BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
So, what is better, Marvel or Capcom? I pick Capcom btw

Like i said before, Capcom has more power than Marvel ever will, no matter what the quantity is Capcom always has done the impossible. You may have mutants like Storm and Wolverine, but that"s nothing compared what Amaterasu and Akuma can handle, try making Storm deal with a dog who controls the elementals and Wolverine stop the raging demon. Also, talking about Demons try defeating Dante, Virgil, and Trish. Them alone can at least defeat 100 of your marvel characters. Combine it with Dante"s and Virgil"s father, Sparta then we will have a real party. Also, the marvel characters will be in confusion when they face digital entities like Mega-man, Zero, Axel, Proto-man, and many more. Then we have the Darkstalkers, which includes of Morrigan, Lilith, Felicia, Jedah and 21 more. Also, I"m kind of glad that you included Wolverine with a room of zombies because the fun part is who said these were regular zombies. For all we know these are the G-virus strained zombies which are very deadly indeed, they can also be tyrants, or people strained with the "Plagas". http://residentevil.wikia.com... Here are some more examples of what these creatures can do, if they even get a scratch in Wolverine, then I wish your whole Marvel Universe good luck because, who can stop a zombie who can"t really die due to regenerative powers and even if we don"t get to him first, they eventually will.
So, what is better, Marvel or Capcom? I pick Capcom btw

Capcom may kill more than marvel, but it is not by much. The deadpool game definitely had no shortage of deaths and the movies were not afraid to eliminate enemy soldiers either. Who cares if capcom deaths are more gory. marvel characters are very powerful, and in a great variety. You have mutants like storm or wolverine, there are many rulers of alternate dimensions like Margali and there are no shortage of gods in marvel comics. there is Odin, Loki and Thor from the nors myths, and Zeus and Ares also make appearances in comics. There is also the demigod hercules. and put wolverine in a room with a bunch of zombies and they'll be gone in no time
So, what is better, Marvel or Capcom? I pick Capcom btw

You do have an excellent point there, but when it comes down to it, marvel doesn't kill as much as Capcom does (trust me I would know). Also there are plenty of Capcom characters, (though they are not mentioned due to specific reasons or just not favorited by fans) and they killed Gods before, so Galactus isn't that much of a big deal and a lot of them are demons, hunters, or Gods themselves. Also, just to say it already, we have zombies (lol beat that).
So, what is better, Marvel or Capcom? I pick Capcom btw

as powerful as some capcom players may be, i really believe that the sheer numbers of marvel characters is just too immense to handle, there are indefinitely at least 500 marvel characters. and when you state capcom's player's power may be more powerful,this is not all true considering some marvel characters are just far too overpowered, for example, there is the mighty vision, with almost every power u could think of, including invisibility, intangibility, super speed, super tough skin along with all the other traditional super powers( think of an even more powered superman) then of course, there are super villains such as galactus, who is about the size of canada and feeds of the cores of planets i think you are in way over your head because you were unaware of the sheer numbers of the superheros (also, quality not quantity is not a factor at this point because all the heroes and villains are super powerful
Transgender Students Should Reside in Their Gender's Hall

It's not just about discomfort. As I pointed out earlier, transgendered students were being harassed. They expressed complaints of such so the solution the universities provided was the gender neutral option. The Transgender Law and Policy Institute works with the needs of transgendered people. They even seem to suggest the gender neutral option to prevent harassment.Having a neutral option does not say that one is ungendered. It just means that facility is for both genders. Students in co-ed dorms don't feel they are labeled as ungendered. The same applies to bathrooms. They're still whole. The idea of gender segregated bathrooms is not ridiculous. Nevertheless, we are not debating about whether or not bathrooms should be gender segregated or if halls should be gender segregated. We're debating about whether or not transgender students should reside in a hall that contains the gender they identify with. I may have digressed by bringing up the reasons for gender segregated facilities. Nevertheless, I saw this as relevant in the context I first placed this reasoning in. My stance remains the same. The safest option is to provide transgendered people with gender neutral facilities so they are not harassed. Nor do they have to expose that they are transgendered since going into a gender neutral facility does not reveal that one is transgendered.
Transgender Students Should Reside in Their Gender's Hall

Providing gender neutral options is not the same as allowing trans* peoples to use the gendered facilities that they identify with. Simply because it makes some people feel uncomfortable is not the equivalency of discrimination. To allow trans* students to use the restrooms as well as a gender neutral option is the only way to make shure that the majority of people can feel comfortable, this would solve the issue of someone who is not completely out but is living the life style of their true gender. Saying that "The gender neutral option is not based on racism" doesn't even make sense. Shure, you may not see it as negative discrimination, but that doesn't mean that it isn't. Equal but separate, that it what groups have fought against since civilization began. So you can't use this, but here is one just like it. It isn't the same, it'd be like saying marriage and civil union are the same. In the eyes of the law it is, but there is a principle. Making trans* students the facilities of their sex or completely ungendered restrooms is saying that they do not count as a whole person of their true gender. To discriminate a part of them is to discriminate against the whole of a person. There isn't even a need for separate restrooms for any gender or sex, so long as there are stalls and policies in place that protect people from wrong doing. The idea that women are in a different restroom to decrease sexual harassment is ridiculous. It perpetuates the idea that all women should be afraid of men, and it perpetuates the idea that all men are going to harm women. As it is now, there is only a door stopping men from doing what you say women are currently protected from. Restrooms are currently named by gendered words (men/women) and therefore transgendered people should not have a problem using the facilities unless the names are changed to male and female on each sign. The halls are currently the problem as they are referred to as female and male, but because the facilities in them are not, it shows a lack of understanding by the state. As for the cost, it wouldn't take long to be officially diagnosed with GID. So long as you went to councilors, who took proper notes, then they can forward their notes (with your permission, of course) and you can be diagnosed within the hour. There are psychologists who practice over the phone and could preform this task fr state, or the state could start hiring people with proper degrees.
Transgender Students Should Reside in Their Gender's Hall

"I don't think that many people are desperate enough to go through all that trouble just to perv on people. " Well the idea of it is that if they tried, they would be found out by the professional. "This has to do with how gyms, changing rooms, fitting rooms, public bathroom are seperated[sic] by sex." And why is that? "The majority of people are hetereosexual[sic], and the majority of people are cisgendered." Oh I see, because if people aren't the majority, then they don't matter. "All these facilities are segregated because people are in various states of undress; hence, they are more vulnerable." These facilities also make transgendered persons more vulnerable. One could argue that transgendered persons should have their own facilities because of their dysphoria to their own bodies. However, if they had their own restrooms they would be separated by the birth sex that no one could control. "Most woman will favor such facilities that are with other biological females." And most trans women would prefer to change with women as to avoid conflict between cisgendered males. "Transgendered people face harassment whether they are put in dorms of their biological sex or if they are put into dorms with the gender they identify with." Then why not give them the preferred option? Putting them in dorms with their assigned sex is by de facto saying that what their gender is doesn't matter. "One solution is to provide a gender neutral option." Or you could provide a sex neutral option and therefore don't discriminate against the minority nor upset the masses. "Many transgendered people complained about harassment so universities provide the gender neutal[sic] option to hinder these issues." Could you provide your sources? "That way, there's no discrimination or harassment. " Creating a separate option is not acceptance, it is still discrimination. African Americans were provided with their own facilities, and yet they were not happy. This was because that separate is not equal, no matter how nice it is. On to my other point. This discriminates against intersexed people because it demands them to chose between the two parts that they do have. The sex they have on their birth certificate is not valid in this instance because they did not get a say in the matter. Thus a sex was forced on them despite the presence of both types of sexual organs.
Transgender Students Should Reside in Their Gender's Hall

"Should transgender students go through either private therapists or the school's therapists to be diagnosed with GID, this would prevent many of these incidents." That's a pretty good idea. Plus, I don't think that many people are desperate enough to go through all that trouble just to perv on people. "How so? How is this point any different than segregating by sexual orientation?"This has to do with how gyms, changing rooms, fitting rooms, public bathroom are seperated by sex. The majority of people are hetereosexual, and the majority of people are cisgendered. The current system of such facilities is set up to match that. Bathrooms are segregated by sex for safety reasons: to decrease sexual harassment when people are most vulnerable. All these facilities are segregated because people are in various states of undress; hence, they are more vulnerable. A women is more likely to be sexually harrassed by a man than another woman. Most woman will favor such facilities that are with other biological females. Nevertheless, that does not mean accomodations cannot be made for transgenderd people. There's a safety issue involved for transgendered people too. Transgendered people face harassment whether they are put in dorms of their biological sex or if they are put into dorms with the gender they identify with. One solution is to provide a gender neutral option. Many transgendered people complained about harassment so universities provide the gender neutal option to hinder these issues. This option is actually growing to accomodate transgendered folks. I think the better solution is to provide the gender neutral option. That way, there's no discrimination or harassment.
Transgender Students Should Reside in Their Gender's Hall

"Some males or females who are cisgendered may pretend to be transgendered just so they can perv on the other students." Should transgender students go through either private therapists or the school's therapists to be diagnosed with GID, this would prevent many of these incidents. "This makes changing clothes easier, bathroom use, etc." How so? How is this point any different than segregating by sexual orientation? "It's not fair to infringe on that when they were told they can dorm with those of their biological sex." It's not fair to discriminate against the minority either. If this were an option then there could be option to opt out of rooming with a cisgendered or a trans* person on the rooming forms. "One solution could be to let transgender people have their own room so they're comfortable and everybody else is comfortable; however, that does not solve the bathroom issue." This is not not discrimination. This is separating trans* people from people who are 'normal'. The bathroom issue can be solved by stalled toilets and showers. There is no need to feel strange about as someone who is living as their true gender.
Transgender Students Should Reside in Their Gender's Hall

Many could take advantage of this set-up. Some males or females who are cisgendered may pretend to be transgendered just so they can perv on the other students. Why are some dorms separated by gender? There's an option for co-ed, and there's an option for segregation. Those students who choose segregation do so because they feel more comfortable living with strangers who are their own biological sex. This makes changing clothes easier, bathroom use, etc. If the school allows segregated dorms, then the students have the right to live with their biological sex if that is what they choose. It's not fair to infringe on that when they were told they can dorm with those of their biological sex. There has to be a solution for transgendered people, but that solution cannot be to put people in dorms just because they say they identity as a certain gender. One solution could be to let transgender people have their own room so they're comfortable and everybody else is comfortable; however, that does not solve the bathroom issue. Of course, transgendered people can also choose co-ed dorms.
Transgender Students Should Reside in Their Gender's Hall

Sex- The biological parts one possesses. (Male/Female/Intersexed) Gender - The personal sexual identity of an individual, regardless of the person's biological and outward sex. (Men, boys/Women, girls/Gender queer) The argument being made is that those who are not cisgendered should reside in the government funded halls that they feel is their correct gender. The reasonings I will give are that residing in the hall of their sex can cause psychological harm, it does not harm cisgendered students, and that it is a ridiculous idea to separate humans by the sex of which they could not control as it discriminates against intersexed peoples.
Why do we have cliques? Pro is why, and con is why there shouldn't be.

I am a she. Cliques should not exist because they exclude people. I know what you'll say, "cliques are a group of people who interact with each other more than others" but honestly, IN MY SCHOOL, that's not the case. If you even approach them, they yell at you. Anyways, you have not given me any reason why we should have cliques. I mean, yeah, it's a group of friends in the year 2010. Also, I asked you for the dictionary you used and the year and you have failed to provide it. I have provided why we should not have cliques. I believe that we should except each other for who we are, and not for what we look like, or how we perform during certain occasions, or even how good we are in life. We all have problems and issues that other people don't know about. So there. I have provided more evidence on how we SHOULDN'T have cliques. Thank you, and good luck.
Why do we have cliques? Pro is why, and con is why there shouldn't be.

Con still has yet to show any reason cliques should not exist; To answer his question about the source of my definition, here is the citation "Salkind, Neil (2008-01-01). "Cliques". Encyclopedia of educational psychology." Because he has not refuted my case I push my case, upholding all arguments, I would also like to amend the following arguments.FriendsCliques allow for a scene of belonging and naturally occur because individuals who are members of a clique are naturally drawn to one another based off similarities, This provides countless social benefits, such as:-A Role -An Identity-Social StandingAt this point you will be voting aff because neg has yet to prove anything throughout the round.
Why do we have cliques? Pro is why, and con is why there shouldn't be.

Well, first of all, I worded that last statement, that's how it is in MY SCHOOL, so read a bit more carefully. I realize that no 2 cliques are alike, and that it's a group of people who interact with people more than others. But really, not any more. What year and what type of dictionary did you find that in? I would seriously like to know. F.Y.I, you used a word wrong, yeah, right at the top there...
Why do we have cliques? Pro is why, and con is why there shouldn't be.

In my opinion, cliques are something we have to demote certain people. There are The Popular's, The Sporties, The Musicians, The Smarties, and then the ones who can't seem to find where they fit in. That is me.-Right now your committing a fallacy, your using Anecdotal evidence to support your argumentation. You have no actual impact from the above statement or any other part that relates to you as an individual. All you have shown is that 1/7Billion People are negatively impact. As stated in my case, "Cliques by definition are simply people interacting more commonly with certain individuals rather than others, we see that there is no innate exclusive-ism or other form of exclusion. We can also see that there is no rooted harms that occur only because of cliques. Without cliques we still see hate, we still see discrimination, and we still see violence." thus you draw no impact from 1 persons disinterest because there is no innate negative impact. At my current school, I have only one true friend. I am not pretty enough to be popular, not good enough to play sports and not get off the field, I can't play instruments that well, and I am smart, but I just don't want to be part of a group that shuns you if you get one stinkin' math equation wrong.- This would be an impactful statement if the next part hadn't been said... I know that not all cliques are like that- So my opponent has conceded that not every clique is like this, in fact if you look to my case, logicaly, interacting with 1 individual more commonly then others is not negativeBecause cliques are not innately bad my opponent has no case saying they should not exist, however due to the sense of belonging given by cliques to 99.99% of everyone we only see beneficial impacts.
Why do we have cliques? Pro is why, and con is why there shouldn't be.

In my opinion, cliques are something we have to demote certain people. There are The Popular's, The Sporties, The Musicians, The Smarties, and then the ones who can't seem to find where they fit in. That is me. At my current school, I have only one true friend. I am not pretty enough to be popular, not good enough to play sports and not get off the field, I can't play instruments that well, and I am smart, but I just don't want to be part of a group that shuns you if you get one stinkin' math equation wrong. I know that not all cliques are like that, but that's the way it is in my school. If everyone just worked together, and excepted people for who they were, the world would be a better place. I realize that it will never be like that, but if we just start at one place, and work for it, then I believe that we could stop cliques, and just be friends with everyone. I believe that we can do it. We just have to try. Thank you for reading, can't wait to hear what you have to say!
Why do we have cliques? Pro is why, and con is why there shouldn't be.

I accept, to start i will post the main reason cliques exist and the base logic behind my arguement.Clique - a group of people who interact with each other more regularly and intensely than others in the same setting (Salkind, Neil (2008-01-01). "Cliques". Encyclopedia of educational psychology)Seeing that a clique is not exclusive but instead a group of individuals that interact more regularly provides my first point.1)Cliques Cannot be avoided in any situation Because Cliques occur naturally my opponent must show the means at which they can logically be eliminated, if they can find no logical means to eliminate this natural process then their arguments fall null and void.2) Cliques provide belonging to the majority Because this debate is hard to quantify we will be looking at what effects who to evauluate the impacts. Thus we look at what a clique is. Assuming that a Clique is a group we see several individuals reaping the benifits of social interaction. The only negative my opponent can provide to this is that individuals are left out, HOWEVER this means the majority of individuals receive benefits thus resulting in a net benefit.3) Cliques are not innately bad Because Cliques by definition are simply people interacting more commonly with certain individuals rather than others, we see that there is no innate exclusive-ism or other form of exclusion. We can also see that there is no rooted harms that occur only because of cliques. Without cliques we still see hate, we still see discrimination, and we still see violence.REQUIREMENTS FOR OPPONENT:In order for my opponent to win they must show several things. First, that Cliques can logically cease to exist. Secondly, That Cliques are innately bad, and finally that Cliques are responsible for all harms provided solving for my second condition.Thanks
Re enstated: It should be legal to fire people from businesses because they are gay

This debate has been re-instated because my previous opponent forfeited 3 rounds. Please do not accept this debate if you're going to forfeit more than one round. Also, no semantics. Now for my disclaimer: Before anyone gets mad at me, I do think that it is morally wrong to fire people from businesses because they are gay. However, this debate is about whether it should be legal. That being said, any arguments stating that people that agree with my position are homophobic are invalid, because people can think that it should be legal to fire straight people from businesses for the reason that they are straight too.