BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Who is Better..Criss Angel Or David Blaine? I think David is far better than Criss..

Before I start my arguments, I'd like to mention that Criss Angel was born on December 19, 1967 making him 40 years old (although age is somewhat irrelevant). I would first like to start off by defining the word better, as defined by American Heritage Dictionary the definition of better is "More useful, suitable, or desirable" According to the same source (American Heritage Dictionary) the definition of magician is: "an entertainer who is skilled in producing illusion by sleight of hand, deceptive devices, etc" Because of this definition, we must look who has a wider fan base and more publicity, and what the true definition of magician is. 1)According to the definition, many of David Blaine's performances are nothing but acts of physical endurance and not illusions. Although he may be a good performer, that is what he is, a performer. 2)In the area of superior magic skills (If we can temporarily let the definition of magician slide so that it may allow David Blaine) it should be noted that Criss Angel is the only magician to win three Merlin's Magician awards, and the holder of the 22nd Louie Award. He holds the world records for longest time submerged underwater (24 hours), the longest body suspension (5 hours, 42 minutes), fastest time to perform the Metamorphosis illusion (under a second) and the fastest straight-jacket escape (2 minutes & 30 seconds). Criss Angel is also the only person to ever be on the cover of both Magic Magazine and Genii magazine, both being some of the highest respected Magic Magazines in the world. While David Blaine has no such awards, and only one current record (17.7 minutes underwater with a single breath) and to your possible rebuttal of other records, I'd like to mention that this record is the only noted record, all others are just claimed by Blaine himself. On the side of publicity these are the current statistics: David Blaine- Criss Angel- Interviews: 9 Interviews: 11 Articles: 5 Articles: 2 Shows: 20 Shows: 22 (not including his own show) and 27 more for 49 Magazine Covers: 1 Magazine Covers: 2 Shows on Broadway: 0 Shows on Broadway: 1 Published Books: 1 Published Books: 1 In conclusion, I'd like to say that Criss Angel is the only true magician of the two, winning numerous awards by the most respected Magic institutes while David Blaine is nothing but a performer of physical endurance (impressive, but not magic) and has no such awards. I would also just like to add this video for a bit of fun, it's a video of Criss Angel impersonating David Blaine. http://www.youtube.com...
music/singing contest

I sincerely apologize for my forfeiture. I would ask the voters not to vote against me, as my phone died and I am without power. I am currently sitting in my car while my phone charges. Knowing that someone will certainly give my opponent points for "F/F," I will contribute two songs for this round. Please, I would encourage the voters to give points solely based on the songs. Third song: The Sound of Silence by Simon and Garfunkel http://youtu.be... Fourth song: Hallelujah by Jeff Buckley http://youtu.be...
Yeezus is better than My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy.

You are wrong for two distinct reasons. The first being that Yeezus is a pile of garbage. It's the rare moment where Kanye attempts to be on the cutting edge, Such as in previous albums, But fails. In reality, The album itself fails to present any new concepts to the industrial or experimental hip hop totality he made his album in, So even the small minority of people who enjoy industrial music wouldn't be blown away. In reality the album itself is a walmart-off brand version of "the money store" by death grips. An album that was simply perfect, Yet Kanye takes the same ideas Death Grips used and attempts to recreate them on his own album. Yet still incorporate his past ideas from before. In reality the album itself is so overly braggadocios and obnoxious, As well as low replay-ability and no real good singles. While black skinhead is an example of where this album was good, It's basically just Kanye whining about how the fashion industry won't accept him. Kanye fails to incorporate a cutting edge archetype of music because he felt the need to explain why he was so excellent on literally every song. The second being that MBDTF is extremely good. While the actual music itself in the album isn't Kanye's best ("The College Dropout, And "Kids See Ghosts". It does represent the peak of Kanye's career. Both when his creativity was peaking, And his mental health was stabilizing. As a result, The start of the album starts off with a triumphant entrance, Dark Fantasy is possible the best entrance track in the history of hip hop, Power is an ode to all powerful figures in the world, Which Kanye considers himself to be. But as the album progresses Kanye details all of his faults, Such as the track "Runaway". The album is Kanye's long-awaited meditation on his fame and the success and failure in his personal life that has come of it. The most interesting topic in hip-hop has and will always be the artist composing the album itself. A deep dive into his physche as Kanye presents in this album is the perfect illustration of what humans search for in entertainment. Stories about other humans, Specifically conflicted, Crazy humans, And as such this album revolutionized rap. No longer were prominent rappers talking about chains and cars, They were talking about themselves, Their faults.
Yeezus is better than My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy.

My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy, While a masterpiece, Only paved the way to his true magnum opus, Yeezus. Kanye West's purpose for MBDTF was to get the people back on his side and, After ensuring that he was popular again, Made an album expressing that he no longer cared about what anyone thought of him. The production on the album is much more experimental, The lyrics are a lot more subtle in their meaning, The story of the album is a lot more interesting, And it is not bogged down by sub-par guest verses from people like Jay-Z. Yeezus is Kanye West's best album, And better than My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy.
MassiveDump Should Not Post on Debate.org

Contention One. My swearing only takes place on humorous debates, where it was agreed upon prior that profanity would be accepted. After deciphering what my opponent was trying to say, I believe he means I troll when it's against the rules. You'll find, however, that there is a large distinction between trolling and humor debating. Trolling is committed with the intention to hurt feelings. My intentions are to entertain while offending as few people as possible. And while I only do humor debates for the most part, I do them skilfully, and yes, seriously. Contention Two. My opponent believes that humor debates serve no purpose on this site, therefore my encouragement of humor debaters is causing harm to the site. However, serious debates on DDO have no effect on society either. The purpose of debate. org is not to solve the world's problems, but to enhance one's arguing skills, which can be done on any topic. Debating is really a kind of non-athletic sport. So in a way, debate. org is a hobby site and a play site all at the same time. And the fans that I brought in are brought in nonetheless. Because they're doing no harm in humor debates, they still provide debate. org with a practical strength in numbers. Contention Three. Again, I only swear when profanity is allowed in a debate. I can only admit to making someone's day while offending another once. This person I offended was an obvious troll, and he has done many worse things on this site. I would never offend anyone who didn't repeatedly offend someone else first. Other than that, all of my humor debates that make people smile are genuinely harmless. Applejack is Best PonyPolite Rap BattleThe Holocaust was a Bad ThingNo One Has Ever Been Far Even as Decided to Use Even Go Want to Do Look More LikeNone of these debates, or any that you can find, do any harm to anyone. They're just for entertainment. If entertaining debates were not allowed, I would have been banned already. We see by this that it is not illegal to be funny. Contention Four Was Just a Rick Astley Joke, You Could Have Just Dropped It. Contention Five- Whitetails. The resolution has nothing to do with what I should be doing instead, so these arguments really have no purpose in deciding my ultimate fate. Besides, I don't have a gun. I Am A Lovable Teddy Bear.
MassiveDump Should Not Post on Debate.org

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to debate you on the give topic. It is my pleasure to accept. 1. Massive Dumps has been know to use Inapropriate Language. In just one of his recent debate he used "b******", "screw this guy", called lannan13 a "piece of crap", shows clear predjudice against mexicans, and said average joes pisses him off. In another debate he showed how much his life sucks. How this is taking this website is seriously beyond me. He supports posting unessicary topics such as super heros, my little pony and pokemon. Also he argued that stabbing someone in the chest 37 times would "probably" kill them. You say that you troll alot, but clearly on the debate.org oriantation is states NOT to troll. Therefore you are breaking your agreement. All of this is from a man who apparently takes this website "seriously". 2. He has diluted that amount of people on debate.org that accually take debating seriously. The 1.2 million people that viewed his my Applejack Is Best Pony debate are the same people who joined the website. These same people are now posting debates that are irrelevent important things in life. All of these people that do not take this website seriously, make debate.org look like a "play" website instead of a hobby website. 3. All of these people you made feel happy, were because of a bad topic posted. In one debate that made people happy, he said the F word blatently obviously. 4. This website was not meant for being random, or meant for saying things regarding the sexual nature of men. Particually with your I am Random as Balls commet. NOW WHY YOU SHOULD HUNT WHITETAILS 1. Whitetail deer supply almost 50 pound of meat, which could feed your family instead of paying for ground beef/steaks at the store. 2. Whitetail deer cause hundreds of car accidents per year. You harvesting a deer would help not only your family but the lives of others around you. 3. Lime Disease is present in Deer, so you would help from deer spreading this dangerous disease.
MassiveDump Should Not Post on Debate.org

As the author of this debate, I will choose which conditions we will accept. That said, I only accept condition number 2.Let's begin:Case in the Defense of MassiveDumpI speak in front of the voters today to explain why MassiveDump has done nothing to deserve the deletion of his account.Contention One: I Take Debate.org SeriouslyI, on the surface, look like the epitome of troll debaters. For starters, look at my name. MassiveDump. That spells it out right there. However, I have won thirteen out of my seventeen completed debates, and one of the only two debates that I have lost was where I was pro, taking the stance that con would win the debate, indirectly making me correct. I have even gone so far as to win debates with a sixty-point lead. My history of success proves that while I tend to debate more on the lighter side of issues, I do so with the desire to win. Contention Two: I Have Built the Debate.org AudienceLet's not forget of course how I put debate.org on the map with the debate Applejack Is Best Pony. This debate, within a week, received 1.2 million views, by far exceeding the original record. By doing so, I have brought brony members into the debate society completely without spamming.Contention Three: I Make People Feel HappyHere are a few examples of the good I have done for the debate community:"...Do I wish some debates from newbies (like myself) should have fewer "joke" debates? Yes. But the ones from people like Massive are what made my recent bad days a bit better." -LotusNG."LOL, Oh my god massive youre the best! XD" -imabench, DDO Comedian and Hall-Of-Famer."...while I admittedly initially figured you were just a troll, you have pleasantly surprised me as you seem to have found a certain niche that is often amusing. You have done a decent number of humorous debates, with a few that were particularly clever, and have added something at least somewhat constructive to the site." -airmax1227, DDO President."So is that the look you gave the toilet afterwards?" -R0b1Billion, in response to my profile picture.These are just a few examples of people I've made smile with my lols. While many humor debaters commonly overlook the intelligence that must go into a troll debate, I have had no problem initiating it, and consequently making someone's day, or just giving them a good laugh.Furthermore, there's nothing illegal about debating pointless crap.Contention Four: I am Random as Balls Rick Astley will allow you borrow any movie from his Pixar collection except one. He's never going to give you Up. ConclusionI, MassiveDump, am not, nor have I ever been, an enemy to debate.org.I look forward to hearing the offenses my opponent thinks I've committed.Toodles.
Tom Brady is better than Peyton Manning

. .. <"Tom Brady is better than Peyton Manning"> Well. .. why? Anyway, despite the fact that my opponent hasn't backed himself, I'll show why Manning is the superior quarterback with the help of statistics. First, an explanation of the stats I'll be using, all of which are available at www. pro-football-reference. com. TD% (TD obviously stands for "touchdown"): <"TD% - passing TD percentage: (passing TD)/(passing attempts). "> INT% (INT stands for "interception): <"Percentage of times intercepted when attempting to pass (minimum 14 attempts per scheduled start to qualify as leader. ) Interceptions/(passes attempted. )"> Y/G: <"Yards per game played (minimum half a game played per scheduled game to qualify as leader. ) Passing yards/(games played. )"> Y/C: <"Yards gained per pass completion (minimum 14 attempts per scheduled game to qualify as leader. ) (Passing yards)/(games played. )"> Completion percentage: <"completions/(passing attempts). "> . .. All of the definitions are either explained on individual player pages, or are available in the site's statistics glossary. Now, to see how Manning and Brady compare to each other in these areas: TD%: Manning: 5.6%; Brady: 5.4%. INT%: Manning: 2.8%; Brady: 2.4%. Y/G: Manning: 259.3; Brady: 234. Y/C: Manning: 11.9; Brady: 11.5. Completion percentage: Manning: 64.4%; Brady: 63%. Brady has the advantage in one category, and loses out in four, including one where Manning has a *very* significant advantage, which is yards per game played. Of course, career statistics and averages like these can be skewed by insufficient sample sizes -- but this isn't the case, since both athletes have been playing in the NFL at a high level for roughly a decade each. This leads well into my next point: Career totals accumulated by both Manning and Brady further evidence Manning's superiority as a quarterback. Manning has 333 career touchdowns; Brady has 199. Manning has 45628 career passing yards; Brady has 26446. Manning has a 94.7 career quarterback rating; Brady's is 92.9 Lastly, I'd like to point out Manning also has an advantage in rushing. Manning has 17 rushing touchdowns, 717 total rushing yards, and averages 2.7 rushing yards per attempt; Brady has 533 total rushing yards, 5 rushing touchdowns, and averages 1.9 yards per attempt. So, not only does the evidence point towards Manning as the more valuable passer, but it also leads us to conclude that he has been more valuable running with the ball, too. In anticipation of my opponent's rebuttal, I'd like to point out that accomplishments such as championships are rather weak indicators of a single player's performance. Championships are a team accomplishment; they're too dependent on the whole team to hold any merit in determining how well individual players have performed. Anyway, that's it for now.
Faith in a theistic God does not come from evidence or reasoning so it is irrational.

To simplify this for you, Pro, yes, I am arguing that the existence of our universe suggests a power capable of its design. You are incorrect however in the assumption that I do not believe in the theory of Evolution, although I believe I am correct in assuming that you hold the belief that Evolutionism and Creationism are incompatible. Since you seem to be familiar with the Cosmological Argument, let us see if you are familiar with the Watchmaker analogy, basically stating that design implies a designer. Now, a watch must be designed to run, but once it has been designed it can run on its own. It is no miracle that life has evolved. This fact is irrelevant to the debate, as was your last "argument," as you didn't actually put forward any argument to challenge mine. The miracle is, Pro, that life existed so that it could evolve. http://en.wikipedia.org...
Faith in a theistic God does not come from evidence or reasoning so it is irrational.

As I understand that round, Con's position is essentially putting forward the Argument from Design [1] with a nod to the Cosmological Argument [2]. Is that a fair synopsis of your defence, Con? Could I press you for a more formal expression of whatever argument you're bringing to the table? Also, could I clarify a point, please? I assume that you don't believe in the theory of Evolution? [1] Argument from Design http://wiki.ironchariots.org... [2] Cosmological Argument http://wiki.ironchariots.org...
Faith in a theistic God does not come from evidence or reasoning so it is irrational.

Pro does provide a convincing argument, but we must consider how and why he is able to do so. He is able to ration because he exists. He exists thanks to an intricate system of processes that, from just one minuscule malfunction, could cease to function. The color of his eyes, whether or not he is able to curl his tongue, his height- every aspect of my opponent relies on specific genetic combinations. The fact that he and I are able to debate this topic possibly from opposite ends of the nation- or even the world- we can thank the universe for. How, one might ask, is it possible that we exist? The chances of a universe so detailed, with functions so interdependent, are slimmer than some can attempt to imagine. This suggests a master creator- a God. Also, as long as we are discussing the rationality of ideas, let us keep in mind that in order for anything to be rational, it must have at some point had a cause. Referenced: Philosopher.org http://www.philosopher.org.uk...
Faith in a theistic God does not come from evidence or reasoning so it is irrational.

That's a fair start; let's roll... It may well be that the belief that there is no such thing as a god is irrational; that has no bearing whatsoever on this debate. It is possible to not believe that there is a god whilst simultaneously not believing that there are no gods. That's a bit of a mouthful, for sure; let me tidy that idea up a bit: When given two bold statements: "A god exists" "No gods exist" It is possible to be of the opinion (as I am) that there is insufficient evidence to justify either claim. Whilst it is true that one of those statements must be true, it is not true that people have to believe one or the other. It's a little bit like if I have a full gumball machine... "There are an even number of balls" "There are an odd number of balls" One of those statements must be true, but a human being is entirely justified in not believing either claim until proof is furnished, in this case perhaps by counting. (Thanks for the example to Matt Dillahunty [1]) So, I'm going to completely agree with Con that belief that there are no gods is irrational. Hopefully, Con'll end up agreeing with me that belief that there is a personal god is irrational. If I can't win Con over, hopefully I'll win you voters out there. On Faith Faith is seen by many Theists to be a virtue; specifically, the Catholic Church teaches that faith is a theological virtue [2]. Faith appears to me to be synonymous with "belief without evidence". Certainly we can see some agreement for this point of view in the letters shared between the late Mother Teresa and her mentors in the Catholic Church. Mother Teresa spent almost half a century complaining to her mentors that she didn't hear the voice of God or of Jesus and that the loneliness was a torment for her; the replies were largely along the lines that the suffering she was experiencing was a blessing from God, allowing her to share some of the divine suffering of Jesus [3]. So, my argument rests for now; here is a brief summary: =1= There is no known evidence to support a theistic god =2= There is no known convincing argument to support a theistic god =3= Theists make a virtue out of faith (belief with no evidence) =4= Belief with no supporting evidence or rational argument is, by definition, irrational --- references --- [1] Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] Vatican Archive http://www.vatican.va... [3] Time Magazine http://content.time.com...
should people trust the flu shot

Thank you for the debate, and I hope you had fun. Sorry about you getting the flu!Last round, so I will only refute con's arguments."Fist off I would like a healthy argument but just so you know it is a proven fact that doctors put some of the flu into the flu shot so you will be immune to it but you may as not have the flu shot because you will become immune to it."In the nasal spray, it is a proven fact that they do. But in the flu shot, it is dead flu bacteria or really, really weak ones incapable of causing the flu. I didn't get what you meant by the last part."All of the flu shot doesn't cover all of the types of the flu."It can't, because it is in too high of demand. As I said, it covers the most common ones. You may not be immune to the more rare cases of influenza. The fact that it immunes you to three types aty one is a pretty big breakthrough. That's all I can do since I can't state more arguments.Thank you for the debate.
should people trust the flu shot

Fist off I would like a healthy argument but just so you know it is a proven fact that doctors put some of the flu into the flu shot so you will be immune to it but you may as not have the flu shot because you will become immune to it. and all of the flu shot doesn't cover all of the types of the flu. You may have been right about all of the facts maybe not but I can tell you one thing you will have a good match :-)
should people trust the flu shot

People should not trust the flu shot because I once got the flu shot and then I got the flu within the next couple days. I do not believe in the flu shot for that reason and that the doctors may as well inject you with the flu and it is a waste of money (besides Walgreens). Doctors should also have a limit on ages that children can get the flu shot at because it might hurt if you are just a little baby. It also doesn't work if you have the flu and you don't know it then you get the flu shot and it is too late by the time it works.