BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Public school is better for developing life skills than Home Schooling

so sice you have no arguments...yet I will just accept the challenge. Lets not digress into homeschooling because that would not be considered private school. I will provide definitions: public school: (in the U.S.) a school that is maintained at public expense for the education of the children of a community or district and that constitutes a part of a system of free public education commonly including primary and secondary schools. [1] Private school: All Girls Boarding School Dedicated to providing the treatment your daughter deserves. www.sunrisertc.com Liberty University Online Online Christian University Degrees Get Free Info - It's Fast & Easy! www.libertyonlinedegrees.com Christian Ministry degree Complete a BA in Christian Ministry online through Leavell College www.nobts.edu/LeavellCollege Ads private school   noun a school founded, conducted, and maintained by a private group rather than by the government, usually charging tuition and often following a particular philosophy, viewpoint, etc. [1] I have gone to school in a private school my whole life (never public) and an American public school is worse that a private school. Begin your case. http://dictionary.reference.com... [1]
God probably does not exist.

I have accepted this debate on the pre-tense that I may not be able to keep up with my opponents high level of thinking, I have seen Sargon debate already on this site believe he is a very knowledgeable and skilled debater, I am still hoping to win this debate but the hope isn't very high as I may not be able to comprehend the high level of thinking my opponent has displayed on other debates. With that said and done, I will proceed and accept the Challenge, Sargon has to show that it is more likely that God doesn't exist, his argument does not need to prove God doesn't exist and neither does my argument need to prove he does, But I need to show that it is more likely that God does exist. .. .. .
God probably does not exist.

Ave.This debate is about whether god exists. I will be arguing that god probably does not exist. Con will be arguing that god probably exists. The winner of the debate will be the person who proves their case beyond a preponderance of the evidene.The first round is for acceptance of the debate format and rules. For the second round, both sides will present their opening statement. For the third round, both sides will rebut their opponents opening statement. The final round will be used for further debate and closing remarks.General expectations of conduct should be followed.God is defined as the personal (rational and conscious, omnipotent cause of the universe, matter, space-time, and everything else that exists.Vale.
Opponent picks topic.

Topic should not be about religion or celebrities etc. ')I have chosen the topic 'Most people with autism are extremely important in society'. I am con for this topic. I have inserted a most to avoid confusion. Most: 'to the greatest extent. ' (In this case, above 80%)Autism: 'a mental condition, present from early childhood, characterized by difficulty in communicating and forming relationships with other people and in using language and abstract concepts. 'Extremely: 'to a very great degree; very. ' Important: 'of great significance or value; likely to have a profound effect on success, survival, or well-being. 'Society: 'the aggregate of people living together in a more or less ordered community. 'All definitions are from Google search (type in define 'replace this with the word you wish to get a definition'). I need not argue that people with autism are not important in society; but I need to argue that they are of average or above average (but not too much) importance. While not needed, I can still argue they are not important in society. ARGUMENTSo, how are people with autism extremely important? They are simply people of average or slightly above average importance in the community. They may have been some famous and important austic people such as Albeit Einstein, but they are definitely NOT common. Austic people general belong as a member of they community, but on rare occasions like normal people they may become famous. If we removed austic people from this world, the world would certainly not be much worse off. Everything would be normal. Simply, how are MOST austic people EXTREMELY IMPORTANT to the world? I will assume most as at least 80%. Has 80% of austic people contributed to something EXTREMELY IMPORTANT to society? Of course not. Only a few have become extremely important to society such as Edison, who invented the light bulb. Have you ever seen a news article highlighting that most austic people are extremely important to society? I await my opponent's response. Thank you.
Opponent picks topic.

Right, I'm not too sure if I can come up with up to TEN different arguments, but I know I must try, so here goes. Here are all the arguments I can think of: Aviators is the best MLP artist Bronism is the true religion MLP: FiM is the best show ever Portal is the best game series Bronies are the most important people in society People with autism are extremely important in society Equestria and the MLP society exists (and so does the fourth wall) "My Little Portal" is the worst fanfic ever What defines the characteristics of a true Brony? What is the best song by Aviators? Hey, what do you know? I should probably be pretty smart and determined to actually come up with TEN different arguments. BTW, sorry that most of them are kindaof the same topic, I'm a huge Brony and really want to let the world know exactly what I believe in and what I think of the universe. Take all the time you need, I shall be waiting patiently. Thank you.
Opponent picks topic.

Welcome to the debate. This is a special debate, with special formats as follows.FORMAT1st round-Pro Introduce the parametersSelf-explanatory1st round-Con Provide the possible argumentsProvide ten possible arguments for me to choose from. Do NOT try to define or explain the arguments, as I can interpret the arguments any way I wish. Anything here should only be greetings or topics. I decide which side I wish to be, IGNORE the fact that debate.org says that I'm pro. The debate topics have to be somewhat different, to prevent ten rewording of a single topic. I can change the topic you provide slightly as well for the debate to be a fun experience. At the start of round 2 I will underline and bold the confirmed topic. 2nd round-Pro Argument & selection of topic.I will provide a confirmed topic here, define the topic and supply my arguments as necessary. My side (pro/con) will also be clearly stated here. Please cite all research and arguments. Please provide evidence for all arguments.2nd round-Con Argument & Rebuttal.Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.3rd round-Pro Argument & Rebuttal.Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.3rd round-Con Argument & Rebuttal.Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.4th round-Pro Argument & Rebuttal.Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.4th round-Con Argument & Rebuttal.Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments. Pro Conclusion & Rebuttal.5th round-Con Conclusion & Rebuttal.Rebut arguments and provide a conclusion in this round. No new arguments.5th round-Con Conclusion & Rebuttal.Rebut arguments and provide a conclusion in this round. No new arguments.No abusive language please. The topics that con picks should not be abusive. The topic has to be debatable worldwide. "My opponent picks the topic." is only a placeholder for real topic, so you may NOT post "I am not posting any topics, therefore I win" or something along those lines. Also, please post topics that are easy to debate on both sides. Topic should not be about religion or celebrities etc.Failure to follow the rules and format stated above results in a full 7-point forfeit to the opposing team. Argument forfeitures also result in full 7-point forfeitures.Rule breakage will result into a full 7 point loss unless forgiven by the opponent (special conditions such as debate topic chosen by opponent can be included if opponent broke rules). Also, justified rule breakage (including forfeiture due to previous opponent forfeiture) does not count as rule breakage. PLEASE READ THE FORMAT AND RULES. I hope we have a good debate. Time limit for each argument: 3 days.Character limit: 5000Thank you.
Direct popular vote should replace the electoral college in U.S. presidential elections.

To clarify, if you read the Round format, it does say I can post my questions to the debate. I did not break any formatting rules.1) Well, if you look at the value of each individual vote per election, you see massive distortion created in each state. Wyoming has 600,000 people and have 3 electoral votes (600,000 divided by 3= 200,000). California has 36 million people and only 55 electoral votes (36,000,000 divided by 55= 654,545) Thus you can see that 1 vote in Wyoming has the representational power of 3.54 votes in California, a distortion of 354%.2) America is a Democratic Republic, defeating both of your definitions. [1]2a) Not applicable since America is not solely a Republic, but a Democratic Republic. 3) Popular vote represents the national majority. The Electoral College is the state majority.3a) Of course not. I don't see your logic there. The Senate serves the states. That is it's express purpose. The House of Representatives serves the people.3b) States are already represented. We need to put the power in the hands of the people, not the states. 3c) Your flow of questions is becoming unclear, please define the "sentimental attachment".4) If you read my 1st round case, you can clearly see the Subpoints explained, in detail, how the Electoral College fixes each and every distortion created by the Electoral College.4a) Throughout the Rounds, I have repeatedly shown how the Direct Popular Vote fixes these distortions. Please actually read my cases.4b) Once again, you have to read everything written. It is clear you did not read my case.5) Your flow of questions is illogical. The Supreme Court's ability to judge Constitutionality is still applicable. Not sure where this question came from.I offer an observations:1)- My opponent has obviously failed to read my case, or he wouldn't have asked many questions.Let's look at the entire round today: (Round formatting does say I can respond)My opponent's only contentions for the Electoral College to remain is that it was the Founding Fathers' intent and Small states are being protected.Refutation 1: Founding Fathers' IntentThis argument requires a few answers:1: The Founding Fathers were not always right.2: The Founding Fathers could not have seen the distortions created by the Electoral College.3: The original reasons for the Electoral College are no longer applicable.4: There is absolutely no impact for this point.5: We need to look at what is happening today, not to the happenings of the 1770s.Refutation 2: Small StatesThis argument also requires a fwe answers:1. Small states aren't protected by the Electoral College. (Montana, Alaska, N. Dakota, etc. etc.)2. Under the Electoral College, even larger states are being ignored (Indiana, in my Duke Chronicle evidence)3. Small states are disporportionately represented.4. Representation should be porportional to population.5. Small states willl still have a major voice in elections.For these reasons, I urge an affirmative ballot.
Direct popular vote should replace the electoral college in U.S. presidential elections.

This will be a PF style debate. Round 1: Pro begins debate by presenting its case. Round 2: Con presents own case and attacks opponents' case. Pro defends his case and attacks Con's case. Round 3: CX. Con questions. Pro's responses and questions. Round 4: Con's responses. Pro's "final focus" (telling why they think they won) Round 5: Con's "final focus". Pro does no arguing or rebutting (pro started the debate so Con should finish it to keep the debate as fair as possible). Also, I would like to ask the voters to only vote on who made the more convincing arguments and who used more reliable resources. (a forfeit in any of the rounds will result in an automatic loss)
Direct popular vote should replace the electoral college in U.S. presidential elections.

A few observations: 1) My opponent failed to realize the U. S. is a democratic republic many times.2) My opponent failed to discern the difference between a democratic republic and a republic.3) My opponent has confused the Senate with the Electoral College.4) My opponent confused individuals with states.5) My opponent never refuted the fact that the voices weren't proportional.6) If my opponent had taken the time to fully read my case, he would have realized that I showed in each of my points how the Direct Popular Vote fixes the problem.7) My opponent argues distortion is good. I argue distortion in elections is bad.8) My opponent still fails to list a single, real, non-theoretical negative impact of democracy.9) Equality of states is guaranteed by the Senate, not by elections.10) Electoral College is disproportional, Direct Popular Vote is proportional. 11) My opponent agrees the Electoral College has flaws. To finally clarify the debate: My opponent argued that I never showed how the Direct Popular Votes fixes these distortions. Here are my quotes from Round 1: "Direct Popular vote repairs this distortion by creating an even playing field and placing every vote value at the same value: One. ""Direct popular vote would solve this rare problem by placing the power of the election back into the hands of the people for which it was intended, rather than keeping it in the hands of the few. ""The direct popular vote would fix this discrepancy by making voting power equal across the nation and allowing candidates to address the nation, not just a few states. "I clearly showed how the Direct Popular Votes fixes all distortions. My opponent apparently did not read my cases through. I would encourage each of the voters to read the entirety of the debate as always. I realize the debate is quite long so I thank you for reading it. I urge an affirmative ballot today.
Uniforms in Private Schools

Actually, you don't win just yet. You state that some clothing isn't appropriate for a learning enviroment. That I agree with but I never said anything about dress codes. Should there be dress codes? YES! So, don't get all snappy with me about that. Creativity is something that lives inside us all. We should be able to express ourselves in our clothing and in the actions we do. I have just one thing to ask you, do you even go to a private school?
Uniforms in Private Schools

Topic: The institution of uniforms should be allowed in private schools. My side: Pro There's a reason why there are private schools. All public schools have to comply to the general rules and standards that their respective district imposes upon them and for a significant number of those rules apply to all the public schools in the nation as a whole. Private schools exist because of a large group of individuals do not concur with how the education system is organized and structured. There are certain rules and regulations that the founders of private schools regard as unnecessary or even wrong. Not all private schools require uniforms, but those that do, find the clothing that some children and young adults wear is inappropriate for a learning environment. In order to effectively accomplish what schools are built for, which is to learn and gain new knowledge, these private schools find that enforcing a dress code improves the focus and classroom behavior in a learning environment. You argue that enforcing this policy restricts the youth in creativity. Clothing are often popularized and worn in fashion trends that occur locally and nationally. Many people in the world dress in a certain way in order to fit in a particular group of people, not to be an individual. Rarely do people dress to practice and challenge their creativity and appear in an original fashion. Even if uniforms do restrict creativity in some way, creativity is certainly not restricted to fashion. There are unlimited possibilities for people to be creative other than how they dress. They could write prose, draw art, devise a project, research on a topic and discover new information, and so on.
Uniforms in Private Schools

You need to be a little less rude and focus on the debate. Yes, I go to a private school and I used my person experience. Actually, as I type this I am wearing my uniform now. We should get rid of uniforms, but keep a dress code because uniforms are ugly and they don't seem to flatter the body. I get a little bullied at school by one person because apparently I look "fat" in it. I always defend myself, but that's beside the point. PS: I would love it if you were a little more respectful toward your opponents. You come across as aggresive and mean and no person should come across like that. Please be a little more respectful.
Uniforms in Private Schools

Not only does Con take this debate to a personal level, but attempts to strawman, as well. The hubris of the defeated… My contentions were never along the lines of “Creativity is something that lives inside us all. We should be able to express ourselves in our clothing and in the actions we do.” The debate is revolved around whether uniforms should be allowed in private schools. My opponent has yet to state reasonable justifications for why uniforms should be prohibited. One can express creativity in unlimited ways and can dress as s/he wishes outside of a class environment.
Frozen Is A Good Example For Young Ladies

"This is not a good example for young ladies. It's a bad clich" that powerful women are dangerous and reckless, even merciless, and that you can only be "free" by becoming a fashion model. Being a model is a bad ideal. We know how the pressure on models and pageant contestants drives them into eating disorders, drug abuse and more [1]. Elsa shows characteristics of mental and physical disorders, in particular depression (locking herself away for YEARS) and Anorexia nervosa (her waist is thinner than her head), setting a really bad example for young ladies to follow." I don't agree with your statement. Elsa did not "lock herself away for years", she was separated from her sister and any contact with the outside world because her parents didn't want her to hurt anybody around her. The parents were trying to help her get control of her powers before allowing her to have more contact with people. Women in the film weren't PERMANENTLY abused. Sure, Anna's memories were "removed". But you obviously didn't pay attention to the part where the Grandfather Troll said, "Don't worry, I leave the fun." Therefore, he is implying that he simply changed the memories that had magic. He left the good times. Elsa was driven from her home, but because she was scared. The only person who judged her was the duke of Wesleton. He called Elsa a "witch" when she really wasn't. To add to the part where she is later beaten, you are also incorrect. The chandelier in her ice castle collapsed and while she was running away, a piece of it knocked her out. Another statement that I would like to add to in your rebuttal is where you said "pressure of being independent and powerful in ADDITION to being physically 'perfect' ". In the song, "Let It Go," Elsa said "That perfect girl is gone." The entire song is about a young lady trying to find herself. She is finally accepting that she isn't like other people and she never will be. I'm sure that sometime in the past, you were insecure and that you made some bad choices. But you got over it and accepted yourself in time. I really don't see the difference between that and the song "Let It Go." "How does locking two innocent girls away for years "for their best interest" fit in? If family went above all, why would the parents hide their daughter away because of her powers? Would a real family not be supportive of her exceptional talent?" When the King and Queen locked the gates, it was their choice. In another movie, the hit film "Shrek", Fiona was locked away for "her own good" by her father. It pained him to do so, but he still did it.
Frozen Is A Good Example For Young Ladies

Many young girls are saying that they "are in love with the love of their life" when they haven"t had enough experience in life to understand what love is. At the very least, the girl and the said guy can be just friends. What if they make some wrong choices and the girl ends up ruining her life because she thought she had found Mr. Right at a young age? Another example as to how the movie "Frozen" is a good movie is because it shows that family is the most important thing in anybody"s life. Even though we live in a society where there are more families becoming separated, the movie shows people that despite their actions, a family"s love for each other can overcome anything. In the song "Fixer Upper," one of the trolls said that "People make bad choices if they"re mad, or scared, or stressed. Throw a little love their way and you"ll bring out their best." In another part of the movie, Kristoff said this: "You mean to tell me you got engaged to someone you just met that day?! Have you have a meal with him yet? What if you hate the way he eats? What if you hate the way he picks his nose...and eats it?" He is stating that maybe Hans, Anna"s "true love", may not be what she expects and that she should reconsider marrying him.
Same-Sex Marriage

Alrighty, here is the structure: 1. Acceptance 2. Main Argument (no rebuttal) 3. Rebuttal 4. Conclusion (no rebuttal, any last info) We will be debating on whether or not gay marriage/same-sex marriage should be legal. Trolling is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. These definitions will be the accepted ones: Marriage: a ceremony in which two people are married to each other (http://www.merriam-webster.com...) Gay/homosexual: sexually attracted to people of the same sex (http://www.merriam-webster.com...) Any breakage of any of these standards will result in immediate forfeiture. Regardless, I hope for a good debate :)
Same-Sex Marriage

I will make this quick, as I may have little time. I recently(4 to 5 days ago)came down with a nasty case of stomach flu known as viral gastroenteritis. To save details, my bathroom and I became close friends. Anyway, I apologize for missing the first round and concede to my opponent. I have forfeited, whether or not medically unable. I hope we can still debate another time. Maybe in a week or so when I can put two and two together and still get 4. Sorry again. I know people keep bailing on your debates. Good luck anyway :)
Same-Sex Marriage

I accept, but on one small condition. Before we start the debate, we should at least define what same-sex marriage is so that we don't have any confusion on the definition of the term during the debate. With that being said, here's how same-sex marriage is defined by the Merriam Webster Dictionary. Same-sex Marriage: the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage. [1] With the definition out of the way, I look forward to a clean, and rational debate with my opponent. Citations: [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...