BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Donald J Trump is a great leader

Donald Trump failed miserably as a leader in the business community. The majority of his business ventures failed horribly, Either ending up in bankruptcy or Chapter 11. He lost hundreds of millions of dollars, Due to his mismanagement of properties and bad business practices. He led countless numbers of small businesses to ruin, Such as building supply companies, Contractors, And subcontractors, By using their products and services and either not paying them, Or offering them pennies on the dollar for what was owed. He exploited undocumented workers that he hired as laborers by grossly underpaying them for their work. He stiffed employees at his hotels and casinos when funds ran out, By holding back salaries, Or not paying them at all. What Commander has mastered, Being the consummate self-promoting egoist, Is the remarkable ability to sell himself as something he is not. Trump is a skilled manipulator with absolutely no moral compass, And during his campaign had absolutely no qualms about lying and telling people exactly what they wanted to hear or knowingly making promises that would have been impossible for him to keep. Without any qualifications or experience in the political arena, He literally conned his way into the White House.
Abortion

It seems my opponent has forfeited. If this was just a mistake, (s)he can message me and we can redo the debate. Just as a conclusion to my arguments, I stand by my belief that a fetus is not yet a person until viability, and its rights should not come before the woman's rights. I say it's not a person because in order to be a person it must fit these two qualifications: 1) It must be an individual, which a fetus is not since it is attached to its mother. An individual is biologically defined as "a single organism capable of independent existence" (1). A fetus isn't capable of independent existence until the third trimester, which is why I am against late-term abortion except in cases where the mother's life is threatened. 2) It must have a certain degree of mental acuity. While there are disabilities that might hinder this, a normally-functioning human being will have the unique ability to think critically and have sentience. A fetus has neither of these things, and has no provable consciousness at all, so therefore it completely lacks one of humankind's most identifying qualities. Possessing human DNA is not enough justification for personhood. But as I said, whether or not a fetus is a person is a subjective opinion. Not everyone will think the same about it. That's why it's important that abortion stays safe and legal, so those that wish to have an abortion can do so, and those that regard it as murder can abstain. And the claim that abortion is categorically wrong is rather hasty. What if a woman could potentially lose her life if she brings the fetus to term? In that case abortion is practically self-defense, so it is a procedure that could prevent unnecessary deaths. Or in cases of rape, when it's not the mother's fault, or incest, when the baby could have a whole host of genetic deformities? A pregnancy disrupts a woman's life dramatically, and it's important that if she isn't ready for such a disturbance she have the ability to terminate the pregnancy. Sources: (1) http://dictionary.reference.com...
Abortion

I believe that human life begins at the moment of conception, and so abortion at any time in a pregnancy is immoral. The right to life is the most important right for all people, and it must be protected at all stages of human life. Without the right to life all other rights become unnecessary, so allowing abortion opens the door to the violation of many rights. Human life has inherent and intrinsic value. In cases of rape or incest it is awful that the innocent woman must deal with the consequences of the actions of the guilty party, but to negate the consequences by killing the baby is wrong. Abortions can be dangerous for women and many women who have abortions end up with psychological health issues as a result. If an unwanted pregnancy is allowed, adoption can be a healthy alternative to abortion.
is war ever acceptable

War is absolutely acceptable under certain conditions. Now, say I walk up to you and start repeatedly punching you in the face. By your logic, it would be immoral for you to return said punches. Now you are dead. I deemed you no long appriopriate for this world, uummmmmm because I didn't like your face. I would offer that your retailation is justified. No person in this world has the authority to take your life without your expressed permission, furthermore you have the right to defend it.
is war ever acceptable

Punk Messenger "No man, Persian or Greek, no man threatens a messenger!" King Butler "You bring the crowns and heads of conquered kings to my city's steps! You insult my queen. You threaten my people with slavery and death! Oh, I've chosen my words carefully, Persian. Perhaps you should have done the same." Punk Messenger "This is blasphemy! This is madness!" King Butler "Madness? THIS IS SPARTA!" I rest my case.
Macs "Technology" vs Windows/Linux ... No not at all

No, the technology you can put into a windows desktop is 300000 times more superior than what you can buy from a apple computer/anything from apple. A apple computer is linear it has outdated graphics cards, processors, Low amounts of ram and hard drive space. Im typing this on a macbook air that is 1000$ (School gave it to every kid for like 50$ or something) I looked at the specs and it has 256 gigabytes of hard drive space 2 Gigs of ram intel hd 4000 graphics (integrated graphics card that is absolutely horrible) and a I5 1.4 gz this computer can barely run half life 2 ( a game released in 2004) Now my 856$ windows gaming computer Has a I5 3.2 gz (latest version) amd radeon hd 7770 8 gigs of ram and 1 terabyte of hard drive space ... I can run bf4 at max graphics 50 fps There is absolutely no reason to buy a mac. They are outdated web surfers that look semi nice.
Videos for people is great.

True, it is an opinion. And I'm trying to set up this debate about my opinion. Isn't that what everybody does? Nobody debates facts, because they can't be debated. In debates, OPINIONS are debated, then backed up with evidence to make them seem more reliable. You have to accept that. I'm hoping for a good debate, and I've done, like, 9 debates on this, because nobody will engage in a complex argument about this. So, please, just try to argue with what I say. It will make everything much easier. I'll go further. Videos for People, I think, is highly underrated, and is as good as or better than most other channels. His videos have a kind of comedy that is both unique and common, and his stuff ranges from slightly weird to very weird, but it never gets so weird that it's unappealing. The animation style, as well, is wholly unique, with no motion, no audible dialogue, and no sound effects. It's like a video of a comic strip. But this format does not lower the quality, it simply intensifies the uniqueness of the stuff that pops out of this guy's head. Not only are the videos good, the descriptions are highly entertaining too. Some relate to the video directly, some relate to it indirectly, and others are completely random. It's an added benefit and the words he puts forth are very philosophically engaging. They're hilarious. Sometimes, he just shares his outlook on life. Not too many people take advantage of what they can put in the descriptions. He does, though. I think I should probably post a link to his channel here, since it can be pretty hard to find. Go there and see what you think. You accepted this debate, so remember, think about them in a negative light, even if you actually enjoy them. OK? . https://www.youtube.com... I do want you to keep going, and debate well, because you accepted, and I want to get through all 5 rounds, and I can't stop posting these things on here until I get some competent arguments. I can tell your last round speech was very eloquent, so use it to debate me and we'll get this thing over with. I mean, heck.
Videos for people is great.

About two months ago, I started debates about this thing, and ever since then, I've had to keep making new ones, because my opponents are inept. Please debate thoroughly and pose engaging questions. I look forward to our argument. Your round one argument will be the counter argument to the following: Videos for people is the best Youtube channel I have ever uncovered. It's entertaining. When I see one of his videos, I laugh, I cry, and so on. His videos attract me. I am drawn to them like a moth to a porch light. I don't know why, but I like them. He has a zany sense of humor and a firm grasp of the world around him. He is a hidden genius. I have never seen any videos like his and I don't think there ever will be anything like his. They are completely unique. They are so funny that I can't stop laughing. I don't know who he is, or what he's doing, but I can identify with him. His videos are unique. They are done using stick figures. The stick figures are badly drawn, and created using MS paint, but their quality isn't what matters. What matters, really, is what they do. They do hilariously funny things. they do romantic stuff, funny stuff. Nothing is too insane for this guy to tackle. Every video seems more bizarre than the last. But, although his videos are weird, they still seem somewhat normal, so the viewer isn't removed from reality. He uses normal language in his writing. There isn't any dialogue, only music. everything is written. His videos are the better than anything else I have ever seen. I am a devoted fan to the way he interprets things. Every video of his resonates with me. Videos for people is a genius. I don't know who he is, and I have no desire to uncover his identity. Knowing his identity isn't necessary to enjoy anything he makes. He's quirky, and I enjoy his videos. I await your first argument. Good luck! Please, only accept if you're willing to put some solid work into this.
Standardized testing is not an accurate measure of ones intelligence

You said "beliefs are one thing, opinion backed by hard facts is another." But previously you said that the definition of intelligence is and I quote, "capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc." But that is not the definition of intelligence. So one is left to think that that is your belief and opinion on what the definition of intelligence. The true definition of intelligence is "the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations"(1) With this actual definition of intelligence not your opinion of the definition. It is very easy to see how theses tests are a good judge of intelligence. The measure the amount of knowledge you where able to quire through your life a student.(ability to learn). They then also ask you to take the knowledge and skills you learned and apply them to a new sititaion. You are right if you have a test consisting of only 1 question that has five answers you have a probability of guessing the answer of 20%. But you failed to take into account that theses tests are around 200 questions long. The probability of guessing all the answers right would be more like 1/5^200 or 1.60693804 ï¿½ 10^-140%. So it is for all purposes impossible to guess all the answers right. So no the fact that it is multiple chose does not make it any easier than a fill in the blank test. You talked about how I failed to refute some of your points. Like wise you failed to refute one of my major points. My point about Sir Isac Newton and how he was a loner and hated interaction with people. I had said this point to refute your flawed idea that street smarts is part of intelligence. The definition of street smarts is "the quality of being streetwise"(2) The definition of being streetwise is "possessing the skills and attitudes necessary to survive in a difficult or dangerous situation or environment"(3) How does being able to survive in a dangerous environment equal intelligence. Because if it is all the thugs and drug dealers who survive in the ghetto by pedaling drug and stealing are incredible intelligent. In conclusion standardized tests are a good measure of intelligence because the measure almost every aspect of intelligence. The measure a persons ability to learn by testing the amount of knowledge a person has been able to aquire through out there career as a student. They measure a persons ability to think critically and reason through asking kids to asking people to take previous information and apply it to a completely new and complicated situation. http://www.merriam-webster.com... http://www.merriam-webster.com... http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Standardized testing is not an accurate measure of ones intelligence

Hello again bruce and as I post my final argument, I realize that you did not refute my criticisms about The ACT. I guess that and any other arguments you did not refute you either conceded to me or decided not to refute. Moving on, you said: "I do not believe that street smarts and relationship skills are part of intelligence." What if I said I do believe that street smarts and relationship skills are part of intelligence? does that make it any more right? beliefs are one thing, opinion backed by hard facts is another. You said: "A well designed multiple choice test can be just as hard if not harder than a fill in the blank test." Excuse me for asking, but couldnt someone guess and have a 20% (five questions) or a 25% (four questions) chance of getting it right if they do not know it? Eliminating one helps even more. If you have no idea on a fill-in-the-blank test, you are (Excuse my frankness) screwed. You said: "English, Math, and Science does not equal street smarts" I concede this to you, as they are not equal forms of intelligence. You cannot, however, say thats street smarts are not intelligence, as it is common knowledge that if you are "smart," you have some shred of intelligence. In conclusion, standardized testing is not an accurate measure of intelligence because it does not test all the areas of which intelligence should be tested. Thank you and I await your final argument.
Standardized testing is not an accurate measure of ones intelligence

English, Math, and Science does not equal street smarts. But I do not believe that street smarts are part of intelligence. For example look at Sir Isac Newton he was a loner he had terrible social skills, and hated to interact with people. But by all accounts he was one of the most intelligent person in the history of the world. I do not believe that street smarts and relationship skills are part of intelligence. A well designed multiple choice test can be just as hard if not harder than a fill in the blank test. Specifically when you are able to plant a seed of doubt that none of the above answers are right. Also some of these tests you are penalized for giving wrong answers which also increases level of difficulty.
Standardized testing is not an accurate measure of ones intelligence

Hello, and thank you for accepting. Let me clarify my view of a Standardized test. I view it as a SAT, SSAT, McGinley or other similar test. An IQ test, in my opinion, is not what I consider a standardized test (although it might be). Now, in your argument, you give a link to the ACT wikipedia page, and which i chose to click on the ACT test (I think that is what you meant). Here is something directly from that page. I would like to point out that this is flawed. Some students who perform poorly on the SAT find that they perform better on the ACT and vice versa.[3] The test has historically consisted of 4 tests: English, Math, Reading, and Science reasoning. In February 2005, an optional writing test was added to the ACT, mirroring changes to the SAT later that year. All four-year colleges and universities in the U.S. accept the ACT[4] but different institutions place different emphasis on standardized tests such as the ACT, compared to other factors of evaluation such as class rank, G.P.A., and extracurricular activities. Precisely. may i focus on one area: The test has historically consisted of 4 tests: English, Math, Reading, and Science reasoning. English, Math, Reading, and Science. Pretty basic subjects academically. Here is the definition of intelligence: capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc. Now, does English, Science, Math, and Science incorporate "street smarts," "people smarts," or "relationship smarts?" I didnt think so. Moving on in the ACT desciption: ACT, Inc. says that the ACT assessment measures high school students' general educational development and their capability to complete college-level work with the multiple-choice tests covering four skill areas: English, mathematics, reading, and science. The optional Writing Test measures skill in planning and writing a short essay.[5] Specifically, ACT states that its scores provide an indicator of "college readiness", and that scores in each of the subtests correspond to skills in entry-level college courses in English, algebra, social science, humanities, and biology. More specifically(I dont like to take out of context): complete college-level work with the multiple-choice tests covering four skill areas. As far as I have been taught, Multiple choice is alot easier than fill in the answer. There is 4 or 5 choices, usually ranging from smallest to largest (math). This again is not an accurate measure of intelligence becuase it does not measure all t the types of smarts I listed above. College Readiness and entry-level classes mean nothing as well. Entry level meaning lower level, (entering for the first time) and College Readiness (ready to attend a larger, maybe harder school). I will leave you with a quote from Laurence J. Peters: "An intelligence test sometimes shows a man how smart he would have been not to have taken it." Thank you.
Standardized testing is not an accurate measure of ones intelligence

A properly administered standardized test can give a good measure of intelligence. -You have standardized test such as the SAT, ACT, PSAT, and PLAN. None of theses tests are meant to measure intelligence. The above mentioned tests are meant to measure a students ability to in school and his likeliness to succeed in a college setting.(1) -A normal IQ test when properly administered gives a very good representation of a persons G intelligence. (2) Not all standardized tests are meant to measure the intelligence. But given the right test and circumstances intelligence can be measured. http://en.wikipedia.org...(examination) http://en.wikipedia.org...
I will not contradict myself

Many thanks to my opponent for the well-thought answers. Although I am aware that I am allowed an extra question this round due to my opponent being unable to answer question 9 last round, I have decided to waive that right. ContradictionsThe Slavery/Bible ContradictionMy opponent, during question 9 of the first set of questions, said that he agrees with everything written in the Holy Bible. Thus, if I can show at least one instance in which my opponent said that he doesn't agree with something written in the Holy Bible, he has made a contradiction. My opponent goes on to say that he does not support slavery in question 7 of round 2. However, there are several verses in the Bible that shows the Bible's support of slavery[1][2]. Therefore, since this is obviously an example of how my opponent does not agree with something written in the Holy Bible, this is a contradiction.The Morten Harket ContradictionIn question 10 of the first set of questions, my opponent answers the question of "Is Morten Harket the best singer in the universe?" with "No, but purely a matter of opinion". The answer is, however, a contradiction in itself. Notice how the question is definitive. It asks if Morten Harket actually is the best singer in the universe - it doesn't ask for my opponent's opinion. My opponent answers this with a definitive "No" - meaning that he believes for sure that Morten Harket isn't the best singer in the world. But my opponent goes on saying that it is purely a matter of opinion - meaning that he also believes that it is possible for Morten Harket to be the best singer in the world, depending on who you ask. Thus, he contradicts himself.Many thanks to my opponent for an interesting debate as we move into the final round, Sources[1] http://www.biblegateway.com... [2] http://www.biblegateway.com...
I will not contradict myself

1.Do you believe that woodchucks would chuck a lot ["a lot" being relative to your opinion] of wood given that they could chuck wood? No 2.Do you agree with the following statement? 2 + 2 = 5 Yes 3.Do you value family and friends above all other things? No 4.Your mother and son (if you don't have a son, please assume that you do for the purposes of the question) are drowning in a pool, and you can only save one of them. Do you save your mother? No 5.Do you believe that women and men should have had equal rights throughout all of history? Yes 6.Do you wish you were a fish? No 7.Do you believe that murder is sometimes morally or socially justified? No 8.A person offers you all of the money in the world in exchange for one thing: a person you don't know would die. Do you accept the deal? No 9.Do you agree with the theory of relativity? I am not a physicist. I lack the aptitude and the knowledge of the theory and I will be unable to make a reasonably informed decision on the matter. I will allow my opponent to propose a question in the next round should he so choose. 10. Do you believe that people are born homosexual? No
I will not contradict myself

Many thanks for the answers. On to the next ten!1. Do you believe that woodchucks would chuck a lot ["a lot" being relative to your opinion] of wood given that they could chuck wood?2. Do you agree with the following statement? 2 + 2 = 53. Do you value family and friends above all other things?4. Your mother and son (if you don't have a son, please assume that you do for the purposes of the question) are drowning in a pool, and you can only save one of them. Do you save your mother?5. Do you believe that women and men should have had equal rights throughout all of history?6. Do you wish you were a fish?7. Do you believe that murder is sometimes morally or socially justified?8. A person offers you all of the money in the world in exchange for one thing: a person you don't know would die. Do you accept the deal?9. Do you agree with the theory of relativity?10. Do you believe that people are born homosexual?
I will not contradict myself

I am looking forward to it. 1. Are you a homosexual? No 2. Do you agree with the views of Nazism? Too broad to answer. I do have nationalistic tendencies but I disagree with everything else. So in general, no. 3. Is the information regarding your opinions on the BIG Issues accurate? Yes 4. Do you believe in a God of any kind? Yes 5. Are you currently in a relationship? No 6. Do you enjoy using debate. org? Yes 7. Do you support slavery? No 8. Do you have any regrets? Yes 9. Do you agree with everything written in the Holy Bible? Yes 10. Is Morten Harket the best singer in the universe? No, but purely a matter of opinion
I will not contradict myself

Please note that any questions I ask (or the contradictions that may come from their answers) are not meant to offend my opponent and I apologize if they do.1. Are you a homosexual?2. Do you agree with the views of Nazism?3. Is the information regarding your opinions on the BIG Issues accurate?4. Do you believe in a God of any kind?5. Are you currently in a relationship?6. Do you enjoy using debate. org?7. Do you support slavery? 8. Do you have any regrets? 9. Do you agree with everything written in the Holy Bible?10. Is Morten Harket the best singer in the universe? I look forward to round 2!