BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
All of the recent DDO members with KKK members in their pictures are one person

"That's literally the ONLY anomoly."It only takes one anomoly to debunk your baseless theory. "If you are smart, you wouldn't want to make it too obvious that you created multiple accounts." So you believe I created these accounts over the span of 3 years? Have you even looked at the fact that these accounts were having their own seperate debates? It would be unreasonable and ineffective for someone to create 9+ accounts over the course of 3 years and debate on all of them."What exactly are the chances of this large percentage of debate.org's active members being KKK members?" I am the only one claiming to be in the KKK. We are the ABM and to my knowladge no one else makes that claim. "Additionally, as I pointed out, all of them updated their profile around the same time, all of the accounts post the same content in the same manner:" Ive already spoken about this in the last round. We communicate via group messages, we are a community and share the same ideologies. The burden of proof is on you, as you're making an accusation. Thus far, you've failed to meet your burden of proof and I have refuted every point you have made.
All of the recent DDO members with KKK members in their pictures are one person

That's literally the ONLY anomoly. If you are smart, you wouldn't want to make it too obvious that you created multiple accounts. However, it's still pretty obvious. What exactly are the chances of this large percentage of debate.org's active members being KKK members? It's estimated by a number of sources that there are between 5,000 and 8,000 total members of the KKK in the US[1]. Of the total US population of about 324 million. 5000/324 million is .001%. You're telling me that there are more than 5 KKK members on Debate.org out of probably the 100(that's an over-estimate of the total active members) that are active? Why exactly would they be so over-represented?Additionally, as I pointed out, all of them updated their profile around the same time, all of the accounts post the same content in the same manner: where it's impossible to accept the debate. Sources:[1] https://www.google.com...
KirstinKate is a kiddo

HAHAHA. I'm a kiddo you're debating on whether i'm a kid or not. coming from an adult who i have no clue as to who you are you calling me a kiddo is creepy. my birthday is may 25th coming up pretty soon so i'll be 15. also I didn't choose to debate luke on my hate he challeged me and he accepted it so I went with the flow. you showed two of my "off" debates as evidence. & you call yourself an adult. WOW.
KirstinKate is a kiddo

KirstinKate is a kiddo. I affirm the resolution on the basis that she is young, she acts like a kiddo, and she debates like a kiddo. Definitions A kiddo is a person who is younger or less mature than an adult. KirstinKate refers to the user KirstinKate on Debate.org Contention 1) young By looking at her profile picture on can tell that she is not of the age of adulthood within the United States which is 18. A further investigation allows us to look at her profile and see that she was born In 1994, making her 14 which is considerably young. http://www.debate.org... Contention 2) immaturity http://www.debate.org... The topic of that debate is whether or not she hates a boy or a child named Luke. This is more or less like a middle school or highschool type of thing to talk about. It is much like gossip. Because she is 14 making her young, she is also immature. Contentiuon 3) debates like a kiddo http://www.debate.org... http://www.debate.org... As, you can see, she either forfeits or says one or two sentence answers and avoids actually debating something. That is something that well a young, immature, kiddo would do. The resolution is affirmed
KirstinKate is a kiddo

She conceded that she will be 15 soon, 15 is not considered an adult, so she is a kiddo, I must win the young contention that I brought up. Immaturity the comment WOW, should sum that up as well as the comment in the comment of the debate section and some in these sections of past debates. http://www.debate.org... You can see in the debate round she says another comment like Bull So the immaturity vote should go to me. Also, the debates like a kiddo vote must go to me as well because as shown she cannot make a very strong case, and in my opinion has not made a good one this time. Resolution affirmed
Technology will be the foundation for our extinction

I believe it will be an interesting and challenging one. I will argue that our technology, its effects, and its implications on our lives have better prepared humans for survival for whatever may come. Technology comes in various forms: machines, medicine, communications, computing, etc. For now, these things have made our lives easier, but more importantly, it has allowed us to put more of our thoughts and efforts into tasks that go beyond day-to-day survival. Because of this, we are now more aware than ever of the disasters that threaten human existence. We know quite a lot about how diseases work, and we have developed ways to treat them. We have theorized the different ways that could have caused the dinosaurs to go extinct, and we can learn from them. We track asteroids and calculate our chances of being struck by them, and engineers are developing methods to avoid destruction. There are many speculations going around about how humans will become extinct, but technology has allowed us to be much more prepared to fight against many of those threats, giving us improved odds at survival.
Technology will be the foundation for our extinction

I am not arguing about the usefulness of technology and its positive implications in our daily life. I am arguing that Technology has rendered the natural skills and features of a lot of human's useless for example our ever shrinking jaw size because we no longer eat and chew large amounts of food without utensils. Or our natural speed and strength has become weaker over the years because of how heavily technology is used. Also the concentration of innovative people is getting smaller and smaller. Most of us aren't creating technology most of us are users and we will evolve to become users primarily that will only innovate on whats already been innovated. If our elite innovators or our technology ceases to exist the majority of the world would be helpless against apocalyptic conditions or global natural disasters. We wouldn't have the raw skills and instincts to carry on our species as we have adapted to life that deals with these problems for us.
Riddles

Rules: If the opponent gets my riddle then he get 7 points if my opponent fails to answer my question he loses the whole debate. While int eh three rounds i will post one riddle and the second round my opponent will answer and the third round i will say if it is right or not. RIDDLE: In Bobby's World... ...there are commercials but no television. ...you can see but you are blind. ...there are neither clouds nor rain. ...there is both happiness and sadness. Bobby's World riddles' first word (i.e. "commercials") must have double letters together, and the second word (i.e. "television) cannot. If both words have double letters, then they are both in Bobby's World. If both words have no double letters, there are neither of them in Bobby's World. QUEENS BUT NO KINGS! FLOORS BUT NO GROUNDS! No internet use!
The Nevada gambling age should be lowered to 18

So basically the argument is "The gambling age in Nevada should be lowered to 18" though a lot of this is opinion. It would be nice to provide facts as well. Also if you are in any way moved by this topic. Please feel free to help launch my campaign to lower the gambling age by signing and sharing my petition in the link listed below. Thanks! . https://chn. Ge/2OD2dzj
Abortion is genocide and should be illegal in the United States

Once again, when a child is in the womb they are not nothing. They are a human being. Therefore, it is murder at any stage in the pregnancy. And who are we to judge whether teens are fit to be adequate parents or not. The mother doesn't have to keep the child. She can always give it up for adoption, which is a long process that only good qualified parents get to partake in. The fact is women and young teens fall into the government's trap that having a child is her choice, when realistically we're giving women the choice of life or to murder their child.
Liquid diamonds cannot exist.

Diamond Definition Pro hangs himself on the noose when he uses the mwerriam Webster definition “form of carbon”. It mentions nothing of allotropes, only that it must be a form of carbon. As far as I am aware, when diamond melts (which Pro conceded it indeed does) the carbon atoms don’t transmute into some other element, thus the molten form of diamond is indeed also another form of carbon. When looking up the Merriam Webster definition of “water” we get the following: “the liquid that descends from the clouds as rain, forms streams, lakes, and seas, and is a major constituent of all living matter and that when pure is an odorless, tasteless, very slightly compressible liquid oxide of hydrogen H2O which appears bluish in thick layers, freezes at 0° C and boils at 100° C, has a maximum density at 4° C and a high specific heat, is feebly ionized to hydrogen and hydroxyl ions, and is a poor conductor of electricity and a good solvent” According to this definition, then “solid water” and “gaseous water” are oxymorons, but Pro has already largely conceded that these forms of water do exist. Thus Pro must either rreject the Merriam Webster definitions (which undermines his own argument against diamonds), or accept them but also accept that colloquial definitions take priority. In either case, Pro’s case has been undermined. Pro continually conflates the nature of something, with its discovered identities. The planet Earth’s definition doesn’t change when we discover new facts about it, such as new cave systems, trenches, etc. Simialrly, discovering new facts about solid diamond doesn’t modify the definition used (such as the fact that solid diamond is a covalent network). Impurities in Water and Diamond “Impurities are associated with water and diamonds. When we describe what water is, we will classify it as H2O. “ … and we classify diamond as a form of carbon… Carbon Phase Diagram The number of allotropes of each element is irrelevant to whether or not that element can exist in liquid form. I plainly demonstrated it does and Pro conceded this. The Resolution Carefully note the resolution. It states that liquid diamond cannot exist. It doesn't say that diamond cannot melt. There is a huge difference between these two. Con has proved that diamond does indeed melt (which I totally agree with), but hasn't provided evidence that it can exist as a liquid. The phase diagram shows that carbon can exist as a liquid, not diamond. Moreover, Pro concedes that diamond that can melt… melted diamond…. Is essentially what the resolution demands… “liquid diamond”. Conclusion I demonstrated that diamonds, melt, and that with traditional definitions of diamond which being the preferred definitions, entails that liquid diamonds do exist. Pro didn’t provide reasons why we should prefer his definitions and I made arguments against discovered identities being included in the definition, as this leads to absurdity when applied in virtually any other context.
Liquid diamonds cannot exist.

Thank you for accepting my challenge. To begin, let me clearly define what a diamond is. A diamond is made up of pure carbon with 4 covalent bonds to the surrounding carbon atoms in a tetrahedral geometry. This creates a covalent network solid in which individual units of diamonds don't exist. It is all one giant molecule, diamond. What does melting actually do? For water and most other molecules, this means that we are overtaking the intermolecular forces that attract one molecule to another. These intermolecular forces are weak enough to break but still allow the water molecule to exist separately. The covalent bonds that hold the individual water molecule don't break as easily. Therefore, water can melt and evaporate. What is the difficulty with diamond? Diamond exists as one giant molecule. There are absolutely no intermolecular forces holding the carbon atoms together. You must add enough energy to break the covalent bonds before allowing diamond to melt. Once you break the covalent bonds, it is no longer diamond. It is another allotrope of carbon. Therefore, it is impossible to melt diamond.
Abortion should be illegal

Thank you, I accept your challenge. First of all, abortion helps prevent teenage pregnancy. This prevents a multitude of problems, which I will list below. 1. High School Dropout rates will increase because of parents trying to support their children 2. Based on the assumption that these teenagers will end up working a minimum wage job, they will be unable to support their children in most areas of the U.S. 3. This means the children will suffer from disease and starvation, or possibly have to live out their lives in an orphanage. However this isn't the only reason that abortion is a good thing. Also consider babies with severe deformities or other problems, these babies are guaranteed to suffer. Another group to consider when it comes to having legal abortion are the victims of rape. They never wanted to have a baby, if the never indented to have a baby, and don't necessarily want to. I believe it is their right, you can't force people to do something, as that is akin to slavery. Well thanks for the advantage, and good luck. I am quite interested to see how you will support he illegalization of abortion.
God and Jesus is real

I chose to do this because my thoughts are exactly the same as the Pro's. But I thought it would be fun to play devil's advocate. So here we go. Thank you to my opponent for offering an interesting topic. To start, let's look at my opponents first sentence. "God is real can tell because he saved me a lot of times he kept my dad in the world during a tragic time when he slept walked out of a window and fell onto a cement ground. " Aside from the many grammatical errors here, this argument is extremely weak. Due to the fact that this is Pro's first statement and he/she says "God is real can tell because. ." then that must mean this is the main reason God is real. However, just because you've had one instance in which a miracle happen, that does not mean God is real. Perhaps the real cause of Pro's father being alive is the fact that he fell just right and it is more of a medical miracle then anything else. My opponent goes on to say God is real because he spoke to him in his sleep. Well, I've almost been eaten by a 3-headed dragon in my dreams. Does that make them real? Of course not. Pro goes on to bring up the Bible. Well, to answer my opponents question, there is a bible for the same reason there is a Twilight series. Someone wrote them. Perhaps in a dark time, a few wise old men got together and decided their people needed some hope, so they came up with a fictional character to help them. Pro also ask's why do miracle's happen? Well, as I stated earlier, there are miracles. But they aren't necessarily God's doing. If a baby is born against all odds, it's a medical miracle. If you see a shooting star when you're having a bad day, you got lucky enough to witness SCIENCE. Miracles do not mean God. Pro asks why 32.5% of people believe in him. And that's easy. We want hope. We want a higher being backing us up and telling us everything will be okay. My opponent goes on to say there's an opposite to everything so there needs to be an opposite to Satan. Well, as the Con, I'm saying God isn't real. So it'd only be logical for me to assume if there is no God, there is no Satan. In conclusion, there is an explanation for everything. God is simply a figure created many many years ago to give people hope. :)
God and Jesus is real

God is real can tell because he saved me a lot of times he kept my dad in the world during a tragic time when he slept walked out of a window and fell onto a cement ground. Not really anybody could survive that.That night I prayed and asked God why he saved my dad.He didn't exactly tell me until I slept.He said that my dad was what I loved most.Of course he was right.He continued and said that I needed him in this world.Which is too true.Also,why would there be a BIBLE if he wasn't true.Where do miracles come from.How come 32.5% of the world believe in him and Jesus.(If you do think its alot,go to www.ageofthesage.org/mysticism/world_religionspopulations.html)Also,how can one book be so right 100% of the time about the world we live in.It all falls down to 1 decision.The Holy Trinity(Father,Son,and Holy Spirit).Also,if there is and opposite to everything,wouldn't the be an opposite to Satan.Dark vs. Light,Wrong vs. Right.Good vs. Evil.There only one man to fill the hole,Jesus.The only reason God does devestating things to certain people is to test your Strength mentally not physcially and to give you more wisdom.Good luck to the opponent.Sorry its just 1 round because as 11 years old I can't stay home.
Cannabis should it be legalized

Making anything legal lowers the crime rate.Crime rates are logically reduced when making legal any activity previously illegal. For instance, making murder legal would result in a drop in crime because nobody is being charged with murder.Serious dangers are associated with legalized marijuana use, outweighing benefits.Use of marijuana causes a host of physical and mental impairments including, but not limited to: Permanent memory loss[1] Reduced mental capacity[1] Reduced physical reaction time[1] Paranoia Lung damage[3] Increased risk of developing Schizophrenia[2] Increased risk of injury or death in a car crash[4] Sources.1. http://www.livescience.com...2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...3. http://www.sciencedaily.com...4. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Cannabis should it be legalized

Hello, My names Ethan Cannabis, its a drug we have all heard of even tried some of us. Yes it is a "illegal" drug in most places but should it ? If something is "illegal" its basically means if your found with it you can face jail or a fine. If its illegal why is it prescribed to people who have insomnia, recovering from kemo therapy and is now legal in various states in America and in several countries. Also if it is legalized it will bring a ton of money into the country or state amazing example Colorado ever since cannabis was legalized its crime rate how lowered and revenue has increased and this in only in one place source http://rt.com...
This House would abolish the British monarchy

I will be arguing in favour of abolishing the monarchy in Britain. The Opposition will argue against. BOP is shared, on the basis that it is generally accepted that if you started a new society from scratch it would not have a hereditary ruler. I must demonstrate that the advantages of abolishing the monarchy outweigh the disadvantages and the Opposition should seek to demonstrate that the monarchy is not worth abolishing. The debate will run as follows: Round One is for acceptance. Round Two is for definitions and substantive arguments. Round Three is for rebuttal and substantive arguments. Round Four is for rebuttal and summing up - no more substantive arguments at this stage. Sources do not need to be cited for this debate, however they can be cited to back yourself up if your opponent questions your reasoning. For this reason points should NOT be given for source quality.
Miley cyrus's new "personality" is great.

There's plenty of "mature adults" that like to troll, as long as they can hold intelligent discussions. And if you define Miley Cyrus's personality as "great", then our definitions of mature adults are probably different, too. And also, since you made the claim, you have the BOP as to why she's a good role model. Personally, I think she's encouraging rebellion in teenagers, since she said herself that her music and concerts are aimed toward the younger population. (12-17 year olds.) She hasn't "grown up" in any rational sense of the phrase: http://music.msn.com... And she's into drugs now, by the way. So she is doing something illegal. You have the BOP to show me why her change is good and how she's a good role model if she's just encouraging kids to do what they want to without anyone judging them. If everyone did just that, our world would be in a bigger mess than it's in now. Back to thee.
Miley cyrus's new "personality" is great.

First of all you claim you are a "mature adult" but in the beginning you told me that you were "trolling" that's not what mature adults do. Now, everything celebrity is a role model, and his/her fans will always want to look up to that person. "twerking" is just the newest dance faze and there will always be different ones till the end of time, and this one isn't the worst.... There has been way worse role models to look up to. Miley Cyrus was crazy in the beginning and she has been embarrassed about her little performance on VMAs, but she now is not acting like a tool in the beginning and is now a great artist and role model.
Miley cyrus's new "personality" is great.

Okay, yes I was trolling. And I'm probably going to lose this one. But this is your opinion, too, that her new personality is great. However, it doesn't look like she "grew up" at all. It looks more like she devolved into an attention whore. And what's worse is that she's setting a bad example for kids. A whole bunch of teenage girls are twerking at dances, getting haircuts like her, and basically idolizing her. The last part is probably the worst of all; I believe she's a bad role model, and saying that she just "grew up" isn't going to cut it and excuse her. Mature, responsible adults like us know better. Would you let your daughter behave like Miley Cyrus? I realize it's ad hominem, but this whole debate essentially is, too. It goes deeper than just "personal choice." When everyone follows their own morals, the worst in people comes out. This is all just my opinion, of course. Back to you.
Miley cyrus's new "personality" is great.

Ok first of all, that little "story" was your opinion. There was nothing in there about how everybody else hated her, in fact you said everyone was cheering her on and loved it. Now if you would to pay for a Lady gaga concert you would have no problem with it, but now that she's grownup and everybody still is holding onto the old and young Miley. People change when they grow up. Also if you want to present a persuasive argument, your going to need to tone down the "curse words" and the fictional stories of the "demons" and "brainwashed".
Miley cyrus's new "personality" is great.

I think that Miley is smart for what she is doing. She was the number 1 talked about artist in the US, all of the crazy stuff she does was part of a plan... and it worked. If any other female artist was doing this we would have no problem with it, its just that we can't let go of the old her. Lady gaga, Rihanna, Madonna, and Britney spears have all been naked in music videos and we had no problem with it.... so why should we care if Miley does it, people need to understand that she is grown up and she is her own person now. Before one directions "story of my life" Miley Cyrus was the biggest artist in the US. Her hit song "Wrecking ball" hit number one in iTunes songs. She did some crazy things to get people to talk about her.... and now look, everywhere you go on the internet she is on there, every single talk show she was on the there. She did this purposely and it worked.