BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
in a democratic society felons ought to retain the right to vote

First, i would like to clarify that my whole rebuttal addresses retribution which shows that my opponent has not payed attention to my rebuttals. So this shows how his V and VC fail. my opponent's second point is irrelevant because felons have obviously proven to affect other's lives, that is why society cares to punish them. my opponent's third point is contridictory to his idea of punishment because he claims the resolution demeans the rule of law, so nothing for my opponent stands, and all my claims against his case stands. my opponent's final point is that voting is a privelige, however that makes voting obsolete. What if i told you that your "priviledge" to represent yourself is taken away. Its more than a priviledge, it is a way of our life. If we let society solely decide our fate, that would NOT be democracy, that is a dictator ship. NOw, my opponent fails to realize that my case, V, VC, and contentions all stand so his frame work is FLAWED. I have proven all his contentions to be false in the previous rounds, and my voting issues is the final thing i shud clarify. my opponent tries to hide the fact that he/she puts greater intristi value in others; which is the neg's. only argument. So, with all of these points, I urge you to vote Aff :) --- I would like to apologize if I seemed demeaning in this debate, I really mean't to be firm, rather than mean. Which is 1 reason I dislike typing what I am saying. So I thank the Instigator for the debate ---
in a democratic society felons ought to retain the right to vote

Ill be going over extensions/clarifications leading into voters First my v and vc the idea of punishment as it is supported through retribution as been remained touch less. My opponent fails to address my link to all crimes being the act of stealing and deprivation and that how in a democratic society one needs to value retribution that states in addition to regular sentencing we need deprive or steal the right to vote from the criminals while still allowing them the ability to take part in other means of society. My second point is that of the jury where if you refer to my initial statement felons don't even have the permission to serve on jury showing that they don't have the privilege or worthiness to vote for the innocence or guilt of one individual. So why should they be able to determine the lives of potential millions if their not even allowed to determine one My next point is that of my universalizability claim. The resolution is to circumstantial and sense such is true it demeans the rule of law or taught of justice, in that its inconsistent. Next my claim of being mentally incompetent and that their are prerequisites still stands and need be considered. For essentially I'm proving that voting is a PRIVELEGE not a right something my opponent fails to understand. As for my opponents voting issues, they are in their entirety flawed for the opposition doesn't lead to slavery that's making an inferential and absurd link. More felonies aren't going to increase as a by product for the neg in that if such was true then my opponents entire claim of rehabilitation woulndt stand, but sense there is not a clear distinction or advocacy between the two contradictory statements you must value neither. POint 3 I value victims rights by upholding my vc something the affirmative lacks. Heroes cant be felons for heroes would never deface the law. And finally my opponents framework clearly doesn't stand. Which is why you must look to my voting issues Neg wins because V and VC better uphold idea of democracy and better support opponents claim of equality through retribution natural rights clearly are not of concern for we are debating as proved privileges Con 1 of trustworthiness still stands Con 2 of consistency is still paramount for its circumstantial reasoning con3 of requirements still stands in that that distinguishes between rights and privileges and most importantly my resolution interpretation of the definitions still stand for they went uncontested proving that retribution is A VALID AND DEMOCRACTIC VALUE For such reasons I urge an opposition
Abortion

Note: My firs round was not meant to be taken literally, I just thought it did a fairly good job of summing up my point. A fetus in the first few months is not mentally developed, and to abort it is the equivalent of not getting pregnant in the first place. I am not debating at what point it is developed; it is a gray area. The last two months is not okay to abort, first three months it is. The middle is fairly circumstantial. I am arguing for the right to have an abortion, not whether it is ok to abort a seven month developed child. This post was more of an introductory round, not a main argument.
Dance (Ballet) is a sport

For my final statement: I do believe dance is a sport. Con has pointed out, that yes, I did not make myself clear in my title. But I tried to clear things up in one one of my rebuttals to explain I meant competitive dancing. To further my belief, dance is a sport, because it does use physical exertion and much skill. I have been doing dance for nine years and has experienced what training and criteria that goes into it. Sorry for any confusion and hope in the future to debate with you again.
Dance (Ballet) is a sport

Alrighty let's talk about ballet again. You seem to think that ballet is a sport because, 1. Football players (recognized athletes) sometimes use classical ballet to help with balance, strength, jumping?, to build muscle? the last two go along with strength. 2.It uses all the muscles in the human body. First off it doesn't matter if football players practice by taking ballet. This doesn't add anything to your case. Soccer players practice by juggling. http://www.soccertrainingsolutions.com... It doesn't make juggling a specific sport the same way dancing as a whole is not a sport. In fact in this case it makes ballet a practice exercise. Ballet specifically does not use all the muscles in the body. And mainly focuses on the core and legs. http://www.livestrong.com... You say going to a club to dance is not what you were talking about, however you refer only to dance is this and dance is that. Are you talking about ballet than? If so why is it in brackets? Let us not make this too complicated. I await your response.
Dance (Ballet) is a sport

Dance in overall is both, an art and a sport. Dance takes a level of skill and work. Going to a club to dance, is not what I am talking about. http://www.mibba.com... Ballet is a great example of a type of dance that is a sport. In fact, professional football players have to take classical ballet to help with a)balance b) strength c) jumping d) to build muscle. Also dance is known for using almost all the muscles in the human body. http://www.artsalive.ca... I am glad to hear you look forward to my response and I also am looking forward to yours.
Dance (Ballet) is a sport

First you must prove that an art is compatible with a sport. We both agree dancing is an art for sure. However can it be considered a sport as well? Competitive dancing can be considered a sport however plain dancing for fun or art cannot. Since your debate title does not have the word competitive and instead ballet I will show you the difference. Competitive dancing: a sport in which competitors perform dances of different genres, based on requirements of a competition. http://www.definition-of.com... Ballet: a type of dancing where carefully organized movements tell a story or express an idea, or a theater work that uses this type of dancing. http://dictionary.cambridge.org... The specific kind of dance in your title would not be considered a sport by the definitions layed out. Not all dance could be considered a sport therefore dance in the whole is not a sport. I look forward to your response.
Dance (Ballet) is a sport

SO your argument is based around this statement. "Because sports and ballet have similarities, ballet should be considered a sport." This kind of reasoning has problems. It is like saying, since apples and potatoes are alike and have similarities they should both be considered fruits. As you can see this presents a problem. I will now provide definitions since I did not see any posted. Dance: to perform (a particular type of dance) http://www.merriam-webster.com... Ballet: an artistic dance form performed to music using precise and highly formalized set steps and gestures. https://www.google.ca... Sport: an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment. https://www.google.ca... Now that we have our definitions let us go to work. The definition of sport says a sport involves physical exertion, (by that alone a whole world of activities can be considered sports) Skill, (Another world of activities) which a team or individual compete agaanst one another for entertainment. If this debate centered around competitive dancing this debate would have been more appropriate and you would have had a higher chance of wining. However by definition ballet is an art. I sing a lot for competition . It requires skill and exertion at times. However it is an art. Not a sport. Dancing falls in the art category by definition. Art:the various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance. https://www.google.ca... Therefore dancing is a art. The same as singing, painting and sculpturing. I await your rebuttal.
God

First of all, you chose the con side, you should be arguing against God's existence. I would like to instigate the burden of proof. The burden of proof is the idea that one who is making a claim must prove the claim to be true, rather than the opposition to prove this as false. As you are making the claim that a God exists, you must provide evidence that this is so. You have only made a claim, so I haven't much to talk about. In place of refuting your arguments I will rebut those of others. Some people who believe in God argue that everything has a cause and God is the 'cause' of the universe. This however is flawed reasoning, If everything has a cause, then what is the cause of God? If God can cause himself why can't the universe cause itself. God causing himself is impossible anyways. God didn't exist when he created himself so how did he create himself? They also argue that somehow life started and, since science has no explanation for this, God must exist. This is flawed reasoning. If something is currently inexplicable, you still may not assert that it must be supernatural. Not being to explain something does NOT mean that the cause is supernatural.
According to the Bible, the value of pi is only known to one digit.

Now, I would like to take this opportunity to teach my opponent and all voters who are unaware of this concept about significant figures, also known as sig figs. . http://www.fordhamprep.org... Significant figures are used to approximate measurements so that they are not horribly incorrect. For example, if you had one string length measured to exactly a centimeter long and another string measured to a length of approximately a kilometer, maybe more, maybe less, then instead of saying that their combined length is 1000.01 km, you would say that their combined length is 1000 km, because the longer piece's length is only approximated, and a result cannot be more precise than the least precise measurement used. For multiplication, the number of sig figs in the solution is equal to the minimum of the sig figs in the two numbers multiplied together. For example, let's take a largely approximated measure of thirty cubits (one significant figure) as the circumference of a vessel. Let's also take pi. Pi's value could be considered 3, 3.14, 3.1415, 3.14159265, whatever. 30 / 3 = 10 (1 sig fig) 30 / 3.14 = 9.55 (3 sig figs) -> 10 (1 sig fig) 30 / 3.1415 = 9.5500 (4 sig figs) = 10 (1 sig fig) And so on. .. The point is, the known value of pi at the time of the writing of I Kings cannot be determined from the circumference and calculated diameter. (It could be the diameter and calculated circumference, but that's irrelevant. ) All that we can discover is that pi is approximately three, which is it. They might have known pi to one digit, they might have known pi to three digits, we don't know. Therefore, the resolution is negated. Vote CON. Again, I would like to thank bigtree for this debate. Good luck in future debates!
According to the Bible, the value of pi is only known to one digit.

Thanks mongeese for a good argument. Alright then. I'll try my best! According to the Bible, in [I Kings 7:23], the value of pi is 3. It says that Solomon's temple is "ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, . . . and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about". Simple mathematics follow: Since in a circle circumference (the distance around a circle) is equal to the diameter (the distance across a circle) times the value of pi, we can use substitution to solve for the Bible's pi. C=(pi)*D, where C=Circumference and D=Diameter Now we sub in values: (30 cubits)=(pi)*(10 cubits) and therefore, pi=(30 cubits)/(10 cubits) pi=30/10 pi=3 And voila! pi is equivalent to 3 according to the bible!
According to the Bible, the value of pi is only known to one digit.

Now, my opponent makes an attempt to "void" the resolution. However, a "voided" resolution would not be considered affirmed, but rather, negated. Therefore, this introduction of a potential voiding cannot help my opponent's case. However, I don't actually want the resolution to be void. I want to actually debate. The Bible was written by many authors, yes. However, each author wrote a specific portion of the Bible, and therefore, a specific text of the Bible from which pi could possibly be extrapolated would be written by one Christian author. In effect, my opponent can choose any of multiple authors. I now hope to see an argument that can affirm the resolution, rather than void it.
According to the Bible, the value of pi is only known to one digit.

I thank mongeese for this debate. I would like to start by stating that the Bible was not written by a single person. There were multiple authors who wrote it. [1] If we accept mongeese's terms, that means that "According to the Christian holy text, the value of the ratio of a circle's diameter to its circumference is only known to one digit". By "only known to one digit," mongeese means that the Bible shows that *the Christian author* evidently only knew pi to one digit, 3. "The Christian author" seems to be referring to a singular person who wrote the bible, judging by the use of the singular word "author". That being said, this resolution is impossible considering there are many authors and I do not know to which author the resolution is referring. Therefore, the resolution is void. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org...
According to the Bible, the value of pi is only known to one digit.

The Bible is the Christian holy text. Pi is the ratio of a circle's diameter to its circumference. By "only known to one digit," I mean that the Bible shows that the Christian author evidently only knew pi to one digit, 3. My opponent will have the burden of proof to explain where the evidence exists to affirm the resolution, and how it does so. Good luck to my future opponent.
According to the Bible, the value of pi is only known to one digit.

I am typing this on an iPod (sadly). I will have to keep it short. Anyways, if my opponent knows about significant digits (let's call them sig figs),he should know that sig figs are measured by the number of sig figs in the source numbers,in this case 10 and 30. All non-zero numbers and trailing zeros are counted as sig figs. That means that the value of pi should also have 2 digits. So, pi should be 3.1 at least, if sig figs are to be counted. My source for all info about sig figs is . http://en.wikipedia.org...
95% of active men members on DDO would make terrible husbands if they ever got married

Let me tell you what Pro’s last round sounded like to me. “I’m imabench, self-proclaimed king of the trolls, and so I always get to be the one that wins! So stop winning! Waaaaaaa!” Why imabench thinks he can invade serious realms with trolling, but seriousness cannot invade his realm is fascinating. Tell me more about how wrong it is for me to troll the trolls. [1] My opponent has only managed to provide evidence that I am a douchebag. Consider his very next point, “When was the last time you ever saw a girl go with the average looking smart guy and not the gorgeous looking douchbaggy idiot?” My opponent accuses me of douchebaggery, but then correlates douchebaggery with success with women. Thanks! As it happens, women do like confident smartass guys who (gently) razz on them both to make them laugh and to establish dominance. If your preferred term for this is “douchebag” – cool, I’ll take it! The “gorgeous” part is helpful but not necessary. You can be as ugly as you want, if you’re cool enough. Consider this homely nobody who is hooked up with Emma Rossum. Notice them laughing and smiling, an important part of his game. [2] [3] At any rate, Pro is committing two fallacies which invalidate his argument. First, ad hominem. However annoying he or anyone else thinks I may be, this does not do damage to any of my arguments. Second, hasty generalization. I think this is pretty evident that he doesn’t know all active DDO members well enough to proclaim we’re almost all bad husbands. He hasn’t seen us in bed (aside from a few alleged stalking incidents). Additionally, Pro claims definitions as being binding without both parties agreeing to them. I only agreed to debate the resolution. What it takes to achieve marital bliss is still open to contention, and so contend I did. Vote Con! 1) http://cdn.meme.li... 2) http://ic.pics.livejournal.com... 3) http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com...
95% of active men members on DDO would make terrible husbands if they ever got married

- Wording of the Resolution:"He did not resolve at least 95%. He did not resolve approximately 95%. He did not resolve the majority of DDO members… He resolved 95% of DDO members will make terrible husbands. What this means for voters is that it is only in the case that he is able to demonstrate the probability is equal to 95% that he has upheld his BoP. 96% just won’t do, nor will 94%, nor 99%. It has to be 95% for a Pro win."^ You see this? You see this???? This is EXACTLY what im talking about!You see how douchebaggy the con made his argument just so that he can do everything in his power to win it even though its a completely minor debate? This is clear evidence that most guys on DDO would make terrible husbands should they ever marry. Literally the 95% thing was a figure of speech yet con jumped on it and abused the hell out of it JUST to improve his arguments.... That alone shows that my arguments have merit.... - Most guys on DDO dont do well with the ladies" But over time, intelligence skews attractiveness dramatically in our favor"Hey voters. When was the last time you ever saw a girl go with the average looking smart guy and not the gorgeous looking douchbaggy idiot? Exactly. This is an unsupported claim that has no scientific backing or any evidence implying it is true. - To be in a successful marriage, the guy has to let the woman be right even when shes not."Pro incorrectly frames the conditions of successful marriage. Here is what one popular website defined as some of the tips to a successful marriage"Its my debate and I defined the conditions of a successful marriage as letting the woman be right even when shes not. Therefore your argument is completely invalid, especially since you actually asked the internet for tips to having a successful marriage, which indicates that you dont know how to have a successful marriage, like most other guys on DDO. =============================================================The simple fact is that guys will do anything to win an argument even if its minor, just look at how hard con is trying to win! Abusing the hell out of the wording of the resolution? Redefining conditions after they had already been defined? Actually giving sources in a troll debate???? All of cons effort he put into his arguments are evidence that men on DDO are incapable of letting others be right even when they are not, which is a staple of a successful marriage. Therefore roughly all male members on DDO would make terrible husbands should they ever get married since almost everyone on DDO is stubborn as hell and will fight to the end of the Earth to win a minor argument rather than just let it go, especially when they think they are right.
95% of active men members on DDO would make terrible husbands if they ever got married

I first want to make a note the profound ambitiousness of my opponent’s resolution. He did not resolve at least 95%. He did not resolve approximately 95%. He did not resolve the majority of DDO members… He resolved 95% of DDO members will make terrible husbands. What this means for voters is that it is only in the case that he is able to demonstrate the probability is equal to 95% that he has upheld his BoP. 96% just won’t do, nor will 94%, nor 99%. It has to be 95% for a Pro win. 1) Most guys on DDO are nerds Okay, on this point you’re right, and I’m wrong, honey. 2) Most guys on DDO don’t do well with the ladies Given point 1, this seems highly unlikely for the long run. Many DDO members are in their teens, and during that time, it is true that nerds may sometimes end up inconveniently stuffed a locker. But over time, intelligence skews attractiveness dramatically in our favor. Many pickup artists were once nerds. After learning female psychology, behavioral conditioning, and other techniques, these men have learned how to make themselves nearly irresistible to almost any woman they choose. One such man, Neil Strauss (aka Style) wrote a book called The Game which describes his experiences and transformation. He has since trained countless others. [1] 3) To be in a successful marriage, the guy has to let the woman be right even when shes not. Pro incorrectly frames the conditions of successful marriage. Here is what one popular website defined as some of the tips to a successful marriage: [2] Speak Up. In a healthy relationship, if something is bothering you, it’s best to talk about it instead of holding it in. Respect Your Partner. Your partner's wishes and feelings have value. Let your significant other know you are making an effort to keep their ideas in mind. Mutual respect is essential in maintaining healthy relationships. Compromise. Disagreements are a natural part of healthy relationships, but it’s important that you find a way to compromise if you disagree on something. Try to solve conflicts in a fair and rational way. Be Supportive. Offer reassurance and encouragement to your partner. Also, let your partner know when you need their support. Healthy relationships are about building each other up, not putting each other down. Respect Each Other’s Privacy. Just because you’re in a relationship, doesn’t mean you have to share everything and constantly be together. Healthy relationships require space. For these reasons, it seems likely that DDO experience could in fact promote males to be more articulate, more respectful, more interesting, and all around better husbands than the average male later in life. But the important thing for voters to notice is that there has been no good reason to think they’d be any worse, and especially not at the 95% my opponent needs it to be. 1) http://www.youtube.com... 2) http://www.loveisrespect.org...