BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Order Adderall online at cheap rates with quick delivery

One can buy Adderall Generic online along with prescription and have their doctor devise a treatment program according to the patient's condition. Adderall is a prescription medicine known to treat Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and sometimes also prescribed to help with the sleeping disorder, Referred to as Narcolepsy. ADHD is a term for the lack of attention that is majorly been seen in teenagers today. This is not a good sign and must be treated well in time. It is important to understand that the medicine does not act on the cause of the pain, Meaning that it does not end the ADHD or Narcolepsy but only gives a momentary relief. Adderall should be taken according to the prescription as a preventive measure. The chances of falling into Adderall abuse is quite real. And, The aftermath keeps getting worse. Such a situation arises only when a person with no symptoms of ADHD or narcolepsy. As these are the conditions which it works on. https://www. Ambeingeneric. Us/buy-adderall-online-and-get-a-prescription-along-with-it/
Classical Music Battle #2

As in the last edition, each side may choose a piece that is regarded as classical music (it can be from early periods like baroque all the way up to more recent ones like modernism) and argue for it. Each side tries to prove that their piece is better than the other's. Round 1 is for acceptance only. In round 2, each side will present their piece and outline their great qualities. It is not allowed to attack the opponent's piece in that round. In round 3, attacks and comparisons may finally begin. Also, no one may tell the audience to vote for them in the arguments. The piece that both sides must present has to have an average duration that is below 10 minutes. And the limit of characters in each argument is 4000.
Classical Music Battle #2

My opponent has forfeited the final round...that's too bad, I was looking forward to this debate.Nonetheless, I will post my final argument.In Barber's piece, we have a musicality that is uninterrupted by pretentiousness. As Olin Downes, a music critic, once said of the piece, "...[W]e have here honest music, by an honest musician, not striving for pretentious effect, not behaving as a writer would who, having a clear, short, popular word handy for his purpose, got the dictionary and fished out a long one." [1] This lack of pretension allows us to examine the tension he builds in the music and the true emotionality and overall beauty of the piece. Liszt's "Mephisto Waltz 3," though it is a well written piece, has a flair for the over dramatic that doesn't do much more than add to its pretension. If you weren't crying for the first few minutes of the piece, then the climax, which comes at around six or six and a half minutes, may just bring you to tears. It reaches a dynamic and emotional climax and then goes to silence - then quietly goes back to its original theme, and gets quieter into nothingness. It's a heart-wrenching moment. There are very few composers who are able to write so beautifully and so emotionally as Barber was. Again, as good as Liszt's piece is, it doesn't match the Adagio's beauty or emotion.So, for the reasons listed, Barber's piece is the superior one.Source:[1] Music in the USA : A Documentary Companion, p. 471.
Classical Music Battle #2

My piece is Adagio for Strings by Samuel Barber ().Barber's Adagio is an extremely emotional piece that was composed by a relatively youthful Barber - he was about 26 - and was originally written for a string quartet, but was arranged for a full string orchestra by himself and was completed in the same year as the quartet.It is an example of a piece written in arch form, meaning that the sections are structured with repetition in reverse order (e.g., ABCBA). It makes use of many techniques often seen in modern classical music, such as tight harmonies and constantly changing time signatures. Barber makes use of fascinating chord structures while maintaining a tear-jerking sound and without over-orchestrating the piece.Alexander Morin said the piece was "full of pathos and cathartic passion" and that it "rarely leaves a dry eye." For this reason and for the expert musicality, I have chosen this piece.
Classical Music Battle #2

My piece is "Mephisto Waltz 3" by Fran Liszt. And here is a link to the performance: https://m.youtube.com... This piece was composed by Liszt when he was old (the time where he became the most explorative in his compositions), and it is the most complex of the Mephisto Waltzes. And even though this piece is rarely played in the concert platforms, it is extremely modern. Naming all the harmonic oddities in it is a difficult task. This piece was intended to bear no dedication, but after the French pianist Marie Ja"ll played through the work and repeated some passages, Liszt dedicated the Waltz to her just as he made some changes in the music. Mephisto Waltz 3 is one of the most unique and advanced Liszt pieces and therefore, something of extreme importance in Liszt literature. That is the reason I've chosen this music.
Anxiety improves performance.

Some people get anxious when asking for help, Feeling that they can't do something and need help. Anxiety is a normal emotion meant alert danger. Anxiety can also lead to adrenaline when our fight of flight response kicks in. Rather than tell yourself "Everyone is going to see my hands are shaking" try saying "I can use the energy my anxiety gives me to perform even better. " You can still succeed even when you're anxious as long as you are open to the idea that nervous energy can fuel your performance. Each time you take action despite feeling anxious, You"ll develop a little more mental strength. Over time, You"ll gain more confidence in your ability to tolerate anxiety not as the enemy but as a challenge.
Anxiety improves performance.

Although the Pixar film 'Inside Out' does highlight how anger shouldn't be ignored, It is also shown that being sad and unhappy should also not be ignored and should be taken seriously and to help one overcome their fears and unhappiness. Reaching our optimal state during a performance can be approached in different ways other than negative thoughts, Which can lead to long-lasting mental illness problems. Anxiety can be reduced by speaking to a coach, Parent, Friend, Teacher or practitioner. By speaking to someone, They may be able to help reduce pressure and anxiety and create a plan to be successful and happy for the performance. It is very common for people to choke on performance day, From stress or pressure.
Anxiety improves performance.

Yes positive emotions are no doubt important, And negative emotions can be bad and harmful. However the recent Pixar movie, Inside Out taught us that negative emotions shouldn't be ignore. Experiencing negative emotions and anxiety help us hone attention directly front of us. Our brain is telling us that this thing (or person) is important and should be resolved or dealt with before moving on. Without negative emotions, We are less likely reach our state of optimal performance. It is suspect negative emotions trigger a system in the brain that tell us our performance is starting suffer. Without feelings anxiety and frustration, The brain isn"t driving to our optimal performance.
Anxiety improves performance.

Anxiety is a common problem faced throughout Australia. Some people may think that adding stress and pressure to someone will improve their performance, But can have an incredibly negative effect on an individual. When facing stress or pressure before a performance, Some things that one may face is feeling threatened or in danger. This may result in failure or unfair play or bad sportsmanship, They may feel a pressure to win which may lead to cheating and/or unhappiness, And the fairness and friendliness in the practice or do not meet the expectations or satisfactions of the rules in the game.
Private Handgun ownerships should be outlawed

Thanks, Pro. Pro asserts, to quote him: "handguns like a barreta or M9 for example should be outlawed for private ownership uses due to the vast majority of the united states gun ownership is common and there is a high percentage of people misusing it or involved in a death or injury accident or incident." Am I to take it that only Beretta handguns (M9 handguns are manufactured by Beretta) (1) should be banned from private hands, according to my opponent? If so, then surely Pro has already negated the statement in the title through his own argument. If Pro is not proposing a ban of just Beretta handguns, but handguns of other make besides Beretta, then which ones are "like" Beretta handguns? Perhaps more specification is needed. If my opponent is not making such a claim that only Beretta handguns should be banned from private ownership, and rather that all handguns should be banned from private ownership, well, why should that be so? Based on my interpretation of my opponent's argument, Pro has not yet given any evidence against private handgun ownership. Pro seems only to have thanked me for pointing out the need for specification, and indicated that he agrees he must present statistics that pertain solely to handguns. He has not seemed to actually make an argument against private handgun ownership. As no argument against handgun ownership has been given, I do not need to address an argument against private handgun ownership. Sources: 1. http://www.beretta.com...
Private Handgun ownerships should be outlawed

I assume that, because my opponent has argued based on the statistics pertaining to gun homicide in the United States, my opponent means that private handgun ownership should be outlawed in the United States by the statement in the title. The argument pertains to handgun ownership prohibition. My opponent lists statistics pertaining to all guns, not just handguns (which were never specified). I assume this because as there is no specification in my opponent's statistics as to which type of gun is being referred to. I have to conclude that my opponent refers to all types of gun collectively through the use of his statistics. My opponent is arguing against handguns, according to his position and the title of this debate. For my opponent to make a case against handguns in particular, in terms of gun violence, he would have to show how prohibiting ownership of handguns by private individuals would achieve lesser rates and cases of gun violence. Why should I or any other person accept an anti-handgun position until a case is made against handguns in particular? My opponent's assertion that "Private Handgun ownerships should be outlawed" is not currently backed by any evidence pertaining to handguns in particular in this debate. Therefore, as my opponent has yet to prove the statement given in the title, I do not require evidence for my position on handguns. I can merely dismiss my opponent's claim because it lacks data pertaining solely to handguns.
Private Handgun ownerships should be outlawed

That abolishing handgun ownership for citizens and people besides the authorities or agencies. I believe it will reduce crimes, accidents, and save money and effort towards authorities. Children are affected by this law they could have emotional or psychological illness adults also. Gun control in America is bad people all over the country have guns that abuse it or misuse it in a bad way. For example, In 2010, guns took the lives of 31,076 Americans in homicides, suicides and unintentional shootings. This is the equivalent of more than 85 deaths each day and more than three deaths each hour.1 73,505 Americans were treated in hospital emergency departments for non-fatal gunshot wounds in 2010.2 Firearms were the third-leading cause of injury-related deaths nationwide in 2010, following poisoning and motor vehicle accidents.3 Homicide: Guns were used in 11,078 homicides in the U.S. in 2010, comprising almost 35% of all gun deaths, and over 68% of all homicides.6 On average, 33 gun homicides were committed each day for the years 2005-2010.7
Plump Barbie Faces the Same Issue as Slim Barbie

I understand my opponent's thoughts on the curvy doll, for I thought the same thing, at first. It's easy to interpret the curvy doll as an embracement of diversity, because that's what Mattel has been portraying her as. My opponent is speaking on behalf of the surface, while I'm looking below the surface, because there's more than meets the eye. Although my good opponent is correct in saying Taylor Swift displays a skinny figure, she's not showcasing her skinniness, while Kim Kardashian is showcasing her curviness. It can be argued that Taylor Swift is just presenting her body type, as oppose to presenting it as beautiful, even if it is. I would like to argue with my opponent that people don't look to models for standard beauty but for imaginative beauty: as beautiful creatures than beautiful people. A majority of the female models are taller than the average male, for example, which is not ideal for the standard woman. As for runway models, that my opponent mentioned, who are skinny, are not in the media, but commercial models, who are, are known to be much curvier. If the full figured doll was made to make full figured girls feel beautiful, as my opponent states, then the doll is capable of giving young girls the impression that you're not made to feel beautiful until society thinks you are, because it wasn't until society thought that full figured bodies were beautiful that Mattel released this doll. The only people Barbie represents are the people the media represents. Girls need to be shown that you don't have to be beautified in the media to be beautiful, but Barbie shows otherwise, when she shows a full figured doll only after it has been shown through the media. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having an abnormally large nose, but Barbie has yet to embrace this because the media has yet to embrace it. Until Barbie stops caring more about setting good trends than setting good examples, she will continue to have a bad influence on some girls and we can't afford a bad influence on any girl. That's my final piece. I'd like to thank my opponent so much for contributing to this debate and opposing my argument so well. Good luck to her, and make the best debater win.
Plump Barbie Faces the Same Issue as Slim Barbie

Thank you for entering this debate with me. I will refute my opponent's points and present my own arguments as to why the introduction of the full-figured Barbie sets a better example. My opponent argues that the full-figured or curvy body has been introduced because today's celebrities are much curvier than they used to be, so this is now the desirable body type. While it is true that there is more acceptance for different body types than there used to be, it is also true that there are still many very thin celebrities, including Taylor Swift, Jennifer Lawrence, and many others. Merely because we can now consider full-figured women beautiful doesn't make this the most dominant, sought-after body type. The vast majority of main-stream models, for example, are still very skinny, and these are people we look to for beauty only! Celebrities are usually famous for something, whether is be singing or dancing or acting. Models are famous because they are beautiful - that fact that the majority of them are still thin shows what body types we value as a society. My opponent also argues that, just as the original Barbie may have encouraged girls to diet themselves, the curvy Barbie encourages them to gain weight. This is blatantly untrue, mainly due to the fact that the original Barbie is still in production. The original wasn't replaced, it is merely that an additional body type was added to give curvier girls a role model of sorts. This promotes the sort of inclusiveness I have discussed, and would not promote unhealthy habits any more than simply having the original would. Of course, Barbie is not perfect. There are still many people that aren't represented. However, the idea of the curvy Barbie is to promote inclusiveness and health for young girls, and for full-figured girls to understand that they can still be beautiful. Being born with a certain body is something that you cannot change, you can only strive to be healthy as you are. The curvy Barbie isn't unhealthy; she isn't obese or even overweight. Her body is in fact likely much healthier than the original Barbie's. I am personally very thin, and I don't feel threatened or overruled by the curvy body. My body type is still widely over-represented in the media, and I am perfectly fine to share some of the spotlight with a slightly larger doll.
Plump Barbie Faces the Same Issue as Slim Barbie

I would like to make clear that the curvy Barbie doll is actually no curvier than the original doll, meaning she is not endorsing different body types but is the same body type in a few sizes up. I would also like to mention that this debate isn't whether the curvy Barbie doll looks better than the original doll but whether she sets a better example for girls. Here's what I think. With full figured beauties highlighting the media, such as Kim Kardashian, for example, it's very convenient for Mattel to release a full figured Barbie doll, knowing she'll be in good company, and in other words, in style. Mattel wants us to believe that curvy Barbie is indicating to girls that they don't have to be skinny anymore, when in reality, although she is indicating this, it's obvious no one has to be as skinny anymore, because celebrities aren't as skinny anymore and they're (considered to be) the ones to be. Barbie is curvy for the same reason she was skinny. Because curves are what today's average girl wants and whatever most girls want is whatever Barbie has. However, as safe as it is for Barbie to obtain, it's not as safe for every girl to attempt, considering not every girl is naturally curvy, which is the issue here, just as not every girl is naturally skinny, which was the issue with Barbie before. Inspiring girls to be curvy is inspiring some girls to be something they're not, such as myself, for instance. If I wanted to look like a full figured woman, I'd have to overeat, because my "full figure" is not very full. Even women who carry weight don't always naturally carry it in the most ideal places. Only so many of these young girls are going to grow up naturally looking like the curvy Barbie doll, making Barbie, once again, an unnatural and unhealthy image to aspire to resemble. Thank you for hearing out my side of the debate. Let's hear yours!
Plump Barbie Faces the Same Issue as Slim Barbie

This debate is whether the curvy Barbie doll [1] is better than the original Barbie doll. [2] I can tell you why it isn't, and you can tell me why it is. Just as undereating can result in poor health, so can overeating. [3] If Barbie wants to be a healthy inspiration to girls, then she must not inspire girls to be anything but healthy. Resource(s): [1] https://www.amazon.com... [2] https://www.amazon.com... [3] http://www.livestrong.com... Make the best debater win.
The Christian god exists and rules over the universe - read rules

My opponent must be a Christian that believes in every word of the bible. They must construct one strong evidence-based argument that proves the existence of their god. If my opponent or I disagree with one another (which we most likely will) we must post a refute/defence. I will not post any points as to why being an atheist is best as we do not have the burden of proof. If my opponent agrees with me I win, if I agree with them they win, if we disagree the voters are suggested to look for any violations of my rules and/or see if his argument holds up to my refutes. Terms All terms and definitions are influenced by or excerpted from the Oxford Dictionary. Rules 1. No forfeits 2. Any citations or foot/endnotes must be individually provided in the text of the debate 3. No new arguments in the final round 4. Maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere 5. No trolling or deconstruction semantics 6. No "kritiks" of the topic (i.e. arguments that challenge an assumption in the resolution) 7. My opponent accepts all definitions and waives his/her right to add resolution definitions 8. For all undefined terms, individuals should use commonplace understandings that fit within the logical context of the resolution and this debate 9. The BOP is shared 10. The first round is for acceptance only 11. Violation of any of these rules or of any of the R1 set-up merits a loss Structure R1. my rules, your argument R2. my refute, your defence R3. my summary and refute, your summary and defence
THBT Homework should not be given out to students.

I believe that for this debate, I will be taking the PRO side. In this debate, I will be introducing some reasons for why homework is bad and how it doesn't help students learn better. Some of the points I will be covering will be the fact that a lot of the time homework is simply busy work. How much will you really learn from a standardized worksheet? If homework does not provide opportunities for meaningful learning experiences, it's unlikely that most students will get a lot out of it. As a part of the PRO side, I am defining this motion as "schoolwork that a student is required to do at home'.
science teacher grading

My teacher gave everyone on assignment with instruction. I got points taken off for not doing stuff that she didn't even tells us to do. For example, I got 10 points off my grade for not coloring a bar graph. She never mentioned ANYTHING about coloring it. Another example, she took off another 10 points for me not putting the averages of the numbers on top of the bar graph, when I put them on the bottom of the bar graph.