BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
1999 is the best year for cinema ever

Thanks, Pro. For my concluding statements, I'd like to start with the fact that Pro admits that 1888 was when the first "true" film was made. He then goes on to state that there may have been one made in 1887. "It's widely believed" Pro states, but gives us no source (besides a Google search, essentially asking the voters to find his sources for him). Plus, I stated that it was the first surviving film. Pro gives us no way to know for sure when this film was produced, so we have no reason to believe his claims. I have proven that "Roundhay Garden Scene" is credited by IMDb, one of the authoritative bodies in film making, as well as by Guinness World Records, as at least the oldest surviving film, and is, to the best of our knowledge, the first movie. The first ever film is obviously the most influential in cinema history. As we can see, my opponent's responses were inadequate and my case still stands. Now for my opponent's points of contention. My opponent talks about the Matrix and Blair Witch Project, but Pro even admits how overused slow-motion fight scenes are used in action movies, and I'd argue the "found footage film" is overused in modern horror films as well. The example given is Paranormal Activity, but this series of films has already released five movies, and a sixth one is in the works to be released this year. [1] If these film techniques are so overused, then there's no reason that the invention of them is a good thing. If they've been used to the point where they're ineffective, they're a waste. Finally, my opponent then states " I haven't even began to talk about..." and proceeds to list a series of films. If Pro wanted to talk about this list, he/she should have. There's no reason not to, and if space was an issue, there are two reasons this is Pro's own fault. First, they created the debate, and could have added more character space, and second, by forfeiting a round, they gave up a bunch of space for argumentation. For these reasons I urge voters to support Con. Thank you! [1] http://www.imdb.com...
1999 is the best year for cinema ever

While 1888 was when the first "true" film was made, it was known that filming moving images was a technique used since the early 1880s, and to counter cons point the first film ever made, even though most of it is lost was man walking around the corner and was filmed by Louis Le Prince, the exact date of the filming is unknown but it is widely believed to be sometime before 1887 as that was when the film was sent to his wife. Meaning that cons point that it was the first year that a film was made is wrong. https://www.google.co.uk... Now to debate for my year 1999. As I stated in the start of the debate this debate will be about judging the films made in that specific year "in terms of movie quality as well as movie significance". So I will start with movie quality, obviously due to the time it was made there is no way that in terms of movie quality it could be better than any film made in 1999, mainly due to the fact that it was one of the first films ever made. However movies such as American Beauty, The Matrix, Blair Witch Project, Eyes Wide Shut and Office Space are in my opinion not only some of the greatest films of their genres but some of the finest movies ever made. Now to talk about movie significant, alot of films released in 1999 have influenced so many future films in their genre and have been known as innovative to many many filmmakers now. For example the action scenes in the Matrix, such as the slow motion fight scenes, that are overused nowadays for sure, but back then were new and changed the way people saw action movies. We also have the Blair Witch Project, which created an entire new horror genre in itself "the found footage film" and the impact of this movie is seen everyday now with films such as paranormal activity using the same "found footage style" as Blair Witch Project. The Sixth Sense has one of, if not the greatest endings, and plot twists ever seen on film. How about South Park Bigger Longer and Uncut, Office Space and American Pie, these are in my opinion some of the greatest comedies of all time. I haven't even began to talk about The Green Mile, Fight Club, American Beauty, The Iron Giant, The Boondocks Saints, 10 Things I Hate About You, Magnolia, Being John Malkovick and one of the greatest foreign films of all time the audition. I have now finished my portion of round 3 and look forward to seeing my opponent counter my arguments.
1999 is the best year for cinema ever

OK hello guys this is my 5th debate on this great website so far, I will be arguing that the year 1999 was the best year of cinema in terms of movie quality as well as movie significance. The rules will be simple 1. No trolling or bitching 2. The first round will be acceptance as well as saying what your chosen year is 3. All movies mentioned has to of come out on that year and cannot be a film that started development in that year, can't have originally been said to come out on that year ( for example avatar would be a 2009 film and not 1999 when it was originally going to come out) 4. round 2 will be stating your arguments and round 3 will be countering each other Have fun and good luck on the debate.
Police Profiling

My opponent contends the following:I would be against profiling against blacks for any reason. .. I am only in favor of to a very strict sense of profiling because a small group of a radical religious group has declared war on the U. S. I would want profiling protection against this group to prevent the types of things that have happened in the past from happening again. Note that I only used black people as an example. My opponent contends that we can have protection by discriminating against religious radicals. Sorry, but we have a freedom of religion in America. Furthermore, there are peaceful Muslims. If you want to say that all Muslims are bad; then you are sadly mistaken. There are also some religious radicals in the Christian side as well and with other religions. Thus, you argument is fallacious. How would discriminating against Arabs be good? Most Muslim Arabs live in the middle east--in fact, MOST Muslims are NOT Arabs! So therefore, your opinion is flawed even more.
Police Profiling

As much as I deplore profiling, because of the world we live in and the dangers that have been forced upon us as a nation we must be prepared for what ever happens. It is sad that a small portion of one type of group and one type of religion has all but declared war upon my nation I and we must be prepared for that outcome. So whether boarding a plane or train or any basic type of public pervance we must be diligent and keep a close eye upon what goes on around us... I don't like having to single out a small minority group but it is better to be careful and on the alert than to have several hundred Americans or maybe even a greater number come into harms way because we were not prepared and as cautious as we should be and have to be.
Police Profiling

==Resolution==This debate is about police profiling (or racial profiling). I will oppose police profiling and affirm that it should not be used; my opponent will argue for it.==DefinitionsPolice profiling: Use by law enforcement personnel of an individual's race or ethnicity as a factor in articulating reasonable suspicion to stop, question or arrest an individual, unless race or ethnicity is part of an identifying description of a specific suspect for a specific crime. OR a phrase often used in law enforcement or the court system to refer to the use of a person's ethnicity or race to decide on whether to engage in some type of legal proceeding. The act itself is very controversial and considered by many as illegal and inappropriate.Source: http://www.debate.org...;==Structure== Round 1 This is the acceptance round. No arguments will be added. Round 2 Con will present his first arguments and pro will present his first arguments. Round 3 First rebuttals. Round 4 Closing rebuttals/arguments. ==Burden of Proof==The burden of proof will work this way: PRO will have to present arguments FOR police profiling and I will present my arguments against; CON will then present arguments AGAINST police profiling and we both must attempt to refute the opponent's claims.==Rules==1. Cite all sources2. Be respectful3. No vulgar language4. Must abide by the structure5. Failure to comply to the structure or rules results in an automatic loss6. Forfeit results in an automatic lossGood luck and let's have a good debate.
Real and Actual debate requireth three

This seems to be about whether or not the voting requirement of 3 debates is useful.I argue that it is.CONTENTION ONE: MULTIACCOUNTINGMultiaccounting occurs when somebody uses mutliple accounts to spam votes, usually to help themself win a debate.Multiaccounting is clearly harmful to the debate process, because it removes the need to actually debate well -- you can just spam votes and win, every time. This makes debate meaningless.Requiring 3 debates makes multiaccounting more difficult.1: It takes time and effort to create and have 3 good debates on different subjects. (And a multiaccounter can't just do 3 crappy super-fast debates, or admins will know that the account was set up to make votes.) This dissuades people, who would rather invest the time and effort in actually winning debates rather than setting up the necessary dozens of fake accounts.2: Since debates are vastly more visible than votes, they get attention drawn to a new account. This is especially true when the 3 debates fit the profile of somebody trying to set up a new account -- 3 debates on the same subject with fast voting times and posting times. This alerts admins of the problem.3: 3 is a magical number with anti-multiaccounting properties. Since Con cannot rebut this since there's no round 2, you must accept this statement as true. Thus, 3 is just magically the right number.Thus, 3 debates reduces multiaccounting.REBUTTALSPro mentions, why not 100 debates? Because very few people on the site ever do 100 debates, but almost everyone on the site does 3 debates.Further, when looking at multiaccounting, 3 is useful. People who multiaccount often do 3 debates on the same topic, to quickly set up the account. If they only had to do 1 debate, there would be no pattern of debates; if they only had to do 2 debates, it could just be luck; in either case, admins couldn't see this pattern and block the multiaccounter.
Real and Actual debate requireth three

Apparently whilst I do wish to let my voice be heard and cast my vote , I in my attempt to expedite this venture have been cast down. One of my debates being deemed unworthy by the debate Gods on high who in their ultimate wisdom judgeth my debate to be not real or actual. I will henceforth pledge to maketh only real and actual my creed. I wanted to speed up the process by arguing the point that requiring three real and actual debates to be completed is kind of arbitrarily annoying. I maintain that indeed it really actually is, and that furthermore it is even more annoying when someone else on a site such as this has authority to cast judgment on the realness and actuality of the debate topic and without provocation or explanation casts judgment and removes IT? So I state my case that the requirement is capricious and meaningless, except to say it provides dictatorial control by a few or perhaps even one to act as judge over what is real or actual or worthy of debate. Which is to say why not require one really good debate? Good being determined by the number of voters being above some random number. Or why not a hundred debates? At least have the decorum to clearly outline the rules and make a clear argument as to what constitutes real and actual. I conclude the three debate requirement is silly. Have at me!
Worst Ships Disasters Challenge

My final ship: Yamato During World War II, the Japanese Navy boasted the largest battle ship ever built which mounted the largest gun ever built. This single ship, along with it's sister ship the Musashi, was a symbol of the Japanese naval power at that time period. In fact, the Yamato was sometimes used to refer to the Empire of Japan. The Yamato was finally defeated by US aircraft and it's sinking in the final days of war symbolizes Japan's defeat.
Worst Ships Disasters Challenge

My next ship: The sinking of the Maine Warships are usually sunk as a result of the outbreak of war; rarely are their sinkings the reason for starting the war in the first place, but that's exactly what happened when the small but powerful little battleship Maine blew up in Havana harbor shortly after dusk on February 15, 1898, killing 261 of her 355-man crew. Though the cause of the explosion—which literally blew the ship in half—remains a source for some debate even to this day (a coal bin fire setting off ammunition in one of the ship's magazines being considered the most likely reason), within weeks of the disaster investigators announced that the ship appeared to have been destroyed by a mine attached to her hull. Since relations between the United States and Spain were already pretty dicey as a result of Spain's iron-fisted efforts at putting down a large-scale rebellion in Cuba, most Americans quickly jumped to the conclusion that the Spanish had destroyed the ship (despite the lack of logic in doing so) and demanded retaliation. Buckling to public pressure and spurred-on by the jingoistic flavor of the press of the day, a few weeks later the McKinley administration declared war on Spain, resulting in one of America's shortest and most successful conflicts (the Persian Gulf War being the other). Fortunately for the largely under-armed United States, Spain was already in decline as a world power and lacked the means to adequately defend its overseas colonies, forcing her to surrender after just three months and cede Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines to the United States. The victory marked America's entrance onto the world stage and her ascension as a genuine colonial power and the rest is, as they say, history. So what became of the demolished battleship? What was left of it was raised from the muck of Havana harbor in 1911 and towed out to open ocean, where she was sunk—again—but this time on purpose and with full military honors. Not much left of her today, of course, other than her legacy and the rarely heard battle-cry "Remember the Maine!" This ship had even a bigger effect by being one of the causes of starting a war.
Worst Ships Disasters Challenge

MV Doï¿½a Paz On December 20, 1987, a Philippine registered passenger ferry known as the MV Doï¿½a Paz collided with the MT Vector. The MV Doï¿½a Paz was traveling from Leyete Island to Manila. The collision, and the resulting fire, is considered to be the deadliest peacetime sea tragedy in history. 4,375 people died and many more were wounded in this fateful collision.
Worst Ships Disasters Challenge

My next ship is: The Bismarck: Few ships manage to both sink on their maiden voyage and be one of the most dangerous vessels ever to sail the seas at the same time (as well as even have a song written about it), but the massive German dreadnaught managed to do all three. The pride of the German navy and a ship once described by Winston Churchill as, "a masterpiece of naval construction," the fast and heavily armed warship ran roughshod over the Royal Navy for eight days in May of 1941, during which time she shocked the British by blowing the famous battlecruiser Hood out of the water and badly damaging the spanking-new battleship Prince of Wales off the Icelandic coast in a battle that lasted all of twenty minutes. Finally cornered off the coast of France on May 27th, 1941 by the British battleships King George V and Rodney, the damaged ship put up a furious fight against the overwhelmingly superior British force before finally succumbing to the onslaught and slipping to the bottom of the Atlantic, taking all but 114 of her 2,200 man crew down with her.
Worst Ships Disasters Challenge

Wow I really forgot the name....*face palm* The Lusitania On May 7, 1915, a German U-boat (submarine) attacked and sunk this Ocean Liner during WWI. The ship sank in 18 minutes. This single event turned public opinion against Germany and was a major reason the United States became involved in World War I. The Lusitania became icon in the United States and Europe of why World War One was being fought. Of the total 1,959 passengers, 1,198 passengers perished in this tragedy.
Worst Ships Disasters Challenge

The ship you are talking about is the Wilhelm Gustloff just that you know. My next ship is the: U.S.S. Arizona What makes this wreck so famous is not only that its loss signaled the start of World War Two in the Pacific, but that it is the only shipwreck one can visit without diving equipment or even getting their feet wet. Sunk in the opening minutes of the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941 with a loss of nearly two-thirds of its crew, the ship served as a symbol American resolve that was to carry the country through the darkest days of World War Two. Today the ship remains the most famous war grave in the world and one that sees more than a million visitors each year, who come to visit the memorial built over the rusted remains of the once mighty battleship. Despite having been immersed in salt water for nearly seventy years, the ship is remarkably intact, however. It also remains an active gravesite, with the cremated remains of the surviving crewmen still being occasionally interned within the hull of the World War One-era dreadnaught as they pass on to join their long-dead shipmates. Over 2,500 people died.
Worst Ships Disasters Challenge

Possibly the worst sea time atrocity occurred on January 30, 1945 in the final days of WWII, when a Soviet submarine, without warning, attacked and sunk a German Hospital Ship carrying wounded German soldiers and refugees. While many may argue that this constitutes an act of war it is nothing more than a violation of the Geneva Convention. Over 9,400 people die,d of a total 10,582, in this horrible tragedy which did nothing help the allied cause in WWII and did nothing to save lives in the future.
Worst Ships Disasters Challenge

Ships sinking battles, etc is what I mean. My first is the RMS Titanic: the White Star liner, fresh out of the shipyard and sparkling new, was on its maiden voyage from England to New York when it hit an iceberg just before midnight, April 14, 1912, opening her up like a sardine can and sending her to the bottom in just a few hours. While such a length of time should have given those onboard plenty of time to get off the doomed vessel, the ship carried fewer than half the lifeboats required, dooming over 1500 men, women and children (out of the over 2200 onboard) to a watery grave and giving the status quo quite the black eye. The only positive thing to come from the tragedy was improved safety and communications procedures being implemented throughout the maritime community (which, in the long run, probably saved more people over the next few decades than were lost on the Titanic).
many women and girls dressing up like kardashians and does it affect them

THe problem is have is that usually we have to understand is that the kardashians are celebrities and the clothes they wear i have seen at societal events, so i dont understand how a high fashion profile dress suddenly makes the word casual for commoners, i walk around and i feel like people are going to fashion events, people like me who arent dressed like would get scared interacting or otherwise. i would honestly get just intimidated by such people. i dont know whether they have an attitude i just said it looks like they appear to have a face that says you can sit with us. in a society where people dont look at you there is no warmth no level of comfort and smile in strangers glance i dont want these people to walk around ,no thing feels wam or clothing style that says its comfortable.dressing up like a kardashian im afraid makes them look like a kardashian and i feel scared thinking do they think like a kardashaian. do these girls theink they are better than us, do they have emotions, do they even snort their faces or make funny faces while laughing or afraid ot ruin the contour. also lets recall how we loook at high school as taught in movies. the popular girl was the one who was rich popular and she acted around like a snob, or sometimes people just assume being high profile they are, they may not assume that way about the girl next door.the beverly hills kids or rich kids acted arrogant, do i want these young teens at age 17 or 18 to put on such heavy make and walk around like theyre older than they already are. these girls also look like they are going to a wedding, that is how much make up they whe nthey go out, if everyone looked like they were going to a fancy gala and you didnt imagine how much youd stick out, and with kim kardashiperhaps i am wrong may be the make up doesnt affect the attitude, but it affects me culturally and religiously and on apersonal issue about how strange and intimidated i feel by their clothing styles for it different thanmine
many women and girls dressing up like kardashians and does it affect them

The Kardashians are definitely HUGE trendsetters in the fashion and beauty industry, every single one of them, there is no denying that. But they're not the only people who have or can impact young people like this, as you're trying to make it out to be. Everyone can look like a bum once in a while but the Kardashians all have busy lives and a lot of money; put two and two together, and you have your answer. They constantly go out to appearances, whether it be interviews, walking the red carpet, etc. and they hire personal makeup artists and stylists so they always look their best. Youtubers (self proclaimed "beauty gurus", more specifically) and other popular celebrities also play a part in what girls want to look like or how they want to be perceived by other people. At such a vulnerable age, everyone in terribly impressionable; they want to look like anyone but their true selves. You shouldn't blame your insecurities on popular clothing and beauty trends. If you feel happy not following the trends, that is YOUR choice; follow it if that's what makes you happy.