BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
It is better to just poop fast rather than wait, if you don't have a book

you make a good argument, however you too have missed a few key points! holding it in will increase your risk of kidney disease! Additionally, when i say poop it out i dont mean force it out, just gradually push with an extra tug, this relieves pressure in your stomache, and also relieves your stress. You can avoid work in many other ways too! for example, hide a laptop in your briefcase, go to the bathroom, get your poop overwith and enjoy yourself! Your boss will still think you're in the bathroom! Another reason is if you're on a real vacation, long poops take up your life, making it a less enjoyable life! My opponent claims that life is too short and you should enjoy it on the toilet! In my opinion, why waste it on the toilet when you can enjoy your REAL vacation with palm trees, not stained tile and old scratchy toilet paper. In addition, you claim that pooping it out fast leaves a mess and quite a smell, but yet you claim territory ONLY when you relax? you just disproved your own point! Also, speeding it up leaves a more satisfying log. To add to that point, when speeding the proccess up, you leave more poops, which end up MORE stinky. Also, by leaving more poops, you clean out your poop bladder, which as an end result means you dont have to poop again. I have thus disproved all of your "theories," proving all of mine, and humiliating you. i hope you can deal with this stink
It is better to just poop fast rather than wait, if you don't have a book

Well done, but I think there are a few key points you are missing. 1. If you are at work, a longer poop will get you to miss more work and decrease the chances that your boss will run into you and ask you to work on weekends. These poops are the closest thing I have to a vacation. 2. If you force to poop, sometimes it becomes a real mess to clean up, so while the net time you save is increased, the gross time you save remains the same when factoring in extra time and resources spent on whipping. 3. A longer, lingering poop may leave more of a smell, thus establishing your territory and giving you claim to alpha male of the bathroom. 4. Just because you don't have a book doesn't mean there isn't other stuff to do. There is plenty of things to read in your wallet: The back of your drivers license, your voter registration card, a collection of movie stubs. Some people like to write polysyllabic witticisms on the wall. You can draw, paint, or nit a sweater. Really the possibilities are endless. So my argument boils down to: life is short, so enjoy your time on the can.
It is better to just poop fast rather than wait, if you don't have a book

I believe it is much better to push hard, and get the poop over with, rather than sit there and relax. Relaxing, and waiting is much more time consuming, and often the poop clings, making you shake your butt a little to get the little straggler off. However, if you just poop it out, you can return to your everyday life, and enjoy the rest of your day, claiming you have accomplished an impossible feat. On the contrary, if you have a book, you can read about other people, and before you know it, "pop" its out! It is very simple and it slides out, but this only works if your mind is off the subject. Sometimes, if you're just reading, you dont even know its out and some times you're there for hours! I find this an enjoyable task! All those who disagree, probably have a piece of toilet paper stuck in their buttox. So YOU SUCK! thanx
Naturalized Citizen Presidential Eligibility

I think that us as Americans should be on the lookout for the dreaded virus, Tibola. Tibola is a virus passed on by anyone bitten by this girl named Tia who likes to bite and scratch people. We need to keep the country healthy, so anyone who sees this girl, please take a picture and report her to the FBAA (FuckBoy Association of America). This public service announcement has not yet been reviewed, or thought through very clearly. All rights reserved to FBAA.
Resolved: The United States ought to end its provision of arms to foreign insurgents.

Harm Caused by Insurgents In Afghanistan, over two-thirds of civilian casualties were a result of insurgents, and this is a 28% increase from 2009. [1] One of the reasons that there is such a large increase could be due to Russia supplying weapons to Taliban insurgents. [2] Yes, this isn’t a case of the United States supplying weaponary, but it proves that the weapons given to insurgents can result in mass destruction, like the civilian deaths shown. To supply weapons to possibly dangerous groups is giving them a catalyst to hurt people. Also, insurgents nearly always use acts of terrorism to achieve its goals, as it is “‘the easiest form of insurgency’". [3] “Insurgent violence may take various forms. These include revolution,coup d'etat, guerrilla, terrorism and riots. In recent years the termintifada gained publicity, referring to the Palestinian uprising in theIsraeli-administered territories. With the exception of riots, theseforms of political violence can be also viewed as strategies ofinsurgency”. [4] “In practice, the terrorist operational inventory is rather limited. They place explosive charges in public places, assassinate political opponents or carry out assaults by small arms on the public at large, take hostages by kidnapping, hijacking, or barricading themselves in buildings.” They have a slim reach compared to more established terrorist groups, but it causes explicit harm nonetheless. This behavior can't be encouraged by the United States. Misuse of Weapons According to Elias Groll of foreignpolicy.com, the United States is “supplying weapons to these [insurgencies] despite the heightened risk that they could be misused or diverted”. [5] This is because the way they are currently giving weapons makes it easy for them to end up in the wrong hands. For example, the United States supplied crates of weapons to Kurdish forces, but they were picked up by the Islamic State. [6] In another example, the United States supplied Iraqi troops with weapons, which they sold on the black market to Syrian rebel groups. [7] If not properly used or delivered, these powerful weapons can end up with the wrong people. Citations[1]https://www.theguardian.com...[2]http://www.independent.co.uk.... [3]http://news.siteintelgroup.com...[4]https://www.google.com...[5]https://www.google.com...[6]http://www.nydailynews.com...[7]https://www.theatlantic.com...
Resolved: The United States ought to end its provision of arms to foreign insurgents.

Alright, let's get some definitions and rules out of the way first. Definitions Ought - Used to indicate a desirable or expected state. (. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...)Provision - The action of providing or supplying something for use. (. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...)Insurgent - A person fighting against a government or invading force; a rebel or revolutionary. (. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...)The rules here will be fairly simple. Round One is Acceptance and BoP is shared. Other than that, standard rules apply. Thanks again to tejretics. Let's get this debate started! :)
The Ultimate Rap Battle

Loony bottom line your a rhyme taker Let me be clear homeys a faker Stealin some bars is all good and fine But takin a whole verse is crossing the line I normally shred suckers like you but instead.... Nah who am I kiddin im still gonna verbally stomp your head Pickin someons lines apart definetly aint smart I'll use you to whipe a wet fart so your playin your part Next time your able remember dont steal someone elses fable I'm going to bury you in this box i made outta your own kitchen table You'd like someone to give you an opinion of your rhymes Your stolen words go on deaf ears like a cryin mime I spit so much fire your ash's are incinerated someone else step up cause this kids obliterated
The Ultimate Rap Battle

Hey listen up homies, because I gotta tell If you accept this battle you must be whack as hell, because my rhymes are like butter, they are so smooth I'm gonna win this s**t, you get my groove? Before I start owning, I'm gonna lay down a rule Don't copy off music, because that ain't cool Make up your own raps, keep your head erect Click that yes button and hurry up and accept!
The Ultimate Rap Battle

Oh, I see, white boy thinks he good I should put you in yo place, yes i really should but tell ya what son, you are already dead I can tell you like giving old guys head You say that my lines are fake? You serious man, Im tight fo christ sakes All of me is 100 percent Oops, was that yo ego? Did i make a dent? I am pretty sure that my bars are for real I make up these rhymes, my imagination is steel your name is Anishac, what kind of crap is that? I heard you were good, so i let you up to bat, but it seems i was wrong, so i have to say that it is pretty hard to beat me, if you are gay Im pretty sure when it comes to rhyme I take the cake So go back into your basement and cry and masturbate
Capitalism an Inherently Exploitative System

Markets schmarkets, the idea that markets are some magic mechanism that we must be governed by is an unrealistic ideologically twist and is not how economies have functioned ever. A really existing market is not whats taught, a market isn't supply demand a market supplies what people can afford those are very different things we can easily come up with demands of things we want they wont be produced what is produced is were the money is. Markets are inefficient and do not take care of social needs and create crises because Private tyrannies (corporations) only interested in profits and the externalities are ignored. Wage work has been considered a negative relationship at least since Cicero noted " ...vulgar are the means of livelihood of all hired workmen whom we pay for mere manual labour, not for artistic skill; for in their case the very wage they receive is a pledge of their slavery. " [1] Wage labor not only bolsters inequality it is incredibly wasteful, wasting of workers' efforts and resources on producing useless luxuries;the waste of goods so that their price may remain high; and the waste of all those who sit between the producer and consumer, taking their own shares at each stage without actually contributing to the production of goods (the middle man). High salaried work (editor,manger,etc)perpetuates the hegemony of the employer class through manufacturing consent and eliciting false consciousness. A professional " is an obedient thinker, an intellectual property whom employers can trust to experiment, theorize, innovate and create safely within the confines of an assigned ideology."[2] Marginally, both chattel and wage slaves may become bosses espoused by "rags to riches" or "slave to master" stories that occasionally occur/occurred marginal cases of "success" are not justification for a system that squanders human potential so that some may live like kings while others starve. 1 http://penelope.uchicago.edu...*.html 2 Disciplined Minds - Jeff Schmidt P.16
Capitalism an Inherently Exploitative System

If wages are exploitative, then every trade is. A worker trades their services for money. People who are able to accomplish more (more skills) are, often, able to trade their time for more money. If the markets are good, people tend to get paid according to their ability to provide services other people want to pay for. If we had a society without money using a barter system, it would be equivalent to having a consumable physical asset that everyone else has. If everyone is given equal opportunity, then it is only fair that those who put in the effort to succeed go further than those who don't. Giving everyone the same resources regardless of how hard they have worked is unfair to those who work harder. As my opponent has given an informal and off topic round, so I will reply in kind. I work for a small business with a very generous CEO. When I was hired as an intern, the CEO took time to come introduce himself and meet me at a work function when I'd only been there one week. In my five years at the company, I fell ill with an unknown illness. Even without a diagnosis, my company repeatedly encouraged me to take medical leave to figure it out. It took me two years, and four medical leaves to get on track, and they bent over backwards to bring me back every time. Without me working, my company suffered in terms of getting things done and billing our customer for my labor. We recently converted to being an employee-owned company [1][2] which is a way that businesses share profits with employees. Another way is through Christmas bonuses which are usually in proportion to profits made that year and value to the company. These are both purely capitalist ideas to make employees happy. Making employees happy isn't inherent to capitalism, but it is certainly part of it. What is unfair isn't unequal wages. What's unfair is unequal opportunity. Yes, I know the first source is someone's opinion. It is used to provide definition to the term, not as a supporting argument. 1) http://www.usnews.com... 2) http://www.nceo.org...
Capitalism an Inherently Exploitative System

I am a socialist because i find capitalism morally reprehensible The free market and globalization, promised as the route to worldwide prosperity, have been exposed as a nothing more than a con. Corporations have no loyalty to America or the American worker. They are vampires. also the new republic is a liberal website Opening arguments The wage system itself is exploitative, it buts the laborer works under external control, in the words of Wilhelm von Humboldt,"we may admire what he does, but we despise what he is."[1] . Until "industrial feudalism" is replaced by "industrial democracy," politics will be "the shadow cast on society by big business"[2] the employment contract is a legal fiction in that it treats human beings juridically as mere tools or inputs by abdicating responsibility and self-determination. 1 http://archive.mises.org... 2 https://www.princeton.edu... (sorry this is so short I am beeen really busy )
Capitalism an Inherently Exploitative System

Capitalism- An economic and political system in which a country"s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit Exploitative - describing the treatment of someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work. Round 1: acceptance/introduction Round 2: opening arguments, no rebuttal Round 3: rebuttals Round 4: responses to rebuttals and closing statements Judging: minimum 2500 elo with select winner. MaesterAemon, I saw your previous debate and copied your round 1 definitions into this verbatim. You had a debate with an unfortunate FF. If you would take this debate, I believe I can be a suitable opponent for you on this topic. If you would like to take this debate at a later time, please leave a comment listing when I should attempt to reopen it. Thank you and good luck.
The US polecis and action AGAINST CUBA ARE WRONG

i have to prof that the U.S. polecis are wrong not the cuban polecis are wright . the U.S. polecis are wrong because they are hypocritical. say they do not negociate with a communist regim because it has one party,when you negociates with countries that have no partie what so ever like saudi arabia is wrong. but saudia arabia has oil. baising your foreign polecis on profit and not on morals is wrong is a prosititucion of the countries integrety. batista vs castro batista:commited mass murder of the cuban peopel with us support.A real holocaust a fascist regime. At the time the U.S. were fighting against the nazis. thats hyprocresie fight something and supported. you said its the us concern because were all live on the same planet but should not the haul panet get a say on the matter . U.N votes against the embargoin 2010: 179 positives, votes 4 negatives and I abstaint. the US real objectives. the US signed a law that it haul purpuse is the conquest of cuba and maked it a state is cuba a dictatorship no .it has elections raul castro will not candidate for the next elections,so we will have a non castro president. U.S terrorism batista groups an the U.S goverment i are behind terror attacks against cuba .suicide boming,biological warware . if cubas embargo muss stay up for the goood of america why did most american countries voted against . but cuba only has one partie again you have perfect relation ship with monarquis.and you only allow for two parties to go to the debattes.the us sistem is crocked.i will put a video up explainnig why. Cuba does not repress their peopel pacific protestation are allowed. only most of the cuban peopel try to beat the protesters up.when the polecis take them away for their own protection.they say they goth kippdnapd.but io they let the peopel do what they want.the news goes viral cuba lets protesters get killed! cuba has problemes kepping its infrastructure uo because of the embargo if the hospital are in ruin its the U.S. fault problemes with us voting system:http://www.youtube.com... source of my informations:(you learn spanish in scoll i hope)http://www.youtube.com...
Song Debate

I can't ever narrow down a top 5 songs I like. My top 5 always changes depending on my mood or what I have heard lately. So I'll just be posting songs I like that strike me as some of my favorites right now. First I'd like to post the "Melody of Pandora" from God of War 3. It's fairly obscure, but it's the only thing I even remember after playing that game. http://www.youtube.com...
are there intelligent lifeforms in our galaxy

Resoution- There are intellegent lifeforms in our galaxy. As per this resolution, you must prove that-a) Alien life exists.b) Said Alien life is intellegent.c) Said alien life exists within our galaxy.Definitions-I trust that you will have no objection to the following definitions. All definitions are from the New Oxford American Dictionary.Life n. the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, funtional activity, and continual change preceding death.Intelligence n. the ability to acquire knowelage and skills.Arguments-Life within our galaxy, even with your odds, is unlikley. Even in the case that life has occured on another planet, you must also prove that this planet
are there intelligent lifeforms in our galaxy

First thing is the discovery of the first earth sized planet orbiting within the habitable zone of its star that is capable of holding water on the planet. It was discovered by the Kepler and named Kepler-186f. This is the first time a planet that is near resemblance to earth within the habitable zone discovered in which with more research could help discover more like planets in the future. . http://www.space.com... Now theoretically theres2 billion planets capable of hosting life. Rounding off that there is an estimated 100 billion stars in our galaxy and each star has 1 star in the habitable zone (some start has multiple planets in the habitable zone) that equals out to 100 billion planets in the habitable zone. Now we are talking about planets within the same size to 1.5 times larger than earth within the habitable zone. with the sun being a particular size that would cut down from 100 billion to 2 billion planets most likely being capable of hosting life. That is 2 BILLION PLANETS now all of this is in theory of course since we are not capable of traveling to those planets but with the technology that we have to find out what elements might be on the planets chances of finding life is highly probable not if but when. Now 100 billion is estimated with what has been found now and calculated within the size of the galaxy and it came up to 100 billion. Now with this scientists also states that we will find more as time goes on and there could be possibly 200+ billion suns just within our own galaxy. Now if that is the case 1 planet within the habitable zone that would be if 200 billion is a more correct number than it would be 200 billion habitable planets. Now with the use of Kepler now scientists are being so bold to as in claim by 2040 they will have found life on another planet. Theoretical of course but thought it was kinda cool that scientists are actually being cocky enough to say that. Now there is another method being brought into light where using a BCI (biological complexity index) method that 100 million planets to host complex lifeforms. www. space. com/24894-exoplanets-habitable-zone-red-dwarfs. html . http://www.space.com... . http://www.space.com... www. space. com/24894-exoplanets-habitable-zone-red-dwarfs. html . http://www.theguardian.com... . http://www.popularmechanics.com...
Chewing gums should be allowed in schools.

As my oppenent is so humble to let me go but I'd would like him to go first. I still don't want to waste your time so I'll show you people the history of chewing gum. The ancient Greeks chewed mastiche - a chewing gum made from the resin of the mastic tree. The ancient Mayans chewed chicle which is the sap from the sapodilla tree. North American Indians chewed the sap from spruce trees and passed the habit along to the settlers. Early American settlers made a chewing gum from spruce sap and beeswax. In 1848, John B. Curtis made and sold the first commercial chewing gum called the State of Maine Pure Spruce Gum. In 1850, Curtis started selling flavored paraffin gums becoming more popular than spruce gums. On December 28 1869, William Finley Semple became the first person to patent a chewing gum - U.S patent #98,304. In 1869, Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna introduced Thomas Adams to chicle. In 1871, Thomas Adams patented a machine for the manufacture of gum. In 1880, John Colgan invented a way to make chewing gum taste better for a longer period of time while being chewed. By 1888, an Adams' chewing gum called Tutti-Frutti became the first chew to be sold in a vending machine. The machines were located in a New York City subway station. In 1899, Dentyne gum was created by New York druggist Franklin V. Canning. In 1906, Frank Fleer invented the first bubble gum called Blibber-Blubber gum. However, the bubble blowing chew was never sold. In 1914, Wrigley Doublemint brand was created. William Wrigley, Jr. and Henry Fleer were responsible for adding the popular mint and fruit extracts to a chicle chewing gum. In 1928, an employee of the Frank H. Fleer Company, Walter Diemer invented the successful pink colored Double Bubble, bubble gum. The very first bubble gum was invented by Frank Henry Fleer in 1906. He cal led it Blibber-Blubber. Fleer's recipe was later perfected by Walter Diemer, who called his product Double Bubble. So obvesuley chewing gum has been in culture of human kind for a long time. Hoprfully my oppenent can clarify his agrument because this topic can become very broad.