BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Ultimate Team War - Rapture

I apologise to my opponent for not posting sources for my last round. I was rushing to write my response before I had to go out and I just spaced on it, so here they are: [1] http://starwars.wikia.com... [2] http://www.dandwiki.com... [3] http://www.d20srd.org... [4] http://www.planetbaldursgate.com... Moving on… I don't think I underestimated your team at all. In fact, the great power and variance of your team is the source of my difficulty in coming up with a feasible plan. I must remember to take the enviroment of our battles into account more. Regardless, I'm confident in my plan, so here are my rebuttals... MAGNETO It seems that my success rides almost completely on defeating Magneto and I think my plan of attack will be very successful. First of all, Mace Windu is well and truly capable of using Force Grip on Magneto via the camera. The man is the former Grand Master of the Jedi Council. We see via the very source my opponent posted Mace Windu using Force Wave, an extremely powerful form of Force Push (which Force Grip is also derived from) to send hundreds of droids flying away from him. Force Grip is a much less powerful ability than this. The only reason that Mace Windu wouldn’t use Force Grip (and again, I strongly feel that he would have absolutely no difficulty with it and I’m sure the voters will agree) is because it is considered a ‘Dark Side’ ability. Clearly that is irrelevant in this battle. Second, my opponent claims that this is a telepathic ability, yet he very well knows that it is a telekinetic ability and Magneto’s helmet is no defence against it. Finally, there is no chance that my opponent’s team would think to destroy a security camera while Magneto is floating a foot above the ground choking to death; they wouldn’t know that was the source of the attack. So, my attack on Harry and Link works as I suggested it would, with an all-out onslaught by my entire team. MEWTWO I think my opponents defence against this attack is bollocks too. I specifically stated that the team would wait three seconds before detonation before teleporting Wolf to Mewtwo. This gives Mewtwo less than two seconds to react to the completely surprise attack. There is nothing on the Mewtwo page to suggest it has precognition or super reflexes. KYOGRE I admit that this is the most dubious part of my plan. However, I luckily chose Mace Windu as one of my characters for other reasons and he fortunately adds significant chance of success to it. You see Wish [1] works based on Wisdom; my source states “wisdom of 18 is nigh-on essential to get the most out of this spell”. This is not a particularly high Wisdom for a high-level character. If Mace Windu were a D&D character, I suggest his wisdom would be much higher than that, perhaps as much as 22; clearly he would be successful with “I wish that Kyogre would be transported into this room.” Even the most fiendishly devious Djinn would have trouble twisting that into also transporting enough water to flood the entirety of Rapture, even if the source of the wish had a lower wisdom. Mace Windu's wisdom makes this a moot rebuttal. SOURCES [1]http://www.planetbaldursgate.com...
Ultimate Team War - Rapture

Ok, so my opponent’s contingency plan is at least possible for me to defend against, so let’s see if my team can deal with the massive threat posed by Magneto… I purpose that Mace Windu can kill Magneto with FORCE CHOKE [1] without being in the same room as him. Irenicus will teleport (using GATE [2]) the group to the Rapture Control Centre, where Tony Stark will be able to operate the camera system (Ryan uses it throughout the entire first game) and bring Magneto up on screen. I don’t even need to venture into Non-Canon material to show that it’s possible for a sufficiently powerful force wielder to kill someone via a view screen. Darth Vader does it in Episode V. This leaves the Harry Potter and Link to take on my entire team, which would clearly be a slaughter. Knowing exactly where they are, via the cameras, Irenicus teleports the group into a position to ambush. Neither Link nor Harry Potter has the ability to sense, so it would be a suburb surprise attack. Mace Windu and Kratos attack Link, who would no doubt fight valiantly, but would simply be outmatched. Irenicus casts “Power Word: Stun” [3], Iron Man fires a volley of blasts from his palm cannons and Wolf fires his shoulder cannon at Harry Potter. He may have a chance to defend one of the attacks with a deflection or shield spell, but the barrage of the attacks would definitely kill him. My opponent will no doubt argue that oxygen is quickly running out because of his bastardly act and he is correct. But, this battle has been five minutes at the most so far, hardly enough for Rapture to be devoid of oxygen. *sigh* I have been trying to work out for three days how to approach this and this is the only viable attack plan I could come up with. The group seal themselves in back in the Rapture Control Centre, which would clearly have sufficient oxygen to last long enough for them to implement the follow set of actions. It’s a long shot, but I essentially have no choice. Mace Windu goes into a deep Force Meditation, reaching out to sense the locations of Kyogre and Mewtwo; via telepathy he can communicate this information to Irenicus. Wolf begins his self-destruct mechanism. As we saw in the original Predator movie, it only takes about a minute. With three seconds left, Irenicus uses Gate to teleport Wolf right on top of Mewtwo. The resulting explosion would obliterate both of them. This leaves Kyogre. Irenicus casts “Wish” [4] and Mace Windu (who clearly has the highest wisdom of the group, the variable of the spells success) and asks that Kyogre is teleported into the room. Once in the room, my remaining four team members would clearly rip the uber whale pokemon apart.
Ultimate Team War - Rapture

Water comes pouring in, flooding the room. Mewtwo covers himself in a psychic bubble. .. " It's a shame Mewtwo didn't cover himself in the psychic bubble before causing the decompression that just killed his entire team. Clearly my opponent didn't think out his plan too thoroughly. .. -Rapture is located at the bottom of the North-Atlantic ocean. [1] -The North-Atlantic ocean averages at about 8,900 feet deep. Even if we assume (which we can't) that it's only a quarter that, it's still more than 2000 feet. [2] -Humans generally die from nitrogen narcosis at around 300 feet. [3] -Even a whale must go through a lengthy decompression process to reach deeper depths. [4] -None of my opponents team has any method of protecting them from this sudden extreme decompression or from nitrogen narcosis. In otherwords, as soon as my opponent ruptures the protective glass, he causes a deadly decompression which kills all of his team. Even if he does manage to survive this decompression, his team members will be killed by nitrogen narcosis. He doesn't take into account that both Iron man and Wolf will be capable of breathing without the oxygen provided by the trees he just destroyed. So thanks mongeese, you made this battle very easy. [1] . http://bioshock.wikia.com... [2] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [4] . http://www.ftexploring.com...
Ultimate Team War - Rapture

Now, to choose my remaining two team members: Team Member 4: Magneto Magneto is a villain from the Marvel universe. While physically not very powerful, he is very intelligent, and has the ability to manipulate magnetic fields to his benefit. His wiki: . http://marvel.com...(Max_Eisenhardt) Team Member 5: Kyogre Kyogre is named in mythology as the Pokémon that expanded the sea by covering the land with torrential rains and towering tidal waves. It took to sleep after a cataclysmic battle with Groudon. Its wiki: . http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net...(Pok%C3%A9mon) My chosen canon is the anime. Now, onto the battle! My opponent has chosen in the comments section Olympus Heights as the starting location of his team. At the start, Harry casts a Bubble-Head charm on himself, and transfigures Magneto's helmet so that it is a closed container, holding oxygen. He then casts Fiendfyre upon the trees in the Tree Farm, burning them to the ground and depriving Rapture of its source of oxygen. Concentrating, he redirects the Fiendfyre along the past towards Olympus Heights. I estimate that it would take about a minute for the fire to reach Olympus Heights. Link puts on his Zora Mask, transforming into a Zora. After about thirty seconds, as the tree farm is gone and the fire is well on its way, Mewtwo concentrates his psychic energy to destroy the Arcadia. Water comes pouring in, flooding the room. Mewtwo covers himself in a psychic bubble and floats out the hole that he has created; Link swims after him. Harry and Magneto hold on to Kyogre's back as Kyogre departs. Magneto uses his magnetic prowess to bend back metal to expand the created hole large enough for them to safely pass. Team MONG quickly arrives in the water outside Olympus Heights. Mewtwo then concentrates again to destroy Olympus Heights like he did Team Rocket's research lab. Kyogre joins with a Hyper Beam attack, and Harry uses Expulso to add to the destruction. Magneto assists by ripping apart any metallic structure of Olympus Heights; this ability could destroy Iron Man, painfully ripping his suit in half, Jon, pulling out the artificial back of his skull, and Wolf, whose advanced technology would be robbed from him. Mace Windu would lose his lightsaber, and Kratos would lose any of his metallic weapons. No member of Team TVELL seems like they'd be able to survive in the water with an ability to put up any real kind of fight, especially after the destructive collapse of Olympus Heights. My opponent would have to point out how they'd survive at this point, because I don't see how they could; I would then detail how my team would fight off these survivors. If the war is still going on after Olympus Heights has been destroyed, Team MONG will proceed to destroy other parts of Rapture until either the war ends in their victory or the enemy has been found. Good luck, tvellalot, with your response. I look forward to reading it.
Ultimate Team War - Rapture

Team TVELL: Jon the Shattered One Extremely powerful mage. Main antagonist of Baldur's Gate II http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com... Kratos Main character of God of War series. He is the mortal son of Zeus. I'll be using his GOWIII weapons and abilities. http://godofwar.wikia.com... Wolf Lone Predator sent to prevent a Xenomorph outbreak on Earth. http://avp.wikia.com... Jedi Master Mace Windu The Jedi who would have beaten Darth Sidius (who later stalemated with Yoda) had Anakin not intervened. A master of all the Jedi arts and exemplary member of Jedi council. http://starwars.wikia.com... Iron Man Tony Stark, he's the man of steel, he's a real cool cat, he's the real deal. http://marvel.com...
A Proposal of Protocols (for those who care)

Ok, let's finish this thing. An excellent point on "To be played/decided/etc." So now we'll say that this form (where resolution is chosen in preliminary debate rounds) is also acceptable. If one does this, the resolution should still be clear - not a question or verbal gobbledygook. I know you know this, I am just writing out loud. So the code is this: ""I, [X], as a debater and judge, will/do... 1.Use only one account. 2.Understand and make it understood to others that the topic of the debate IS the resolution when I Instigate a debate, unless the resolution is to be decided within the first round(s) of a debate. 3.Respect the wishes of the Instigator of the debate when I accept a First-Come Challenge; i.e., if a person writes "I'm a Christian and want to debate an atheist," this will be respected. 4.Vote based on strength of argument, or by the parameters set forth by the Instigator, and not on my opinion of the topic. I will also try to provide constructive feedback/criticism as often as possible. 5.Attempt to write correctly in the language known as English. 6.Not go through a user's account and vote against them on every debate they've had because I had one bad experience with them, or disagree with them on something I feel strongly about, or for any other reason." That's what I have. Sjj, make any stylistic changes you think might be necessary. And thanks again to anyone who had input here. We'll see how it goes I suppose. Also, Sjj, please re-emphasize that there is not supposed to be a vote on this debate at the end of R5.... lol someone will surely vote and screw it up. Am I a pessimist or a realist? And thanks to you, Sjj. Peace Britt
A Proposal of Protocols (for those who care)

Gawsh, I only have 25 minutes left, scared me on the ride home, I was like "oh S**t that debate." I've read the comment section, and I noticed that my IRL friend gahbage had posted down there, which reminds me of a few debates that I had against him. When we debated, the topic, in both instances, was a sentence that had no resolutionary value. Something like "To Be Played". And from there, we did a thing where the topic was determined in the following rounds (5 were allotted.) While the second part of how we debated, with the topic being picked in debate probably isn't desirable for most people, I think that giving the topic a non-resolutional title makes life that much more difficult for people who vote on debates without actually reading them. Its an easy step to take, and its one that wouldn't require any alteration in code. The only criticism that I think could be put against it would be that it would become harder to find debates on topics. I suppose to counter this, one could just post the debate topic in the first lines of their argument (where else?) Also on the idea of RFDs, I thank you for bringing that up, because its something that needs to be in the heads of more users on this site (its sure in mine), as its just a good thing to do. I'm outta juice now Britt, I'm gonna hand the mic back to you. I am happy to have participated in this dialogue, and I thank the commenters for their opinions.
A Proposal of Protocols (for those who care)

I honestly don't have much to add at this point britt, although I would like to say a few things about a comment that was left below us. "Dude, I'm telling you, mandatory RFDs won't do anything. When people do post RFDs, the debater who disagrees with these RFDs will likely rebutt them in the comment section and perhaps even insist on a flame war. Not only that, but when we get RFDs, you'll then hear people start complaining about people who give RFDS are unqualified or don't even give real RFDs, but just say things like 'I VOTED CON because i thought his argument was better." So then the webmaster is gonna respond through having an official moderator moderate debates, which is only going to turn into a bigger mess. Why? Because like any forum, if you verbally wank off to the mod long enough (become part of his/her posse), the mod will start doing you favors, such as voting in favor of you on a debate you lost. So honestly, the voting system is pretty much unfixable. It's good in theory, but if you really want to solve the problem, you'll have to get rid of it all together. This will easily weed out the people who only come here for win ratios as well as eliminate the point to creating multiple accounts." After reading this comment, it seems to me that he does have a very good point. RFDs, while great in theory, pose a high risk of leading us down a path to nowhere. To me, it seems like the people that really care about debate and such already are the ones leaving RFDs when they vote, while those who think less of debate don't. I think the best thing that we can do for the website at this point is A. leave constructive criticism when you vote, and B. ignore stupid debates, by not voting. I don't know how far those two things will get us, but it will at least try to create and maintain some level of moral integrity. I also agree with the other point made, about removing win ratios. Nothing feels better to some people (myself included) to see a nice, high, green percentage. I think removing it will make the website more pure. Alas, this would require altering the code, and once again, we have not the power to do such a thing. I'm sorry I couldn't come up with something more to talk about at this point britt, especially after not getting in my last round. But thats what I have to say, and now that I've said it, I'm passing the ball back to you.
A Proposal of Protocols (for those who care)

This debate is a means to an end. It is also probably in vain. I would like to include as many debaters as possible, so please, leave feedback. If you don't really care, or don't care at all, then do just that, please - don't participate in the debate in any way, shape, or form. Don't leave comments, don't vote, and above all - DO NOT TAKE THE TOPIC. This is really not so much a debate as an announcement of ideas for the benefit of the debating community. Thus, I request a co-debater of some seriousness and who is also interested in fixing the problems at hand. We've all seen the quality of the site here deteriorate quite rapidly. The idea here is to pinpoint the problems, and come as close as we can to solutions that we can all live with. Roughly, I see the rounds going along as additions and refinements to the solutions of the problems (after we agree on what the problems are) as more debaters comment and leave their take on the situation. The end I have in sight is a sort of "Honor System" - an internal dynamic of trust and integrity for those that "sign" the resolution by voting and leaving a comment agreeing to complicity. For those that collaborated and "signed," there will be a knowledge, that if they are wronged in a future debate by someone by way of the problems we are trying to solve, that it was not by someone here. This does depend on the character of the individual, to be sure, and no matter what we come up with, it will only have limited application. In any case, I think it's an idea we can try and work with. My favourite problems: -A Fundamental (possibly intentional) Misunderstanding of what Debate is, as well as Voting based on opinion, friendship, or avatar instead of on strength of argument -Voter Transparency -Voter Feedback (RFD) -Silly debates and debaters -Disrespect of language -Multiple Accounts -Trolls Now, what can we do? Ideally, Britt
i hate girls that are like equal rights for women! then turn around and make the guy pay for dinner

"we like people for their qualities but love them for their defects." (Guillermo del Toro, line by Agent Myers in "Hellboy")from: http://www.imsdb.com...I love all people, women included. Even if sometimes they are inconsistent, flawed and illogical. We all are.We are on this site where we argue with others, not out of dislike and the desire to prove ourselves right, but for respect and the fun of debating.People make mistakes. They are subject to habit and tradition just as much as to individual aspiration. The women you refer to are in conflict. The media demand them to be independent, family values tell them to be the protected female.How do you expect them to make up their mind?You on the other hand have been raised to be a decider. Whether the woman gets the same rights or not: you're only content if you have a say in it.How about you just find a woman who is a better match for you and be happy?
i hate girls that are like equal rights for women! then turn around and make the guy pay for dinner

Okay i hate the women that are like i want equal rights! if the guys get to run 4 laps i want to run 4 laps if the guys get to normal push ups i want to do normal push ups . But then that same girl will turn around and be like you have to payt for dinner because your the guy and that how it works and oh you have to pick me up for the date because that's how it works. i mean if girls want equal rights then support it all the way not just half the way.
Abortion should be illegal.

No it shouldn't. For one, it is democratically supported. For another, it is the individual who has signed the social contract who benefits from society, and no-one else, unless predefined. That is, the child gains no inherent rights in the society - only through personal morality. Abortion is a good form of birth control, and finally we can use the aborted fetuses to help our country in other ways, from stem cell research to save lives to new flavoured ice cream.
Lying is always Immoral

Hurrah. Finally done with this debate.R1) Lying in NaturePro argues that more death means that a hypothetical Zombie Apocalypse would be even worse.However, there are two problems with that argument:1. If the Zombie Apocalypse is worse, then there would be even MORE death, which helps improve the world even more!2. The Zombies would win anyways. The movies are big, fat lies, with their happy endings and whatnot. More deaths early on just helps the Zombie Apocalypse finish up faster. Furthermore, Pro states that, " But because most people don't want to suicide, it is "common" for people to not accept death"Oh, so now he's calling depressed/suicidal WEIRD!? What kind of horrible person is Pro!? He then goes on to say that, "if people who suicided knew about the zombie apocalypse, there's no way they'd kill themselves. I mean, nobody wants to help zombies!"On the contrary. Many people would commit suicide to avoid the pain of having their brains eaten. Plus, being a zombie is actually really fun. R2) Lying in BedPro questions the reliability of Dilbert comics, claiming that they are satires. However, what he fails to notice is that satires are meant to reflect reality. The only reason non-productivity is such a central theme to Dilbert comics is because it is so commonplace in office settings. Thus, lacking productivity is the norm, and is moral by Pro's definition.As for the soldier from Monty Python, he has been saying that since the moment you accepted this debate; Pro merely noticed it just now, and is now taking his quote out of context. Shame on him. He owes the soldier and apology. GWL-CPA would give him a good scolding for this.R3) Online Lying Pro claims that since virtual 9spaceking is virtual, we cannot see him, but he is still there.I will argue that anything which we cannot see does not exist.P1: Out of sight, out of mind (adage)P2: According to solipsism, anything which is not out of mind does not actually exist (i.e. only mind exists)C1: According to solipsism, anything that is out of sight does not existP3: Solipsism is a metaphysical possibilityC2: It is a metaphysical possibility that anything that is out of sight does not existP4: According to Romanii's Law, all metaphysical possibilities are true in my little worldC3: In my little world, anything that is out of sight does not exist.P5: My little world is more important than all of your stupid worldsC4: Anything that is out of sight does not existSince that syllogism is too long and has too many big words for you to understand, you will simply accept its truth of it's final conclusion without further examining the premises leading up to it. CONCLUSIONI have thoroughly refuted each and every one of Pro's arguments, showing that Lying in Nature and on a Bed is actually morally desirable (because death and non-productivity are moral), and that Lying Online is not possible because virtual people don't exist. Vote Con!Thanks to Pro for engaging in this debate, and thanks to anyone who votes on it.