total of 17%. [Can be customized into Bullet Seed, which focuses on hitting multiple times, or to create a trap]Side B; Giga Drain: Sceptile shoots vines a few feet away, draining 22% damage, and recovering 16% damage to Sceptile. [Can be cutomized to go closer to Sceptile, or to deal more damage, but recovering less]Down B; Detect: This is a counter attack. If Sceptile gets hit when doing this attack, the attacker will be hit with a toxic gas, dealing 26%, then sending them flying a fair distance. [Can be customized to put opponents to sleep, or for raw attack power with a shorter counter time]Up B; Vine Whip: Sceptile launches a vine diagonally upward, and homes in on solid platforms, such as the stage. This can damage opponents for 3%, but is mainly a recovery move. [Can be customized fordealing damage with a shorter reach, or a leap with the vine. ]Final Smash:Mega Evolution: Sceptile mega evolves, and raises his attack and launch power by 1.5x, for 30 seconds. Why Sceptile? Sceptile is a pokemon in Pokken Tournament, another fighting game. He's also the one I chose in Pokken, so I share a bond with him. As for attacks, we could get inspiration from Pokken Tournament. I had inpritation from there, after all. Also, when I was thinking about a new Pokemon for Smash bros, the first one that came to my mind was Sceptile. Closing Thoughts:With that, I think Sceptile is a great candidate for the next Smash Bros game. I wonder what my opponent will say about Absol.
New Pokemon Fighters in Smash Bros

For this debate, both me and the Contender will choose Pokemon that would be good as playable characters in Super Smash Bros. Rules: 1. You may only choose a Pokemon that has not yet been playable in Smash Bros (Mewtwo is in Melee and SSB4, Greninja is in SSB4, Ivysaur is in Brawl, etc.) 2. You must have 4 special moves, and a Final Smash for your chosen Pokemon. 3. No trolling, kritiks, semantics, etc. Doing so will result in at least a conduct loss. 4. You must explain why your choice is good, not just say "I like this Pokemon", since this is a debate after all! 5. No forfeiting a round, this counts as a concession to the opposing side. Voting Rules: 1. When voting, you must have a sufficient RFD. 2. This includes which Moves you thought were good, which reasoning you liked and why, and whether everyone followed the rules. Round Structure: Round 1: Acceptance, as well as saying which Pokemon you choose. Round 2: We will say our Pokemon's move sets and Final Smash, as well as why that Pokemon should be in Smash Bros. Round 3: Pro and Con will attempt to find any flaws with the opposing side's argument. Round 4: Final rebuttals and defense. My Pokemon is Sceptile. When my opponent accepts the debate, he/she will choose their own Pokemon, and post their argument Round 2. Good luck, and let's do this!
Muhammad wrote some Qur'anic verses in order to have sex with more women

"""first of all, it is very difficult for muslim men to commit adultery because they are allowed to have multiple wives AND slave girls"""" ya cause you know my dad is married to 10 women, and slave girls or whatever is in your head, slaves aren't allowed in general, ya i don't think you do know anything about islam. """"Are you complaining about posting verses in English when we're having a debate in English? I didn't need t search the internet to come across these verses, they are readily available in any copy of the Qur'an"""" no it's the fact that your taking the english translations as a fact or probably some non muslim guy explained to you the verses, arabic and english are so much diff, arabic has symbols and letters that do not exist in english, and every word has 5,10 meanings, it depends on what was the quran talking about before that verse, and how is that letter spelled example, لَعِبَ talks about the past and it means played, لَعِبْ talks about the present and it means that he already played, لَعِبِ talks about the presents and it means that someone is talking about playing and other two meanings, this is a poor example i just gave you , and theres ALOT AND ALOT of rules in arabic, these are just the basics oh and watch this, http://www.youtube.com... I know more about the Qur'an and the English language than you do if this debate is any indication lol yep you do :D , it's like a little kid coming to me and saying that he knows about rocket science more then anyone, clearly you do not know anything about it, this debate was a waste of time
Muhammad wrote some Qur'anic verses in order to have sex with more women

1_ he said that pointing to not do adultery, and it's not a reward it's just that you can do whatever you want in heavenFirst of all, it is very difficult for muslim men to commit adultery because they are allowed to have multiple wives AND slave girls (33:50 amongst many other verses). Are you telling me that the afterlife-sex that muslims are promised in the quran is not a reward? What is it then? A punishment? The constant promises of sex in the quran and ahadith clearly demonstrate that Muhammad had a massive lust for sex, and to suggest that he didn't marry women for sex id ludicrous. http://www.thereligionofpeace.com...2_all you said about verses are just misunderstanding you have, and second there translated in english, and third of all, stop searching the internetAre you complaining about posting verses in English when we're having a debate in English? I didn't need t search the internet to come across these verses, they are readily available in any copy of the Qur'an.3_lol dude, i'm a man of proof it's either you have a proof or just don't talk about it ok ? and tell me how many verses is there that talk about women ? theres 6000 verse and theres 1000 that talk about science, the way your talking about it is that it's a porno book, lol you don't know what are you talking about bro lol, reading what you rought gave me a facepalm dude.Now I'm starting to think you're just trolling me here. Reading what I "rought" "gave you" a facepalm? The Qur'an is not a porno, but if it were made into a movie, it would at least be rated R. It is more likely that it would never make it to theatres because of the extreme portrayals of torture, violence and forced sex in it (e.g. sex with slave girls that I pointed out earlier in my response to 1). 1000 qur'anic verses talk about science? Do you even know what science is? Saying that 1/5th of the Quran is about science is like saying 1/5th of all kindergarten level fairy tales outline designs for particle accelerators. I'm sure someone could use the story of rapunzel and make some weak connection between that story and particle physics.4_ for the third one, i said that because it proves that mohamed didn't right his book, and how are you an atheist if you believe in god ?"Rought/Right" = wrong. "Wrote/write" = right. You pointed out that the Qur'an mentiones Mary in order to prove that Muhammad didn't write the Qur'an? That is seriously troll-level stupidity. And when did I state that I believe in god? I don't. 5_no lol cause the fact that you don't know what are you talking about and all this unvailed information your probably getting it from the internetUnsubstanitated claims here. I know more about the Qur'an and the English language than you do if this debate is any indication.
Muhammad wrote some Qur'anic verses in order to have sex with more women

1_ he said that pointing to not do adultery, and it's not a reward it's just that you can do whatever you want in heaven 2_all you said about verses are just misunderstanding you have, and second there translated in english, and third of all, stop searching the internet 3_lol dude, i'm a man of proof it's either you have a proof or just don't talk about it ok ? and tell me how many verses is there that talk about women ? theres 6000 verse and theres 1000 that talk about science, the way your talking about it is that it's a porno book, lol you don't know what are you talking about bro lol, reading what you rought gave me a facepalm dude. 4_ for the third one, i said that because it proves that mohamed didn't right his book, and how are you an atheist if you believe in god ? 5_no lol cause the fact that you don't know what are you talking about and all this unvailed information your probably getting it from the internet
Muhammad wrote some Qur'anic verses in order to have sex with more women

hello my opponent, it's seems like you just created this account you have there just to do these kind of things which is sad. 1_ do you have any proof that mohamed did that just because he wanted women ? 2_ and it wasn't written by mohamed cause mohamed couldn't read or write 3_ jesus is mentioned in the quran more then mohamed, and marry mother of jesus is mentioned more than the two, she is mentioned 32 times, she even has her own surah 4_ god isn't something supernatural, he's not related to nature to be supernatural 5_ the link is broken 6_ we don't know about his mom, dad, etc,etc cause it wasn't mentioned in the quran, it wasn't written by him, he's the one who was memorizing it from the angel gabriel, he would come to him and tell him the verses, then he would go to the sahaba, to write it down for him, after mohamed died the quran wasn't like this one, the pages was separated, every surah was separated, then one of the sahaba said that he's going to make then all a one book, so they won't get lost, and a lot A LOT of people had it memorized. 7_ this debate is so random
Muhammad wrote some Qur'anic verses in order to have sex with more women

I believe that certain Qur'anic verses were written by Muhammad and not some supernatural being called Allah (btw, I do not believe that Allah exists). They were written by Muhammad in order to allow him to have sex with women.My arguments, the verses in question, and more evidence that Muhammad had a very healthy sexual appetite which he often satiated by pretending to be a Prophet, are outlined on this page, which is not my work:http://www.thereligionofpeace.com...;
Good and evial

Their is not such thing as good and or evil because just thinking about it everyone had their reasons. Just because someone kills another person dose not under any circumstances mean that they are evil. Also just because you have not killed anyone does not mean that you are good. the reason i am saying this is because if killing someone means that, that person id evil them wouldn't our soldiers that fought for us in the war be evil. Think about it they have killed tones of people and i'm pretty sure that those are some of the reasons that people now a days call other people evil. You know that guy that went to jail for murdering a man on the streets. Well that man did that because that man on that streets had killed his wife and he needed to avenge his wife after all they had been through together. Also that boy that was caught with drugs he had bought the drugs to give to his sick mother who was practically dying and needed those drugs.
Abortion

I believe that Pro and I have agreed to continue this debate another time, as I for one am not able to give my full attention to this debate. As I previously mentioned, this was my first ever debate, hence I did not realize that 24 hours was in fact quite a short time period to post an argument. I apologize, but I would definitely like to take this debate up again, because I believe that Pro made a lot of interesting points that I would like to discuss and expand on.
Deep water oil drilling, Kimo vs. Pono

" the world is at a state where t can not run without oil is just proving my point further. The world has become so greedy and is taking too much for granted." Meaning oil drilling is absolutely necessary and is not wrong. According to you, what is truly wrong is human society, but NOT human conduct itself. This does not prove that oil drilling, the conduct, is wrong. Your point is not proven. I gave you an edge by digressing, but you digressed with me. . .sad Point standing: Deep water oil drilling is a process that is not wrong. "I dont have any sources for this beacus this is my personal opinion." Coolios! Concession! Grammar! Free points! Yay!
Deep water oil drilling, Kimo vs. Pono

im just going to say im anly doing this because im trying to proove a point just like everbody else, but i can go on forever because one i love to do this kind of stuff and two because i am extremly stubborn. I do realize gas is used i many more things than just cars but the fat that there is so mny cars nowadays is a big part of the issue at hand and just by you saying that the world is at a state where t can not run without oil is just proving my point further. The world has become so greedy and is taking too much for granted. Few would actually be able to survive it seems without oil. For example me, i dont drive and i have a green thumb, and i could survive without most electronics. I dont have any sources for this beacus this is my personal opinion.
Deep water oil drilling, Kimo vs. Pono

Part of the issue? Global warming patterns are more directly correlated to the sun patterns than with CO2 emissions. "So what Beginner seems to be saying is he drives a gas guzzling vehicle and could give a damn if he kills innocent life forms." My opponent seems to think that gas is ONLY used in vehicles. The oil extracted is a very precious and much needed commodity. Oil runs everything. The clothes you wear, the food you eat, the car you drive, the housewares...all the items in this link: http://www.anwr.org... and much more. Almost everything requires oil. The world is now in a state that it cannot run without oil. By giving up oil, you are agreeing that we should give up the production of nearly everything in the world. We should stop producing housing, ventilation, commodities (such as clothing, toothbrush), etc. You are saying we should give up running water (because the engines running such pumps are, guess what? OIL-facilitated) and nearly all common necessities you probably don't even think about. By denouncing nuclear energy, my opponent has also agreed to alternative forms of energy. Since we do not have anything close to a sufficient amount of supplies (economically and literally) to produce enough 'clean' alternative energy, we would be relying on the burning of fossil fuels (the old method) which is much more accessible/practical to mass produce. The irony is that we use nuclear energy because its proponents want cleaner energy. They are against using oil/burning fossil fuels so they support using nuclear energy. This is because nuclear energy is very clean and does not harm the environment when contained. If my opponent is against oil-energy, than the only other practical option is nuclear and vice versa. Other options such as wind and solar are expensive and hard-to-make products. The production of such clean energy alternatives will not cover our energy consumption rate. We consume millions of barrels per day even with nuclear energy: http://www.accuval.net...
Deep water oil drilling, Kimo vs. Pono

Ok before you respond again, think, we have this one planet to live on, we are contributing to global warming, even though I personally believe part of the issue is the earth is going through another cycle, and if we screw up this planet we cant just hit a reset button like in a video game and expect everything to be ok. So what Beginner seems to be saying is he drives a gas guzzling vehicle and could give a damn if he kills innocent life forms. I am also against nuclear anything because of the fumes and because almost anything associated with nuclear is going to cause plenty of irreversible damage. http://waterdefense.org... go to this website and read both the deep water drilling and the nuclear articles.
Deep water oil drilling, Kimo vs. Pono

So what if some of the damage done is unfix-able? This does not prove deep water drilling to be bad. How is extracting oil bad? Obviously, you would also be an anti-nuclear power proponent because nuclear power functions on much the same level. Nuclear power plants could cause huge damage (e.g: chernobyl), but we still use it because it is clean, EFFICIENT, and necessary. I will give my opponent one more round to give logical and/or data support to her statement against deep water drilling before I post my arguments. If she does not provide this, I will post anyway.
Could the Nazis have defeated the Soviet Union in WW2.

Pro uses a lot of what ifs for his arguments. You talk on tank vs people lost how many people are in one tank. Russia is very wooded and tanks are next to useless. You claim that the USS would fall if Moscow was taken and pressed ways they could do it. Stalin already had planes to move north into Siberia and run the government from there. There was a location built in the Ural Mountain for the new government. In this location a Blitz would be unlikely due to point 3. As to the government falling apart did the US fall after Philadelphia was captured in the rebellion from Brittan in the 1770's or in your war of 1812 when DC was burned. In conclusion the USSR had more men. Said men knew how to fight in the colder weather. They may have had better technology but so did the Romans and they still could never concur the Brits. Te USSR weather was their greatest advantage. When the Nazis where freezing the USSR was perfectly fine.