BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Music Battle

Yanni - Felitsa It's so clear that Yanni brings every ounce of emotion he can gather into the song. Playing any instrument isn't something mechanical, with a fixed structure. It's something that allows for the free flow of oneself into one's body. I've played the piano and violin before, and I know this -- to have true skill with either instrument, you should be able to exercise every bit of one's body and one's mind. Playing a piano, for instance, isn't just about the movements of fingers. It's about every touch upon a key being light, and slow movements as one finds a rhythm. And Yanni brings that rhythm. The serene smile on his face reflects the happiness that lies in sweet reminiscence of his mother, alongside the hint of sadness at her passing. I was introduced to this song by two friends of mine - one of them my closest friend, and the other a relatively distant one. Let's call them X and Y, for their privacy (the latter has a DDO account too). X and Y were, before I came to know Y (my closest friend) very well, best friends and they were like brothers... they shared everything with each other. They drifted apart due to Y distancing himself slightly from X, which X didn't like at all. X -- a relatively immature person back then -- decided that he wouldn't ever like anything Y did anymore, and that close connection they had (like brothers) was lost. I don't like the idea of losing friends, and I've tried to convince Y to make it up with X for a while since. And Yanni's "Felitsa" is, right now, the only thing that connects them - I have little doubt that it's important to my closest friend. So it is, by extension, important to me.
Women should be treated with the respect men get.

Thank you for posting your next argument. Argument extended with the debate leader board. The woman is more successful debating. Debating a waist of time is other matter which I will gladly debate with you after this one. Your logic about Respect and control is not right. You said, "Men are better than women yet for some perverted reason we choose to respect them and give them control" The way you phrase that means that you are against men getting respect and control, since you are talking about the man. Please explain yourself when it comes to Hitler, please give me the quote you are referring to.
Women should be treated with the respect men get.

You stated that the leading person on this site is a women. Does that make her more successful? No. It means she wastes more time in front of the computer instead of living a fruitful life. Concerning control vs. respect; it is disrespectful to some to forcibly take away what control they have. Animals could rule in society but because Man is more able and successful than animals we take away their control and give it to ourselves. Men are better than women yet for some perverted reason we choose to respect them and give them control. Where is the logic in that? I say let the better rule. Throughout history there have been great minds like Karl Marx and Adolf Hitler who saw that their was something wrong with society, then through their reasoning picked out the parasite that caused it, and then conceived a system which defeated that parasite. Marx said it class, Hitler said it was race, I say it's gender, it's that simple.
Women should be treated with the respect men get.

Thank you for posting your next argument. Fist of all, one can not say that men are more successful then women. The reason why is because there is a lot of different types of people, some more successful than others. I do not know if you noticed but the leader debate.org is a women. First of all women are not a lesser life. Second of all respect and control are to different things. Giving a women respect will not make her the leader of the world. I would not give respect to an animal, but I would to a women. Also, women are part of the fundamental structure for society. If there were no women, there would be no men. I look forward to your next argument. Sources: (1). http://www.debate.org...
Women should be treated with the respect men get.

This dipstick thinks women are as great as Men. But who is it who really provides all the fundamental structure for society?! Men are much more successful than women and have a much higher average IQ. When you give control to lesser life forms all of society become negatively effected. You wouldn't give control to an animal would you? No, they are fit to be pets(slaves). women are merely in between a Man and an animal.
Women should be treated with the respect men get.

In your analogy where you replaced giving control to women with the color red, implies that giving control to women is a fundamental piece of being a man. THAT makes no sense. My statement does. The Holy Bible is the most sexist document I have ever read and it is what I shape my life around, I could not truly be Christian without being sexist. My father was a great man but he was far to submissive to that ***** he called a wife. She was always trying to take control even though my father was obviously the more dominant, intelligent and deserving person. One day he conjured the guts to realize what was happening and he put her in her place. But that wretched, lonesome species of his wife reacted like an animal and shot him, she was taken to jail, leaving me all alone, that is what feminism causes.
Women should be treated with the respect men get.

Thank you for posting your argument. You have failed to do what I asked. I will try to explain the simple law of grammar. Look at this example. "An apple hangs on a tree like an orange, yet for some strange reason, it's red. " You are talking about the apple in the first place, just like you are talking about the man. I noticed that you claim to be a Christian. God commands women to respect their husbands, but he also tells men to respect their wives.
Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or dip

I'm sorry, but it seems to me like my opponent is not reading my arguments. I am not blaming America for anything. Instead, I was responding to your point of how china's market is going down the drain. Well, if you refer back to my second post and the Goldman Sachs article along with it, you can see that China's market is not going down the drain, instead it is growing above the average for countries and it's change from investment to consumer spending is actualy going to make it go up more in the long term. What my point was is that since you are saying that China's bad market is affecting America in a very bad way, and that is why we should not trade with them, that instead China's market is going up at a very steep rate, and it would be beneficial for us to exchange in trade and other activities with a country like China whose economy is going up at a very large rate.
Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or dip

In this rebuttal I shall address my opponents arguments and try to prove them wrong. So, my opponents stance seems to be that since China's market is going down the drain, it is making our markets drop as well. Well, my first refutation is, who is to say this is not because of us working together and having better diplomatic relations? Because we almost seemingly refuse to engage with trade with them unless our hands are tied our back, we will not work with them and trade with them. If we engaged with an alliance with them like we did with the UK, then both of our economies could be bolstered with this. Secondly, is china's market really going down the drain? While's china's transition from investment to consumer spending may have caused a stuttering of economy in the short term, in actuality it's growth of GDP is going up above the average, from 3.2 percent to 3.5 percent, says Goldman Sachs in this article "http://www.goldmansachs.com...; In actuality, China's market is going up, not going down, and wouldn't it be better for us, as Americans, to do the best for our people and attach ourselves to their rapidly growing economy.
Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or dip

We cannot have a policy of economic stagnation between two countries. With this period of economic interconnectedness, China's economic problems are our economic problem, and vice versa. Right now, viewing China as the Big Bad Wolf is not a correct position to take. In actuality, it is not even a grown-up position to take. If we allow ourselves to become friends and cooperate with China, who knows what problems could be resolved. In particular, the problem of North Korea could be easily flushed out if we became China's allies, because they almost totally depend on China. With arguably the two greatest world superpowers working together, we as a nation would achieve so much more. So, this is why I believe that we should have better economic and diplomatic relations between our two countries.
Video games cause bad behavior.

On her contentions in order: 1. People being unable to focus is not bad behavior. By that logic people who have ADD are evil. 2. I don't care about newspaper articles, it's irrelevant to this debate. I agree that we are surrounded by violence, but my opponent has yet to prove that being surrounded by violence has actually CAUSED bad behavior. Since she has yet to prove that she has no argument whatsoever at the moment supporting her claim. Onto my contentions: Both my points are cleanly ignored by my opponent, and thus extend both of those two arguments and those are your reasons for voting for Con today. Let me remind you that video games promote cognitive skills that people will need in life, and that also despite more and more people playing video games, crime rates have not gone up.
Video games cause bad behavior.

1. Lengthy hours in front of gaming, could make it hard for kids to focus in school activities, psychologists said US researcher. 2. Most of the video games on the market today are frightening in what they contain. The level of violence and the subliminal messages that this gives our young adults is scary indeed. Our teenagers these days are surrounded by violent video games and newspapers/news articles that are full of how violent human beings are to each other daily.
Video games cause bad behavior.

My opponent has yet to provide an argument as to why playing video games causes bad behavior. Whether she thinks video games are bad or not is her opinion, but she has absolutely no argument to support her claim as of yet. For the sake of debate I'll make a quick argument. Video games do not cause bad behavior for the following two reasons. 1. Video games promote cognitive skills and hand-eye coordination which are things people need in life. Video games also can be used for educational purposes such as the LeapFrog software that helps teach people. 2. In real life this theory is completely untrue, more and more people play video games and yet there has not been a drastic increase in crime. Furthermore, almost everybody plays some form of video games these days, and yet people are as nice as they've always been
Quentin Tarantino is a terrible director

I recall the praise that rolled in when Quentin Tarantino released Pulp Fiction. When I saw the movie, I was mostly unimpressed. It was a series of quotable quips and silly hipster garbage. I didn't hate the movie, but it certainly wasn't what I was made to believe, i.e. the greatest piece of modern cinema. Now, I will not say he is a terrible director for this. He has some good movies to his credit. I would even say Pulp Fiction is on that list. What he IS a terrible director for is not maturing. Every director hits a point where they realize they need to do something new. Steven Spielberg had Schindler's List, James Cameron had Titanic, Tim Burton had Big Fish, the list goes on. Tarantino continues to churn out movies that are campy, gory and "hip". Look at Robert Rodriguez, he made Sin City and From Dusk 'Til Dawn. He also made Spy Kids and Shorts. All of which ranged from huge to moderate successes. He is in the same boat as Tarantino, but manages to break away to do something different. There is no excuse for Tarantino continuing the unrelenting style he uses for every movie.
Quentin Tarantino is a terrible director

"As to the argument itself, I'm not making any sort of claims. It's all opinion. I am only trying to shed light on something that I personally believe. I realize having sources is imperative to any argument. But there is no way to find a source that says whether or not for FACT that Tarantino is a bad director. It's all about opinion, and I realize that, and I also realize I may be alone in my argument. But I want to point out what I see as flaws." In reality this one excerpt of my opponents speech would be enough to urge a ballot in my favor but I will continue, but do keep in mind this automatically defaults arguments and sources to me due to the fact that they concede them to me. "I know he is still making "hits"." Do bad directors continue to make hits? No they wouldn't the one time wonder phenomena is possible but as my opponent concedes he has multiple hits so this simply isn't true, he is a good director. "Death Proof was an original idea." This also directly negates other claims against hit inability to create diverse films... "Quentin Tarantino has incredible potential." One more monumental concession in this round. But if you, the voters, do not buy these verbatim quotes we can extend my 2nd contention from my first speech, it was never argued and shows how experts agree that he is a great director. we can also extend the rottenttomatoes ratting which was once again not attacked, and portrays how viewers enjoy his directing. In short all votes in this round, with the exception of grammar, ought to go to me. This is why: Conduct: My opponents subtle jibes at my character already merit a vote against him, but to show why it ought not be a tie rather a vote for me we can look to my acceptance at over-looking his confusion and lack of understanding and allowing him a debate, showing that I am a debater of true character. Arguments: If we don't buy the literal concession of this point made by my opponent we can look to the fact that my arguments are structured with a clear thesis and overall goal, and they were never attacked furthering their cogency. Sources: By sheer numbers we can see I win, but furthermore on the reliability of the quotes we can default to me again because as my opponent contends her arguments are sourced by opinion and there are no facts to support her claims. Grammar: In hindsight the grammar by both debaters doesn't warrant anything other than a tie, because no single can speech adequately give reason why either debater should receive a ballot. Thank you for your time and effort. I urge a PRO, which is technically CON, vote on this topic.
Quentin Tarantino is a terrible director

You really must put quotes in quotation marks. It makes your arguments difficult to read when you just cut and paste. As to the argument itself, I'm not making any sort of claims. It's all opinion. I am only trying to shed light on something that I personally believe. I realize having sources is imperative to any argument. But there is no way to find a source that says whether or not for FACT that Tarantino is a bad director. It's all about opinion, and I realize that, and I also realize I may be alone in my argument. But I want to point out the flaws in his directing. Or what I see as flaws. All of his movies have the same elements. And they're done in such a way that it isn't really a trademark so much as just repetitive. His movies all have the same feel. I know saying his first few movies were good sinks my argument, but my reasoning as to why his directing skills are poor is that he never matures. Those few good movies were only good because they were fresh. It's like a band having three good hits and fading into obscurity. I know he is still making "hits". That is only a metaphor. But he has yet to do anything different or original. You need to do something more than shock your audience. You have to give them something they have never seen. We've all seen WWII. In many different ways. Tarantino's take just assimilated them all into one movie and called it his. Death Proof was an original idea, but not original execution. Nothing besides the premise hasn't been seen in Tarantino's movies already. His movies rely on dialogue. There's nothing wrong with this. Thank You For Smoking is one of my favorite movies, and is almost entirely dialogue. But Tarantino's dialogue, while very witty at times, usually degenerates into excessive swearing and sleaze. To a point where it's just filler. It makes the otherwise enjoyable exchanges feel forced and silly. In closing, I will say this: Quentin Tarantino has incredible potential. But he wastes it on the same routines. He has lost a lot of credibility with me, and continues to with each new movie. I only want to bring this to the attention of the masses. There is no proof of his lack of directing skills. Only an opinion that I would hope others agree with.
Quentin Tarantino is a terrible director

Detailed, please don't make me scoff. you lack even basic sources to credit your assertions. But this is the accord I feel we may be able to reach beginning in the next round you write why you feel Quentin Tarantino is a terrible director, and I will refute as best as I can. Sound like a plan :). I am more than happy to debate this topic, whilst refraining from semantic arguments.
Quentin Tarantino is a terrible director

Your poor English isn't the uneducated internet troll type, but more the foreign lack of comprehension, so I won't cite grammar and spelling errors. But rather than agreeing with me, you could have commented like everyone else to say that I did it wrong. Or private messaged me. The debate would have either ended without a challenge or someone would have used my misunderstanding to fuel their argument for why I'm not worth listening to. The content of my detailed argument makes it obvious that I made a mistake. Someone who genuinely disagreed could have made me look completely foolish. But now we're stuck at an impasse because we're in agreement with the subject. If you wanted to voice your opinion as to why Tarantino's a bad director, you should have made your own debate and left this one to someone with a genuinely differing opinion. It's really disappointing.
Quentin Tarantino is a terrible director

While it is fun to over-analyze, please bear in mind that I am new to this site, and that I thought by choosing "Con" I was saying I'm against something in general, not that I was against my argument. But since you chose to ruin this by agreeing with what is obviously a mistake, I suppose there is no argument. Way to ruin the fun. I am apologize but over-analyzing!?!?! Please all I have done is point out the mistake in your logic. The concept of this website is not very hard, you chose a topic, "Quentin Tarantino's directing abilities", and then you chose PRO or CON. Also you are misconstruing my argument you as CON are against something in general, in the confines of this round it is the topic, not against your own arguments. Therefore going CON against the resolution "Quentin Tarantino is a terrible director" implies that you feel he is a terrific director. And you could be less harsh. It is entirely your fault for misinterpreting a basic concept, not my for showing you it. Furthermore none of my arguments have been refuted, extend the contentions which show that Tarantino's moral character is severely flawed making him a bad person, and his directing is sub-par, making him a bad director. Thank you :)
Pedophiles Should Be Electronically Tagged

My opponent has returned already? They must have gotten him to confess to his crimes swiftly. I praise the work of Big Brother to allow my fellow comrade to rejoin society, if only to commit the same crimes he did before. For that, he shall be punished swiftly once again, but this time, mercy will not be an option. My opponent says that she speaks the truth, but ignores the prophetic truth that stands in front of her. 1984, a prophesy in disguise as a novel, written by George Orwell, pseudo name for the man, the name, the legend, Eric Blair. It is right here, it is the cold, hard truth. She may choose to hide behind her 'facts' and her 'truth', but they will soon be like dust in the wind, virtually nothing. Her eyes are clouded by the clouds that cloud, but I see clearly now that the rain is gone! My eyes are free of the clouds that cloud, and I see the truth for what it truly is. My opponent says that the current government, and I agree! But to change it for the better, we must fully monitor every person, in every moment of their life. This would include pedophiles as well. I have shown, through the prophetic works of Eric Blair, that a regime that monitors and controls every aspect of life will lead to increasing amounts of joy and happiness, regardless of their place in life! It is for the overall good of all!My opponent wishes to appeal to your inner emotions, but shut them off and listen to reason! The truth is in front of us all! Your eyes can be lifted of the clouds that cloud and your sight can see straight through the veil and into the truth of the world! Her words are lies, her 'facts' and 'truth' are all slanderous blasphemy, intent on making our beloved Big Brother look wrong, but it is not the truth! Her mind has been poisoned by the treacherous Emmanuel Goldstein, and she shall soon be punished once and for all for her transgressions. My opponent wishes for you to cast aside everything else and look at the information, but the only truth in this world is imbedded within the prophesy of 1984! You must begin your journey of enlightenment there, and you shall soon see things as I see things. As such, the only true vote will be one for the pro debater. If you do not, I fear that the end result of it will be evaporation and a swift death.
Pedophiles Should Be Electronically Tagged

A forfeit? They moved even faster than I believed possible. The thoughtpolice have evaporated my poor, poor opponent for his transgressions against Big Brother. I'm glad that he will be brought to justice and brought to beg for mercy and redemption, redemption that will come in the form of a painless bullet through the head. But he had it coming to him. I beg those who plan to vote on this debate take into consideration only my arguments and extend them cleanly across the flow. I also ask of the voters to completely disregard the blasphemous preachings of the Goldstein agent that is my opponent, for he will not be responding to this debate any longer.