BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Jerry Rice was the best NFL player of all time

RebuttalsTexans14, I am, in a sense, a veteran of debate.org. You are a freshman. Do not test me. I am warning you. "I truly believe dogs are better than cats. I also believe that homosexuality is not a choice. I did not "ruin" your debate. All I did was vote with what I believe in. Don't go rushing to judgement." Look, you cannot simply vote for what you believe in. You must analyze the debate and vote for who debated more effectively. In the votes, there is a clear section for "agreed with before the debate" and "agreed with after the debate." Those you can do with whatever you wish. However, the other points are not a game. They are serious matters. The question is not, "Who do you agree with?" The question is, "Who debated better?" "The reason I posted the 208 touchdowns is because second place is Emmitt Smith's 175. It's not even close, so you can see why it's a valid argument. Also I think it's arrogant to say that you don't need a knowledge of football to win this debate." Career statisftics do not prove anything. They may be support, but they do not prove your case. Perhaps Rice had more touchdowns than any other NFL player, but what about his moves, his style, his speed, and his way of playing? You can provide numbers and fancy statistics if you want, but it will not help you much. The reality is that this debate is opinionated. Also, my opponent has not provided a source for his statistics. That is a huge mistake. You cannot argue something without sources. Did you make all these numbers up, perhaps? How do I know that these are not fake? It would be recommended that you provide a source. Look, Texans14, I urge you to listen to reason. I hope you grow and improve on debate.org, but this is not the way to go. I hope you take my advice.
Jerry Rice was the best NFL player of all time

First of all, I have not been trolling. I have been voting based on what I truly believe in. I truly believe dogs are better than cats. I also believe that homosexuality is not a choice. I did not "ruin" your debate. All I did was vote with what I believe in. Don't go rushing to judgement. Back to our debate. The only reason my argument was so brief was because I like to start debates short and to the point. The reason I posted the 208 touchdowns is because second place is Emmitt Smith's 175. It's not even close, so you can see why it's a valid argument. Also I think it's arrogant to say that you don't need a knowledge of football to win this debate. Here are Jerry Rice's career statistics. Games played-303 Games Started-284 Receptions-1541 Yards-22895 Yards per catch-14.8 Yards per game-75.6 Touchdowns-208 Longest play-96 yards Many of these are NFL records. So you're saying you don't need football knowledge to win this debate. I'd think again.
Passing Brexit was a Mistake for the United Kingdom

My opponents debate technique is awful. I posted so much evidence and even gave sources to the evidence...I'm not even going to debate you from your last post since you only bashed the integrity of my information which is clearly there, well stated, and that has proof given from my direct sources that are reliable. You have refused to even look at the EU constitution, so I will link it here: http://europa.eu... Final Statement: I believe in independence. It is strange, hard to come by, and is difficult to attain, but it is there, and the UK is grabbing it in a historical way. I know it will be difficult at first and I know there are people who are skeptical, but I truly believe with all of my being that it will be 100% worth it in the end when the UK can look at themselves as a thriving independent country in a world where independence doesn't come by very often. The news can say all they want, but based upon the past, independence has always garnered self sufficiency, and that is something worth attaining in my book. I believe in a more free and independent UK, and I believe in the country, so much so that I have no doubt they will make careful and well thought out decisions for their future as an independent body. As to my debate competitor: I am sorry you didn't find my information helpful...I don't know how to give you more evidence than I already have. If you decide not to read the EU constitution or the WTO, or any links of information that I gave to you, then my friend, you are purposefully blinding yourself to my debate which clearly answered all of your questions that you gave. But thanks anyway for debating the subject, it has been invigorating and full of knowledge.
People who use Debate.org do not think before they write.

Debate. org should be a place for itellegent debating, but this is not the case. Many who come here just give their opinion and don;t listen to the other debator. People should learn from others not just argue with them. No one on Debate. org even respect others' opinions. (please disregard the above text. this is a test to see if people read arguments or just vote based on their opinion. ) I like all the people on debate.
An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind

after my opponent forfeited his last round, i chose to not respond, as he gave me nothing to respond to. once again, my opponent forfeited the final round, and still i have no rebuttal to refute. thus you should extend all of my arguments, and recognized that they have not been debated by pro. in that case, those pints are awarded to me and you should vote con on the basis that they were not proven untrue. remember that this is about what pro has contributed to the debate and not your own opinion. so, thanks for reading and see ya soon :)
An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind

** what if everyone does commit a murder? then you would agree that the whole world would go blind. ** "what ifs" do not prove anything. in order for this point to be valid, you must prove that (there is at LEAST a likely chance that) everyone will commit a murder. the resolution does not suggest that everyone will commit a murder, and evaluation of both history and the current times indicates that most people do NOT commit murders. so this "what if" is incredibly far fetched and has absolutely no merit in this debate. ** after all, the saying implies "an eye for an eye" which would mean direct retribution ** the death penalty and capital punishment were the only crimes mentioned in round 1, which sets the tone for this debate and our discussion. further, even if i were to say "ok this terms means direct retribution for EVERY crime" (which i wouldn't), you would have to explain how the world will "go blind" if direct retribution were applied.
An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind

"so long as not EVERYONE commits a murder, then not everyone will "lose an eye"" what if everyone does commit a murder? then you would agree that the whole world would go blind. "keep in mind that the death penalty and killing have been the only crimes introduced to warrant the usage of this term" if death penalty has been introduced for killing, then why isn't a rapist raped and torturer tortured. after all, the saying implies "an eye for an eye" which would mean direct retribution.
An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind

the principle "an eye for an eye" refers to those who have committed a crime. so if someone committed a murder, their life should be taken as well to serve as equal and fair just punishment. well, so long as not EVERYONE commits a murder, then not everyone will "lose an eye" so to speak. meaning the whole world will not go blind. keep in mind that the death penalty and killing have been the only crimes introduced to warrant the usage of this term throughout the context of this debate. that said, back to pro...
An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind". Gandhi quote. The father of non- violent resistance in the modern age, Mahatma Gandhi led a peaceful revolt that won India's independence from British colonial rule. His message of non-violent resistance is as timely today as it was 50 years ago.When someone commits a heinous crime, such as murder, he or she is usually sentenced to death. This is known as capital punishment or the death penalty. The death penalty has always been a very controversial subject.
Health Care is Unconstitutional

The reason it is unconstitutional is because it infringes upon the rights of others. If someone does not want it, it should not be forced on them. But also, in case you haven't realized, this is socialism. Socialism is when the government takes care of life necessities. Health care is one of them since most of us if we didn't have it would go bankrupt. So everyone that was saying Obama is a Socialist, is 100% correct. Like Al Gore would say, "it's an inconvenient truth!"
Health Care is Unconstitutional

Hmm. Apparently...The debate is going to go similarly to this:Round 1: ArgumentsRound 2: RebuttalsRound 3: RebuttalsRound 4: RebuttalsRound 5: SummaryI believe that when PRO mentions 'health care', he is refering to Obama's Health Care Plan, aka Obamacare. http://en.wikipedia.org...Unconstitutional is "not in accordance with a political constitution, esp. the US Constitution, or with procedural rules."==Arguments==1) The constitutionality of Patient Protection and Affordable Care act (PPACA/Obamacare) has been supported by three out of four appellate courts.http://articles.latimes.com...http://online.wsj.com...2) Looking at historic indicators, we can see that Obama's health care plan is heading in a positive direction.Patrick Whelan, M.D, Ph.D., practicing rheumatologist and director of Catholic DemocratsAnd I am at the end of my character limit...Rebuttals next round :D
Health Care is Unconstitutional

I personally believe that President Barack Obama's Health Care Bill is unconstitutional. Why? Because you are making people getting something that they may not want. Actually statistics prove that more than 50% of Americans do not want anything to do with Obama's Health Care Bill. I don't want anything to do with it either. It has proven that it does not work. Look at France, and Sweden. Look at the EU position right now. They are going bankrupt, and some people want us to bail them out when we can barely bail ourselves out.
Health Care is Unconstitutional

PRO claims that I am hard to understand.1) I don't have much to say about this. This is simply his opinion, nothing more.(I am writing normally...at least in a DDO-friendly way)PRO says that most Americans appose the bill.1) I don't know about PRO, but I'm pretty sure a 50-50 split is not a 'majority'. I provided a direct link to CNN's polls, and it clearly shows that 13% of Americans believe that Obamacare should be extended, and 37% support it. This adds up to 50%.PRO mentions that his source is "Fox News".1) He didn't provide any link to show why this statistic is actually from Fox News.PRO claims that an appellate court is not the Supreme Court, which is most likely to rule it unconstitutional.1) Appellate courts are somewhat in the middle of court rankings. http://en.wikipedia.org...) Appellate courts are the best method of prediction currently.3) He doesn't explain why the Supreme Court will rule Obamacare unconstitutionalIn conclusion, my arguments still stand.
Health Care is Unconstitutional

PRO claims that I supported him1) He doesn't explain why, unless if he means that I dropped his "polls argument". PRO says that I didn't mention anything about his "polls" argument.1) There is no evidence provided for this.2) According to CNN, 37% support the bill and 13% want it to go even further. This adds up to around 50% who support the bill.http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...==Dropped==1) Once again, he didn't respond to the fact that 3/4 appellate courts support the bill.2) Looking at round 1, it seems that he also dropped the argument that we can see that Obama's health care plan is heading in a positive direction, through historic indicators.==Renforcing My Arguments==1) One of the jobs of our government is to provide everyone the right to life. We save around 45000 people a year with this bill.==New Arguments==1) Many unfair health insurance practices are no longer allowed. (Pre-existing conditions)Out of Room
Health Care is Unconstitutional

PRO claims that just because some people are against Obama's plan, it should not be allowed.1) If some psychotic murderers believe that they should be out of prison, should we listen to their demands?'PRO mentions that some people do not wish to have this bill.1)The goal of this bill is to insure as many people as possible. 45,000 people die every year in the United States due to being uninsured. http://www.cbsnews.com...PRO claims that "Socialism is when the government takes care of life necessities."1) Actually, socialism is "any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods." http://www.merriam-webster.com...2) By making this argument, PRO concedes that obamacare is necessary. 3) This protects human life, and everyone has the right to live in America. ==DROPPED==1) 3/4 appellate courts support the bill. NO ROOM
Who should be on the official mount Rushmore of wrestling greatness

Ok so the first thig you did what say how a mount rushmore should be based on people who started, expanded or empowered America, when using that definition Rikidozan STARTED the JNWA, which helped start the wrestling boom in Japan, as well as that he inspired and trained 2 other all time greats Antonio Inoki and Giant BABA, both of whom helped expand wrestling in Japan by founding AJPW and NJPW. Like how another person on my mount rushmore Mil Mascarus, helped expand not only wrestling in Mexico, but was one of the driving forces behind Lucha Libre, getting more recognition internationally. Now for your our guys Richard Negron, to be honest i have no idea why hes even in the discussion, other than founding the Wrestling League, i can't find anything hes done that i would consider worthy of being in the mount rushmore, definitly not over Mil Mascarus or Rikidozan,in terms of starting or expanding the wrestling business. Now for Bruce Baumgartner while a great amateur wrestler has never in your words expaneded, or started any part of wrestling, not a company or style of wrestling, so once again i don't see how he could be on this list ahead of flair, rck or any of my picks. This will probabily be the hardest thing to argue fr, that being hulk hogan being out of any mount rushmore of wrestling. So first of all, while you have point that hogan was in movies before the rock, The Rock did something Hogan could never do, he became a full time actor, and is now part of one of the biggest movie franchises in the world right now. He's paved the way for other wrestlers to become full-time actors. To finish this off, Hogan has a history for backstage politics, and refusing to put people over, while The Rock, has made superstars by putting over guys like Randy Orton, Batista, Brock Lesnar and John Cena. While Hogan single handedly delayed or destroyed the cariers of mr perfect, bret hart, yokozuna as well as randy orton, shawn michaels, remember the end of wrestlemania 9. Those are the reasons why i put the rock over hogan. Ronda Rousey, shouldn't be on a mount rushmore of wrestlig, maybe in mma but not wrestling, the only thing shes ever done in the wrestling industry is beating up Stephanie McMahon. Shes not in the wrestling industry imo, shes in the mma idustry so for me theres no way she should be included in this debate ahead of the rock, flair even hogan or even any of my picks. So thats why i don't think any of these people should be in the munt rushmore of WRESTLING not mma greatness. I can't wait to see my opponents comebacks and i look forward to reading them. Good Luck.
Who should be on the official mount Rushmore of wrestling greatness

Did you know Mount Rushmores 4 Presidents were not picked just because they are historic favorites or great? They were picked because each one either started, expanded, united, or empowered our nation. I tried to pick my 4 with that standard. 1) Richard Negr"n you have probably never herd of. Partly because he himself is not a wrestler. But without him you might have never even herd of wrestling as a major sport. Like Washington he founded the wrestling league. 2) Bruce Baumgartner is an Olympic Wrestler who is the very first name and face you will find when looking up historic olympic wrestling champion's. Thus he is quite literally the poster child according to his Googlability for real wrestling greatness. 3) For the exact same reasons my opponent chose the Rock I chose Hulk Hogan who is the actual wrestler that broke the wall into Hollywood. Its why they call him "Hollywood" Hulk Hogan. Back before the Rock even had guest rolls as a alien goon in Star Trek Voyeger Hulk Hogan got fake beat up by Rocky Balboa and before the Rock ever got together "the game plan' Hulk Hogan was in Mr Nanny. Hulk Hogan is the reason I even know what wrestling is because of those movies. At least he was the first reason. 4) Ronda Rousey is the only hope for the future of wrestling. She's the only reason people are even talking about wrestling again. She may not be in any wrestling league but everyone agrees she takes primarily wrestling moves into the ultimate fighter arena. The sheer level of awesomeness of her but kicking powers in her last match was so great even my friends who never talk about sports was talking about on Facebook. Not to mention she's possibly the first female wrestler to receive quite this level of adoration and attention by the media and fans everywhere of wrestling. Summary: my Mount Wrestling Rushmore has staples of real wrestling and fake wrestling, and staples of the founding of major organized wrestling leagues and the future of wrestling. Diverse great figures for diverse reasons. And I will defend this pick to the last round as the best.
Who should be on the official mount Rushmore of wrestling greatness

Ok so the first person i will add onto my mount rushmore is the 16 time world champion Ric Flair. Ric Flair revolutionized wrestling during the 70s and 80s, had the greatest gimmick of all time, and he owned it, the one and only nature boy WOOO.To go with this he has the greatest catchphrase of all time, ric flairs Woo could get a pop anywhere, from England to Korea and from the earth to mars, ric flair could get a pop. His fued with Dusty Rhodes is legend wait for it dary. He can get an awesome wrestling match out of anyone. His matches with Dusty, Ricky Steamboat and Sting are all time greats. The best on the mic of all time. He should be on everynes mount rushmore in my opinion. He in my opinion will always be better than Hulk Hogan, and that as well as everything else i have put on this list is why i believe he belongs on my mount rushmore. The second person i will put on my mount rushmore is the japanese legend Rikidozan, like ric flair Rikidozan was a massive draw anywhere he wrestled, but he was particaularily popular in Japan.During his first few years as a wrestler in Japan he was booked to wrestle and defeat the american wrestlers that made him a national hero during the keyfabe era in japan. Due to his popularity and the love he has from the people of Japan, he has helped the wrestling industry blossom in Japan, the region where wrestling is considered to be taken the most seriously, as well as that he has inspired and trained many japanese wrestling legends including Antonio Inoki as well as Giant Baba. He also founded the first Japanese Wrestling Company, known as the JPWA, also known as the Japanese Pro Wrestling Alliance, also featuring Inoki and Baba, who later went on to found the two best wrestling organisations ever All Japan Pro Wrestling and New Japan Pro Wrestling. Due to Rikidozans incredible impact on pro wrestling in Japan, I have to put him in my mount rushmore. The Third person i'm gonna put in my mount rushmore is the man of 1000 masks Mil Mascarus, like Rikidozan Mil Mascarus, has helped wrestling gain popularity in his home country of Mexico, and as wellas that he also helped increase the popularity of one of the best styles of wrestling ever lucha libre, because of him Lucha Libre is being enjoyed by millions of wrestling Fans around the world. For this i definatly think Mil Mascarus should definatly be in the mount rushmore. The Final Person who i think should be in my mount rushmore is the jabroni beating pie eating trail blazing eye-brow raising peoples champ the Rock. Why not steve austin you ask, well thats because hes the first wrestler to be able to break the wall into holiwood, this has opened the door for wrestlers to be able to make the transition to acting, and has given wrestling more mainstream attention than anyone in wrestling history, nt only that but his legendary mic skills and promos, helped the WWF gain more steam in the attitude era. Due to this The rock is my final pick for my mount rushmor
Who should be on the official mount Rushmore of wrestling greatness

please help me out with that some by procrastinating when you submit so that my 12 hour round includes some hours during the next day otherwise I will be typing my whole debate round on my phone from work. That's just a courtesy request you of course don't have to do it. My Mount Rushmore includes. .. 1) Richard Negr"n . https://en.wikipedia.org... 2) Bruce Baumgartner . http://bleacherreport.com... 3) Hulk Hogan . http://hulkhogan.com... 4) Ronda Rousey . http://rondarousey.net... And while I can here the comment section all ready protesting my choices I want to point out my opponent did not say we could only choose figure from wrestling leagues themselves or any particular league, they only said figures of wrestling greatness. I think I have a pretty diverse selection of figures that fill that bill for diverse reasons. I look forward to this debate.
Who should be on the official mount Rushmore of wrestling greatness

Hello everyone For my first debate i'll be talking about a subject i'm very passionate about pro wrestling. In this debate i will be debating that my mount rushmore should be the definitive mount oorushmore of pro wrestling. For those who don't know a mount rushmore of a certain sport would include the four most important of the specific sport, for example for basketball, my mount rushmore would be michael jordan, magic Johnson, Wilt Chamberlain and Kobe, or for football (european) it would be Pele, Maradona, Bobby Charlton and Zidane. So here are my rules 1. No swearing, bitching etc 2. Only 4 so no honerable mentions, no this one or that one arguments 3.
Longer Lunches

The idea that schools could persuade kids to eat better without making a single change to their cafeteria menus may sound like pie in the sky, but its proponents have some data to back them up. After analyzing the eating habits of 1,001 elementary and middle school students in Boston-area schools, researchers found that the more time students had to finish their lunches, the more fruits and vegetables they ate and the more milk they drank. ADVERTISING One of the six schools that participated in the Modifying Eating and Lifestyles at School " or MEALS " study gave students as little as 20 minutes for lunch. Some of that time had to be spent getting to the cafeteria and standing in line when they got there. By the time they finally sat down with their trays, some kids had only 10 minutes to eat. Of the other five schools in the study, two had a 25-minute lunch period and three set aside 30 minutes for the midday meal. The actual time to eat ranged from 10 minutes to 33 minutes (some teachers let their students go to lunch a little early), with an average eating time of 23.9 minutes.