BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Team War

Alright, here is Team War, based off these other Ultimate Team Wars I've seen on DDO. This battle takes place in a cube with side length and height of ten miles. Half of the cube is the prairie, an open field of low grass with several trees, and the other half consists of a sea/ocean that is 10000 feet deep. Rules 1. Each side must pick four characters for the debate. 2. Each side can not pick characters that are way too godly and can not be beaten Ex. Arceus. 3. One side wins when all of the other's team members are dead, continually unconscious, or essentially unusable. 4. In the first round, Pro reveals two of his team members, and Con reveals all four members. Pro reveals his remaining two members in Round 2. This is so that Con does not make a team that is a complete counter to Pro's team. 5. Characters that step out or forced out of the cube are automatically rendered defeated. 6. For this debate, characters will be unaware of each other's abilities. 7. Each side can't use the same character. For example, me and my opponent can not have Mario at the same time. Here are my first two characters: Tobi. Tobi is a genius and the true mastermind of the Akatsuki. He has the ultimate form of Spacial Ninjutsu. http://naruto.wikia.com... Darth Vader Darth Vader, once Anakin Skywalker, is a master of the force and the Chosen One, and also a sith lord. The Darth Vader I will use will be the one that first fought Obi Wan Kenobi on Mustafar (Darth Vader without the suit). http://starwars.wikia.com... Alas, that is all for now. I look forward to this debating this with you. I renistate the debate since I personally know my opponent, and he has requested I restart it.
Team War

It is unfortunate that my opponent was unable to respond in time for Round 4. Nonetheless, I have no points to rebut in this round. My opponent will have to rebut my very first argument and the other argument in Round 3. It is not fair to post an argument, since my opponent has forfeited and this is the last round of the debate. I ask Con not bring up any completely new points to the argument. He can really only rebut what I have posted. With that, I hand over the final round to my opponent.
Team War

However, I will go ahead and try to rebut them. Battle Plan My opponent says that Alucard will try and attack Articuno straight off the bat. However, if Alucard runs straight at Articuno, Articuno can use Mind Reader, followed immediately by Ice Beam to freeze Alucard. Before he can try to escape, Vader can grab him by Force Choke and strangulate him to death. Now, Alucard can not use his heat method to kill Articuno: Even if he did, Articuno could counter with Rain Dance. Now, my opponent says Moka can use her speed to destroy Toph. My opponent says Toph won't see her coming. My opponent is right, Toph won't. However, Toph will feel her coming through her Seismic Sense, allowing her to pinpoint any incoming attacks. Toph can then cover herself in Metal if she sees a massive Roundhouse kick coming. Once Moka kicks the hard metal and fails to destroy it, Toph can then counter with a hard punch. Or, Articuno can use rain dance and paralyze Moka right off the bat, as I showed in the previous round. Now, with Moka paralyzed, my opponent can not make the "ULTIMATE FEMALE TEAM" he desires. Moka will be left paralyzed for the time being, since she is now at the mercy of being killed by anybody. Now all that are left is Rias and Anko. Vader can grab Rias and kill her through strangulation. Now all that is really left is Anko. Vader can kill Moka right now and finish her off. Anko will try and attack one of the four members, now that all the others are dead. My opponent has completely neglected Tobi in his argument. Now I will show what Tobi can do. Tobi could have easily gone underground in the fight, and now come back up. It Anko tries to attack Tobi, I will show how she will lose in my above argument. If she tries to attack Articuno, he can use Ice Beam and freeze the ground, making her slip, and putting her at mercy to be killed by a Force Choke. If she attacks Vader, Vader can just Force Choke her. And, if she attacks Toph, Toph can trap Anko in an earth prison, where Tobi can come in, and then suck her into his eyes and out of the match. With that, Team Pro wins. Conclusion of Round two argument: I have shown how Team Pro can still counter Team Con with Team Con's own plan. Now, Con must find a way to stop the counter I have proposed.
Team War

It appears it is my turn and so I shall show you an alternate plan. Battle PlanIn my plan, Using Alucards infinite range of speed and strength, he could simply teleport/run straight at Articuno. Using his transformation abilities he can transform himself into a giant blob of heat resulting in the melting of Articuno or in its series case. Fainting due to its incredibly intense heat. After that, Using Mokas speed she can, as she does in all of her fights, Roundhouse kick Toph into oblivion. As she can virtually move so fast that she can fly, thus allowing Toph to never see her coming. Once Moka is finished she could run back to her original point allowing her and Rias to team up. Allowing them to be the ultimate female team. With Moka's super human senses and abilities and Rias powers of the dark destruction they could obliterate anyone that they desire. Last but not least Anko Mitarashi. As I cannot at the moment think of anything for her, I will simply allow her to move about the battle field, slithering and dodging any move she needs to. Using this techneich, Both Toph and Articuno should already be knocked out if not Toph should be sent out of the ring due to Mokas infinite power and strength.
Team War

I accept the terms and conditions. I will now post my characters.AlucardAn everlasting and possibly perfect vampire who works for the Hellsing organization to rid the world of unneeded vampires. (He will be able to use all of his abilities without being commanded by Integra Hellsing.) http://en.wikipedia.org...(Hellsing)Rias Gremory"The female protagonist of the series. She is a third-year student at Kuoh Academy and is the Academy's number one idol. Known as the "Crimson-Haired Ruin Princess" and the "Princess of Destruction" , she is the heir to one of the highest ranking and famous Devil families, the Gremory Family." (She will be able to use all of her abilities.)http://en.wikipedia.org...Moka Akashiya (Inner form)A teenage fighting vampire with superhuman abilities. (In this match she will have already fed before the match.)http://en.wikipedia.org...Anko Mitarashi A female ninja of The Hidden Leaf village that has the power to release snakes. (In this match she will be able to release her curse seal and all of her jutsu.)http://naruto.wikia.com...I await my opponents last set of characters.
Moderator Replacement

There is hardly anything left to refute. I am going to go through some of the contentions, but Krazy dropped or did not respond to almost all of them. The ones he did respond to were not accurate rebuttals. Immature/ Not aware he is a ModThe entire point that I made was dropped. Krazy failed to show how people not being aware that he is a moderator, actually effects his ability to moderate. I addressed the immature aspect of this in the last round which was no touched. He fails to make this contention solid and does not meet his BOPOre Ele is FakeThe point about security was completely dropped, thus this contention is invalid. For all we know Ore Ele wishes to not diverge his personal information to the public for safety/security reasons. Krazy fails to show the correlation in trust in a moderator and this point. Thus his BOP is not fulfilled and was refuted with privacy concerns which Krazy failed to address. Ore Ele does not WorkKrazy acknowledges Ore Ele was a vital part in the Elo System and implemented it. This confirms the point that Ore Ele does not work. By acknowledging this Krazy refutes his own premise. Other UsersKrazy drops yet another point. He fails to show why Ore ele should be replaced. He lists off a group of people whom he feels would be better moderators without giving any reasons as to why. He also fails to show why other members being able to moderate would mean that Ore Ele should be replaced. We could simply add another Mod and not replace him. This point is invalidUser Demand a ChangeHe committed an Add populum in the first round and drops everything behind this contention and my rebuttal. It does not stand and is invalid. Rebuilding ContentionsI really do not need to address each of my contentions in turn. Krazy did not refute any of them and merely asserted personal assumptions as to why he feels Ore is a bad moderator. None of this is backed with fact other than the forum issue that occurred, which Ore apologized for. In addition to this remember Krazy went on rants calling Airmax and Ore things like "stupid fuk", and saying "he hopes they are raped", and calling them a "btch". This is a blatant violation of the TOS and can result in a temp ban, but due to the issue that occurred both Ore and Max offered Krazy another chance because they somewhat under stood his anger. ConclusionKrazy has failed to address how and why Ore is a Bad moderator and should be replaced. I have shown that he has played a vital roll in site updates, that he cares for the site, that he really active and a great debater who understands site etiquette. He is even willing to admit when he does something wrong. Krazy is letting a little joke get way out of hand, and taking his personal feelings out on OreIn the end this boils down to the BOP. I have refuted all of Krazys contention and he has failed to refute any of mine. He has also failed to solidify any solid reasons as to why Ore should be replaced. He has failed to meet the BOP and uphold the resolution.
Moderator Replacement

Ore_Ele is immature and people are not aware he is a mod"Moderators" work is a serious job,It is no fun, they have to deal with millions of users of a particular site. If Mod's are themselves trolls, users only option will be to leave the site.Ore_Ele is fakeMod's must create a sign of trust among users. Fake profiles will result in lack of trust among users on the site. Airmax is the best example for "Moderator." Ore_Ele does not workJust because Ore-ele is one of the lead member in bringing ELO system doesn't mean he/she works all the time. Airmax does most of the mod work as seen and known by many users here.Other UsersOre-ele may be doing mod work from long time and no one can continue a job for life long period. If users believe "Moderator" isn't doing the job appropriately, then the site and it's users have every right for demanding change. Users like Roylatham, Ragnar, Whiteflame, Wylted etc suits for the job best. I believe this is the right time for demanding change over.Uusers Demand a ChangeChange is necessary everywhere and users have every right to demand change. It brings refreshment to the site and its going on work.Forum DramaNow this is very important as it brings the clear picture what happened? This may be initiative bringing the necessary change and to implementing it.RebuttalsExcellent Debater/ Frequent Forum User/ Long Term UserAll the above qualities doesn't match for a person to be qualified as "Moderator." Roylatham is excellent debater too also a long term user and he is been before Ore-Ele in addition to that he is also frequent forum user (which is not necessary). Elo SystemAs said earlier, just because he was the lead member in bringing this system doesn't mean he can be a "Mod".Great Down to Earth GuyThis doesn't need to be addressed at all. "Moderator" job is sensitive and a troll & childish behavioral person cannot handle it. He genuinely cares for the siteThis statement is totally false. He himself said that," He is here just for fun and continue trolling for his personal fun in the recent thread I provided.ConclusionMy opponent tries to shift the BOP on me but the Rules clearly says BOP is shared. Ore_Ele is not serious about his job at all and is not the right person as "Mod". If "Moderator" job is taken from Ore_ele and is given to better and serious users like Roy, Ragnar etc, this site can flourish even longer with proper administration.Final WordsThis debate is no fun and I request voters to vote in dignity as this issue is about "Moderator Replacement". There are users who really care for this site but some trolls is bringing a bad image to this site. Please think over the issue seriously.Thank you Mikal for accepting and presenting your case.
Moderator Replacement

Resolution: Ore- ele should be replaced as moderator. I shall be arguing for the above resolution. The BOP shall be shared. My opponent shall argue against the resolution. Rules R1 is for Acceptance. R2 is for Arguments and Rebuttals. R3 is for Rebuttals. No new arguments in R3. A forfeit shall result in a full 7-point loss. Thank you! Any one interested shall post comments and I'll pick my opponent.
There should be no prisons

Thank you for posting this debate, I accept. Let's get right to the chase. While I do agree that our prison system is broken, to say that there "should be no prisons" is too much. Likewise, there are a few problems with the pro's proposal. First, the pro has not proposed an alternative to prisons. They're bad and all, but from what I can tell, the only other thing is capital punishment (ie. the death penalty), which is always not an option. While it's true prisons will take up more money than the death penalty, using death for each and every single crime just isn't right. Second, prisons don't necessarily represent a burden on society, in that they're something we constantly worry about every day. In fact, we fantasize about them in a plethora of television shows about prisons (eg. Law and Order, Orange is the new Black) Third, the people who "are taken out of work" aren't regular people like you and me; these are convicted criminals-- maybe that's a good enough reason to keep them out. Thus, my Counterplan is that the USFG should substantially increase its support of prisons inmates through increased maintenance of those prisons, and release of unwarrented prisoners. The definition of "unwarrented" (entered as unwarrentable) is "not justifiable." [1] Prisoners that fit this category are those who shouldn't even be in prison at all, or were unjustly sentenced and put into prison. Here is an example: John Oliver's Last Week Tonight episode on Bail showed that a frightening proportion of people were sent to jail simply because they can't pay their bail. One man under this category was given two options: bail, or RIKER'S ISLAND.[2] These aren't convicted criminals (yet, but that's not the point), these are simply poor people. To give them the same level of justice as a convicted criminal is just not right. The Counterplan solves for the pro's points by a) not drastically changing the justice system, b) limit the amount of people in prison, thus c) limit the cost to maintain those prisons through less prisoners. The pro's third point on "burden on society" just isn't true.
There should be no prisons

Side-note: I note I forgot the citation for the Last Week Tonight episode, it's here: The order is: counterplan, then case. The pro has conceded the majority of the counterplan, especially the net benefit of unwarrented prisoners. Thus he concedes the CP solves the case.The only thing the pro has contested is the issue of prisons itself, which I will address on the case debate. Case The pro contradicts himself. First, he says on his first point that "death penalty is the only solution." But in his next point, he goes on to say that "if smaller crimes are committed, there should be no death penalty." The definition of only as defined by the Oxford Dictionary is "solely or exclusively" [1]. He advocates death penalty only, then he says no death penalty in this exception. We'll concede that the only alternative aside from jail is the death penalty, as that means the pro must explain death for petty crimes such as littering. On the first point, the pro says everyone is afraid of death, and thus is a good deterrent. That is not the case. Allow me to bring to this debate the case of September 11th, 2001. Jihadists stormed 4 airplanes, striking them into the heart of New York City, the Pentagon, and Pennsylvania, without a regard to death. Death wasn't even a worry for these people. If these people can overcome the fear of death, what makes the death penalty any good as a deterrent. Second, the pro says community service solves lower crimes. community service is something that's already in place in crimes like littering. It's jail that serves as an impetus to finish the community service. Third, the pro extends his primary points. Now given his confirmation that the only alternative to jail is death, this extensions sounds sick. 1) "save us money." The pro's advocacy will save money at the cost of a lot more graves and widows, and will put us on the same level as places like Iran, who use death indiscriminately. 2) "increase work force". Not really, if those that are supposed to increase the work force are dead. 3) "prison guards get other jobs." It basically means they're fired, which means LESS JOBS! Even if some do get other jobs, it's still a job deficit, exactly the opposite of what the pro said would happen in his first speech. Citations http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...
There should be no prisons

Death penalty is the only fair solution. First, everyone in the country should be informed and know that the death penalty will follow if such and such crimes are committed. This would prevent people from doing these crimes, and the ones that do them with the knowledge that they may face the death penalty are dangerous enough only by this fact, not to mention the crimes committed as a plus to that. If smaller crimes are committed, there should be no death penalty, only daily work for the community, the judge decides how long the person should work and what job the person should do based on the crime. This approach would save us money, it would increase work force, it would make all those prison guards receive another job that is more efficient for the advancement of society. It may sound harsh to liberals, but it's the best approach if we look at it this way.
courts have the responsibility to create racially balanced schools

Well I'm just going to wrap up here. I don't believe that any body of government should force a child to attend a certain school or bar them from attendance of a school based on race alone. It would be a logistical nightmare and may result in kids having to travel out of the way to attend a school, which costs money, all for the sake of balance. Simply let the children attend school in the district they reside in. Thank you.
courts have the responsibility to create racially balanced schools

Well, I can't quite understand the points you made except one about the 14th amendment.All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws(1). With this text, forcing kids to go to different schools is not against the 14th amendment because they didn't deny them the privilege of going to school, they just simply didn't let them go to THAT ONE. They still had the privilege as citizens to go to school. I would also like to point out that due to location of the states, demographics will be different and it is virtually impossible to racially balance schools. I live in San Antonio Texas. The 2 largest demographics are caucasian and hispanics. I travel frequently all around San Antonio and I have not noticed a particularly high amount or blacks, asians or europeans. While there are some, they do not amount to nearly the number of hispanics, So in San Antonio, if all the schools were balanced best as possible, there would probably be about 3x as many whites and about 1.75x hispanics as compared to all blacks, asians and europeans combined, This is simply from my own observation. Different states and cities have different demographics, but as a whole, you cannot racially balance schools if the demographic isn't there. Plus, how would a court of law go about balancing the schools? How would they know how where to send each black, white, hispanic, asian, european, so on and so forth, to school? How would they know how many they have to begin with? Answering these questions to lead to tax dollars being wasted and personal privacy being invaded. You can't just tell someone where to go to school because they're not white, or because this school doesn't have enough blacks. Everyone should just simply go to the school of the district they live in. Simple as that. I would also like to point out that most of the examples you used, If I read them correctly, have to do with racism. Racism isn't something you can forcibly destroy by a balance of demographics. The person in question has to change their moral lifestyle to end their racism. Vote Con 1. http://www.law.cornell.edu...
courts have the responsibility to create racially balanced schools

affirmative 1 In 1964 many kids started boycott 1 kids refuse to attened there school many kids got home school 2 kids started throwing eggs and other metarals at the buses which the black were on 3 kids and there parents started protesting around boston affirmative 2 In 1974 court ordered busing was the only strategy that could have desgregated 1 blacks already tired different things but didint have enough money 2neighboohs were segragted and kids went to there neighboorhood schools 3 the parents still didnt had a choice by the court of law there had to bring both kids togther so now thats started a problem beteween the people and the court of law affirmative 3 Race should be used as a basis for school assignment 1 justic sstephen breyer wrote down yess putting kids togther race would related a conflict 2 judge alex member of the arh circut started putting both black and whites togther which made him thinks that now one race have a power over a norther 3 the school districts went aginnist the 14s amendnt which said everyone is equal but the school still went agenst the law putting kids in different schools making it hard on not just the parents but the kids also 1