BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Individual privacy is more important than national security

The Amendments about privacy has not been repealed or ratified, which shows that it is still important in modern life. Privacy is a fundamental human right that cannot be taken away, even when the nation is endangered. Where does the so called ' National Security' stand when the people of the nation don't even trust the government? The government should provide basic surveillance to protect the country but as it was revealed in the Snowden incident, the over-control from the government has gone too far. There was no proper system established, therefore who's to decide which cell phone record to listen and who's to decide what kind of agency could have the right to listen to others personal conversations or information without the person knowing?
Individual privacy is more important than national security

Primarily, it must be understood that the Constitution was drafted at a time when America was very young and not yet an economic and political powerhouse. Highly destructive weapons/force such as nuclear bombs, unmanned aerial drones, and long ranged rockets had yet to be invented, and therefore, there lacked a serious threat of foreign militaristic acts of terror at the time. With the United States being as powerful as it is today, it is the government's duty to both secure and ensure the safety of the nation as a whole. In a society where a bomb can be made out of a pressure cooker, the safety of the individual should come instinctively before his/her privacy.
Homework should be banned

I will now be making my rebuttals against Pro's arguments.1. Homework is a common cause of childhood obesity.It might be a cause, but it sure isn't 'common' or a 'major contribution', because it isn't hard to just take a break from homework for a while. Sure, you're losing time so you might get a bad grade, but you don't have to do your homework all in one sitting, right before you sleep or right after you get home, no. You argue that "children are supposed to be able to play and do exercise after school, and they cannot do that if they are wasting time on homework". Well, yeah they can. Depending on when they want to play or exercise, they can do it right when they get home and when they're finished, do their homework. If it's quite a while after they get home, then they should start doing their chores first. If they still have time before they can exercise or play, they can start doing their homework until then. That way, they won't do as much when they come back.Some schools may not have this class, but they can use ACE or Seminar to do their homework if they have free time. School can have a lot of free time, depending on the district. A district example is USD 402. High school includes a class for both A days and B days called "Seminar", or ACE. Students use this time to join clubs or other things, or if they don't have any of that, they can do their homework. Overall, they have a lot of opportunities to do their homework before they have other important business to deal with.2. Many parents are joining the fight against homework.That's definitely not the greatest case of parenting. If they suspect that homework has too many negatives than positives, they shouldn't be making a fight over it, but maybe calmly talk to the district if homework is really necessary. Schools are very persistent with their rules and regulations, so if parents are banning homework from their child while the school will not change their opinion about homework, they are actively ruining the child's learning process, therefore, they won't get a good education system, and won't make it out of school. Therefore, the parents are causing harm to children if they ban homework.3. Teachers give too much homework.Yeah, they do, and I can't refute this argument. If the National Education Association standard of homework should be 10 minutes per grade level, then it should be the case, but it seems like teachers are really giving out too much homework for standards, and the NEA should find a way to make schools follow the standards. However, you say "In addition, seniors in high school can have up to hours of homework, leaving little time to relax, and have fun." Depending on what time they get off from school, and their time to join any clubs or whatnot if they're required, they definitely have a lot of time to 'relax, and have fun'.That is my rebuttals for round 3.
Homework should be banned

I am here to yet again say why homework should be banned. You may say it's just so that students can be glued to their phone and iPad, but there is so much more to do than that! Many children have chores they aren't able to complete, because they are spending so much time on homework! First, it's unhealthy. Children are supposed to be able to play and do exercise after school, and they cannot do that if they are wasting time on homework. Also, it is one of the most common causes of childhood obesity. In addition, it can cause back problems, especially in high school students. Second, Many parents are joining the fight against homework. When parents join, all is lost for the people against, because they have the rights, and the power, to stop their child from doing homework. Parents may ban it due to the pressure it puts on their child, the stress of having to check it, or even just the fact that its there, and they have to make sure their child did it. Third, Teachers give too much homework. Studies performed recently showed that first grade students were receiving up to 30 minutes of homework, which is almost three times the amount that should be given, according to the NEA, or National Education Association. In addition, seniors in high school can have up to to hours of homework, leaving little time to relax, and have fun. This is my argument for round two. Sources: https://www.healthline.com...
Homework should be banned

Hello, I will be proving why homework should not be banned. I'll make my own arguments here in Round 1.1. Homework provides an opportunity for parents to interact with and understand the content their students are learning so they can provide another means of academic support for students. [1] Also, teachers give out homework not for students to do work and learn, but instead to see if the way they teach the material is successful so they can get the best knowledge in school. [2] 2. The recommended amount of homework depends on grade level.“Does Homework Improve Academic Achievement?” also identifies the amount homework that serves as a learning tool for students. While practice improves test scores at all grade levels, “Homework for junior high students appears to reach the point of diminishing returns after about 90 minutes a night. For high school students, the positive line continues to climb until between 90 minutes and 2.5 hours of homework a night, after which returns diminish.” [1]3. Homework is basically testing, but you have a longer time to finish it.Homework is just like tests, quizzes, etc.. It's also usually significantly easier than tests, as tests are about if you have learned all of the material and remembered it all. If you did, you'll get a good grade. Just like homework. There's no negativity here. Sure, you're wasting precious time so you can get yourself glued to your phone or T.V., but at least you're showing that you're improving. There have been multiple cases of teachers finding different ways to teach or urge to do your homework if homework grades aren't done or aren't having a good grade most of the time. And this works successfully. That's why homework should not be banned.Sources:[1] https://education.cu-portland.edu...[2] http://lessonplanspage.com...;
Homework should be banned

Homework should be banned. First, it's unhealthy. Next, parents are banning it already, so it's not being done anyway. Third, teachers give too much. You may say it helps us remember things, but does it if you cheat?! Plus, there is a national homework standard of ten minutes per grade but teachers are giving 2 and 3 times the amount recommended by the NEA. So it should be banned. All info found from a reliable source. =)
Jesus ran a sex trafficking ring and all followers of Jesus are sex victims

1: Maybe but Virgin Mary is considered Virgin after we know from bible that she put a Lily in her Pus*y? Maybe Joseph was too busy with Woodworking and he didn't have time to satisfy her (i think Joseph was a big Cuck btw) 2: Maybe Jesus was Gay and gang banked from his 7 students we don't know this for sure Maybe the 7 students tied him in s cross and have BDSM with him, my point is allot of things i read at the bible shows to me that he maybe liked to put vegetables and fruits in his anus like UnVirgin mary did with the lily you cant prove my theory is wrong and i cant prove that your theory is wrong 2 3: Maybe Jesus liked BDSM, i have a theory for this coz he wanted to be master and all others be his slaves I think you gonna agree with me at this coz allot of people that time called him "Master" I wanna thank you for this debate it was very delightful and i wanna have more debates with you in the future you seem logic person, but lets leave the rest to the peoples who vote to decide who is probably right.
Jesus ran a sex trafficking ring and all followers of Jesus are sex victims

I will begin by answering your points, then I shall present a strong evidence based case.[1]It is possible the virgin Mary plugging herself with cucumbers, carrots, flowers and anything she could find due to sexual desperation. However this is mere guesswork. [2] Jesus did hate whores, this is due to Jesus hating consensual sex in general. The Bible attempts to play Jesus off as being A-sexual due to having no reference to his sexual orientation, but there is speculation into whether he was gay. Due to society at the time viewing gays as evil, it made sense for Jesus to at least pretend he hated gay people, but riddle me this, why did Jesus, with all his Godly power, choose to hang out with 7 male disciples and not 7 hot female disciples? Simple because he enjoyed male company and getting f**ked in the arse.[3] While unsupported, one could speculate that Jesus used a cucumber and the likes to plug his anus due to his homosexual nature.While I accept almost all of your claims, I do not believe they are anythign more than guesswork.Let us look at a few Bible quotes.[1] Thessalonians 2:12 Jesus spoke- “Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself yet to have taken all the slaves. But one thing I do: Reward you with them all, I press on toward the goal to gift them to all."This is Jesus offering slaves to his followers, showing he traffics humans for slavery, from here it's easy to begin making logical connections, it's possible he traffics some for sex to make some profit on the side.[2] Psalm 5:3 Jesus spoke- "David, come into me as you have come into your wife. In the morning I lay myself before you and wait expectantly" This verse from the Bible shows us that Jesus was luring a potentially young boy named David, while it doesn't specify what Jesus wanted, it certainly gives us some concerns.[3] Psalm 37:23-24 (NIV)“The LORD makes me firm, yet the people make me firmer, the lust of man delights in him; though they may sin, he will not disprove, for the LORD condones your sins, he creates them, rejoice with me and sooth your lust.”Here, Jesus is clearly advocating the lust of man and admitting he sins. Jesus was born a normal person of flesh and blood, he is not pure, he is the sins of man it's therefore perfectly reasonable to assert Jesus trafficked sex slaves among other sins.Due to providing logical evidence, cherry picked Bible verses and exposing the sexual nature of your average, lustful man, I declare it perfectly reasonable to suggest Jesus was a sex trafficker and urge voters to consider me upon voting.
Jesus ran a sex trafficking ring and all followers of Jesus are sex victims

I don't Believe this, Theres no way Jesus Likes to have sex with human beings I Have some theories that Jesus liked to have sex with Plants and staff 1: His mother Virgin Mary had sex with a Lily "that show to us that she had plant fetish 2: Jesus hated Whores and womans in general , He hates gays 2 so either he is Asexual or He have Fetish with plants 3: Jesus may Followed his mother Plant fetish to pleasure himself That is what i believe and you cant prove me wrong
Jesus ran a sex trafficking ring and all followers of Jesus are sex victims

Evidence shows Jesus was a man who got many people to follow him, boys girls and adults, all were willing to do anything he wanted. This debate aims to ask and answer some of Christianities best kept secret [1] Why are people asked when praying to bend down and present their buttocks in a fetal position? Evidence tells us Jesus taught them to do this so he could f**k em in the arse [2] Do people get nailed to the cross for being well behaved? Nope, people get nailed to the cross for nailing under aged boys and girls. The Bible excludes any accounts of Jesus being sexually active, yet advocates him being a man, could it be that the Bible excluded some of Jesus's deepest darkest sexual secrets? Let us find out in this debate.
e.c. segar's popeye comic strips are better than max fleischer's popeye cartoons: part two

i concur, sir! the comic strips are better by a thousand fold. the cartoons use the same weak routine over and over and over... you know, popeye and olive oyl, bluto beats up popeye, takes olive, popeye beats up bluto. popeye and olive together again. this routine only works for so long before it is exhausted. the cartoons, though, have a million different setups and a million different punchlines. in these, popeye goes out west, battles the sea hag, talks politics in nazilia, fights in the ring, and scrutinizes wimpy for being such a loafer. the plots are more dramatic and, frankly, reflect the era much better. i await your next argument.
e.c. segar's popeye comic strips are better than max fleischer's popeye cartoons: part two

obviously the cartoon is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy better than the comic strips because reiding is for NErds!!!* Why wud u want 2 red ur cartoons wen u can watch them moving and talking on the screen in front of you??? The POOpeye cartoon is infinitley better becase it bgrings the character to LIfe?(& DUhyhh any smert person will votE for my argument cuz it makes so muhc sense. sources cited: YOURE MOMMa
e.c. segar's popeye comic strips are better than max fleischer's popeye cartoons: part two

e.c. segar's popeye comic strips are the REAL popeye. they show the one eyed spinach eater in all his glory. the cartoons by max fleischer, however, are weak and stupid. in these, popeye does nothing except beat up bluto. in the comic strips, popeye has a wide variety of opponents, including toar, jabbo, the sea hag, jack snork, mr. chizzleflint, clint gore, lem kronch, and general bunzo, as well as an assortment of nameless brutes who pop up for no reason. this is a wide variety of villians who beat bluto a thousand to one. i am arguing that the comic strips are better. you are arguing that the cartoons are better. good luck!
Analog vs. Digital Mixers

"I'll give you a perk as to why purchasing all the parts separately would be better. You know whats going into your system. Lets see do I want Yamamha deciding what compressors I use or can I chose DBX or Alesis." Mix matching different brands of equipment could have adverse effects, such as every different brand has a seperate power cord with seperate voltage requirments. Many of these different power cords have the same plug that runs the voltage into the equipment from the outlet. If you were to accidentaly place the wrong power cord into the wrong peice of equipment, then you could blow the tubes or circuitry and possibly cause DEATH. Being totally knowledgable about your tools and technology is crucial for success. Personally, I believe that Yamaha knows exactly which tools mesh well together for the most professional, not to mention SAFEST product and outcome with use. For faster and more visible immediate changes during show, you could hook your digital mixer up to a monitor. Sound Dude's should always have a clients sound prepared and ready at the time of the show. So a professional shouldn't risk quality for brotherly music mumbo jumbo. PRIORITIES, sir. Constant awarness and respect for your equipment gives a smaller margin for error. For the safest, newest technology, digital is the way to go. Not only does it make recording and live show's easier, and better... there will be up to date companies to assist you if you have any problems. Not to mention constant upgrades available to fit you, or clients needs! From my experience in the sound feild... I like to do what is best for MY clients. What THEY need, making THEM sound better. Gratification of creating my own "custom" sound board is not what I'm for. Quality performance. Isn't that what mixing sound is all about, making the best sounding show possible. That's what I'm for... are you?
Analog vs. Digital Mixers

Not only does the new technology of digital mixers inable easy live gig set up, they're also more cost efficient. Instead of byuing the multiple parts and gadgetry needed for an Analog run show, you can buy a digital mixer for the same price and get a higher quality product. In turn giving the audience a better show. Resolution for situation A: Don't let unasociated people screw with your equipment. Resolution for situation B: A professional is always prepared. Or, you could get better glasses, or a digial mixer with a large screen and knob capacity to suit your individual sound dude needs. YOU beleive analog makes life easier. But is easier always BETTER?
Analog vs. Digital Mixers

I'm sorry I should of been more clearer in my opening statement, I talking about live sound usage. My apologies. "Why not learn techniqes that would better the quality of your profession?" "Having more than one piece of equipment brings the ratio of sound quality down... because its traveling from cord to cord. Also, more equpment equals more chances of malfunction." In what sense does digital mixing make a better quality. I know with Analog yes there is more cabling so there might pose a problem. User error or bad cables, but it is something that can be tracked down and fixed by a properly trained sound technician on the spot, instead of ripping apart or sending the digital mixer back to the factory. Also, regardless of all the extra cabling, it does not bring down the sound quality. The sound traveling the short distance of 3inch - 1 foot, does not deter from the overall sound. I'll tell you what will cause a bad sounding mix is these dang fangled new age digital mixers. Improper care and misuse of the these digital mixers causes those sensitive little parts and microchips to rattle and destroy itself. Another thing these digital boards were created to make life easier for the sound tech, in reality its more of a pain in the rear end to read endlessly the manuals and practical application. They have the features of presets and hundreds of memory banks to store and save your work. Situation: You show up to the gig site and you have 20min to set up and start. Johnny Dumbface walks up and says "Hey I'm there sound guy and would like to use your equipment to make it easier" you agree to the favor, and what does the moron do. Erases all the work you've done and your back to square one. On average to go trough and replicate all the settings you have for the gig might take you hours to reset. Hours you dont have. With a Analog board to physically reset the whole board is something you can notice and prevent from happening. With that high tech junk, one button takes you right back to bringing that board right out of the box. Another situation: You show up to a gig unprepared cause your boss doesn't give you time to prep for the gig. Now with an Analog board you can wing it and set up on the fly. Twisting and setting your knobs as you go, why, cause you can physically grab the knobs and faders you need right there. With digital boards your flipping trough pages and pages of information trough the board that you cant see, only in the tiny screen and this knob works as this and that, multipurpose single knob and button after button just to find the page were the panoramic potentiometer or EQ is at. Analog just makes life easier on the sound tech. And still produces a great quality performance, regardless.
Analog vs. Digital Mixers

Personally, I don't believe anyone would want someone with limited knowledge to be mixing any music for them. The client would want someone with extensive know how and experience. So even if the mixing equipment was hard to figure out, I would want my sound professional to learn the techniques that would best suit my needs. Why not learn techniqes that would better the quality of your profession? Reliablity comes with quality, and I am a firm believer that quality and perfection can be found in digial recording. Most of all the music we hear on the radio today was recorded using up to date digial recording. Not to mention the small sound jobs that can be made easier by using one peice of equipment compared to many to get the same effects. There is room for error in any peice of high tech equipment. The controler of the gadgets is in charge of using the tools he or she has correctly and efficiently. Having more than one piece of equipment brings the ratio of sound quality down... because its traveling from cord to cord. Also, more equpment equals more chances of malfuncion. Sound guys shouldn't be scared of that which they do not know... and embrace new technologies to better their feild... and quality of their product.
Analog vs. Digital Mixers

I have been in the sound business for awhile now, and just recently opened my eyes to more possibilities of sound. In my experience as a sound guy Analog Mixers have always been the way to go. Not only because that was first made and anybody can figure out how to use them, but because they're reliable and will always be better than any Digital monster board on the market. Digital boards, like most digital anything, have plenty of room for error. They have to many sub page this and that, and any aspect of the actual board is run by this motherboard. From the mechanical faders, and the infrastructure of adapting compressors, gates, reverbs, and any other outboard effect you could use built in. I know having everything built in seems like a great idea. Compact and easy to move, but it's not necessarily better. One thing goes wrong and the whole thing goes down the drain. Analog boards, on the other hand, have everything laid out in front of you and allow the sound guy to preform the job better. If an effect or channel goes out, easy fix. Why? Because its right there to physically see and change. Unlike these hoax boards were you have to be a sound Guru and now a electrician and scientist, and take the whole thing apart to fix the dang thing. And thats not easily down on the gig site. Now for the point. I think anybody who's anybody should stop making this unholy mobs of mess and stick to what works and whats been working for years. Analog mixers are hands down the standard, and there's nothing wrong with moving outside the box, but when it comes to sound Analog boards are what this world needs.