BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Education system of California.

My opponent has done something rather amazing. Not only was her argument entirely composed of abusive ad hominems towards me, but she has managed to insult the majority of Debate.org's users. That's right. Mellers23, you just insulted the community that is voting for you. I take great offense, and you should be ashamed of your lack of conduct. If we were on a real-life debate stage, you would be laughed off. How dare you! I DEMAND an apology for your petty personal attacks and lack of etiquette and sportsmanship. But beyond this, Mellers23 still makes one major fault: She fails EVEN to forge a proper ad hominem. EVERYTHING she attacks me with is based off assumptions: I do not believe that I am number one; I don't care about how many debates I win as long as I learn, and hone my debating skills; I do do things with my intelligence such as maintain a politically-themed blog; I don't expect people to care what I think; etc. I don't have a girlfriend however, so congrats on that. I have been the only debater thus far to create any non-fallacious arguments. Thus, you the audience, must vote for me thus far. Please Mellers23. Please either counter my arguments and make non-assaultive arguments of your own, or forfeit this debate. Oh, and by the way: I prefer to stare at a monitor, and NOT at microchips. I guess it's one of those personal preference kind-of things. Pixels rule; circuits suck.
Education system of California.

Oh my goodness! Ok, Mr.know-it-all. Why is everyone so hellbent on being 'woo, I'm number one!' Apparently, people these days have no other talent besides sitting in front of a screen trying to win votes. NO. BODY. CARES. ABOUT. HOW. MANY. POINTLESS. ARGUMENTS. YOU. WIN. You are 14!!!!! Go get a girlfriend, and cuddle with her in front of a fireplace and such. Why don't you go live? You have 80+ years to argue with people. Do it for real, with people you can actually converse with. Words you can actually hear. Conversations that have actual meaning! Not all of these robots that spend countless hours perfecting how well they debate? Are you kidding? Newsflash: No one here cares about what you think, except yourself. People might get offended by some things I'm saying but it is absolutely true. Yeah, you're smart. Great. The world needs more intelligence. But actually do something with it? Please? Not just stare at a bunch of microchips. I encourage everyone to use their brainpower to change the world, because it needs a lot of change. Perhaps Poejoe should mean "Poultry Joe". Hinthint: chickens.
Education system of California.

I'm a high school student in Apple Valley, CA. We seem to be in a little bit of a dilemma. The budget crisis is terrible. I blame the Governor. Does anyone know when the next [elections for governor] are? Well anyway. I think they're cutting it 10-15%? D=!!! At my school, they built football stadium lights around our track, and we don't even have a proper field. We don't even have stands. They also chose to build baseball/softball dugouts, and out teams have never gotten close to the state championships. When our soccer teams don't have proper goal..things. And they have one the CIF[championships] for the past 3 years. My school is choosing to fund the athletics instead of the academics. They cut 600 staff/faculty members from my district for this coming school year. This means the class sizes are going to increase dramatically, and the overall success of students is going to decrease. I don't want to fail life! I want a quality education, along with the 3000 other kids that attend my school. So, as a student, I can propose ideas to the student council/school board. Does anyone have any practical, not so out-of-reach advice on what to suggest to my 'school officials'? Because they don't seem to be doing a very effective job, so I think it's time to change something.
Comcast ought to be broken up, under U.S. Anti-trust regulatory law.

History of Comcast Business Comcast Business is the division of the Comcast Corporation which handles the sales, marketing, and delivery of Comcast services such as Internet, phone, and Ethernet to small, medium, and large businesses. In 2012, Comcast Business grew by 34%, the fastest growth of any of Comcast's products, reaching $2.4 billion in revenue Comcast was founded in 1963 in Tupelo, Mississippi, and the Business Services division was added in 2006, initially serving businesses with 20 employees or less. By 2010, the company's investment in "massive amounts of fiber" for its cable television operations enabled it to include medium sized businesses of 20 to 250 employees.By February 2011, Comcast Business began its rollout of metro Ethernet for large businesses,and in March 2011, Comcast Business launched its business telephone service called Comcast Business Class Trunk Service, and completed its initial rollout of metro Ethernet in May 2011, providing services for large businesses to 25 markets. Comcast Business expanded market presence throughout 2011, and continues to expand as of 2013. By 2012, the Business Services division had the highest growth rate of any of Comcast's services. The division's revenue has increased every year since 2006, when the division's earnings were $265 million. By 2013, Comcast Business had become the largest business-facing enterprise, by revenue, of all cable providers who provide services to businesses. Initially, Comcast Business was for businesses with 20 employees or less, such as florists, dry cleaners, and bakeries, but with continued expansion, Comcast Business is now able to serve medium sized businesses such as clinics,hotels and the hospitality industry, as well as large organizations such as the Boston Ballet, and sports arenas, including arenas for the Boston Celtics, the Boston Red Sox, the Denver Broncos, the Philadelphia Phillies, the Washington Nationals, the Oakland A's, and the Detroit Tigers. In February, 2014, Comcast Business was recognized as the fastest growing company based on 2013 carrier Ethernet provisions.
Comcast ought to be broken up, under U.S. Anti-trust regulatory law.

In light of its recent buyout of time-warner cable company, I believe that Comcast ought to be split apart into smaller companies for the good of the free market.My Standard BoilerplateRulesRound 1- Acceptance, Historical Background, and Definitions only.Round 2- Constructive Arguments only.Round 3- Free choice.Round 4- Rebuttals/Defences only. Round 5- Closing Remarks. No new rebuttals/defences/responses/arguments may be made in this round. You may, however, make fresh cross examinations of points, using your own points.Any rule violation constitutes an immediate loss of conduct points.Forfeiting more than 1 round constitutes a full 7 point loss. The BOP is shared.Please, do not accept this challenge if you merely plan to challenge the premise of this debate.I will argue that Comcast has become too large as a company, and should be broken up into two or more smaller companies of equal size in order to encourage competition in the free market.Con must argue that Comcast has not become too large as a company, and should not be split up by U.S. regulatory anti-trust law.
Comcast ought to be broken up, under U.S. Anti-trust regulatory law.

Rebuttals"Sub-point A.1Politic"I don't see how this in any way clashes with the resolution, or my argument. My opponent simply states that, "the political climate of south korea improves their internet connections." Well I'm saying we should change our political climate in order to improve our internet connection."Sub point A.2Open versus closed networks"Again, this point in no way clashes with the resolution."sub-point A.3Population density"I'm not understanding Cons point here. His argument so far fails to clash with the resolution. It instead only explains the elements of south korea that lends itsself to high speed connection. THough I did reference south korea, this debate is about an American company. Comcast."Main point B"Comcast is the best of all evils. I have shown that other countries have more competitive cable markets, which results in better service. Comcast is simply the best of a terrible selection of companies and services."Main C"My evidence that it is a monopoly? Well if you read my argument you may see that. If my opponent understood how exactly US anti-trust laws worked, he might understand my argument. You don't break up a business once it is at 100% market share. You break it up well before that. Furthermore, there are regions of the US that are monopolized. Seattle, Atlanta, and Chicago are some, just to name a few. "Susan Crawford, former broadband advisor to President Obama, stated “The major cable providers in this country do not compete with one another. The operators clustered all cable into regional monopolies during the summer of 1997.” They deliberately do not trespass on each other's turf. "(1)SummaryMy opponents argument does not clash with the resolution, for the most part. What few parts do clash are unabsed opinions that I have proved here to be false.Sources1. http://crosscut.com...;
Comcast ought to be broken up, under U.S. Anti-trust regulatory law.

Pros CaseA) Comcast Controls a Massive Market ShareWith the coming buyout of Time-Warner Cable, Comcast will soon control around 30% of the national market share for cable television (1). The TWC deal is a merger of the largest and second largest cable providers in the country. This is a clear violation of federal anti-trust laws, such as the Sherman Act. B) Comcast has an even larger market share in local economies.Although the Sherman Act is a federal law, it still applies to Comcast on the local level. Many areas of the united states are what is called a "Comcast Monopoly Zone" meaning that Comcast is the only ISP in the area. In these areas, the Market Share of Comcast isn't just 30%, or even 80%. It's 100%. Total monopolization. This is obviously contrary to capitalist ideals. In non-infrastructure businesses, local dominance is not a problem. The global economy insures competition right? Or at least, the national economy does, right? Not in the case of ISPs and Cable companies. If you're living in a Comcast Monopoly Zone, you may realize that you want to give your business to a Korean ISP (That average internet speeds thousands of times faster) but you simply cannot because the infrastructure just simply isn't there. Your only option is Comcast. Comcast will charge you more, and give you less.C) Comcast Stifles Competition.With such a strong control over the market, Comcast is absolutely stifling competition. In metropolitan areas, maximum connection speeds average 2 mb per second (two Megabits). This is also alongside a very austere bandwidth. In South Korea (where there are numerous ISPs and savage competition) the average internet connection speed is 2.2 gb per second (2.2 Gigabits) that is over 1000x faster. The reason why Comcast doesn't provide speeds this fast? Why should they? All that will do is cost them more money, without any real benefit, because everyone in their areas are already 100% dependent upon them for internet service. Comcast can up their price all they like (within reason) without providing any real significant upgrades to your service, because you simply have no where to go. Sources1. http://dealbook.nytimes.com...
The prophecy in Isaiah 53 is Israel; not the Messiah.

==Resolution==The prophecy concerning Isaiah 53 is one of the most debated chapters in the Bible. Pro will affirm that the chapter is talking about the Israeli nation as a whole and not Jesus. Con, on the other hand, will affirm that it is talking about the messiah, Jesus. ==Introduction==The chapter of Isaiah 53 says the following: 1. Who would have believed our report, and to whom was the arm of the Lord revealed? א. 2. And he came up like a sapling before it, and like a root from dry ground, he had neither form nor comeliness; and we saw him that he had no appearance. Now shall we desire him? ב. 3. Despised and rejected by men, a man of pains and accustomed to illness, and as one who hides his face from us, despised and we held him of no account. ג. 4. Indeed, he bore our illnesses, and our pains-he carried them, yet we accounted him as plagued, smitten by God and oppressed. ד. 5. But he was pained because of our transgressions, crushed because of our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his wound we were healed. ה. 6. We all went astray like sheep, we have turned, each one on his way, and the Lord accepted his prayers for the iniquity of all of us. ו. 7. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he would not open his mouth; like a lamb to the slaughter he would be brought, and like a ewe that is mute before her shearers, and he would not open his mouth. ז. 8. From imprisonment and from judgment he is taken, and his generation who shall tell? For he was cut off from the land of the living; because of the transgression of my people, a plague befell them. ח. 9. And he gave his grave to the wicked, and to the wealthy with his kinds of death, because he committed no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth. ט. 10. And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution, he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God's purpose shall prosper in his hand. י. 11. From the toil of his soul he would see, he would be satisfied; with his knowledge My servant would vindicate the just for many, and their iniquities he would bear. יא. 12. Therefore, I will allot him a portion in public, and with the strong he shall share plunder, because he poured out his soul to death, and with transgressors he was counted; and he bore the sin of many, and interceded for the transgressors.
God does not exist

God does not exist its quite simple. basic laws of physics. they are laws because they have been proven be 100% true 1 matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed in otherwords 0 does not equal 1 Some logic here since matter and energy cannot be created from nothign they must have always existed both exist in space so space has always existed. matter energy and space exist within time so time has always existed. The universe is made up of matter energy space and time. Ergo the idea of god is insane an all powerful entity that created a universe that always existed? to add to this god is said to be the same forever meaning he cannot be made of energy or matter as they constantly are changing. also he would have to exist outside of time which is impossible if somthing does not exist within time it doesnt exist. If you want to say he still does then let me yell you this Somthing that is not made of energy or matter and that does not exist in time CANNOT influence the universe in any way shape or form ergo god would not be all powerful ergo god doesnt exist.! probably a lot of typos seeing as i suck at typing so just ignore them
9spaceking is fairly hard to lose against

I would first like to rebut. 1. "Your number 7 clearly shows I have not prepared enough. It can be said from this that even my debate topics are weird and cannot be understood." My confusion has nothing to do with your preparation. Most, if not all people, do not prepare their topics beforehand. They simply debate what they have on their mind or they choose their topics from a long list of potential topics available in the Internet. The fact that Pro chose this topic, which has never been debated before in the years of existence of humanity, indicates the originality and creativity of Pro. This shows that Pro is able to come up with novel ideas and present them to others. 2. "I argue that extremely dumb debates are trolled and only have one possible side to win. Debates such as "this debate is stupid" is simply...stupid!" If the topic so severely biased, it is not debatable. As a result, although the topic may be accepted by others and may be present in this site, it is not a debate. Hence, Pro did not lose debating, he merely lost an argument. (See number 5 of my arguments in Round 2) 3. "It is hard to lose against 9spaceking"....this means if you debate against this user, you are more likely to win rather than lose. "Hard"--difficult to do, "lose"--get less points than 9spaceking." Thank you for your clarification. However, I am still confused. All your points lead up to the stance that 9spaceking is easy to win against. This means that I am to argue that it is harder to win against 9spaceking. I would try refraining from using negatives in the topics. 4. "In the previous round my opponent has reflected ALL my points" That is because of the confusion. I presented my arguments on the basis that I am arguing that Pro is not easy to win against the Pro as I mentioned in Round 2. 5. "As you can all see I am not prepared at all, I do not really support this position of opinion, and thus, I am easy to win against" But neither am I. I haven't and will not prepare for these kinds of debates. If Pro does not support his positions, I am curious as to why he instigated this debate. Also, if Pro does not support his positions, that means that Pro conceded. 6. "I do not really support this position of opinion, and thus, I am easy to win against" Oxford dictionary defines win as "be successful or victorious in (a contest or conflict)."[1] If Pro simply concedes, it is not successful nor victorious for Con. Therefore, Pro is NOT easy to win against; it is easy to gain points and elo. Now for my arguments. Opposition has to put in an effort to win against Pro. I, 9spaceking's opponent, am spending time reading and typing my responses. If I were to simply accept and never put forth a response, I will surly lose. This has been an interesting but confusion debate and I thank Pro, the instigator, for this debate. Vote Con! [1] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...
9spaceking is fairly hard to lose against

your number 7 clearly shows I have not prepared enough. It can be said from this that even my debate topics are weird and cannot be understood. I argue that extremely dumb debates are trolled and only have one possible side to win. Debates such as "this debate is stupid" is simply...stupid! "It is hard to lose against 9spaceking"....this means if you debate against this user, you are more likely to win rather than lose. "Hard"--difficult to do, "lose"--get less points than 9spaceking. I hope this clears it up. In the previous round my opponent has reflected ALL my points! Congratulations, I've run out of points. As you can all see I am not prepared at all, I do not really support this position of opinion, and thus, I am easy to win against. This debate shows a good example of any other debate I lost. In conclusion, it is hard to lose against 9spaceking--in other words, it's easy to win. Good debate.
9spaceking is fairly hard to lose against

What makes it easy to lose against me? I do not prepare for any of my debates, thus, I have to ab-lib along the way, likely making many grammatical errors along the way. I just scan over my response before I post it. Sometimes I forget to post things, and run out of rounds to post whatever I posted. You have made my point: I tried to support my position, but I failed in round one, because my grammar was incorrect and worded in a run-on sentence. Here, let me try fixing that sentence: I argue it is fairly hard to lose a debate against me. I have only won debates my opponents forfeited. Because of my one-sided topics that are usually way too biased, all my opponent has to do is minimum to no research at all. I even make up and accept extremely dumb debate topics, such as "This Debate is Stupid", "torture is cool", and "The age of the earth is over 10,000 years old" (seriously, I disagree with that.) As you can all see, I am very hard to lose against.
ban islam

The problem with the motion is that people in America have a right to freedom of religion. To pick out one religion and decide it should be banned is blatant discrimination. Furthermore there are millions of practicing Islamics that are very peaceful and do not bother anyone. America is supposed to be the land of the free and the motion presented here is a direct contradiction to freedom. That being said I have to admit that radical Islamics are by far the most dangerous type of religious fanatics in modern history. There have been polls taken around the world that show their are many millions of radicals in other countries that have a deep hatred of everything that is the west. Pro has stated that "muslims that dont follow the Koran are not terrorists" but provides no statistics or any type of supporting evidence what so ever. Despite my opponents lack of evidence the motion does seem appealing to many Americans given recent events. Even I have considered that perhaps it would be safer for everyone should Islam be banned. But we have to keep in mind the Muslims have lived in peace here for many years without any incidents to cause concern. It was only after 911 that fears of radicals became common place. While I am against an outright ban on Islam I will say that America needs to stop any more from entering the country. FBI Director Comey has went before Congress and openly declared that vetting all the refugees is simply not possible. ISIS could very well infiltrate them and come to American soil. We have to accept the people that are already here but that does not mean we can't stop anymore from entering. This way Islam is not banned and we make it much more difficult for ISIS or any other terrorist group to enter the country.
Rap battle!!!

This will blow your MIND! MCDONALDS THE RAP Sittin' on the couch with the morning post With a cold cup of coffee and some boring toast Thinkin' I'm-a change it up, yeah that's always fun What you reckon, Remz? A McDonald's run So we hit the couch cushions, need some dollars, friend Yo, I found a five. Man, that's Canadian. How 'bout a loonie? A twonie? A spoon or The Goonies? Oh, it's 10:25. Dude, you gotta move, G. Got the cash, got the car, got the pedal to the floor Speed limit's 25, but I'm doing 34 Going drive-thru style, man it's fast express You can call it trans fat, I call it happiness Roll up to the teller fella with a minute to spare Frenchy with a headset, "can I take your order?" A McGriddle with a little sweet and sour there, son A McMuffin, then be stuffin' muffins up in my trunk Then a tray or two of hotcakes, man I can't decide, uh... All's I know is hit them things with Aunt Jemimah How 'bout an egg fajita for some Texas flavor No drama but my momma wants a breakfast bagel Don't forget my #4, or there'll be hell to spend And I want them eggs poached like an elephant Frenchy back on the line, "is that all your order?" No it ain't, fool, I want a Coca-Cola! Get my cup of Coke and I'm-a start a riot Cuz on the cup lid, dude depressed the "diet" Check his shirt tag, and I catch the name Brian, I ain't tryin' to drink aspartame Sittin' on the couch, 'bout an hour later Pickin' at a pouch of some Now n' Laters Hardly starving, man, but I find a hunch Start the car up fast because it's time for lunch It just takes two bucks and I get what I need Two beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese "Supersize Me" said he's had enough of it But how is it bad for my heart if I'm in love with it? If you never had McDonald's, heck, well dude you should It's a party, like a Hardee's, except the food is good Just don't get a large #2, I plead with you friend Cuz it'll be a large #2 when you see it again Enter the store, first you holla, then you Pick a couple items off the dollar menu Four hot McNuggets, dessert with custard Mix the sweet n' sour with a squirt of mustard. A Big Mac attack, you can max the lettuce Paying ain't a pain, they take cash or credit Want a water? You can pay up there for spring Or get the free Grimace cup--how embarassing They say, "you're playing with a cardiac arrest, my boy" Only thing bad for my heart's when they forget my toy Now I'm-a have a milkshake, but before you rant It's made of shamrocks--now that's a plant People say it's bad, but I don't believe them McDonald's is peace--just ask Tom Friedman Momma catch me with a 'zine, and she's screaming "stop! Don't you worry, Mom, it's just my man Ray Kroc http://www.youtube.com...