BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Who is the best champion for each role (top, mid, jungle, adc, and support) in league of Legends

Its true that Jax doesnt work in some team comps, but neither does shyvanna. To be fair, i dont think theres a champion that works for every single team comp :P Shyvanna just wasnt that strong in season 3. There were many better options that could lane better then her and team fight better then her. but she is strong, especially in season 4. And ur comment for fizz is basically the same for any assassin mid lane. Once their combo is done, they have nothing until theyre cooldowns are up :P. Season 3, assassins were just op. Vayne is only better if the player has superior mechanics. If she is behind on cs, shes useless since she'll deal no damage. Corki i believe has better poke, laning phase and teamfights and is better for a team. 1v1 i guess it could be different, but corki's burst is also quite good. As for your Leona choice, i believe she has amazing cc, but only if you land it. If u miss ur combos, you're screwed. there are supports who have more sustain and good cc too that are easier to play and harder to miss cc. btw i played this leona draven combo and if u get the cc down, its pretty op, even though draven is kinda bad now :P
Who is the best champion for each role (top, mid, jungle, adc, and support) in league of Legends

Even if it's season 3, my answers would stay the same other than ADC. Jax, even though he becomes an amazing split pusher after botrk and triforce, is not the right choice in a lot of teamfights. The tanky top meta was in season 3. Fizz, after Lich Bane, becomes a terror, but after this combo is done, he is no longer scary. Corki was strong, but vayne is the superior adc in season 3. Being a Diamond player, I have faced many different team comps and have just stated what I feel. Feel free to oppose what I said. interested in your mindset
Who is the best champion for each role (top, mid, jungle, adc, and support) in league of Legends

ummm dude u didnt read the rules....its season 3 not season 4... soooooo ur gonna lose :P Top : jax- all his abilities provide for the best overall offtank his q is both a gap closer and escape w is just damage dealer e is stun and way to avoid physical attacks r is damage dealer and amazing defensive ability since it scales off ad and ap Mid : Fizz fizz is very mobile and has an amazing set of abilities. They deal crazy amounts of burst and can be used to defensively to avoid damage. also has a gapcloser. Even though his ult is a skill shot, it still provides amazing damage Jungle : I agree with Elise. She has amazing waveclear, and her she basically has 7 abilities. Her ganks are very easy to set up and she has cc, gapcloser and abilities that deal lots of damage. She can counterjungle quite successfully because of her fast waveclear. ADC : Corki Triforce buffs in season 3 were just ridiculous. I remember in the LCS basically all adcs played him when they could it was 80% or something. Corki had an amazing laning phase and works amazingly in team fights as well. HIs passive give him true damage which is op, his q, and e are good for csing, poke and team fights since theyre aoe, his w can be used as escape or gapcloser, and his procs triforce and provides poke and range. Corki is o.p. Support : Thresh- He is just op dude. he has so much cc and his lantern is not even fair. It can be used to set up ganks or used to allow the adc to escape a sticky situation. His laning phase is rly good with his hook and flay and his ult is a good cc and damage dealer. PLus his passive lets him scale his abilities. Remember, this is Season 3 not 4. We can use the rest of rounds to refute or talk about league :P
Who is the best champion for each role (top, mid, jungle, adc, and support) in league of Legends

Top= Shyvana. Although she may suffer in laning phase against champs like Renekton and Mundo, she outscales all of them and becomes a terror. Her teamfight potential is superb and her dragon form is super strong. Jungle= Elise. She has a very fast clear time and her kit allows her to perform very successful ganks. If she gets behind from ganking too much, she can just farm the jungle quickly and catch up. She can also counterjungle very effectively. Mid- Gragas. His burst potential and laning ability make him hard to lane against and his ult is extremely effective in breaking up teams. ADC- Lucian. Once it gets to mid or late game his passive becomes deadly. The two AAs can deal close to 1000 damage and his ult can steal dragon/baron, siege objectives, and burst enemies. Support- Leona. The immense CC that comes from Leona is too strong.
Rand Paul (Pro) vs a Republican of Your Choice (Con)

2016 debate. I will be arguing for Rand Paul for president while whoever accepts can argue for whichever REPUBLICAN candidate they want. That candidate has to be someone that is considering running, but does NOT have to be in the race yet. Here is the round format: Round 1: Acceptance Round 2: Opening arguments Round 3: Rubuttals Round 4: Further rebuttals and conclusion The rules are fairly standard. Forfeiture is an immediate loss of conduct points. Proper spelling and grammar will be used but occasional lapses are fine. Sources are not required but are strongly suggested. Overall, a spirited and fun debate. I thank whoever accepts.
Should US Foreign Aid Be increased

Its true that there is little solid evidence that it actualy helps a country develop but that was not my argument. You are right that the biggest steps twoards develpoment must be made by the country in question but if a country has no funds and a failing government, there is no way they can start to make the changes that would help them advance. If they are given funds than they can start to make steps in the right direction. If we just let them fall apprt entirely, than like I said, a breeding-ground for terrorists.But giving money to failing contries is only part of the motivation for foriegn aid. By helping the militarys of countries that contain terrorist groups we can start to eliminate that threat in a less intrusive and more effective way than the war on terror. The truth of this can be seen from the recent fall of ISIL. And we can force smaller countries with functioning goverments to pass laws, or not pass other laws, by threatening to stop foreign aid.
Should US Foreign Aid Be increased

Foreign aid the US sends to developing countries significantly helps them grow, but more importantly, it keeps the US safe and in control.The US Spends a huge amount of money on defence, with good reason, but a cheaper alternative to at least some of the defence budget is to win friends and influence people with foreign aid. We can threaten to withhold money if laws that hurt us our passed, we can beef up the military of middle eastern countries, so they can beat up potential terrorists, and we can keep failing countries afloat so that they do not end up like the middle east, a chaotic breading-ground for terrorists. By doing this prudently the US could significantly decrees the neccesary defence buget and and come out with a net gain.
Is Grand theft auto bad for teenagers

Well that may be true, but how does someone happening to be a jerk or a hacker screwing up your games cause more mass shootings, or imply that Grand Theft Auto is bad for Teenagers? That seems less that Grand Theft Auto is bad for teenagers, and more of 'Teenagers are bad for other teenagers', or 'hackers are bad for teenagers', in my opinion. I will extend to my opponent another opportunity to secure their position and explain further why this debate was raised. I would like to urge my opponent to use as many of the characters as you can, that you have allocated to this debate to explain further, as a single sentence is far from sufficient to not only debate, but to express your own opinion. I would like to welcome my Opponent to try as hard as you can to reply as much as possible - as I believe many people want to write more in these debates, but are hesitant to open themselves up to criticism. If this is the case, I would like to let you know that I will not look upon your response as negative, as I attempt to understand the perspective you come from, instead of the words you use to get them across. Please - Tell me why you believe this is happening, I would like to discuss this with you.
Is Grand theft auto bad for teenagers

Whilst my stance in this debate is on the 'Pro' side, I will debate this with you after setting some definitions : Stance : My Stance on this debate is as follows; Gaming in general can assist players with a myriad of skills and helps build mental 'pathways' to assist with logical deduction. I do not agree with the statement that Shootings would not have occurred if teenagers didn't play GTA (Or any game, for that matter). Definition : "Cool" "adjective 1. of or at a fairly low temperature. "it'll be a cool afternoon" synonyms:chilly, cold; More 2. showing no friendliness towards a person or enthusiasm for an idea or project. "he gave a cool reception to the suggestion for a research centre" synonyms:unenthusiastic, lukewarm, tepid, indifferent, apathetic, half-hearted, negative; More noun 1. a fairly low temperature. "the cool of the night air" synonyms:chill, chilliness, coldness; More 2. calmness; composure. "he recovered his cool and then started laughing at us" verb 1. become or make less hot. "we dived into the river to cool off" synonyms:chill, refrigerate, make cold/colder More" I assume you are pertaining to the second definition under Adjective. Please confirm so we are discussing the same definition. I would also like for you to expand upon the fact that it 'shows bad examples to teenagers' - As this is a broad statement for such a refined topic.
Is Grand theft auto bad for teenagers

Unfortunately this debate has grounded to a halt.Another fun fact that GTA can provide - It can noticeably increase one's retention to a subject - So one can engage upon a task or discussion, and maintain focus throughout the entire scenario.As there has been no update since my previous conclusion, I will make no changes to my stance. For ease of reading - I have copied the conclusion below :Conclusion :I have shown that GTA can be attributed to stress release, source to enforce this below :http://www.science20.com......I have shown by common sense that playing a game does not warp the sense of reality to make things previously considered morally bad - do not somehow become 'hip, cool new things' to do.
The US Should End the Cuban Embargo

The embargo allows the United States to apply pressure on the Cuban government to improve human rights. Their has been a long history of human rights abuses in Cuba. Examples of the abuses are that 4,123 people were detained for political reasons in 2011, and 6,602 political detentions occurred in 2012. The Congressional Research Service reported that there are an estimated 65,000 to 70,000 prisoners incarcerated in Cuba as of May 2012 this is among the highest in the world on a per capita basis. The 1996 Helms-Burton Act stated that the United States has an obligation to promote human rights in keeping with the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This embargo allows the United States to take the proper steps in securing human rights in Cuba.(1) The United States is already helping Cuba with food and water .The United States has been exporting food to Cuba following a devastating hurricane in 2001 and now the United States is Cuba's second-largest food supplier. Annual food sales to Cuba peaked at $710 million in 2008. (2) Cuba has virtually no private sector, opening trade would only help the government, not regular Cuban citizens. The 90% state-owned economy ensures that the Cuban government and military would reap the gains of open trade with the United States, not private citizens. Also any foreign company operating in Cuba are required to hire workers through the state; wages are converted into local currency and devalued at a ratio of 24:1, so for example a $1,000 wage becomes a $240 paycheck. (3) Sources (1)-One Hundred Fourth Congress of the United States of America, "Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996," (25 KB) www.gpo.gov, Jan. 3, 1996 (2)-Stephanie Hanson, "U.S.-Cuba Relations," www.cfr.org, Jan. 11, 2010 (3)-Richard E. Feinberg, "The New Cuban Economy: What Roles for Foreign Investment," www.brookings.edu, Dec. 2012
On 9/11, WTC 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition.

I am here to argue against the claim that WTC7 was brought down by a controlled demolition. I will ask that my opponent produce no more than 3 claims that point to a controlled demolition in order to allow us to examine these claims in detail. I also would like my opponent to also, whenever possible to link to a source as I will do the same. Sources should not include links to videos without any timestamp or reason. If space allows I would also like my opponent to explain a motive for destroying WTC 7. I look forward to your opening argument.
A true "Conservative Republican" Would Favor the Legalization and/or Decriminalization of Marijuana

Being republican does not incline one to be absolute conservative about everything and history can disprove your argument. Look back to when America had first became a nation. We were not democrats, republicans, and independent, rather we were federalist, democratic-republicans, and other. In all sense of the word republican it means one in favor of a republic not whether or not a republican has certain ideals of conservatism or liberalism. This debate holds so little value because you are placing a stigma on ALL republicans and also a stigma on ALL political parties. It is just ludicrous to absolutely associate republicans with being conservative, but furthermore, even being conservative doesn't mean that you must be in favor of legalizing marijuana or that it is in your best interest. That would be a narrow minded approach at tackling political issues in the world because you would have a definite set of rules that you would follow when making your ideas. By taking this ideology to a bigger picture, we would not need the Judiciary branch of the United States because then we wouldn't have to take ideas into review of whether they are good or not. Next, I have a problem with the wording of the topic because it forces an absolutist idea into the form of a moderate idea because what Lindsay is stating is that ALL republicans would thus have to be in favor of legalizing marijuana whether it would be moral or a right thing to do. She takes away all human characteristics from being human by stating that we will all think in an inflexible mode of comprehending and understanding and that we can never use reason. Her ideology in and of itself makes one think of human beings as being robots which we are not!
A true "Conservative Republican" Would Favor the Legalization and/or Decriminalization of Marijuana

Thank you Lindsay. I still am not fond of the idea that we attempt to classify certain groups as having certain beliefs because we all have our own individual beliefs that must be taken into consideration. A "true" conservative needn't think anything that his party believes, but rather is more easily persuaded to err towards republican ideals. There really isn't too much to debate and I implore everyone to cross-apply all of my arguments from my first set of arguments seeing as how they have all been conceded. - Matt
A true "Conservative Republican" Would Favor the Legalization and/or Decriminalization of Marijuana

Mr. Matt, You bring up a great point. I consider myself a liberal, but do not agree with every liberal point of view. I'm not saying that a true conservative SHOULD favor the decriminalization of pot, rather they WOULD. And I guess I should be more specific, as there are so many different types of conservatives...more libertarian, more socially conservative, etc. I just want to emphasize that my objective is not imposing any moral belief. It's just a matter of consistency. I think some people also claim "Republican" but truly have more "Libertarian" or even sometimes "Liberal" views, but then again, this goes both ways, and I know a lot of "Liberals" are actually more "Conservative" than they even know. I also am probably slightly biased because I live in the Bible Belt, and so many of my peers claim to be "Very Conservative..." based on their upbringing. However, they don't really know what "conservative" in government-terms means. I suppose it's similar to the on-going debate of how it is ironic that Democrats typically support a woman's right to choose (ending the life of a fetus) yet would spare the life of a murderer by opposing the death penalty. The purpose of the debate is not so much to argue, because there isn't much TO argue about...more so of an eye-opener for those who so quickly claim "conservative" but don't understand all that it entails.
Resolved: I-am-a-panda is a Panda

"I did not give a very CLEAR definition of who David was (By the way, he's danononian on debte. org. ), and I have no proof to contradict your statement that he is a false prophet. " >> Whats debte. org? I have not heard of such a website. When I looked it up, this came up : . http://search.mywebsearch.com... "Yes, the half-German, half-Scottish Queen of England told you that Seth MacFarlane has recorded your life story in Jesus-oriented "Family Guy" cutaway gags, and that she's having an affair with him. I'm sure that Philippos of Greece and Denmark will be pleased to hear about that, and then order all the Cantonese to eat Seth MacFarlane's pets at their behest. " >> I have found undeniable picture evidence of the eloping of McFarlane and Elizabeth. . http://www.debate.org... Disprove THAT! "You also do not have any proof that the Prophet David has met David Beckham at any point in his lifetime, nor that David Beckham influenced the Prophet David in such a manner. " >> On the contrary, I have proved your so called "David" does not exist. "Two: Just because there are many Roman Catholics in Ireland does not mean that you are not Articus. You might be on a diet. Maybe you just have a Diet Catholic every now and then. " >> I would really notice the remains of agnostic Catholics if I was eating them. AND, if you've seen me, I'm definitely not on a diet. My opponent has mis-defined "Grammar Nazi". My opponent has picked apart the adjective, when it is one word. Grammar Nazi is defined as: Someone who believes it's their duty to attempt to correct any grammar and/or spelling mistakes they observe. [. http://www.urbandictionary.com...] . http://encyclopediadramatica.com... "One: I live in an area where Jews are a significant portion of the population. " >> Grammar Nazi's, as defined above, have no problem with Jews. Even regular Nazi's don't. "Prove it! " >> They are divine black holes encircling my eyes. You DISPROVE they aren't! Thanks, Panda
Resolved: I-am-a-panda is a Panda

"Firstly, I gave the definition of who David was. You have no proof that this False Prophet wannabe is the real 'Prophet'. Furthermore, the very fact they have lived in the same city AND share the same name leads me to believe David Beckham has used his ways as an egotistic and inherently bad flashy Footballer turned false prophet to make this other David believe he is a prophet." I did not give a very CLEAR definition of who David was (By the way, he's danononian on debte.org.), and I have no proof to contradict your statement that he is a false prophet. However (Correct punctuation again!), you do not have any proof to the contrary except some fictional cutaway gags involving Jesus from "Family Guy," which I will address now. "Excuse me, but at least I have some sort of video evidence. I am actually great friends with the German Queen of England, Elizabeth II, who is in turn lovers with Seth M[a]cFarlane. She can 100% verify M[a]cFarlane was in fact recording my life thus far on her bequest." Yes, the half-German, half-Scottish Queen of England told you that Seth MacFarlane has recorded your life story in Jesus-oriented "Family Guy" cutaway gags, and that she's having an affair with him. I'm sure that Philippos of Greece and Denmark will be pleased to hear about that, and then order all the Cantonese to eat Seth MacFarlane's pets at their behest. (Continued from the first argument of this round.) You also do not have any proof that the Prophet David has met David Beckham at any point in his lifetime, nor that David Beckham influenced the Prophet David in such a manner. "The[n] I have proven that I am NOT... Articus. Job done there[!]" One: Articus is not a prophet. He is the "Glow-in-the-Dark Nerf Football Lord of the Planet Mars" (Just for clarification, that's American football, not global football.). Two: Just because there are many Roman Catholics in Ireland does not mean that you are not Articus. You might be on a diet. Maybe you just have a Diet Catholic every now and then. In the last three arguments of Round IV, I-am-a-panda has accused me, C-Mach, of being a "Grammar Nazi." We'l see about that! Grammar defined - "The logical and structural rules that govern the composition of sentences, phrases, and words in any given natural language (1)." Nazi defined - A member of the National Socialist German Worker's Party. (1) http://en.wikipedia.org... I might be a grammarian raised be grammarian parents, but a Nazi, I am not. One: I live in an area where Jews are a significant portion of the population. Two: Almost all of my friends are Jewish or have a Jewish parent (The Prophet David being one of them.). Three: I am a libertarian, the complete antithesis of a Nazi. "If you find... cousin[s]... shot up, it[']s just business." Trust me, shooting several dozen Mormons is a waste of your time. "Of course they're not due to dehydration!" Prove it! I am now off of Avenue George V in the 8th arrondissement of Paris, so I might have yet another chat with the Hungarian President of France.