BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
It does NOT taste nasty

Alright then con, forget the drops. I think my opponent grossly misunderstood my point.. Regardless, Con made the accusation after his first time that marijuana tasted nasty AS A WHOLE. So for him to retract his argument and play the "opinion game" is a bit cowardly, and a tad pathetic. Cheap semantics won't win this debate, and If con continues to use that BS argument this will no longer be a real debate but a simple misconception. I implore con to have the guts to stand by his original argument and not weasel out of this "debate". Lets review... *MY ARGUMENTS* 1.*Different buds have different flavors* - With over 400 known different strains of marijuana, taste will in fact vary. Sources: http://www.kgbanswers.com...... http://www.kindgreenbuds.com...... Cons rebuttal: NONE 2.*The taste of marijuana can be controlled in favor of the user* - Due to the vast variation of flavored blunts, papers and good ol' swisher sweets, virtually anyone can enjoy a hit of their personal favorite of flavors. Cons rebuttal: Irrelevance.. 3.*Con's accusation is illogical* - "*In short the flavor of marijuana varies, and not only that can be controlled to taste delicious to any individuals liking based on their particular taste. So to deem marijuana as a whole of quote "tasting nasty" would be an unfair and illogical accusation.*" Cons rebuttal: NONE *CONS ARGUMENT* 1.Its opinionated. My rebuttal: Not only is that a BS argument, its a flat out lie with regards to your previous accusation previous to this debate. AND. I. QUOTE. " Hey, Erick thinks bud tastes nasty!" You would reply "It does!" You went on and on repeatedly saying that marijuana tastes nasty. Now we finally reach a debate about this on DDO and you cowardly retract your claim and hide behind the opinion defense. Much like a creationist hiding behind the "you can't 100% disprove gods existence" excuse, you use cheap semantics and ridiculous circular reasoning behind your argument. Con has failed to negate the resolution, marijuana does not taste NOT taste nasty.
It does NOT taste nasty

-- My opponent has a feeling of skepticism towards the wraps and blunts in question to perform their duties to provide a delightful taste to said "toker". Which is a very valid point, however regarding this debate, that argument is flawed. For when wraps or blunts fail, that's where drops come in. Drops are a flavoring additive that provides an enhancement of taste to smokers if they desire a better overall taste from their green. Source: http://www.everyonedoesit.com... Although on the site they label it "tobacco flavoring drops", it is rather obvious what they are really advertising for..
It does NOT taste nasty

Sense con has not responded to any of my arguments, I will restate my claims. 1.*Different buds have different flavors* - With over 400 known different strains of marijuana, taste will in fact vary. Sources: http://www.kgbanswers.com... http://www.kindgreenbuds.com... 2.*The taste of marijuana can be controlled in favor of the user* - Due to the vast variation of flavored blunts, papers and good ol' swisher sweets, virtually anyone can enjoy a hit of their personal favorite of flavors. 3.*Con's accusation is illogical* - "*In short the flavor of marijuana varies, and not only that can be controlled to taste delicious to any individuals liking based on their particular taste. So to deem marijuana as a whole of quote "tasting nasty" would be an unfair and illogical accusation.*"
It does NOT taste nasty

Now let me define what "IT" is. (Marijuana) My opponent thinks marijuana tastes nasty. I beg to differ. So would the 4 million daily marijuana users, the 6.1 million "heavy" users, and finally the 16.7 million regular users according to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. http://www.samhsa.gov... Now regarding taste, I will simply debunk my opponents cheap centrist of a rebuttal with the notion of flavoring. Yes that's right, different buds have different taste, so to generalize all nugs of having the same taste (let alone a bad one..) would be flat out illogical. On top of that, smokers will often use different flavors of blunts and rolling papers to give them a personal flavor of their own choosing. Flavors of several blunts and rolling papers include: Bubble Gum, Candy Apple, Cotton Candy, Grape, Peach and Sweet Cherry. Source: http://www.internationaloddities.com... Flavors of several rolling papers include: Banana, Blueberry, Candy Cane, Cinnamon, Pineapple, MILK CHOCOLATE, strawberry, root beer, marshmallow and yes even freaking MAPLE SYRUP. Source: http://www.juicyjays.com... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *In short the flavor of marijuana varies, and not only that can be controlled to taste delicious to any individuals liking based on their particular taste. So to deem marijuana as a whole of quote "tasting nasty" would be an unfair and illogical accusation.*
I should have let Con pick the topic. (Serious debate)

Then the resolution should have read "I should have let Con pick the topic as long as he chooses a topic that meets conditions x, y, &z." If you start a debate and let your opponent chose the topic, no conditions attached, then all my points hold true; and that is the resolution we are debating. Thank you for a fun debate. I enjoyed this topic; it's different from any of my previous debates, and I'm glad you chose it. I wish you the best of luck, in this and your future debates. - Chrysippus
I should have let Con pick the topic. (Serious debate)

I appreciate the kind words, but you could have ended up with any debater here - and by extension, any topic imaginable. ANY TOPIC. You might not appreciate the horror of those words. Allow me to show you a glimpse of what it could mean: https://www.debate.org... https://www.debate.org... https://www.debate.org... https://www.debate.org...
I should have let Con pick the topic. (Serious debate)

And I showed how leaving the decision of what the debate is about can easily get you into trouble. Good opponents are hard to come by, and if you leave the choice of topic to the first person to come along, you could very well find yourself at the mercy of a troll looking for an easy win. Common sense and logic indicate that you should be specific when setting up your debate, to keep it from being twisted against you. Choose your own battlefields to give yourself the advantage.
I should have let Con pick the topic. (Serious debate)

My argument was on topic; you say you should have let Con pick the topic - but that IS the topic and you picked it, clearly indicating that you do not actually believe it would be better for me to have picked the topic. Otherwise, why wouldn't you have just said: "Con chooses the topic for debate" and let me decide? And, while I can come up with interesting topics for debate if given enough time, you could very easily have ended up with an opponent who could not, or a troll who would not.
I should have let Con pick the topic. (Serious debate)

"... You relinquish control over the debate, allowing your opponent to twist the debate however he chooses." Actually, I very clearly showed what the debate was supposed to be about, as you yourself stated. Also, I take it you are attempting to Change the subject. I have another reason why I should have let you pick the topic: because this topic in itself is not very interesting, it stands to reason that if I had let you pick the topic, you would have picked something much more interesting.
I should have let Con pick the topic. (Serious debate)

You should not have let Con pick the topic, as by so doing, you relinquish control over the debate, allowing your opponent to twist the debate however he chooses. And in fact, you did NOT let Con pick the topic, obviously recognizing such a move as a recipe for failure. Instead, you state the debate topic quite clearly: "I [Pro} should have let Con pick the topic." By your own actions, you have acknowledged the shakiness of your position. You probably shouldn't have made this 5 rounds, though.
Topic of the debate.

"Reminder that the topic of the debate is "Topic of the debate," not "The US should legalize gay marriage" nor "WriterDave is a troll." Denial of Con's right to change topic by fiat. "a. As the resolution makes NO sense, I deserve arguments as I at least attempted to have themb. Your trolling, denying to explain the resolution mean I should get conductc. Your breaking of the TOS should be a automatic win"Dismissal of all of Con's first three statements as irrelevant. Pre-emptive dismissal of Con's final statement for same reason."a. You should be dismissed due to your spamming and trolling and failure as a instigator to make a debate with no clarification and refuse to do so"Expression of gratitude to readers for their attention. Request for their votes. Apologies for my opponent being completely missing the point of this debate. Promise to find someone with a sense of humor next time."a. This wasn't a debatable resolution with any clarification.Vote CON as he was trolling, spamming, breaking the TOS, not explaining the debate, and well wasting my time. I am bored here's this............http://www.google.com.............http://www.google.com...............http://www.google.com...............http://www.google.com.................http://www.google.com.............http://www.google.com...............http://www.google.com...VOTE CON
Topic of the debate.

Reminder that the topic of the debate is "Topic of the debate," not "The US should legalize gay marriage" nor "WriterDave is a troll." Denial of Con's right to change topic by fiat. Dismissal of all of Con's first three statements as irrelevant. Pre-emptive dismissal of Con's final statement for same reason.Restatement of opening argument. Submission that topic has been established in the absence of counter-argument.Expression of gratitude to readers for their attention. Request for their votes. Apologies for my opponent being completely missing the point of this debate. Promise to find someone with a sense of humor next time.
Topic of the debate.

"Notation that "silly" and "joke" debates are far from unprecedented on DDO."The debate you cite was considered a spam debate. [http://www.debate.org...] Also it is a spam debate as, well, the resolution is not arguable, just like this one. "Observation that neither that argument nor the topic of the debate, which is "Topic of the debate," have been addressed by Con."I already choose a topic. Your just trolln'. Arguments he dropped:TOS violationsHim not clarifying here or in a PMThat he is a trollThat this may encourage cuss words, which break the TOS
Topic of the debate.

Refusal to dignify opponent's accusations with a response.Notation that "silly" and "joke" debates are far from unprecedented on DDO.[1] Lamentation that the instant open challenge was not accepted by someone with a sense of humor.Restatement of opening argument. Observation that neither that argument nor the topic of the debate, which is "Topic of the debate," have been addressed by Con..[1]Footnote pointing to one instance of such a debate: http://www.debate.org...
Topic of the debate.

My opponent seems to have made a spam debate with little clarification and seems to be refusing to do so. By posting a spam debate you are technically breaking TOS rules. [http://www.debate.org...]. (section R) Now, one must first define spam. In this recent debate, this troll had many un certifiable and useless debates, and that was considered spam. [http://www.debate.org...]. In my recent PM I asked this makes no sense, please clarify. He said "Clarification of topic of debate, and nature of debate" I will post a link, although it may be blocked. [http://www.debate.org...] He is obviously trolling as well. A troll posts things that either cause emotion or off topic material that disrupts normal conversations. [http://en.wikipedia.org...] The majority of the time people post these debates the contender chooses the subject and proceeds. As he has given no clarification, is acting temporarily like a troll, and has spammed I already deserve to win the debate, Now, the TOS states no cuss words. When one makes a worthless debate that is spam it may invoke this language. "Will not use the Service in any way that violates the terms of this Agreement, or that aids, encourages, or purports to authorize anyone else to violate the terms of this Agreement." [http://www.debate.org...] As this encourages the behavior it violates section R of the TOS. Conclusion: My opponent: a. Has acted like a troll b. hasn't clarified the debate c. has spammed the website d. and broke section R in the TOS I urge a con vote.
School should start later

While it is true that a lack of sleep may danger students when driving, starting school at a later time may not affect these circumstances. More sleep will increase their ability to perform and feel better, however, if a school starting time is delayed, it'll only push back and affect other schedules. My opponent mentioned that students need more sleep especially if they're in sports, for it affects their performance. Starting school at a later time will change their schedules and students will get out of school later in the afternoon, pushing their after-school practices even farther back. In other words, it'll make no difference. According to the National Federation of State High School Association (NFHS), in the years of 2016-2017, nearly 8 million students were playing sports in school. This means that a very large amount of students who play sports, and even more with those in other after-school activities, will not be benefitted by the change of a school's starting time because their practices will just start later, causing them to go home at a later time anyway. To add on to my argument, in an article by the U.S. News and World Report published in November of 2015, they discuss reports done by the American Association of Caregiving Youth. In these reports, it is stated that approximately 1.4 million children between the ages of 8-18 are caregivers. They take care of their family members in need, but if school started later, they would be going home at a later time. Every day after school, I watch my younger brothers because my mother is at work. If I got out of school later, my brothers would not have anyone to watch over them. Delaying the school starting time may benefit a student who does not participate in after-school activities, but it may also negatively affect what they do for their family. - - https://www.nfhs.org... - https://health.usnews.com...
School should start later

I understand that natural light is preferable over artificial light, but many students have jobs and activities that cause their "internal clocks" to shift anyways, but they still have to wake up early causing many unhealthy side effects. Not only this but according to the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, a later starting time can increase attendance at schools and decrease car accidents because teens are more awake while behind the wheel (1). When students work, their shifts are later in the afternoon, and they do not get home until the nighttime causing them to sleep late because of their circumstances. A later start time would allow them to sleep more feel better, and perform better. Teens are naturally wired to sleep later, so no matter what time they have to be up they are still sleeping late (2). Personally, I sleep late every day if I have to be up at 6 am or 9 am. Having extra time to sleep would make a huge difference in my mood, alertness, and focus. In middle school, our start time was 9 am. Those two years were the best years of my life when it came to my sleeping schedule. I slept over 7 hours each day. Now, 6 hours of sleep sounds amazing to me. For people who do sports, sleep is important and can help your performance as well as prevent sports injuries. Everything factored in, a later school time would be the best remedy for sleep-deprived students who struggle every day to stay awake in class and make their best of their education. (1) https://aasm.org... (2) http://time.com... (3) https://www.athleticbusiness.com...
School should start later

School should not start at a later time because it may only cause the students to sleep even later, since they don't have to wake up at an earlier time, and will cause them to be exposed to light at night, making it harder for them get up for school in the morning. The Scientific Reports published a research in 2017 done by scholars from the Surrey Sleep Research Centre and Department of Mathematics. In this research, they used "mathematical modeling" to understand that people are not naturally a morning or evening person and it depends on when they're exposed to light. According to a TES article, published in March of 2017, the academics from Surrey University and Harvard Medical School argue that changing the time of when school starts will only cause most teenagers' "internal clocks" to drift later. To further explain, students will be up later and their exposure to light at night will make it harder for them to get up later in the morning. They believe that exposure to light during the day is best for them because the lights will be off or dimmed by night. Their predictions on how to get more and better sleep are based on how light interacts with the "biological clock." So, if school starting times are delayed, then students will most likely be up later, exposing themselves to artificial light from things, such as lamps or phones, which will make it harder for them to get up later in the morning.
School should start later

A later start for schools will help improve students health and performance. The American Academy of Sleep Medicine recommends teenagers get a daily 8-10 hours of sleep in order to maintain good health (1). The truth is, with sports, extracurricular activities, a social life, and homework, students sleep late and have to wake up too early. Most schools start before the recommended 8:30 am start time. This means that students are sleeping less than what is healthy for their growing bodies and minds. The risks that can arise from a lack of sleep include becoming overweight, performing poorly, suffering from depression, and engaging in risky health behaviors like drinking and smoking (2). When a student does not adequately sleep, they do not feel alert and cannot retain information (3). With a later start time, students will be able to sleep the amount needed and therefore stay healthy and focused in order to perform at their top potential. (1) https://aasm.org... (2) https://www.cdc.gov... (3) https://sleepfoundation.org...
Laws supporting certain individual groups shouldn't be implemented permanently.

Let's start things off with the basic factor that I should get out of the way, I don't disagree with the idea that individuals should be receiving equal treatment, Along with equal opportunities, But what I do disagree with is that every individual, No matter the background, Should be equal to everyone else. In theory, Many would like to assume that this idea is pushing towards the pinnacle achievement of supporting minorities and the ones in peril as many people in the world don't have the fortunes that some have acquired through the means of family benefit or heritage. It's important to implement the necessary means in helping these people but to allow some individual groups to acquire certain benefits that are easily abusable to certain people I think is dangerous and should be taken down without much hesitation. Since this is the start I would like my views a bit broad since I do not wish to reveal my strong arguments yet, Along with the reason of allowing open opportunities for plausible arguments. Thank you. The floor may go to the Opposition.
A mac osx is better than a desktop computer

FINAL REBUTTALS >Price I don't know if you're reading the articles you're posting, but the girl clearly says her laptop was old. Of course a brand new mac is going to be faster than it. >Viruses You've avoided the point about silly people doing things they shouldn't and not having virus protection. I find it very hard to believe your ‘cousin' just ‘played a game' and it ‘destroyed' your computer. >Games I'll quote this one. "Okay. Thank you for elaborating on it. You also agreed to some of my points. You stated that the Windows environment is very vulnerable, which means that there are more viruses on Window than Macs. Macs now include many softwares on PCs. . http://hubpages.com...; I never stated that the Windows environment was very vulnerable. I stated that the Windows environment was more vulnerable as the cost of functionality. I did agree with you that there are more viruses on Windows and I explained why. CONCLUSION My opponent's main argument throughout this debate was that because Mac's are significantly more robust in regards to virus and malware infection, that this makes it the superior operating system. However, my main argument against this point has not been addressed at all. I have explained exactly why Windows has so many more viruses. I've explained that this fault can be countered with intelligent computer usage, like using any of the number of Anti-Virus software packages available and not clicking the flashy box that says "You've won! ". I've explained that the main reason for this fault is also a benefit in another context. The resolution is refuted.
A mac osx is better than a desktop computer

Thank you for your fast responses. Good luck! > Price $129 was from my source: http://news.cnet.com... . Although the Mac book is heavier than the Toshiba, the Mac book clearly has many other benefits that are not listed in Toshiba. http://www.amazon.com... and http://www.amazon.com... . As posted on http://www.computing.net... , someone stated that the Toshiba was slow and everything and that the Mac was a big improvement. It changed her life. > Viruses Yup. My rather old Windows desktop computer died. My cousin went on it and played a game, which basically destroyed my computer. http://hubpages.com... > Games Okay. Thank you for elaborating on it. You also agreed to some of my points. You stated that the Windows environment is very vulnerable, which means that there are more viruses on Window than Macs. Macs now include many softwares on PCs. http://hubpages.com... => Conclusion of Debate with Additional Comments As you can see, the Mac book OS X is very much overpowering the Windows computers. I urge a Pro vote. I thank my opponent for accepting this debate and give him good luck on his future debates. Happy Holidays!
A mac osx is better than a desktop computer

I'd like to begin with a quote, "I like both Macs and Windows." ~ Ethopia619. However, on to the debate: 1. You have to admit, one tenth of all computers is a lot. This means that since Macs have less virus than Windows, Macs are safer to use than Windows computers. Definitely. 2. Gamers Yeah, I'm not a programmer for games. I don't know what you're saying. Sorry. Please drop topic. 3. Viruses I do. Windows contain many more viruses than Macs. Viruses went into my Windows desktop and basically destroyed my computer, while my Mac still lives on. _________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1. Round 1 Opponent's Hates In round 1, my opponent states that Vista stinks. Well, http://news.cnet.com... states that Windows 7 is basically Vista with a few fixes. If you hate Vista, you hate Windows 7, thus leaving you hate Windows. 2. Costs Apple computers usually cost about $129, while Windows 7 is much higher in price. Mac books are have a better price advantage than most of the computers. http://www.pcworld.com... http://news.cnet.com... ==> Conclusion The Mac book OS X is cheaper than Windows 7. OS X does not have much viruses, compared to Windows. This means that OS X is safer to surf with than Windows. Therefore, the Mac book OS X is better than Windows 7. Thank you and happy holidays!