BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Ultimate Rap Battle: The Sequel

Call me a hoe, throw me a sequel That's Okay though, I gon' rip, Yo. Call Purple absurd, but I got rhymes like no other. Make you pee in your pants just like your little brother. Kid you forget that fact that rap is more than rhymes. It's a musical form, what's crucial is the timing. Your nonsensical syllabic structures make me sigh. So bad it makes me mad and wonder why you even try. Internal rhyme schemes making your head spin. Are you here to suck the D or are you really trying to win? So here we go again. Another wack rapper for me to bash and toss in the garbage bin.
Ultimate Rap Battle: The Sequel

Oh hey there, I hope you don't care I was looking on the org, and saw you were there. So i thought to myself, Oh my This girl got rhythm, her raps are fly but then i saw the name, it was absurd my friend, my buddy, my bro somenerd. I thought, dayum, this girl beat my bro So i decide to go all ape s**t on this hoe Sorry for the insult, but you gonna die Whats with the pic, arn't you a guy?
Ultimate Rap Battle: The Sequel

Sure I'm a dude. Born in eighteen ninety nine. Believe what you read, kid you're out of your mind. Maybe if you took the time to learn to rhyme, You might even make sense half the time. The difference between you and me? I'm a true MC. When I drop my lines it's mental imagery. Think you look good standing next to me? I grab the mic and turn you into a catastrophe. See when I groove, my words are music. Sound it all out, and you can move with it. Losing it, dancing crowd, tearing up their shoes to it. When you take your turn, it's it smells like moose sh1t. And to the audience who are in the know.
Ultimate Rap Battle: The Sequel

Round five, the end of the show. After all this time, you still like to blow? I'm not going to lie, this has been fun. But now I'll take my trophy, since I obviously won. Your rhymes are lacking, they have no flow. If you don't understand, Ill try to talk slow. Repeat after me "Purpledrink sucks" "Hes better than me, i rapped good out of luck" Now there, sit there, do you feel better? Im pretty sure you lost, did you not get the letter? A little birdy in the comments, mentioned little wayne you remind me of him, no rhythem, and well, insane. You can't try to battle, if you can't win. I will break your legs, and I will bruise your shins. You will bow down to me, as I am the master. I rap so quick I can't go any faster. As I sit and stomp you, You fill up with agony I am so better than you, you just a dumb tranny. Your profile says youre a dude, but you look like a chick. Either youre lieing, or you are a girl with a d**k. Sorry to question your sex, that was off guard. But listen, b***h, go run in the yard. Bark bark, that is what your raps are to me. For me losing sucks, but for you its a nessissicty I mean for you, its impossible to be great Give up, because you just got raped. So decide my audience, tell me who won. Grammar's for idiots, but I am still number one.
Ultimate Rap Battle: The Sequel

Nothing is yours. You can call me a whore. I break your balls till you're sore and make you pray to the lord. Say you're blessed by the Pope? Or molested and groped? Better hope I don't say you're a joke. I see you scared and trying to step up your game. Try hard by you're coming up lame. For shame! Want that fame but ain't getting no love. Cocaine is a hell of a drug. Hit that pipe, it makes you high as a kite. Try hard with all of your might to be tight. But your rhymes just ain't coming out right. I'm in your mind, gonna turn on a light. Get in your head and make you want to be dead. Round 5 and you're feeling that dread. So sad. You'd rather die than have read what I said. Feeling shy, your tears soaking the bed.
Ultimate Rap Battle: The Sequel

Mammy, yeah, you know how to spell The pope blessed me, and told you to go to hell. I'm a sweet rhymer, my beats are extreme. You just an old timer, gay and serine Maybe you used to be good, back in the 50's, Sorry to tell you, but rap ain't for hippies. You think you can beat me, but you are just so bad. That crap you call rap just makes me sad. I can't believe it, you think you can win? Tell ya what lil' girl, you better think again. I'm telling you, you ain't good no more, you can't rap you dumb a** whore. There's some bad insults, but a female Canine? I think you better forfeit because this battle is mine.
Ultimate Rap Battle: The Sequel

Wanna come profane? I blow your membrane. Okay. Listen b1tch. The Drink is legit. So sick when I spit, it makes you listen and think. You try to bring it but it's wrinkled old sh1t. Wanna win it, try to rip it, but you sinking the ship. Try to step, but get kicked in the ribs, licking a d1ck. Run back to Mammy, point right at me, tell her I win. Whoa it's just getting so much worse and worse for you. Like the Pope throwing holy water and cursing you. Do I really have to read another dopey verse from you? I'd really rather end it and just throw my purse at you.
Conservatism is the best option

In your argument you bring up points about both that have to do with the history of Europe. In modern times in America both of the ideas of changed where Liberals want to increase entitlements and have the government do everything for the people. The problem with that is then curroption kicks in and oppression happens. Modern conservatism wants to save money and let people mostly govern themselves which keeps away government oppression and bring economic wealth to a society.
Conservatism is the best option

Conservatism is a ideology built on tradition and values policies based on its age; the actual effectiveness of such policies/relevance to the current political/social situation is not as important.Liberalism is largely attributed to John Locke, who was living during a time period where absolute monarchy was popular. Because liberalism is based on turning away from more tradtional ideals, liberalism generally supports ideas such as free speech, press, religion, etc.dat 500 character limit
Conservatism is the best option

It promotes individual freedom. Unlike liberalism, conservatism promotes freedom among all individuals in a society to govern themselves. As long as people maintain that freedom, government can not take over again. Liberalism is too similar to socialism, nazism, and communism. What do all four of these things have in common? They involve socialism and collectivism which can damage a society greatly. Conservatism is closer to our core values. Conservatism upholds the constitution with high regard
Conservatism is the best option

Modern conservatism does advocate limited government, but the reason for this is not what pro thinks it is. It is really to limit regulation of big businesses, which happened to be the number one source of corruption during the Industrial Revolution (railroad trusts, Boss Tweed, etc.). Contrary to what my opponent believes, corruption does not come with power, but with money, which is exactly what conservative politicians get a lot of from big businesses for running on this type of platform.
Has christianity deviated from truth

I think christianity has gone astray.We water down the gospel,the church seeks to entertain people,for the most part its about sitting in a pew listening to a pastor giving a sermon,then chucking "20 in the offering hat. The church is more worried about outward appearance than inner/heart change. The average church member even thinks it ok to go home after a church service and watch porn. we call the few preachers who faithfully deliver a sermon,we call them fanatics or even heretics.whats wrong
Has christianity deviated from truth

I think you misunderstand my question.I dont think christianity has been poisoned on the contrary,i think christianity has lost its roots and effect.There is no need to bring the old testament God into it. My point is the church is all about outward appearance,not inner change. I think we mislead people,with a diluted gospel message.Paul's hard hitting message is overshadowed with "his soft sayings". The gospel should offend,believers especially. where are the men of God.
Has christianity deviated from truth

I put forward a proposition that the old fundamental sect of Christianity has not only failed but is poisoning the entire religion and movement itself. Firstly, no person in the modern age truly follows the gospel word for word. The bible advocates stoning women for adultery and portrays God as a hypocrite (as he commits genocide after telling people not to kill). Therefore a modern interpretation on the bible is required to remove outdated and morally dubious parts, and inject vitality to it.
flat tax

Um my stance thing isnt negateing anything. I'm clarifiyng things. "A flat tax can be any rate as long as "taxpayers pay taxes at the same percentage rate of their total income" so it is irrelevant if our government would implement a 100% income tax or not. What is relevant is that a flat tax could call for 100% of an individual's income." This is not true because I make a billion dollars the goverment takes away lets say 20%, but then the poor people get 20% taken awat too. thats not 100%. Your for a national sales tax instead. If you look at europe they love them. You start out with a 7% sales tax but then it raises in a year rose 17 Um your local goverment statement is only partially correct. The department of education doent establish schoold, but it does guve many people loans for school. As well as other things. http://www.ed.gov... You 0% plan still doesnt work, they have to buy supplies aka your sales tax. So either way you can gelp or hurt them. I meant to say it is more economically sound then your plan and the current one. "That is not the debate." Yes it is because you talk about how your is better then mine, I talk mine is better then yours and how the old system needs changing. That is implied since this debate is american and that is a big issue on this topic. Your definitoon is similar to mine. Mine is about acheivement. So is yours, I just left out the private ownership and work part. Cool, thanks for explaining your definition of the 100%. But it doesnt work. They only own a percentage of the income, you own the rest. A national sales tax is a risky system that may not raise near enough money to support all our needs in defense, education, health care, etc. Consumer spending, which drives a thriving economy, would likely drop as people save and invest more rather than spend. Need more examples? E. Burnum. The Federal law trumps state laws. So they can intervene whenever they want to. It's in our constitution.
flat tax

ok I made this debate to broad. But I will keep it as it is. Well to make my stance more clear, I belive every tax rate needs a constitutional ammendment to pass. This is so when the goverment passes lets say a 9% or a 6% tax then they cant keep raising it every time they blink. Because you 100% is imopssible anyway, and our goverment isnt that dumb to make a 100% tax at this time. I also don't see how it is immoral. Should my parents who make x amount oof money get taxed 40% and not the people a few miles away? A small tax won't be that much. Further more they use our schools, our roads, our police system, and they don't pay for it. And it wouldn't make people more poor because if the buissnses are taxed less they will be more likely to hire. EX. lets say after investments I have 1,000,000$. I own a company. Then the goverment comes and takes 50%. Or after the flat tax with an ammendment is passed I only lose 10%. Woould I be inclined to hire more with losing 50% or 10%. I would build a new factory and hire with the 10% law! Well, It is not economically sound. Obviously they have their flaws. My libatarian dad has told me some of them. But as he said "a flat tax is a lot better then the tax system we have now. It would temporarily create jobs. And if the goverment never raises the rate then it will forever be good." So even a skeptic of a flat tax thinks it will help the economy, as long as it stays the same. Also it is still economically sound because If those people with no taxes get hired then they get taxed, and can get promoted. Thats what capitilism is about. Capitilism is about freedom, work hard you get earnings, and pay for what you get. I added the last part but people need to oaay their fair share as I stated above. I still don't understand how the goverment owns our income. Is it because they set it to wherever they want? Well they do that now don't they? Just saying. A system without an income tax is terrible. Weve seen this in europe. They pass a sales tax and keep raising it. You can't really regulate raising and lowering the sales tax because the federal goverment keeps a 10% tax on goods and you state tax just keeps raising it unless the feds tell them to stop. so its 10% federal tax, 30% state tax. Wow that sounds good... not. "Not if the tax rate is 90%." once again, even though our goverment can be dumb at times, they wouldn't pass a 90% income tax. Maybe a 9% or 6%. And they can't raise it if we use my idea, ammendment. http://www.heritage.org... read this it is interesting. http://townhall.com... http://www.epinions.com... http://www.financialsamurai.com...
flat tax

I agree with a flat tax. You show me why not and show another type o tax that you would think works better. It would substantially increase the take-home pay for American workers from not only the lowering of the income tax brackets but the elimination of both the business side and employee side of payroll taxes. U.S. federal tax rates go as high as 35% in 2011, and additional surtaxes are scheduled to hit when Obamacare kicks in. On top of that, employers and employees both pay 6.2%, for a total of 12.4% per employee. All these taxes would be replaced with the 9% individual rate. So if your taxable income is $50,000 and your average tax rate is 40% counting payroll taxes, under Cain's plan, instead of $20,000 in taxes, you would only have to pay $4,500, for an extra $15,500 in take home pay! Regardless of your income level, those people that pay income tax will receive a cut. Corporations and businesses would have a massive inflow of investment cash, leading to business expansion and new hiring. Since capital gains and dividends are no longer taxed, banks and investors who have kept trillions of dollars on the side would be pouring money into capital investment. Businesses that have been limited in growth due to lack of funds would then be able to start expanding, hiring workers as part of the process. All that new hiring would have a chain reaction, as previously unemployed Americans spend their paychecks, providing a jolt to the demand side of the economy. People who criticize the flat tax plan and emphasize its riskiness ignore the vast number of problems & riskiness of our current job-killing, de-motivating, freedom-sapping tax system. http://www.hermancain.com... http://www.forbes.com...
Neo-Darwinian Evolution is Specious

Hey creationtruth thanks for the opportunity to debate. I feel like I am well equipped for this challenge and will try my best. In university and school when learning Biology, we quickly get acquainted with the theory of Evolution. Although there is a foundation of knowledge and a paradigm to understand before learning it. :Age of the universe :Age of planet earth :Age of life These are pre-requisite to Darwinian evolution. I will need to clarify if we are referring to micro-evolution, where functions such as adaptation, mutation, genetic drift, natural selection and migration are in play. Or macro-evolution, with one form to another using micro-evolution.
Neo-Darwinian Evolution is Specious

ResolutionNeo-Darwinian Evolution is Specious.DefinitionsNeo-Darwinian Evolution - The alleged scientific theory that all life shares a common ancestor and has achieved phenotypic diversity via natural selection working on indiscriminate genetic mutations.Specious - Misleading in appeareance; superficially plausible, but not in accordance with what is known in reality.Rules for The Debate#1 - Only science arguments#2 - No arguments from probability.#3 - No logical fallacies or Red Herrings.Round 1 - Acceptance*Round 2 - Opening ArgumentsRound 3 - Rebuttals and Defense of ArgumentsRound 4 - Final Defense of Arguments (No New Arguments)*Acceptance of this debate entails full understanding and adherence to the definitions and rules of the debate. Failure to abide by these rules or quibbling about said definitions should warrant a loss of all points on the part of the offender as judged by the prospective voters.
Should assinssins creed have dog companions to fight for you in the game

Hello, PRO. Your thesis is: 'The Assassin's Creed games should have dogs companions to fight for you in the game.' My thesis is: 'The Assassin's Creed games should not have dog companions to fight for you in the game.' Good luck. A 'dog' is defined as 'a domesticated carnivorous mammal that typically has a long snout, an acute sense of smell, and a barking, howling, or whining voice. It is widely kept as a pet or for work or field sports.' [1]. For the sake of simplicity, dogs in the Assassin's Creed games have the same habits and properties as real life dogs (eg: are typically memorable, attract lots of attention and have the same size and strength as dogs in the real world). Contention 1) Dogs are Unable to Follow You Around EverywhereAssassin's Creed games have a lot of climbing and jumping around. P1) If you don't have thumbs, you cannot climbP2) Dogs don't have thumbsA1) Thus, dogs cannot climbWhy would dogs be in Assassin's Creed if they can't even do one of the most abundant actions in the game: climbing? The game also involves a lot of jumping onto a building, then climbing, then jumping onto a building, then climbing, etc. Even if a dog could climb onto something (eg: jumps onto boxes and then onto a roof), it would likely have to full-on climb something, which is impossible. Also, some dog just jumping around a city would attract lots of attention, which leads me to my next contention: Contention 2) Dogs Attract Lots of AttentionWhile playing Assassin's Creed, you want to fly under the radar all the time, because, well, you are an assassin. By having some loud dog following you down the streets, you are attracting too much unwanted attention. Not to mention, if you are doing an assassination, your target is probably going to notice some guy walking around with a dog following him, ruining the assassination. That would provoke the guards, leading me to my next contention: Contention 3) Dogs are Easy to KillReally, the guards have a lot of armor on: Not to mention that they are armed. How many guards do you think a dog could take down? How many guards do you think it would take to kill a dog? Not many. Of course, the assassin could have multiple dogs...but that would attract even more attention, and they still couldn't follow the assassin. ConclusionDogs, if they were your companions that would fight for you in Assassin's Creed, couldn't follow you, would attract lots of attention, just as dogs do in the present (really, would you ask to meet some random stranger on the street or a dog, and would you remember a dog or some random guy on the street?) and would easily be killed by the guards, thus we can decided them useless in the Assassin's Creed Games. Thank you. Back to PRO. Sources and Citations[1]-https://www.google.ca...
Animal Testing

Approximately 95 percent of all lab animals are specially-bred rats and mice. Non-human primates account for less than one-fourth of 1 percent; dogs and cats combined, less than one-half of 1 percent. The balance includes rabbits, guinea pigs, woodchucks, pigs, sheep, armadillos, leeches, zebra fish, squid, horseshoe crabs, sea snails and fruit flies. Rodents are the animal model of choice for modern medical researchers because they have a naturally short life span -- two to three years -- that allows scientists to observe in "fast forward" what happens during the progress or pathogenesis of a disease.
Capitalism vs Socialistic Democracy

Parameters and Precepts: Round 1-Acceptance Round 2-Cases Round 3-Rebuttals Round 4-Defense No kritiks Forming a new argument in the last round is unacceptable Terms: Capitalism-an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. There will be a tolerance for regulations in the version of capitalism that I am defending. This version of capitalism will also concede to the requirment of universal college. People should be capable of recieving education in order to live in a stable capitalistic society. The version of Capitalism that I am defending can be compared to the policies implemented during the Nixon administration and Reagan administration. Social Democracy-a socialist system of government achieved by democratic means. This debate will focus on the advantages and disadvantages of both system. Pro will be definding the advantages gained by a social democracy(Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Canada), and disproving the advantages of capitalism provided by Con.
Catholic Church Same Today As It Was In Early Christianity

The framework for this debate, I only need to prove that today, the catholic church is not the same as when it began. If I can prove that in one way, it has changed, then I win this debate. I would also like for my opponent to clarify when early christianity is defined as. I'll start with my case and go onto their points a)the catholic church now accepts scientific teachings as facts. They have changed to accept evolution now and earlier, the rejected it. b) The also concur that a geocentric theory of the universe is false. And they now accept that the heliocentric theory is true c) They are also less violent in their convictions. I mean it's not like we've had a crusade after a while. Also, we no longer hang adulterers and hethens. If it truely was consistant, I would be executed for even taking the con side of this debate. d) there are less frequent and less violent exorsisms. Now people don't actually believe that you can be possessed by the devil e) They no longer cotrol all actions of christianity. They used to be the embodiement of christianity. Now it is all over the place. Where I'm from (the south) the baptists are the church. All points will be extended in my next speech Now onto his points. 1) Ok, Then it isn't the same 2) If what he claims is true, then Martin Luther was a liar and actually supported the church. And to claim that everyone believes the same is untrue. 3) First of all, the fact that you would say something so arrogant is not only offensive, but is unprovable, because we do not know what god says. There is no existing warrant for this claim and it has no relevence to this debate. disregard it. . http://www.timesonline.co.uk... . http://en.wikipedia.org...
Catholic Church Same Today As It Was In Early Christianity

History can prove that the traditional Catholic Church of today is virtually the same as it always has been and has not changed in three important respects: 1)The Church has never changed Her Doctrinal teachings, only clarified or elaborated upon them; 2) She has remained Universal and One in belief; 3) The Church, through a continuous line of unbroken Apostolic succession, can be historically traced back to the first Pope, St. Peter, Bishop of Rome - whom Catholics believe to have received governing Authority over the Church from Jesus Christ Himself. No non-Catholic Christian church of today can lay claim to all three of the above elements. I respectfully challenge an opponent to disprove these claims about the Catholic Church using Historical facts. For example, using early Christian writings, Church Council documents, Archaeological findings, etc. Thank you. May Our Lord Jesus Christ bless you and fill your soul with His love and grace.