BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
THBT we should learn english with a native speaker than a non-native speaker

Rebuttals:CON states that native speakers cannot fully empathize with the difficulty their students face. This can be rebuffed in two ways. Firstly, the motion states the contention to be whether 'we' should learn WITH native/non native speakers, not learn FROM. Hence, CON's arguments which is based on a student-teacher relationship does not stand. Secondly, we see (as per my definitions) that the difference between a native and non-native speaker does not concern that of ability. CON's argument ignores this and assumes that there is a difference in ability between the native and non-native speaker, thus giving rise to the student-teacher scenario. Arguments:Since the topic at hand is learning WITH, we shall be discussing both the non-native and native speaker as students. Generally speaking, it is precisely because there exists a difference between the native and non-native speakers in terms of their understanding of more intangible aspects of a language that makes for a more fruitful learning experience for both students. There can be an exchange of perspectives, whereby the native speaker with a more in-depth understanding of the language at hand, in this case, English, can share his take and viewpoint on English with that of a non-native speaker, while the non-native speaker may be able to offer another candid and more culturally neutral way of viewing English that the native speaker may have never even thought existed. Please bear in mind that I am comparing non-native speakers with native speakers in terms of their understanding of a language's 'intangible aspects', rather than purely ability. A non-native speaker can have equal or better mastery of a language in terms of being able to speak it fluently and use it on a daily basis in any occasion, but they may not grasp more abstract aspects of a language (etymology, regional slang, idioms, etc. ) as thoroughly as the native speaker. Thank you and I await CON's response.
THBT we should learn english with a native speaker than a non-native speaker

Seeing that PRO has not provided any definitions nor laid down any ground rules, I would like to do so for him. DEFINITIONSNative speaker: A person who has spoken the language in question from earliest childhood [1]Non-native speaker: Someone who has another native tongue than the language being used [2]RULES 1. Please observe civilised etiquette and refrain from ad hominem2. Should one forfeit, they must state their reason for forfeiture in the comments section or in the succeeding round, the legitimacy of said reason will be determined through negotiation3. Have fun! Once again, thank you to PRO and I look forward to an interesting debate! SOURCES USED [1] . http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...[2] . https://en.wiktionary.org...
Wonder Woman is the best Female Super Hero

first of all you said 'Wonder Woman is ONE OF THE BEST female superheroes ever created". Key words one of the best , pick is Phoenix. Powers and Abilities: Phoenix possess infinite telepathic and telekinetic powers. It is unknown as to the extent of her abilities. As Jean Grey, she has demonstrated the ability to read minds, project thoughts into the minds of others, astral travel, manipulate objects, generate force fields and stimulate heat molecules to generate blasts. Why she rocks? When Jean becomes the persona "Phoenix," she is debatably the most powerful superhero in existence.
Wonder Woman is the best Female Super Hero

Again, you come to the fact that she hasn't had a movie! Those movies didn't do well because they were badly scripted. Wonder Woman will get her movie in due time. Wonder Woman has been around for a long time and she will remain a constant icon. She's a great female character for little girls to look up too. She can hold her own against Batman and Superman. She is one of the key members of the Justice League! Just because she doesn't have a movie doesn't make her less important
Wonder Woman is the best Female Super Hero

First, she has an animated movie. Secondly, the reason she hasn't had a movie is because the media is afraid of loosing money. There are many people who thought that if a the main character of a movie is a woman, people will not go to see it. However, with the sucess of Brave and Hunger Games, they have been proven wrong. Third, not only did Wonder Woman make a huge impact in comic books, she has been the subject of many books like Wonder Women: Feminisms and Superheroes by Lillian Robinson. You're really gonna have to try harder
Wonder Woman is the best Female Super Hero

However, I am going to have to disagree with you. Unlike Wonder Woman, Phoenix hasn't left an impact on the world. Not only is Wonder Woman an influential comic character, she is also a feminist icon. She represents the idea that a woman can be still and still be lady like. She is kind and gentle when she needs to be and protects those who need to be protected. Phoenix on the other hand is usually seen as a villain and as Jean Grey, she is an extremely week character.
Should Kids have to do Chores

Hello, As the Pro contender, I will be showing the reasons why children should do chores. Yes, Children did not ask to be brought into the world, but no one can change the fact that they are. Doing chores is just another way to help this children learn the way the world works so to say, the world won't give you everything for free, and if you think that that is just how that works you are surely mistaken. Chores are not enjoyable but neither are jobs (Depending on what your doing) or education, but they get you ready to do hard labor. Chores teach children gratitude, and they also teach them how to manage their time. If you have to clean the kitchen and do the laundry, but want to see a movie in an hour. It teaches you to be efficient. Therefore, Chores may not be the most enjoyable thing but they do teach you things that will help you in the long run.
Should Kids have to do Chores

I understand what you are saying, and from the looks of it, you like dong chores. But when parents have their kids doing chores all of the timem then the parents are going to start relying on the kids to do the work when something is not done or they dont feel like dong it. Kids shoud also be able to have a choice to decide whether or not they are going to dp chores or no. I know its a parents responsibility to raise a child in the way that they should go, but kids need time to deicde what they want to be in life, and they cant vener have time to theirselves if they are always cleaning up or walkin around doing what their parents say, while the parents bark them around telling them what to do and when to do it.
Michael Jackson is STILL the King of Pop

Michael Jackson is not the King of Pop, he died, therefore the next heir must take over the reign. In the past many kings have died and if the heir succeeded in the coronation they become the ruler. In this case Michael Jackson was a king for quite a while, you see, but when he died--though many people wept on the streets of Paris--nobody could deny that a new king had to take his place. You did not provide any definitions (or arguments for that matter) therefore I can present my case in any way I want. There are many ways to refute how you said Thriller is the only reason Michael Jackson is still the King of Pop. For example if M. J. was still alive now, I admit that he would rule over Icona Pop [] but since he's not alive I'd say someone else had to have taken the rule over Pop. Some people would say Justin Timberlake others would say Basset Hounds or Justin Bieber, but I'm going with Brandon Howard because he the next heir in the Royal family []. He is the alleged son of MJ, or people think, but also the most likely even though he's not the most famous. I mean, I trust DNA tests! In this music video for 'Thriller' [] it shows how Michael Jackson is not a king, but a monster. (Da duh daaaa!) Besides, the music video defines 'thriller' as what we now call a 'horror.' So if that song really was proof for the blatant statement that MJ is still king, than there would still be the same definitions for the terms used to categorize movies/films. But technically you saying the word thriller could mean anything. http://www.google.com... http://www.google.com... So who's rule are you under, anyways? I've never heard of a town or any civilization named--or nicknamed--'Pop' so I don't know the options for kings. You never informed me why Michael Jackson is a king at all or how he became one. Good talk. Good debate. And good day.
I am the only real person on Debate.org

No.I had hoped you would figure out what I was doing there, however I will re-iterate to you. (Edit: when i read this, I see it seems aggressive, I do not mean this - I was legitimately hoping you would, as I had a coutner claim for that too which would have knocked your socks off ;) )You gave me the opportunity to make a point, and I had alot of fun trying to figure out a smart and funny response - however this brought me to the core, in my opinion : Words are easily create-able.I can make a masterpiece, and you may or may not believe I am human, However I could be a human who has created a program with my intellect, to create accurate and 'new' responses, a sentence that has never been used before - It is do-able.What I stumbled upon is that the one way to prove your validity, is with actions or predetermination.This took me on a new tangent on the subject, and I realised the next way to prove humanity - WE ARE NOT PERFECT.I failed- I lost the previous round. I have nothing to prove now, as I have 'lost' - Yet here I am.My action of defending after losing (A logical Fallacy), has irrevocably prove that I am human, As who else can front up and say "I screwed up..... BUUT" and then defend EXACTLY what they just 'lost'?I am playing on a gamble here, but I hope it resonates with you like it did with me, and you understand why I chose this track.====Alternatively, I anticipated that this would happen, I imagined the scenario, then purposefully declined the round, to put in the position that you had proven your point, to then rip that from underneath you - by explaining that my 'submission', was in fact me preparing you to lower your guard, to then prove my point.That is my definition of being a person - I knew what would happen next by imagining it (predetermined)- I then directed the 'flow' (actions) to my own desired outcome.Both are signs of a real human being, and both are symbioses to humanity - I am "smart", I am selfish. (Picture when we were all simple sperm, what happened to those other 'brothers or sisters' you were competing against to reach the egg, That is what i mean by Selfish - I am here for me).I use these against you.Apologies for not writing in the previous round - however what I thought I would right before deciding on this path, were alot of fun - thank you so much for this good debate!Zarium (a.k.a Human), OUT.For the Icing on the cake, I will invent a new word : Idioselliquism; or the art of selling useless junk to the gullible non-thinker (people off-guard or those out of their knowledge).
I am the only real person on Debate.org

Artificial intelligence (that is, machine intelligence), has gotten very good at imitating human conversation. [1] [2] The burden of proof is on you to prove that you are human. You must pass the Turing test. You must say something only a human could say, or do something only a human could do. It must be something no human has ever said before on the internet. If you can't, I will know that you are really a pernicious AI bent on world domination and I will reveal your secret to the human government. [1] http://www.cleverbot.com... [2] http://alice.pandorabots.com...
Homework is a Good Thing.

The first benefit of homework is that it allows students and teachers to work more closely together. They can discuss their assignments or any problems that they are having with parts of their textbooks, before or after classes. The second benefit is that it can bring families closer together as students may ask their parents or siblings for help on their homework. Not only will this help the students get a better understanding of their work with any parts they are stuck on, it will also allow parents to get more involved in their child's educational life. Thirdly, doing homework will prepare students for the big end tests. If a child does poorly on an assignment then they will learn what is necessary to do well on the next test without being punished. It also provides students with the opportunity to practice at what it takes to be successful in school. Like they say, practice makes perfect. Doing homework is also a great way to develop responsibilities. By being assigned work one day and knowing that it has to be done by the next day, they will develop a sense of punctuality by turning their work in on time. And finally it allows parents to see how their children are being educated and they can develop a better idea of how they can help their child.
I will not break a rule- and this time I mean it!

~Rules~ 1. During rounds 2 through 4, the instigator is uphold all obligations which have been set for the contender to follow while abandoning the PRO position. Only during Round 5 is he allowed to swap back to PRO. 2. The user known as Logical-Master is allowed to serve as a substitute for the Instigator during Rounds 2 through 4 (in other words, LM will essentially be PRO throughout rounds 2-4) while also fulfilling his obligations as CON (hence, he is PRO and CON for a limited amount of time)(he is also CON, only to assure that the instigator doesn't attempt to sabotage his position). The position he is upholding shall be placed in sections titled PRO and CON during each round for the sake of clarification. 3. When upholding the position of CON, Logical-Master is the only one allowed to make the rules as well as determine whether or not anyone upholding the PRO position violated said rules; rules made by any other party shall be swiftly ignored. If there are any other obligations as CON other than being present during the debate, anyone else upholding the CON position is free to fulfill said obligations. ~End of Rules~ Thanks and good luck!
I will not break a rule- and this time I mean it!

This was my first topic on DDO, and since I was new to the site I failed miserably. I am going to give it another shot. Here are the rules: ~Rules~ 1. Each round CON must give me three rules, which I must follow. Failure for PRO doing so results in a loss. Failure for CON to give three rules to PRO results in his loss. 2. The rules cannot have anything that will go against the Terms of Service, or will be increasingly tiresome or difficult. I think the voters will decide on where the questionable rules stand. 3. If CON sees any breaking of rules, he must say so in his next turn. PRO will then either admit defeat (and automatically lose) or argue why he thinks he did not break a rule. CON can also admit defeat if he finds he cannot find any rule breakages, and of course automatically lose. ~End of Rules~ I am anticipating my opponent's post, blah blah blah, lets get to it. :3
I will not break a rule- and this time I mean it!

With the instigator now being PRO again, all of the rule breaking which has taken place on the PRO side now rest on him, hence he loses this debate. I rest my case. Additional Rules (since I am supposed to create rules every round). #1. PRO must eat some pie after this debate concludes. #2. PRO must buy CON some pie after this debate concludes. #3. PRO must purchase some whip cream after this debate concludes.
I will not break a rule- and this time I mean it!

*clears throat* I'll take that as a concession. ============= MY CON SECTION | ============= 1) PRO must do 10 push ups and sit ups while drinking juice. 2) PRO is to set a timer on a VCR 3) PRO is not allowed to say the words "I give up." I believe PRO's rule violations are self-evident thus see no need to explain them. ============= MY PRO SECTION | ============= . . . I give up.
I will not break a rule- and this time I mean it!

Many greetings once again to the real retarded flamingo. I see your slave is not present. That is rather good to hear. However, it's very unfortunate that in spite of your efforts to find a loophole in the set of rules I've laid forward, that it has all been naught. You say that your first rule having the line "give me" indicates that I've contradicted your first rule, but this couldn't be further from the truth. Although the first rule does say that you are to be given three rules, it also states that failure for PRO following these rules doing so results in a loss. Ergo, you can follow these rules to your heart's content, but the main concern in this debate is whether or not PRO violates them. Let me stress the point that there is nothing in my rules which impedes you personally from following my rules. With that being said . . . ============= MY CON SECTION | ============= Lets say you buy the instigator's argument. That still doesn't change the fact that he has violated each of my rules which I set about in R2. Copy and paste each sentence in his last response and you'll see that they are all above 10 characters. Furthermore, not all of his sentences compliment Michael Bay as we can see with the following sentence: "Also, I have been wearing a hat for your third rule." Therefore, even by the instigator's own argument, he has still lost this debate. Also, whether a statement, fact or an opinion is presented(although both of the latter can easily exist in the former), my ruled concerned sentences, thus that argument fails as well. ~Rules~ 1. PRO must present a picture of a square circle. 2. PRO must post an attractive picture of Jodie Foster. 3. In addition to complimenting Michael Bay, PRO must also compliment George Bush in every sentence he makes. ~End of Rules~ ============ MY PRO SECTION: ============ Jodie Foster is the hottest chick I've ever seen, hence posting a picture of her would be too much for the DDO community handle and I'm pretty sure this sentence is more than 10 characters. Square circles are highly offensive thus I refuse to post a picture of one. And Hillary Clinton is super special awesome!
I will not break a rule- and this time I mean it!

I am confused as to why you view my rules as pointless, because that talented Michael Bay wouldn't. Anyway, your whole concept of you being PRO and CON contradicts my first rule, which clearly states "give me". Shanarf to you, and I hope buff Michael Bay thinks so as well. 1. Character: the aggregate of features and traits that form the individual nature of some person or thing, like dashing Michael Bay. Voters, you will see that what I write above contains only one character, and that is Michael Bay, the smart fellow. And in some sentences I purposely did not contain any compliments toward awesome Michael Bay because they were not statements, but facts and opinions. Also, I have been wearing a hat for your third rule. Adios, and good luck to you and intelligent Michael Bay!
I will not break a rule- and this time I mean it!

Greetings the real retarded_flamingo. I feel you on your problem with your slaves. My slaves do that all the time! It's such a bother. There's a reason slavery was abolished. Nevertheless, it doesn't matter who is using your account. My rules are stated to concern the instigator and whoever is using your account is the instigator. There is nothing you can do about that. Furthermore, my 3rd rule stated that all rules created by anyone other than me (Logical-Master) are to be ignored, hence making the majority of your above round pointless. =============== MY CON SECTION | =============== RULES: 1. All of PRO's sentences must be no longer than 10 characters. 2. Each statement which PRO makes must also be a compliment towards Michael Bay. 3. PRO must wear a hat for the duration of the debate. I have a good feeling that PRO will violate these rules. In fact, I know without a doubt that it shall be done explicitly! ============ MY PRO SECTION: ============ Uwe Boll is the greatest directer ever and this sentence is probably more than 10 characters. In addition, I don't like to wear hats, hence I refuse to wear a hat!
I will not break a rule- and this time I mean it!

Apologies, but I relize that one of my slaves seemed to start a debate, mimicing an older one I had participated in. Since he was not retarded_flamingo I must restate MY rules of the debate. ~Rules~ 1. Each round Logical-Master most post three rules to which I, retarded-flamingo, must follow. Not following the rules unless they are against this before hand set of rules results in a loss. If Logical-Master does not give me three acceptable rules he loses. 2. The rules cannot have anything that will go against the Terms of Service, will be increasingly tiresome or difficult, or allow Logical-Master to take both sides of the debate and I to be PRO at the 5th round. I think the voters will decide on where the questionable rules stand. (i.e. the tiresome or difficult ones.) 3. If Logical-Master sees any breaking of rules, he must say so in his next turn. I, retarded-flamingo, will then either admit defeat (and automatally lose) or argue why I think I did not break a rule. Logical-Master can also admit defeat if he finds he cannot find any rule breakages, and of course automatically loses. 4. If I, retarded-flamingo, am actually not retarded-flamingo, then I return on my next turn with a clean slate- meaning all past complications or rule breakages are not to be counted. 5. If Logical-Master posts rules directed to retarded-flamingo, who is me, but the account is being controlled by a slave or hottub mate, Logiacl-Master's rules are not to be counted as not followed and are to be forgotten. ~End of Rules~ By the way, if you request to continue this debate with my slave, I banished him from my hottub and he died in a nuclear explosion. This means that you cannot debate with the person who posted first on this debate. Hopefully no one else will go on my computer........
Homeschooling is better than public school.

I would have to disagree with you. I am in http://www.k12.com... and we have tons and tons of after school club's such as photography, physics, ect. We also do have tons of social out goings. We meet up all the time our whole school and teachers do. We have picnics and even homecomings/proms. We also get 10 minutes before each class to talk to our classmates and teachers.
Homeschooling is better than public school.

My opponent claims that homeschooling is better than public schooling. I do not believe this is the case since public schooling provides one wih all sorts of social opportunities. You're around many people of the same age you can make friends with, there's afterschool clubs, etc. While at home these same opportunities do not exist. Bullying can indeed be a problem in public schools, but isn't it better that one learns about all social situations and how to deal with them? There are valuable social skills to be learned from both friendships and encounters with people you don't particularly like. Bullying is usually a negative thing obviously, but through school you can also develop a support system to combat this too. I'm a product of public school bullying and I had both friends and counselling support networks through my school. As for better grades, that is entirely subjective. Different people do well in different environments and in different subjects. What my opponent claims to be good at somebody else may be even better at, or even worse at. For somebody who is extroverted and learns well in environments with other students public schooling would be beneficial for them. Good luck!