BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Humans should eat eggs.

I will follow the same format as you so people can compare our debates and vote accordingly. Health 1. It has been proved that the "high cholesterol" egg is actually not bad for you-unless you have diabetes, but that's something you'll bombard me about later, so save it for later. Many hospitals, clinics, and even private/unofficial doctors recommend eating eggs for breakfast. Most doctors don't want to kill you, so their advice is likely sound. 2. Cancer-oh how I hate it. Research has shown that methionine and choline do not cause cancer. Nor do they make cancer worse. In fact, some research has found that choline actually prevents diabetes, but this is unconfirmed. 3. I really can't put up an argument against diabetes, so I'll skip it. 4. Eggs are actually better than most other sources of protein, cholesterol, etc. Come to think of it, I haven't come up against anyone who really is this good. I've probably already lost this debate :(
Humans should eat eggs.

Okay, well this will be the THIRD time I'm making this debate. The first time my opponent just claimed I was attacking her and didn't respond, and last time my opponent just seemed to magically disappear and deactivate his account for no reason. Whoever accepts this, please actually do this properly. This premise of this debate is that eggs laid by hens should be eaten by humans, I will be taking the CON position. Feel free to argue on any basis, good luck.
Mega Charizard X vs Mega Charizard Y

Yes, Charizard X may be the stronger individual but Pokemon is about team work and I will argue that Charizard Y is a much better pick. First of he has a better special ability because drought makes him and his whole team stronger and makes all water type Pokemon weaker. Secondly mega Charizard Y has more resistances since he is resistant to Fairy type, Fighting type, Bug type, Steel type, Grass type and Fire type whereas Charizard X is only resistant to Steel type, Grass type, Fire type, Bug type and Electric type and he is now affected by toxic spikes. (Sorry for my bad grammar.)
In WWI, Russia played a more important role in the defeat of the Central Powers than France.

In the poll, Con said: "lol at those thinking it was Russia or the US. "I assume that Con believes that just because a country left a war early or joined a war late, the role of the country is not as great. I could agree with that, however with Russia it in WWI it is much different. I will start by providing some statistics on German, Austrian, Ottoman, and Bulgarian casualties on different fronts of the war:Western Front: 5,603,000 [1] Eastern Front: 7,350,000 casualties [2]Middle Eastern Front: 1,500,000 [3]*I am not including the Caucasian front. So if you add the numbers destroyed on the Western Front and on the Middle Eastern front where the French fought, you will see that the numbers are about the same. And the French did not kill all of those soldiers I stated above. British, American, and many Dutch troops fought alongside the French. I have proved that Russia killed more enemy soldiers than France did. Russia played an important role in saving France:The battle of Tannesberg was a Russia defeat but it forced Germany to send men to the east to help stop the advancing Russians. Otherwise, the Schlieffen Plan might well have succeeded. The war on the western front was largely a stalemate:The fighting in the west was largely "Trench Warfare" where soldiers often spent time doing nothing. I await my opponents arguments. I would appreciate if he does not refute my arguments yet and only state his in order to make this debate more equal. Sources:. http://en.wikipedia.org...http://en.wikipedia.org...http://en.wikipedia.org... . http://history1900s.about.com...
There Should Be More Security in Schools

The belief of high crime is only a mechanism to create massive fear. Garland Fear of crime is sufficiently widespread to become a political reference point and crime issues are generally politicized and represented in emotive terms. Concerns about victims and public safety dominate government policy and the criminal justice state is viewed as severely limited in its impact. A high-level of "crime consciousness" comes to be embedded in everyday social life and institutionalized in the media, in popular culture and in the built environment Security only creates a manipulative discourse, aimed at justifying any and every policy. Mitchell Securement, as a giving of value, assures us against loss by making the world replaceable. In this respect, security is nothing other than total availability, imagined as a world of utter transparency where all resources, human and otherwise, are constantly surveilled and traced through their paths of circulation. When the state uses a threat constructing discourse, it creates this ideal of security, which is constantly trying to be reached. The case is thus the root cause of the status quo harms. Derderian the denial of this permanent condition, the effort to disguise it with a consensual rationality or to hide from it with a fictional sovereignty, are all effects of suppression of fear. The desire for security is manifested as a collective resentment of difference--that which is not us, not certain, not predictable. The fear of the unknown and the desire for certainty combine to produce a domesticated life, in which causality and rationality become the highest sign of a sovereign self, the surest protection against contingent forces. A safe life requires safe truths. The strange and the alien remain unexamined, the unknown becomes identified as evil, and evil provokes hostility--recycling the desire for security.
There Should Be More Security in Schools

I Believe that schools should have better security for the sake of the students and staff inside. Better security would lead to less shootings, bullying, and Sexual Harassment. Better security would lead to better health and safety of students as well as staff. To begin with, better security in schools would lead to less mass shootings relating to students inside of a school campus. According to The Washington Post, the have been over 300 school shootings (meaning a gun was discharged on a school campus) since 2013. That means at least 1 a week. This number would be reduced dramatically if school security was a big priority. Students go to school to learn and should not have to burden the stress of academics, and the stress of a possible shooting, or dangerous incident. The numbers of shootings would be reduced dramatically by adding metal detectors, police officers, and locker checks around the school. With more security, bullying would be noticed more easily than without. In many schools, bullying has a zero tolerance policy, but oftentimes this is overlooked. Often the student has no way to stand up for him/her self, and may find it difficult to find someone they trust to speak with. With cameras, and officers around the building, bullys would be caught easily, and would immediately face consequences. Sexual harassment is a huge problem in schools that can be illegal, and needs to be responded to by higher authority. With cameras and officers, the amount of sexual harassment in schools would be lowered, and consequences would be established. 8 out of 10 students will experience sexual harassment from peers or teachers, and 6 out of 10 will experience physical sexual harassment from another peer or student. This is in all grade levels, and could be at least lowered if there were more cameras in schools. Some may say that using money on security is a waste, and that crime will happen either way regardless of the set security. Although not all crime can immediately be stopped it can be reduced to a much smaller number with even a small amount of extra security. Someone trying to commit a crime in a police station with armed officers will have a harder time trying to commit a crime in a school bus where there are no present armed officers. Schools should have better security whether it be cameras, officers, door checks, locker checks, or even just locked doors. If a crime happens that could have been stopped, but wasn't, it is inexcusable for the school to have no security.
Haiku Battle

Just as dirty as making me write a haiku about Twilight.And seeing as this is the last round, I will be going all-out to make this haiku epic.The Aurora what?Sorry, never heard of it.Must've slipped my mind.A bunch of colorswaving around in the sky?Sounds like you're just high.Must've been some d@mnfine drugs to get you so smashed.Running from the cops?Y'know, I could usesomething that potent for myparty tomorrow.Some wavy colors?That sounds like a giant gayrights advertisement.Stupid Alaskans.Didn't you know MisterObama says no? Some stupid colorsaren't all that important forus Americans.If you think they are,you can go back to pre-schooland have a nap-time. That was fun :D
Haiku Battle

You are possibly the most amazing person in the world. Barrack Obama The communist: yes, he is He has the beliefs Government controls He is against gays: their rights He wants the control Denies speech freedom Cosponsored at the UN To limit the speech Runs one-party state That's part of communism Will debate one party Obama controls Takes away speech. One party Barack? Communist. http://www.humanevents.com... That was a dirty shot! I tried.:/ Topic: Why aurora borealis isn't news worthy.
Haiku Battle

Pronunciation. Psh. That's not even a real thing xD Fair enough, I'll concede to that. Haiku is below:Epic romancestruly show us how to feellike a real person.Wild tales of lustand desire drive us toan ultimate end.Crazy tales of lifeand death and sex that can bringthe house down, for real.Add that with intensefighting scenes, hardcore combat,and it's just over.There is nothing thatcan stand against the furyof Stephanie's book. -.- Finally. Now excuse me while I purge my memory of this. You will dearly pay....Your topic: Barack Obama is a communist.
Haiku Battle

Oil is one or two syllables depending on where you are from. It is a diphthong. A diphthong is a noticeable change in the sound within one syllable. http://www.howmanysyllables.com... Take over the world That's the purpose in the game Conspiracy game World domination The FBI; CIA; Dentists; take control The game outlines it The Shadow Government's real It is not unreal The media lies It covers up half the truth Tells what to believe Illuminati Group claiming enlightenment Group proves it exists http://illuminati-news.com... http://www.sjgames.com... Next topic: Why Twilight is the best book
Haiku Battle

It would be, but oil is a two syllable word. So it would be The-oi*l-in*du*stry (1+2+3 = 6) Now, to my haiku over feather pillows.You ain't got nothingon the comfort of afeathered pillowtop.Laying down on itprovides an amazing vibeof euphoria.Nothing replicatesthe intense comfort of afeathered pillowtop.So for the abovereasons, I urge you to geta feathered pillow.Pro's topic: The illuminati exists.
Haiku Battle

Actually, it was 5-7-5. I'm not sure if you are counting the a (1) trick*y (2) top*ic (2) (1 2 2=5) or you meant the first stanza about it the (1) oil (1) in*dust*try (3) (1 1 3=5). I liked yours. I had no idea where that topic would go. Global warming hoax Is like Y2K. The goal? There's money to make Ex-Vice President The scientists researching Now carbon credits? Head of the UN's ICCP gets money They all benefit Gordon, physicist Has evidence it's a fraud For those rich from grants Man-made GW's fake That doesn't mean to trash here Recycling's still good Greenhouse gases still Don't help the air; consider Keeping the air clean This is our place now Take care of it well; stay green Keep your, our, world clean http://epaabuse.com... http://www.globalwarminghoax.com... Your next topic: Feathered pillows.
Haiku Battle

I'd like to point out that my opponent's first stanza breaks the accepted 5-7-5 format that a haiku follows: it is 6-7-5. So as long as I post a consistent haiku that follows the 5-7-5 format, then I will win round one. :D Anyway, onto the haiku.Acne medicinejust doesn't cut the mustardwhen treating your face. Alcohol doesn'thelp your skin at all, it justmakes things really worse. Would you want to usesomething that you could drink ata bar on your face?Nope, didn't think so.Benzoyl, peroxide. Big wordsmake things seem way worse.None of these things arethings that you would want in yourrefridgerator.So why would you wantto put all that crap on yourpretty, little face?That was fun :DNext topic for you: Global warming is a hoax.
Haiku Battle

A tricky topic I must say; I credit you I will have to think The oil industry Is not helping Saudi's pop. It's foreign workers Iraq civil war Cannot contribute; dirt poor Being stolen from Japanese; dollar Selling to U.S. for cheap Budget deficit? Chavez against us There's threats with Venezuela Unstable; just fights Countries are just broke Leaders: unreasonable Exchanging goods? No. Instability Is seen in global market Make a compromise http://www.markswatson.com... That was a difficult topic since I knew nothing about it. Well played, well played. Your topic: Acne Medication Chemicals?
The UK should remain a member of the Customs Union

Brexit means Brexit and it will happen. This is not an attempt to curb the will of the people. However, the European Union is not equivalent to the single market and customs union. They are, undeniably, related but separate bodies. Therefore, considering leaving the EU only was on the ballot paper on June 23rd 2016, it is disingenuous to decide on behalf of the people that they must have also meant leaving the single market and customs union. Given that the margin of the vote was only very small, it seems even more undemocratic for Theresa May's government to take us out of the single market without mandate nor consent. Furthermore, the success of Labour in the 2017 general election has revealed that many do support their position on Brexit: a jobs first, living-standards first (and customs union ) option. Therefore, it seems that many would support this position. We also have a more recently elected parliament (house of commons) which we have put our trust in to carry out our will to the fairest, best and closest standard possible. Therefore, considering that the government has suffered a wave of defeats over this, (including from their own MPs) they should wake up and realise that although we are leaving the EU there is debate over how we do it. This was never on the ballot paper. I am not advocating Athenian democracy. In the words of Margaret Thatcher: "NO NO NO!" I am advocating representative democracy based upon roughly what most people want. Now, the key reasons people cited for voting leave were immigration concerns, sovereignty and redirecting Britain's global position. None of these are violated by remaining a member of the customs union. However, given immigration was a concern remaining a member of the single market would not be fair on the voters. We can have control of immigration and have a sovereign parliament if we stay in the customs union. Most of all, not remaining a member of the customs union would severely hurt our economy leading to the suffering of hard working people many of whom happened to vote to Leave. The amount of money companies would lose merely due to customs declarations would surely drive investment away and lead to more expensive imports for British consumers. The only downside of remaining a member of the customs union is that the EU supreme court would still have jurisdiction. But so what? We support most of their decisions to not import things like chlorinated chicken. Their jurisdiction doesn't matter because it will never stop us from doing what we normally do. Overall, we should remain a member of the customs union because it is in line with what people voted for on the 23rd of June and it makes sense to empower our economy and our democracy. Looking forward to discuss this with a worthy opponent.
Debate rules make winners out of followers

Thanks for your "brief speech." Refutations: "I will keep it really simple, I do not care if you vote for me. Look at what your eyes see, not what they say." I have 3 refutations against this argument. 1.) My opponent doesn't care if the judges vote for him. Thus, the judges ought to vote me, since my opponent is careless about the votes. (I would feel gratitude towards the judges if they vote for me.) 2.) The judges' eyes would see me devastating my opponent's case. 3.) This is not even an argument because it's completely irrelevant to the topic. Since my opponent basically had no arguments, I assume that this is a forfeit. Additionally, my whole case was dropped. For all these reasons, I, once again, urge you to vote for the negative side of this debate. Thank you.
Same-sex marriages should be accepted by more states

If marriages are between two people that love each other then why does it matter what sex they are. If a boy and girl get married that get cheered for, but if same-sex marriages occur then they get shunned. What happens if you have a child and they said that they liked the same gender that they are? Would you shun them as well? If insurance is a problem then yes I can see homosexuals paying more to help care for themselves. You simply do not care if you aren't willing to allow them to be themselves. How would you feel if your entire life was a lie?
Same-sex marriages should be accepted by more states

I accept the debate but homosexuality should not be accepted or legal in states. I am taking the view point that homosexual acts with homosexual marriage are basically one in the same. The fact is that if homosexuality is accepted then it will be forced on schools and religious institutions. So why should we accept and promote a lifestyle that is extremely risky and detrimental to people's health? For instance, I think I care more about homosexuals by being against it! I care enough about them to say that this lifestyle will decrease their life span, likely get them an STD........
Same-sex marriages should be accepted by more states

Homosexuality is becoming more common and should be legally accepted into more states. No crime is being done. You are not being forced into homosexuality. If homosexuality was accepted more then I feel as If there would be less kids out there with depression or fear of not being accepted. Instead of telling little kids what sex they'll be with and making them feel as if same-sex relationships are wrong, I believe that children's relationships should be addressed as their significant other.
Same-sex marriages should be accepted by more states

I am sorry you were abused but the sexual abuse FACTS, RESEARCH and STATS are relevant because no where in the statistics or comment does it say all molesters and rapists are gay. Ultimately, you have given absolutely no support or evidence why states should accept homosexuality this round. I merely mentioned that I am a Christian and you changed the entire argument to focus on this. I provided no Biblical support, although I could, for why homosexuality is bad. It is you who are bringing Religion into this argument. In fact, my facts still stand that homosexuality present many negatives and little to no positives to people and society. You are changing the entire debate on your argument and if we are going to enter in a spiritual debate about homosexuality we need a separate debate on this all together. But acting on homosexuality is obviously a sin, Christians who do not believe this are not following scripture according to God's Word. Just because Christians recognize something as sin does not mean we are judgmental. But most of all Christians are to strive to be Like Christ, keep in mind Christians are still human making mistakes, even large ones. But to answer you questions it is called FREE CHOICE, God gave us the ability to choose what we wanted to do with our lives, live in constant sin or strive to not to. God did not create robots! Also, about drugs I care enough about my friends that if they were doing them I would want them to stop and I would do everything in my power to help them and get them help. Sure it is their life but an addiction is not a way to live and I would work to see them changed. Also, please stop judging me for opposing gay marriage and bisexuality. In conclusion, you are trying to create a who new debate. Homosexuality is a choice or a result from life experiences. It is not natural or intended to be accepted in society, You provided no support or evidence why states should accept homosexuals while my last argument stands with this one that homosexuality should be unacceptable.
Same-sex marriages should be accepted by more states

The main point that got my attention was the sexual abuse. Since I've been sexually abused does that make my rapists gay? How about a male adult in my life for allowing it? That argument is irrelevant because clearly not all sexual abuse comes from homosexuals. Yes, I do care about homosexuality. I'm personally bisexual and believe that when I find my significant other I will not care what gender they are as long as I can love them and they love me the same in return. Religion has nothing to do with it. There are many Christians out there who support it, but don't choose that lifestyle. I grew up with a Catholic father and a Baptist mother. I turned out atheist after being taken to church for 10 years. The fact that people claim same-sex as a sin is judging, which is also a sin. Since you're a Christian I can say it like this. Why are you doing ITS job and judging others? If IT knows all, sees all, and determines the future then why do we set goals? Why do we push ourselves to do things? Why are illegal things done? Why are all these "sins" being done? Why was I followed by a car while I was walking by people yelling at me for my skin color? Isn't racism also a "sin"? Why were there slaves? Why do people say the earth is round when it could be flat? Why do people have abortion if other people would gladly raise the child. Why do people starve? Why are kids abused? There are so many questions without answers. Homosexuality isn't a question it is simply who you are. I always knew I was bisexual since I could talk. If a 30 year old and a 16 year old would like to get married then it should just require consent and background checks to ensure no harm will be done to either person. If my friends continue to use drugs I wouldn't tell them to stop. That's THEIR life. No Im not interested in drugs, but that doesn't mean I'm going to force or encourage someone else to change who they are based on my own beliefs.
World Wide Unemployment Benefits.

I am so done arguing with you about what my country is good at and whether my country is hypocritical. As far as I can see, you think Australia's unemployment benefits is great, and I think USA's unemployment benefits are great, so what's more to argue? If residents of their own country are happy with their own benefits, then isn't that enough? Anyways, nice arguing with you. Again, thanks for creating this debate. Let the voters decide who is right. JSC
World Wide Unemployment Benefits.

If you want to continue insulting my country (that thing with borders defined by random people and usually unnatural), please don't do so debating here. You have a sampling bias, because if you meet an "American" permanently residing in Australia, they're 100% Australian and nothing else. Go to America, find an Australian, and ask if they want to go back to their country. They will say no. Deal with it. We already have good enough national unemployment. https://www.mja.com.au... "As the poor man cocaine ice epidemic is out of control" speak for your own country, overdose deaths have doubled since 2005. If that's your definition of winning...