BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Should the US put prisoners in Solitary confinement

1) Solitary confinement is s a form of imprisonment in which a prisoner is isolated from any human contact, though often with the exception of members of prison staff. 2) Solitary confinement helps insure the safety of the correctional officers. Day in and day out these correctional officers have to deal with dangerous criminals who have nothing to lose, for the especially dangerous ones it is a must that they be locked away for 23 hours of the day. 3) It helps insure the safety of the inmates as well. In prison, there can be a variety of different gangs who wouldn't think twice about taking another inmate's life. The people that belong to these gang or who just like to inflict pain on other people need solitary confinement. 4) It serves as a form of discipline for those trouble making inmates. Solitary confinement makes the inmates think twice before committing an act that is look down upon. 5) It promotes the respect of authority. The inmates cannot feel as if they own the prison or that the correctional officers are soft because that will motivate them to cause chaos. 6) It allows the inmate that is in solitary confinement to reflect upon the acts he has committed that landed him in prison and solitary confinement. ________________________________________________________________ 7) Therefore, the US should keep putting prisoners in solitary confinement.
The United States federal government should reverse the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law.

I suppose the heart of this argument is one's view on the matter of homosexuality. I know of many military leaders and soldiers who are oppposed to GLBT's serving in the military. Living with an openly gay member of the same sex is very awkward and distracting in barracks situations. While I believe that it is not a good idea to repeal the law, and while there are as many military leaders for the law as there are against it, I agree that discrimination cannot be condoned under our constitution. It has to be upheld. I propose that either I will withdraw my contention against said topic, or we redirect the discussion in the remaining rounds to address the heart issue of homosexuality.
The United States federal government should reverse the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law.

I would be very interested to know where you get the stats that soldiers are discharged from the military due to their sexual orientation. That is, by definition, what "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" does, it protects gays and lesbians serving in our armed forces. -Repealing that law would not solve anything, in fact, if anything, it poses the risk of opening up gays and lesbians to ridicule within ranks, not from superiors, but from fellow privates, sergeants, and the like. -Other nations doing something should never be our sole reason for doing something. This is just common sense. Following other nations around will do nothing but cause what happens to one nation to happen to all nations, and then there is no one left to rescue anybody. -Again, I would like to know where you get your stats on soldiers and citizens approval of open homosexuality in the military, and about the Arab linguists. Am I to believe, then, that the majority of Arab-American linguists and translators are, in fact, homosexual? Surely we do not want to create another stereotype for people to throw at our Middle Eastern brothers. -As for your last point, which I addressed above, this law actually reduces the possibility of discrimination. You cannot force people to accept something. You can help them to get to know the person first, instead of immediately labeling them as "gay".
The United States federal government should reverse the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law.

The Don't Ask, Don't Tell Act is economically and morally repugnant. - We spend much of the taxpayer's dollars to train good soldiers and then these expensive soldiers are suddenly discharged for a discrminatory reason as sexual orientation. - Hundreds of soldiers have been discharged even though we need these soldiers desperately. - Arabic linguists are in high demand and low supply in the military, but these people are being let go of the military for the purpose of sexual orientation. - Many nations allow homosexuals to express their sexual orientattion in the military and do a great job fighting. - Most soldiers and Americans have expressed that they are comfortable with the military including homosexuals. - Discrimination is wrong and should never be a policy of the United States of America as the Fourteenth Amendment states. "No state shall deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The "Epicurean paradox" disproves the existence of the biblical God.

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"- Epicurus If God is defined as - the supernatural being conceived as the perfect and omnipotent and omniscient originator and ruler of the universe; the object of worship in monotheistic religions (as according to http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu...) the Epicurean Paradox sufficiently disproves his existence.
The Republican and Democratic Candidates.

What are you talking about? This started as a debate about whether or not candidates cover the issues and has turned into a platform for you to voice your personal views. As far as the debate is concerned, you don't answer any of my points. There will always be bickering, but the candidates DO have real policy discussions. All along the campaign trail each candidate cites several specific solutions to the problems you so eloquently noted. The typical voter doesn't hear much of it because Anderson Cooper and the like insist on covering the 'race war' and other insignificant issues. While the candidates do bicker sometimes, the media is largely to blame for their paparazziesque coverage of the campaign. You have given me NO reason to think otherwise.
The Republican and Democratic Candidates.

In the last round we spoke about candidates not focusing on the issues at hand. They tell us what they think we want to hear. That's nice in some respects, but as a voter I would rather them tell us the truth than lie to us. Next please Going on with other thoughts , Again I repeat my question on Health Care for all Americans Where is it? Do only the rich get it ? I don't think so. Also the Issue of Iraq I think that we should finish the job we started due to the fact that we are in their country to help defend them .Next thought Aghanistan is not where we should be at this time due to the fact that we have no reason to be there . You made a statement in the last round that I would to address. You asked me to watch the debates correct? Why should I listen to the candidates bicker and squabble for 2hrs, when they could be telling the American people how they will fix the problems facing us in the world we live in today. Next thought. Here is food for thought. If the gas prices go up will you be able to put gas in your vehicle to drive to work or your children to school , I think not . That is what the candidates fail to comprehend.What I do know is that without fuel people will not be able to heat their homes or drive their vehicles. These are just some of the talking points there are more points than that . For instance how will a mother of 4 feed her children with no more than very little clean water and peanut butter that is what some fanilies have for weeks at a time. That is not much for the rich man but for that poor family that is all that they have to eat all week until the mother gets paid. Let's talk about affordable Health Care . Affordable Health Care would mean that all Americans could afford to pay for decent Health Care. Going on to my next point, troops in Iraq should not be pulled out because they need us to help defend them and keep them stable.Those are my arguments. Goingon to my next thought.The Democrats just want to raise taxes to make themselves look good in politics and the government which would be our downfall.
The Republican and Democratic Candidates.

I think they are doing so. There are always going to be personal attacks in politics, but the debates and speaches address the issues well. The media doesn't focus on the policy differences, they focus on things that will sell news, like personal attacks and bickering. Last week, Obama and Clinton were campaigning in Nevada. Instead of covering the differences in policy, the news spent all day every day covering 'race in the campaign'. Its not the candidates who aren't addressing the issues. The media is simply covering the Jerry Springer aspect of the debate.
The Republican and Democratic Candidates.

Wingnut2280, What I was simply stating is that none of the candidates are telling us that they want to regulate gas prices. Also no one is really speaking about the issues that face America today. They just want to squabble amongst themselves. What about Health care and educationfor our children. The Republicans want to take Health Care away from our children so that they can look good in politics.Health Care should be for all children not just those who are rich. To clarify what I am debating you about is that I feel that the candidates need to focus on what the issues facing America are.
The Republican and Democratic Candidates.

I agree in a sense. But, I think they are making progress. The common voter has to do a lot of work to cut through the rhetoric and get to the substance of what they are talking about. I think this year is different because, when the candidates get done squabbling over meaningless details in each others personal records, there is some conversation on policy issues, at least to some degree. If you watched the Dem debate Mon. night, you could get some vital information, but you have to watch carefully. there are not really fundamental answers to questions, but little sidenotes that voters should pay attention to. For instance, during the healthcare discussion, Obama and Edwards were squabbling over what universal really meant, or something ridiculous, and then something interesting happened. One of those little sidebar pieces of info crept out. Obama said that Edwards would withhold money from people's paychecks in order to ensure madatory healthcare. Edwards nodded in agreement. This means Edwards is OK with the fact that he would FORCE people to get healthcare, regardless of whether or not they could afford it or desire it at all. Also, you have to learn the lingo. Terms like "create government revenue" is just another way of saying raise taxes. And "universal mandate" is a pretty way of saying "the government is going to make you". If you are a more educated voter and watch them speak with an open mind, you can gain some insight past the public persona. I think we are hearing an outcry to cut the political BS from voters that we haven't seen before. The candidates are responding to this, at least to a degree. I'm not really sure what your argument is, so if you could clarify, that would be great.
style savvy:styling star is a great game

I can tell you, There are so many better soundtracks out there:Fire EmblemFF seriesBravely: DefaultPokemon seriesLoZ: Majora's maskluigi's mansionKirby: Triple DeluxKirby: epic yarnKirby: Planet RobobotKid Icarus. All of these games are on 3DSSeriously, The game's soundtrack is good, But when compared to other 3ds games, It is mediocre at best! Also, Mario maker doesn't count, That is an online game. It's almost like comparing God Of War to Fortnite, They are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GAMES. The game has no plot, No real good soundtrack, And relies on something already used all over games. There is no point buying a game that you could get a similar experience from free games. It is a waste of money
style savvy:styling star is a great game

So? I can make my character look horrible! It doesn't matter whether they can wear it, it's if they can pull it off that counts. I could, As a boy, Wear a dress, But would that make me great? No. So what matters in making any one character wear something? It's the designing to pull off the dress that means everything, Anyone could tell you that. And that designing isn't original, There are others like it.
style savvy:styling star is a great game

I joined cuz why not and I need some brushing up after not doing debate for about 1 month. From the reviews I read, I can already tell you this game is not worth playing. It relies on 2 main points, And a 3rd slightly less important point. It makes people feel good in a moral sense for helping others It allows you to design clothes It simulates business (this one's less important, But still a point) I can say that this game is unimportant, And not worth playing, I don't even have to play it to say this, But I'm starting it a little to play it, To be closer to the debate. Let's break down the 3 points. The reason it is not worth playing, Is that the game-base behind it is so commonplace, That you could find these values nearly anywhere else. For the First reason, The moral well-feeling after helping others, Even if they're just AI. This comes from Kotaku's review of the game, Which also includes the fact you can design clothes. I can tell you already, That this isn't as useful a reason as it seems. Many games can use the ploy of giving the player something to rescue, And feel the hero, Or make a game with something that needs saving, And it makes you want to save it, Regardless of if it's fake. Take Pet Rescue, For example. This game uses the fact that you need to, Well, rescue pets. Even the title of the game is a marketing ploy. Knowing a person's love for pets, The game uses the title to their advantage by saying they need to save these pets. THAT'S what the moral well-being does for this game. It's not really original. . . Second, Is that it lets you design clothes. Well, What makes this special? I know games that don't need portable consoles to do this! AND THEY'RE FREE! Take "Design Home" for example. They let a person design a house/room, And then get feedback from other people about how well it is furnished. But, That game isn't some super-game that everyone should love, Its just another mobile game to most. Again, Telling you why this game isn't exceptional. The third and final reason is that it simulates business. The game seems to try to capitalize on the tycoon-styled gameplay from popular games like Game Dev story, Planet Coaster (AKA Coaster Park Tycoon), And even going as far back as Diner Dash! Seriously, This game is nothing special, Just another tycoon but this time with the abiliy to design clothes. What makes that special? I know games that design Home Fashion, Personal fashion, Tech Fasion, Building Cities, Restaurat fasion, Fasion towards a business, Fashion toward restaurants, The list goes on and on. And the irony, Most of these games are free! You don't have to pay the money for these games! For a game to be great, Since you didn't specify it, We can base this off of a few main factors, Which I'll debate next round: Visuals Music Plot Gameplay Your turn, Tell me why the game is exceptional in these categories, And you win my G.
There is no such thing as herd immunity

1. Grains are bird food and are unsuitable for humans. Birds have a body temperature of 40 degrees celcius while humans have a body temperature of 37 degrees celcius. If humans eat too much bird seed their body temperature will increase to 40 degrees celcius because bird seed is a high energy food designed for birds so that they can fly. When somebody's body temperature gets to 40 degrees celcius they will feel sick and nauseous. A doctor will say that this person has flu like symptoms.Dairy is food for baby cows and is unsuiatable for humans. If humans eat dairy foods they will get sick and have heart, lung and kidney blockages due to calcium overloading.2. Angelman - genetic deformities are not diseases.Nervous system defects - caused by heavy metals and halogen chemicals which are put into vaccines, plastics, pesticides, fungicides, fire retardants, medications and water supply.Parasites - Not classed as disease. (malaria, roundworms, tapeworms, sleeping sickness and gardia) Can be avoided through proper diet and iodine. Don't drink dirty water. Careless behaviour and overcrowding.HIV - Viruses don't exist so any viruses listed are just hoaxes. HIV is just a gay lifestyle disease caused by bad diet.Bacterial infection - Leaky gut syndrome caused by eating too much grain food.Stroke, heart attack, glaucoma, angina, arthritis, headache, and poor hearing all caused by grain and dairy products.Vaccines don't do anything. It is only when a person stops eating the wrong foods that the sickness will leave of its own accord. Bacteria and viruses are not clever. Its humans that are stupid. I don't get sick because i stick to a strict diet and avoid dairy,grain and sugar.3. Statistics - Benjamin Disraeli: 'There are three types of lies -- lies, damn lies, and statistics. lolI am not surprised that you are an expert on statistics. lol4. So, you admit knowing nothing about Luis Pasteur. Ignorance can be a blessing sometimes. lolNote - I hope you realize that your whole argument depends on how well you know Luis Pasteur. lol"Luis Pasteur did plenty of long neck experiments". That doesn't mean that he found out the secrets of what causes disease. According to modern nutrition, leaky gut syndrome and hormone reaserch - Luis Pasteur didn't find anything of significance. He was just a fraud and hustler who was able to trick people into thinking that he had discovered some profound secret of nature. Alas, nature is much smarter than Luis Pasteur and most modern day doctors.Rotovirus - Alas, it appears that your household must have many unsantitary practices because fecal material infection is just a matter of careless food preparation and not washing hands.Note - You can eat a some bad food occasionally. The human body can be very forgiving and will let you get away with a bit of naughtiness. It all depends on how much and how often that you eat bad foods. The more junk food you eat, the more often you will get sick, is a general rule.
There is no such thing as herd immunity

1. "why is it that people who take multivitamins and eat a balanced diet get sick?"Pro - Most people don't fully understand what a proper or balanced diet is. This includes medical professionals and dieticians. They still use the the old redundant food triangle with grain/dairy food taking up a huge 50 % of average diet. See chart below. 50% of these foods will make you sick. That's the grain, dairy, sugar and margarine. Follow this chart and disease will soon occur. Trust the government? Sure can! lolhttps://en.wikipedia.org...2. "Vitamin deficiency does not cause all disease."Pro - You didn't name one that dosen't? Just give me your list of diseases that are not caused by dietary factors and I will demonstrate what vitamin deficiency is causing the problem."So why would vaccinated children be a problem in the first place?"Pro - You are the one who has stated that "vaccination makes a difference". I am only proving that it doesn't make any difference. Note - As far as I am concerned there are no carriers of disease. Note - There is no such thing as a contagious disease (This will be my next debate on this issue)3. "vaccines last for 2-10 years"Pro - Whenever you hear somebody say that the effect of something will wear off in 2-10 years you can be sure they are taliking bullcrap. This time differential is just too much of a difference to be real or useful. If you buy a TV and the salesman tells you it will last between 2 - 10 years would you buy that TV? Noooooo wayyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!! This guy is obviously a con-artist. You run for the hills and save your money. lol So why do people believe medical professionals when they say these things? Is it because they are wearing a white coats and everybody knows that people in white coats don't tell lies, right? lolCon - "This was almost 50 years ago.. medical science, of course, has changed. Thinking has changed."Pro - Well, you believe everything Luis Pastreur said and that was around 1850's. So that that makes you a hypocrite. That's right science has changed, so why do you still believe in 200 year old theories? What about new research into hormones, leaky gut syndrome and nutrition?4. "One last point. If vaccines don't work and herd immunity is a myth, why is it that the resurgence of the anti-vax movement and recept mumps and measles outbreaks occurred at the same time?"Pro - If you are referring to the recent outbreak of measles in Disneyland, then, this is further proof that I am right. This is because Disneyland is a junk food lover's heaven. If eating amusement park food doesn't make you sick, then nothing else will either! lol
There is no such thing as herd immunity

1- Pro states that people have all known diseases within their bodies at any given time. Is this also true of people who take multivitamins every day and eat a balanced diet? And why is it that people who take multivitamins and eat a balanced diet get sick?Furthermore, vitamin deficiency does not cause all disease. Vitamins are enzymes that speed along processess in the body, and while deficiencies can cause problems, they do not cause all disease.2- Pro linked to a cdc source stating that children vaccinated against pertussis can be carriers for disease. I acknowledge this as a reputable source, but since Pro has previously stated in previous debates (and a sentence ago), disease is caused only by vitamin deficiency. So why would vaccinated children be a problem in the first place?3- The next source from Dr. Blaylock has a (more than) a few problems."Applies only to humoral immunity" This is how the adaptive immune system works. He makes it sound as if it is exclusionary. "Only 2-10 years" That is more than good enough for most people. Anyone would take getting stuck with a needle over getting pertussis as I did as a toddler."College" I only had to get one shot: bacteria meningitis."When I was in medical school..." Dr. Baylock was licensed to begin practicing neurosurgery in 1977 after both a residency and medical school. This was almost 50 years ago.. medical science, of course, has changed. Thinking has changed.And so on and so forth. Snopes and the Skeptic's Dictionary have both shown that Dr. Baylock's ideas have been disproven. [1] [2]4- One last point. If vaccines don't work and herd immunity is a myth, why is it that the resurgence of the anti-vax movement and recept mumps and measles outbreaks occurred at the same time?[1] http://www.snopes.com...[2] http://skepdic.com...
There is no such thing as herd immunity

Hello again Akhenaten! My apologies for not responding sooner, for some reason DDO didn't see fit to notify me of your challenge until today. Without further ado, my argument begins with a few definitions:Herd immunity: the principle that if a large enough portion of the population is immune to a disease, the rest of the population is protected from the spread of that diseaseR0: Basic reproduction number. Or, the amount of people an already infected person will therefore infectImmunity threshold: The critical portion of a population required for the protection of herd immunity. Typically, the higher the R0, the higher the immune threshold has to be in order to provide protection.Herd immunity is a principle held by modern medicine. Essentially, it is the idea that if a critical portion of a population is immunized against a disease, this protects the rest of the "herd." It is not foolproof, but it does serve to break the chain of infection.I'll bring in my example from the previous debate so the facts stay fresh. Measle's immunity threshold is at least 95%. The R0 of measles is incredibly high, residing around 12-18 people. High R0=High immunity threshold in order to prevent outbreaks. The recent antivax has resulted in outbreaks in America, as the immunity threshold has dropped.I'd like to ask Pro: what makes herd immunity illogical?[1] http://www.pbs.org...