BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Anything multiplied by 0 would be 0

You, vi_spex, must undergo the following conditions if you choose to debate me on this topic: - No plagiarism - This debate must be taken seriously. A few jokes in between are acceptable, but that is it. - Both Pro (me) and Con (You, vi_spex) must share their BoP (Burden of Proof); Both must reason why they think what they think. Failure to undergo these conditions will result in an automatic loss. I will now present my arguments. Multiplication is a mathematical operation that takes however many sets of a number and puts them together. In the following equation: 3 x 2 The first number, which is 3 in this case, is how many there are of something per set. The second number, which would be 2 in this case, is how many sets there are. So, in this case, you need to put 2 sets of 3 together, which makes 6. We can also switch the numbers up, but it will always get you the same answer, but with a different meaning. So, in the following equation: 5 x 0 The second number, which would be 0 in this case, is how many sets there are. There are no sets. You have nothing. So, that would easily be 0. It does not matter what number is being multiplied with 0. You still have no sets if the number, that is how many there are per set, was altered. Also, again, even switched up, you will get the same answer. Remember, switching up the 2 number's roles won't change the answer, only the meaning. Hopefully my opponent accepts this challenge and either one of us get something out of this debate.
Anything multiplied by 0 would be 0

My opponent states that true is real and goes on to ask me about why 1 added to 1 makes 2. Look, there is a difference between true and literal. Let us take the following equation as an example:1 + 1 = 2This statement is a true statement; It makes sense and the answer is correct.This statement also can be a literal statement; You can apply this to a life situation, like adding one pen to another, and it will make two.So, basically, if a statement can be a literal statement, wording it how you did also makes sense when applied to a life situation. An equation like the following:6 x 0Is not a literal statement; It does not make sense when you say that you will multiply 6 by 0. It makes sense, though, when you say that you will remove the set. Remember, in this debate, we do not need to take math literally.My opponent also goes to say that I am not reading what he is saying, that there is no difference between multiplication and addition when you can not do it. Yes, I am. What you say makes sense literally. However, illiterally, you have no set. For example:You have 6 apples. You want to multiply by 0. So, basically, you want to take 0 sets of 6 apples to put together. You have no set. Therefore, you do not have 6; You have 0 apples.
Anything multiplied by 0 would be 0

My opponent goes on to ask me to show him 0 bananas. Con, vi_spex, when are you going to understand that math is not taken literally unless you are applying it to life situations? Either you have a very hard time understanding that or you ignore it.My opponent goes on to say that I set huge limits to my way of thinking with chunks and sets. No, vi_spex, all my explanations show that:1) I am capable of taking math illiterally.2) I know what I am talking about; I know what multiplication is, etc.And for you to later on say that you can take pen and add it with two other pens and know you have three in your hand just shows that you want to stay simple and you think that accepting the fact that any number multiplied with 0 is 0 or that any number divided by 0 is 0 will complicate your thinking; You are a coward.To be a proper debater, if you know you are wrong, you need to learn how to accept that fact and change up your thinking to correspond with that. If you are not willing to do so, you limit your thinking; As time passes, you will stick with the same thinking, even if it is outdated by then.Let me make it easier for you, Con; accepting the fact that any number multiplied by 0 is 0 will not complicate your thinking; You will only have very few changes to make. Same goes for the fact that any number divided by 0 is 0.Now, all you liberalistic DDO members can give conduct to Con. After all, I did use ad hominem in this argument and called him a coward, right? I do not care. He has to learn. As far as I could, being nice does not work.
Anything multiplied by 0 would be 0

show me 0 bananas you are setting huge limits to your way of thinking with this chunks and sets, it is non sense, where as I can take a pen and add it to the 2 other pens I have and know I have 3 pens in my hand, so its true, as I have to imagine a fourth and I certainly have more then 2 pens in my hand if you walk in the desert and you are hungry, and you imagine a banana, do you have 1 banana?
Anything multiplied by 0 would be 0

My opponent states that 0 added to 6 is 6 because it can not happen. My opponent is correct; 0 added to 6 would be 6. However, his reasoning for it is incorrect.My opponent is taking math literally. Indeed, adding 0 to 6 does not make sense in reality. For instance, you can not add 0 stick to 20 sticks. However, in mathematical terms, it does. Something happens too. You added 0 to 6. The only thing is that adding 0 to any number does not change that number.That is your problem, Con; You take math too literally. You have to stop doing that. If we were discussing a scenario, that would make sense; You can not add 0 to 6. However, in math, you can. However, the number that you added 0 to remains the same.In reality, 0 is not nothing. Again, back to my example:In the following equation:6 x 0The first number, which would be 6 in this case, is how many there are per set. The second number, being 0 in this case, is how many sets there are. You have no set. Therefore, it turns out to be 0.Same with division. In the following equation:6/0The first number, which would be 6 in this case, is the number that you will be trying to find chunks of the second number, which would be 0 in this case, of. So, in this case, you are trying to find how many chunks of 0 there are in 6, which does not even make sense.I await my opponent's arguments.
Anything multiplied by 0 would be 0

6 added to 0 is 6, because it cant happen, so it is an explanation, and not an equation 6+0=6 is false 6=true or, 6+0(6) 6 multiplied by 0 is 6 6 divided by 0 is 6 everything is something, and something is 1, and nothing is 0 existence is defined by experience, and existence is the balancing point between something and nothing, something exist, and nothing exist
Anything multiplied by 0 would be 0

My opponent states that he does not understand what sets are. It is basically a re-wording of groups. Let me give an example re-worded: In the followig equation: 10 x 12 The first number, which would be 10 in this case, is how many there are per group. So, in this case, you have 10 in a group. The second number, which would be 12 in this case, is how many groups there are. Now collaborate the information. You need to put 12 groups of 10 together, and together they make 120. My opponent also seems to not understand multiplication, and has a hard time doing so. You do not add. You multiply. The two concepts are very different. In the following equation: 6 + 0 You are adding 0 to 6, which obviously equals six. However in the following equation: 6 x 0 You do not have a single group. So, that automatically makes 0. Just to repeat, the operations of addition and multiplication are completely different. I await my opponent's arguments.
Anything multiplied by 0 would be 0

forget about the set thing you are changing the word soda, to set for example, why? I have 3 sodas in my hand, I cant have a set in my hand, what is it? therefore its automatically not usefull define set for me if i got it wrong what you are saying with the 5*0 example is you have 5, and you add something you cant add, adding nothing, therefore you do not have 0, as you cant add it
The Fire Flower in Super Mario Bros Wii better than the Ice Flower

MY CASERebuttalsI. The Fire Flower Can Kill Any CreatureThis statement is simly just false. For example, there are several enemies you cannot defeat with the Fire Flower. Common enemies that are immune to the Fire Flower include:-Thwomps-Dry Bones [1]-BoosOn a side note, Dry Bones can be defeated with Ice Flowers.II. The Fire Flower is Super CommonYes, but the Ice Flower is almost as common. Both frequently appear in different levels. The ratio of levels with Fire Flowers to levels with Ice Flowers is about even.III. Ice Balls Fall After One BounceThis is true. However, it does not make that much of a difference, considering that one can easily get close enough to an enemy without getting hit.ArgumentsIV. Star Coin CollectingIn some cases throughout the game, an Ice Flower is required to collect a certain Star Coin. World 1-4 [2] is a perfect example of this. There are no cases in the entire game, where a Fire Flower is required to get to a certain area or item.V. Ice PlatformsOccasionally, Mario will have to make an Ice Platform out of a frozen enemy in order to reach a certain area [3]. This cannot be done with a Fire Flower.VI. Usage on Multiple EnemiesIce Flowers also have another unique ability. They can be used to freeze an enemy and throw it at other enemies [4]. This, again, does not work with Fire Flowers.OtherVII. Sources[1] http://www.debate.org...[2] [3] http://www.debate.org...[4]
school uniforms

I'll start this off with a quick list as to why I believe uniforms are beneficial. 1. Creates a school identity/team spirit 2. Kids can focus less on fashion and trends, and more on education 3. Rich or poor, everyone is equal 4. Sets the pupils up for adult life; office jobs, uniformed work, dress codes etc. 5. Kids wandering out of school without permision can be easily identified and the school informed -- this prevents possible abductions and other incidents where the child can blend in without bring detected
Arrogance Is Necessary To Succeed

Round Layout1- Acceptance, No Arguments2- Opening Statements, No Rebuttal3- Rebuttals4- Rebuttals5- Conclusion, No New ArgumentsArrogance- Having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities.Success- The attainment of wealth, position, honors, or the like.I will be arguing that arrogance is necessary to succeed and my opponent will argue the opposite.
Arrogance Is Necessary To Succeed

Arrogance has no "moderation". Bumped down and deleted the word "over", and you become confidence. There is a difference between the two words: arrogance is much stronger and extreme and most times is negative connotation, while confidence is strong, but a positive connotation. Much can be said about the two words, but as I have summed up in the last round--arrogance is pushing confidence to a new level. In conclusion, arrogance is not required for success. In fact, most times it will ruin the success. If You were far too arrogant, setting the debate to merely 3 rounds that give you less probability to win compared to 5 rounds, it ruined your success. Of course, I have no say about whether or not you were arrogant when you were starting the debate. Nevertheless I have proved my point. Very confidently, but not arrogantly, I say "I will win. I can do it." If I were arrogant I would have lost conduct to you, my opponent. Conduct is crucial in this debate. Thank you too.
Arrogance Is Necessary To Succeed

Although arrogance may help, it is not necessary. As put in http://dictionary.reference.com..., arrogant means "making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud" as well as "characterized by or proceeding from arrogance, or a sense of superiority, self-importance, or entitlement". However, both of these are extremely negative. Over-confidence is actually the most cliched flaw, but a good one too, as it causes heroes to fall from a high point, one famous hero known as Oedipus. His over-confidence and stubbornness contributed to his great fall from being a respected king to a poor exiled old man on the streets. I will take this example and put it against you: Oedipus was trying to help himself and the people, so he confidently and courageously went forth and defeated the Sphinx. In this case, he was not arrogant, he was only confident enough to defeat the Sphinx. He smartly and calmly stood against the monster and defeated it. Had he been arrogant he probably would not have defeated the mighty monster. "Oh, your riddles have no chance against me!" Would have only angered the Sphinx. Within his overconfidence he is overcome with the illusion that he will succeed even when he has not even started to succeed. While you may not agree, I also point out that you made the logical fallacy of slippery slope--you say confidence will give you a boost and because of this, over-confidence will give you a higher boost. But in most cases, this is not true--too much of a good thing can be a bad thing. If you still doubt me I shall conclude in the third round. Meanwhile I will continue the story to prove my point. "very well, here's the riddle: [insert riddle]" The Sphinx says. "Ha! That's too easy! I'll figure it out super quickly!" Arrogant Oedipus states. "Then do it faster!" The Sphinx screams, already having its mouth open and bloody jaw in Oedipus's face. Oedipus bursts out in laughter. "I doubt your teeth will do so much as a cut to me!" *Sphinx eats Oedipus while Oedipus is attempting to mock the Sphinx* END as you can see over-confidence did NOT help him succeed in this case, but rather it ended in Arrogant Oedipus's death. I conclude round 2. Good luck to my opponent.
Arrogance Is Necessary To Succeed

Wow I forgot to put 5 rounds, I apologize. And hahah.Simply put, in part because I forgot to have 5 rounds, arrogance is an over confidence. I can speak from experience as I am 16, accepted to college, and am going to graduate from high school a year early. This being said, I have the feeling that arrogance comes with the territory and in turn helps me maintain myself as I do not want people to see me failing after I have been arrogant. Confidence in yourself leads to a bigger strive for success and if there is an over-confidence it will put you at a higher boost and help you better yourself and your success. You can see this with people like some celebrities and business owners who are unargueably successful. Therefore, arrogance is a key to success.
Trolling Badge

And now for the moment you've all been waiting for: my last round.I would like to acknowledge that I admire my opponent's attempt to pull out of this. However, it's not enough.There's no choice at this point. Seems pretty clear to me. Listen now, I've explained my whole thing about reddit. It has been established that the last page of the Internet is your least visited subreddit. As for the final boss, he's retired. I'm sorry he killed old spider, but he's done with that. There's no more. When it comes to the quote from the president, I wasn't going to bring it up because it wasn't necessary, but the President wasn't referring to the last page of the Internet. He was referring to my opponent's trolling. Sorry, it was just a perfect opportunity. I know what you're thinking. I do what I want. My opponent officially has no case against the last page of the Internet. I mean, some people like the earthporn subreddit. It's one of the top subreddits. Some people don't even know what it is. Doesn't mean we should ban it. So who's with me?! Subreddit equality! Let us not fall for this trap of discrimination and fear. I'm going to officially dub this "subredditphobia." It's eventually going to become a repulsive term for people like my opponent. Unite with me. Your last page is my front page. We have different tastes. That's it. We will tear down this tyranny! This abusive autocracy! We the people have the power to change this! We even have Morgan Freeman on our side! So vote con, and let's bring this down! Thank you to all who have participated and read and voted and everything!
Trolling Badge

Wow, so fast! Final round already! Okay, fine, I apologize for being a jerk, and to punish myself, if I lose in that debate, I will not obtain the trolling badge even if I win this debate. That's right. All my hard work put into this funny debate will go down the toilet. However, I can still win in this debate though, even if I lose in the other debate. I just won't get the freaking badge! You haven't rebutted the fact that the president hates it. How will you know that the last page of the internet is located on Reddit? Maybe it's hidden in a directory link within pornhub, or facebook, or even pointless sites. And BTW, spiders can be very very dangerous. This peticular one was very clever and genius, as well. It was so realistically designed that Jon thought it was a real spider. However, thanks to Spider-man (what an ironic super-hero to save the day), the real identity of the final boss of the internet is revealed. Unfortunately the spider used its ultimate attack and poor spidey was left. .. .||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| In conclusion this final boss of the internet is horrible. It has managed to kill even the great respected Spider-man! The final page of the internet should be banned, so that the final boss can no longer harm everyone. If we don't, we disrespect the president, spidey, those two's friends, and allow the final boss to spread his terror and reign throughout the internet. Ban the last page of the internet!
Trolling Badge

My opponent hasn't even apoligized for being such a jerk to actions. Just thought I'd point that out.Now to move down, I'm going to explain why the last page is subjective. It hasn't been disputed that the last page of the Internet is the last subreddit you ever visit. This means it's different for everyone. I have personally never visited the LifeProTios subreddit. Why? Because I don't care. Some people have. In fact, it's pretty popular. I just haven't ever gone there. Thus, it is my last page, but it's on some people's front page.So it's getting all wibbly wobbly. I would also like to say that the Internet is not a book. It's actually a forum that has some spinoff sources, but reddit isn't a book. Although, if you went to the museum of reddit's profile and read the swamps of dagobah story, you might think differently. I don't recommend reading that story, but if you're brave, go for it. It doesn't make reddit a book though. There's just an article internal to reddit. Back to the point, let's be honest with ourselves here.Basically, my opponent literally can't be right. See? Even Morgan Freeman agrees with me. I've already addressed this final boss stuff. The final boss is retired. I've also already addressed this whole thing about lap dances. Trust me, there is much better stuff on reddit. So who's with me? We unite to disband this autocratic government that would ban subreddits just because my opponent doesn't like them and is scared of picture_of_a_spider! We will be victorious.
Trolling Badge

I'm going to give the run down on why my opponent has clearly bit off more than he can chew.First of all, we can notice the clear conduct violation my opponent commits by assuming he's won the debate that precedes this debate. If he loses the other debate, then this is pointless. It's also a clear slap in the face to our dear friend Actionsspeak. Thus, it's a conduct violation.Now, I'm going to dispute what the last page of the Internet is.My opponent has provided us with some obscure webpage that claims to be the last page of the Internet. However, there is no proof. I could claim to be the final boss of the Internet, but that doesn't make me the final boss.So how do we decide? Well, let's look to the front page of the Internet. That would be reddit [1]. Reddit is the front page of the Internet, and there is credibility. Why is that? You choose subreddits to subscribe to, and everything important or relevant to those subreddits is posted there. If there's something missing, you can post your own link. So this means that reddit's title "the front page of the Internet" is actually a misleading title. It really should be "your front page of the Internet."Wait..... Dare I say it? *crowd murmurs**judge bangs a gavel and waits for me to speak*What's she gonna say?................................It's all subjective!That's right, ladies and gentlemen. The front page of the Internet is based entirely on what you want it to be! So what does that make the last page? Well if the front page is subjective, then the last page must also be subjective. You can have the late page and the front page as the same exact page. It doesn't make sense. So that means, the last page of the Internet is whatever subreddit you least visit.If you're not a redditor, then you don't have a front page of the Internet. So it doesn't apply to you, because if you don't have a front, you can't have a back.They're like mutually inclusive or whatever.So basically all of what my opponent said is bogus. He doesn't even know what the last page of the Internet is. He just knows what someone calls "the last page of the Internet."As for the final boss, everyone knows it's picture_of_a_spider [2]. A troll on reddit who would respond to everything with nothing other than a picture of a spider. He trolled so many people that he was satisfied with all of his comment karma and retired. He's gotten so much good karma that money literally falls on him for a living.Also, much better things happen on reddit than lapdances. Museum_of_reddit will let you know what it's all about [3]. Disclaimer: You probably shouldn't go to that source if you have a weak stomach.So to finish this up, the last page can't be banned, because you can't decide what it is to ban it.Sources:[1] http://www.reddit.com...[2] http://www.reddit.com...[3] http://www.reddit.com...