BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The Samsung Galaxy S3 is superior to the iPhone 5

... This is one of my first debates and have not faced an opponent of your stature, but I will attempt to give a solid argument on your level. My opening arguments will consist of several key factors that consumers focus on when deciding on what phone to chose to use for the next 2 or more years. A) Design/Aesthetic Appeal The Iphone 5 is one of the best built and best looking phones currently on the market. It's glass screen has been improved on by increasing it's shatter-proof and scratch-resistant qualities. It's frame also is constructed from durable, high-quality aluminum which is not only stronger than the GS3's polycarbonate plastic frame, it feels noticeably less "cheap". The Iphone 5 is thinner and lighter than the GS3 but this is based solely on user preference. With this in mind, the Iphone 5 is clearly the winner. B) Screen Quality The Iphone 5's retina display is impressive to say the least. Not many other smart phones are able to boast 326 pixels-per-inch. To attempt to counter this the GS3 tried to abandon the standard LCD display and implement the AMOLED screen. While the AMOLED may be the future of smart-phone screens, it is not at it's peak while LCD is better-calibrated and is brighter. The Iphone 5's good-old fashioned LCD takes the crown. C) User Interface It is hard to argue against the Iphone 5's interface. It is fun, simple, and easy to learn. The GS3's can be confusing at times. On my mom's I struggle to navigate it and find Angry Birds. On any Iphone 5 you can find everything simply with a few swipes and touches. The Iphone 5's classic and simple interface takes the clear victory. D) Cameras The GS3 has a decent reliable camera. It is great compared to most smart phones, but saying it's better than the Iphone 5's is a flat out lie. The Iphone 5's camera has a simple and effective interface that always takes a better picture than it's competitors. The Iphone 5's panorama mode is also fun to play with and takes great pictures. The Iphone 5 clearly has a better camera. E) Future Updates Apple is famous for the fact that they release a yearly update on all of there platforms. The original Iphone 3g can be running the latest apps on IOS 6. The GS3 is still waiting for the Jelly Bean update which is expected "to come in the following months". Months after initial release. Every Apple device received the IOS 6 update simultaneously. If you want to know you will always be running the latest OS on your phone, you can only rely on Apple and the Iphone 5. I hope my arguments lived up to your expectations for this debate. I turn the debate back over to you.
The Samsung Galaxy S3 is superior to the iPhone 5

RESOLUTION (Expanded): Samsung's flagship model the Galaxy SIII (GT-19305[T] to be precise) is superior to Apples latest iPhone, the iPhone 5. I will be arguing in the affirmative.DEBATE STRUCTURE:Round one: Acceptance and definitionsRound two: Opening arguments (Con may NOT respond to Pro's arguments)Round three: Counter-arguments, rebuttals, introduction of new arguments (Con MAY respond to new arguments made by Pro at this point)Round four: Final rebuttals and closing summaryINTRODUCTION:This structure makes for the fairest contest in my humble opinion. If you oppose or do not understand this, please do not accept. By accepting this debate, you agree to debate on these terms. Semantics are to be avoided where possible. I have restricted this debate to people who are ranked higher than me to ensure a quality debate. If you feel you are up to the challenge, please post in the comments and assuming you're an acceptable opponent, I will directly challenge you.Good luck to my opponent.
The Pro Bowl Is Great

first of all the players in the pro bowl can decline the pro bowl if they wanted and second of all you are not the only one who watched the pro bowl. a lot of people watch it and they all think that it is great. and the worst all-star game is the baseball all-star game. i think that the pro bowl is fun to watch and again, it is rewarding for the players who make it to play in it and it is in haw ii so of course they would want to be there. for example, Philip rivers declined the invitation to go to the pro-bowl and so did Carson Palmer. so they do want to be play in the pro bowl. so i am obviously right.
The Pro Bowl Is Great

When I was a kid, I loved watching all football. I enjoyed the Pro Bowl mainly due to my love all things football. As I've gotten older, I came to realize the Pro Bowl was incredibly lame and the players really don't want to be out their risking their careers over a game that is meaningless. The NFL Pro Bowl is easily the worst All-Star game in major sports. This is because the NFL cannot put a viable product on the field. Most of these players are too concerned about their own well-being and lack of a worthwhile paycheck to deliver any kind of a worthy performance in the modern Pro Bowl. With $53,000 to the winners and $26,000 to the losers, the dollar figure is too small to warrant potentially ruining their chances for a new multi-million-dollar contract in the future. Through the perspective of a child, the Pro Bowl is still probably pretty cool. Anyone that claims the Pro Bowl is legitimate football is probably a child and certainly not an actual fan of NFL football.
The Pro Bowl Is Great

The NFL Pro Bowl is easily the worst of the All Star games being played by major sports leagues. Playing football can only be done at full speed and lets face it...none of these players want to risk career injuries by actually playing hard in this game. This fact makes the game lame and boring. The game has certainly been on the decline for years now, and the NFL decided to attempt to reignite fan interest by changing rules, adding a fantasy football-like draft and equipping players with fancy uniforms. Well, it didn't work. First of all, the rule changes were almost irrelevant. Kickoffs were not really missed, four two-minute warnings along with a change of possession after each quarter quickly got annoying and most casual fans probably didn't notice any changes in defensive coverages. It is high time to get rid of this piece of refuse masquerading as an football game.
Death Penalty

Thanks for choosing my subject I was getting bored for a while there, First thing is first, "Well guess what, deciding who lives or dies IS god's work." apparently you do not understand the meaning of hypocrisy because by denying capital punishment YOU are the one deciding that he should live therefore the hypocrisy can go both ways. Also you presume to much, "Now, my opponent will most likely try to put you in the shoes of the victim's family." I take this in a completely more selfish approach. Anyone who has witnessed or had to bare the lost of a loved one should not be the group deciding on a persons fate, in fact it should have nothing to do with this argument. Me being one who has had a 6 year old cousin killed by a man driving under cocaine would know, it is human instincts to want revenge and the revenge being death of course. However this punishment should not have anything to do with revenge, it should be about removing the pigs from society. Allow me to explain, lets take an example of someone lets say Charles Manson, Mr. Manson was a leader of a cult, him and his peons are responsible for the slaughter of 7 victims with axes,knives,forks, and a pistol, in order to start a giant race war that would engulf the world so that they after the turmoil would become kings and queens of the earth. Now Charles Manson is still alive, still in prison. He is a complete lunatic, mass murderer, monster, and a complete waste of a being. Now explain to me why my tax money should go in order to keep this pig alive?? what good does it do to society to keep this monster locked up in jail? he has contributed nothing except death and pain for over one hundred people so why should we as citizens pay tax money to keep him alive? Also the main issue with this "life imprisonment" is one word my friend parole more killers,rapists,molesters and been released from a "life imprisonment" on parole than I can count...well what about the victims? what about the people buried or scared for life because of these people? People complain that the U.S. is the most violent and society, do you know why? because there is no ultimate punishment, because there is nothing to hold these killings back, I study ancient and middle age history as a student the reason these societies were much safer and more secure than ours is because the wrong doers were punished...because government did the job is was suppose to do. When old sparky was plugged in the murder rates dropped, the rape rate dropped, the crime dropped and that is the fact that you must face. Also, show me one example of a person executed who was later proven innocent. Show me ONE person and this "risk of innocents dying" might actually have some truth. The only innocence dying are the victims of pigs who will never face responsibility for what they have done.
Death Penalty

When you look at America and the politicians, you happen to notice a bit of hypocrisy. You have these Neo-Conservative politicians that claim to be doing God's work. Well guess what, deciding who lives or dies IS god's work. God, or any other supreme being is the one that decides who lives or dies. I'm not a religious person, but its obvious that humans aren't capable of choosing who lives or dies. I have trouble understanding why murder is O.K. if you call it the "Death Penalty". And on top of that, once a person is killed, there is no going back. That means if there is new evidence later on, well, its too late. He/She is already dead. Now, my opponent will most likely try to put you in the shoes of the victim's family. Well, you ask the family of any murder victim if the pain ever goes away. I can guarantee that it doesn't. The victim's family's pain will NEVER go away. Its sad but taking another man's life doesn't change anything. Plus, if you ask me, the Death Penalty is the easy way out. If you are really looking to punish someone, a life in prison will do the trick. So overall, humans aren't capable of choosing who lives or dies, the death penalty contradicts laws already in place, the victim's family's pain will never go away, and death is much easier than a life in prison.
Boise State Vs. VTech

Thank you for starting this debate. My opponent is trying to back track by, now, trying to prove the probability of a Boise state win instead of proving that Boise State will win. The debate was titled, "Boise State Vs. VTech" and in the first post there is no indication on the probability of a win. My opponent's words. "This debate shall be a debate on who will win the upcoming game between the two schools in football. " Nowhere does it state probability; therefore with the addition of the words "who will win" allows for the definition to be set on a more absolute. Changing the rules in the second post is not warranted when the guidelines are set up in that one sentence. You must argue that Boise State WILL win! I am here to disprove the sense of absolute and show that there is a chance for Virginia Tech to win. On to my response: Let me take you back to my favorite upset in American football history, Giants VS Patriots Superbowl XLII. The patriots had an undefeated season and were 2 touchdown favorites over the New York Giants. "New England entered Super Bowl XLII as 13 to 14-point favorites" . http://en.wikipedia.org... The Patriots put up the most points over there opponent in that year and QB Tom Brady had broken records with WR Randy Moss setting themselves up for a win. "In one of the biggest upsets in Super Bowl history,[10] the Giants (14–6) won 17–14 over the previously undefeated Patriots (18–1). " That's what happens in football. . http://www.youtube.com... . http://www.youtube.com... . http://en.wikipedia.org... My opponent has flashed a few facts about the Boise state football team but it is not enough to convince anyone that Boise State will walk away with the win, not to mention that he left out Hokie facts. 1. Scrambling QB 2. Practically having home field advantage 3. Better established coaching staff 4. An awesome defense that does well over west coast style teams It is not as easy as my opponent has to prove!
Boise State Vs. VTech

I have been gone for quit some time and I'm sure he will give a good debate. Now for what my opponent said in his opening post. My opponent said that I must prove with out a shadow of a doubt that Boise State will in. However my opponent him self said that anything can happen in a football game, so I ask that use a more likely than not standard of judging this round. I also ask my opponent to give any better ideas for judging. But based on the nature of college football the option posted by my opponent is not fair for me to prove. Now for my argument: First and foremost Boise Stat has the upper hand on experience. Boise is only loosing 3 people from there team from last year. Only one of those 3 were starting players, and e other two hardly played last year. Also Boise State has a QB who is by far there best ever. Kellen Moore is cool under pressure, and unlike the previous QB for Boise he does not make stupid passes. Vtech's QB had a little more than a 50% completion rate. Boise's had 64%. And Kellen has far more TD passes than Vtech's. Now looking at game states over the past few years: . http://sports.espn.go.com... I think we can all agree that this will be a close game. Boise had the #2 D last year and the #1 O. Vtech had a decent stat record last year. But going on close games 7 points or less Boise is 9-6 with Vtech 6-9. Also when high scoring games come o play Boise has the far superior advantage. Over all Boise State has a high flying offense with a QB who is accurate, confident and is the heavy favorite to win the Heisman this year. Boise has more returning players, and last year had a QB with 1,000 more passing yards and more than double the TB's that the Vtech QB had. Our running game did not do as well as Vtechs however we were with out our top runner for more than half the season. And between the two teams Boise has the better rush D. Boise is labeled as having a high octane offense. I have never head that about VTech.
Boise State Vs. VTech

Ok, I'm taking the Pro which shall be the side of Boise State. My opponent shall take the side of Vtech, meaning Virginia Tech. I will not be arguing this round, and I shall lso ask my opponent to do the same. This round shall be used t set up definitions and get guidelines for the debate. This debate shall be a debate on who will win the upcoming game between the two schools in football.
Boise State Vs. VTech

I would like to remind everyone that this is not a intercollegiate debate nor was it set up to be one. I have argued the relevance of words and they're meaning in round two. Do we just throw out these words? Do we throw out what these words mean? I assure you that I have argued within a reasonable right. If my opponent could have shown that Boise State would have won with the force of being able to form a defeat with its second team than I would see why your vote would go towards him; but he himself has stated that it will be a close game. Must I remind you that I did not start this debate nor chose the words of my topic to reflect an assured win for Boise State. My position was not forced to show how Virginia Tech would dominate but how Boise State shows a chance to lose. My sources are based on facts. I have backed up everything I said with the addition of Virginia Tech's defense playing well against a west coast offense team. (Boise State is a west coast offense team. I think my opponent did not know this but I am just stating, also Virginia tech runs a multiple offense with a heavy emphasis on the spread. ) . http://www.hokiesports.com... (Miami has been a west coast offense team from the days of old) College Football is a sport of unpredictability. My opponent has been unable to show a prognostication towards an assured Boise State win.
Boise State Vs. VTech

OK, This is what I knew would happen. And it is a violation of intercollegiate debate. My opponent has put me into a corner that no person could back out of. I wrote in the first round that this debate was "This debate shall be a debate on who will win the upcoming game between the two schools in football. " I never aid Boise State will no matter what win. This debate is plain and simple Who will win the game. I have clearly given proof that Boise State is a good team and has a better QB statistical over Vtechs. My opponent is using info from a team specific web site I however am using an unbiased site. And my opponent has not once given hard statistics for his team. Also he did not give any proof how Vtech s good against a West Coast team. I showed to you that they are two and one with west coast teams. they beat Air Force. I have shown statistically that Boise State is a better team statistically. Boise shuts down running teams. Look at Oregon last year. A team that had a great year in running we shut down. Fresno had a running back that ran through teams, we shut him down. Boise has and will stop the best running teams. My opponent has not given evidence how or why Vtech will win. The only way you can vote is Pro. The evidence provided in this debate proves it.
Boise State Vs. VTech

My opponent has done a good job to show that Boise State will be competitive vs. Virginia Tech but has failed to show that Boise State will win with out a doubt. (Look at my other rounds to see the rules that was laid out at the beginning) The bottom line: It will be a good game. Both teams will play to the best of there ability. Boise State will be tough but so will Virginia Tech. My role in this debate was to be an advocate for Virginia Tech and show that they had a chance to win. This will be a game in which Boise State has never seen the football team in Virginia Techs style. . http://www.hokiesports.com... Virginia Tech's- Running game is explosive. Quarterback has just as much experience as Boise state with better scrabbling skills. . http://www.hokiesports.com... Coaching staff is legendary. . http://www.hokiesports.com... . http://www.hokiesports.com... . http://www.hokiesports.com... The entire state of Virginia behind Virginia Tech. . http://www.hokiesports.com... Good record vs. Ranked opponents . http://www.hokiesports.com... It will be tough but I have show Virginia Tech will be competitive.
Globalization: Friend or Foe, Con or Pro (though not in that order)

"Who first beneath the mistletoeOn Christmas night is found,Must pay a forfeiture, we know,To them that stand around.Approach, ye angel choirs, and thenMake way for happier sons of men."John Bannister TabbI found that poem specifically for the occasion, since it seems I've now been both put in my place and annihilated, and I feel like celebrating, a little. It's such a pity that my opponent was unable to complete the debate. I do hate forfeiture, both the act and the poem! I bid you all, audience and opponent, a very fair and merry day indeed, as drift the snows of winter and rise the spirits of the season in good cheer!
Globalization: Friend or Foe, Con or Pro (though not in that order)

Firstly, let me say what nonsensical interpretation my opponent has displayed of my round 2 debate."The United States have a gory and blood-bathed history, therefore they do not peacefully coexist now." No, I said they have a gory and blood-bathed history. I never once said this was reason to think they do not peacefully coexist now. Stop being a conniving rascal and actually quote me, stop intentionally lying about what I said."Native Americans were often matriarchal, therefore globalization is bad." No, I said Native Americans were often Matriarchal, I NEVER said this was why globalization is bad. Again, another twist of the conniving rascal that is pro."America has a trend toward sticking its chevrons where they don't belong, so globalization must be dictatorship-oriented." I did say that America has a trend of chevrons where they don't belong but this was not ever given as a reason to prove Globalization must be dictatorship-oriented, only to show how harshly it must occur. Again, another twist of the conniving rascal that is pro."Humanitarianism between nations is not to be encouraged." I didn't even use the word humanitarianism once in my debate. Again, another twist of the conniving rascal that is pro."Interrelation would destroy human domination of the planet." I NEVER EVER EVER said this once in my debate. Again, another twist of the conniving rascal that is pro.The only valid points of mine he addressed were as follows:"Globalization causes blood-shed and horror." I never once said horror and would like to abolish this term. It causes blood shed as I showed with many countries who attempted globalization. Creating a worldwide empire is exactly what globalization is about, don't lie to yourself."The intermingling and sharing of cultures and resources impurifies a country's way of life." This is true. I don't see how I ever said any racial slur within this so your counter is ridiculous."Countries should conduct secret weapons research." How else will they defend themselves? The very computer we're using was solely invented due to British research to win the Second World War by Alan Turing.I am furious and unimaginably enraged at the conniving nature of pro's debate. I would like him to apologise and concede all points then actually address my debate.