BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Worker Cooperatives(pro) versus traditional, capitalist businesses(con)

The goals of worker owned cooperatives are certainly righteous, and you wont hear me arguing against the social initiatives, and worker benefits they look to address when individuals voluntarily enter into those work environments. But the key word in that last sentence is "voluntarily". One problem that coops face in a capitalist system is a lack of competitive longevity. If coops were able to be competitive powerhouses like thier traditional corporate counterparts, then the worker cooperative business ideal would have consumed the economic system long ago, because these businesses would have grown larger and larger, eventually employing everyone within the economic system, and monopolizing every sector of production. Every product would be owned by one business which in turn is owned by its employees. The line of ownership of each business would eventually fade, making one giant cooperative business, owned and operated by the consumers/employees themselves. But the plain fact is, coops just cannot do that because they lack the competitiveness needed in a capitalist system. True, coops can be more succesful initially, and can be more sustainable in times of economic turbulence, however, in the long term they have trouble in competitive markets because thier major goal is not necessarily profit making. While some coops are hugely succesful, coops as a whole have only really been able to muster a few periods of notable success in the US (the depression, in the 60s and 70s, and now)before shifts in consumer spending habits, and competition from smaller businesses caused them to fade out. The longevity for coops is not too impressive in the past century. So, there is only one true way coops can replace traditional corporations. Government intervention. I feel that my opponent (this is not a rebuttal, just an opinion on the proposition of the argument at hand) does not truly recognize the adverse ramifications of such a sweeping government policy, which would effect not only consumer choice, and the price of ALL goods. It would effect our rights as workers and our individual freedom, not only in the workplace, but at home as well. If my opponent is going to argue for replacing our entire economic system, then I will make it my job to expose the true effects of such a drastic measure. I will make it my goal to force my opponent to prove that becoming a caste society instead of an economically free society would benefit us. Can my opponent prove that in this caste society, will we acheive true equality, or will the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor? I will make him/her show us how giving our place of work more power to ethically prod us on our personal lives for the sake of production, could benefit us. I will question my opponent on ethical issues. Are we truly bad people if we want to climb the economic ladder, and create more wealth for ourselves? Will strict guidlines imposed on production and freedom of privacy, and lack of competition, be inducive of social and economic progress, or stiffle it? I look foward to an interesting disscussion!
Worker Cooperatives(pro) versus traditional, capitalist businesses(con)

New statistics or facts can be brought up, but only in rebuttal to your opponent's arguments. 4) The first round used for debate should just be opening arguments: no rebuttal to your opponent's arguments are allowed: rebuttals are for the next rounds. Rebuttals to generic arguments are okay though, just don't directly rebut your opponent's arguments if you're the second person to post their first debate round.5) Burden of proof is shared equally, so it is required we both provide reasons why one should support their position. If any of the above rules are violated by either side, voters should award the point for conduct to the one who did not violate them, or who did so to a lesser degree. Definitions:A) Worker cooperative: a cooperative owned and self-managed by its workers. [1]B) Cooperative: an autonomous association of people united voluntarily to meet their common economic, social and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly owned and democratically controlled business. [2]C) Traditional/capitalist business: A business that is privately owned by one or a few individuals who are considered to be higher up in business hierarchy than the workers/employees. [3]If con has objection to any of my definitions or rules, say so in comments before accepting the debate, otherwise it will be assumed you accept these definitions and rules. If con does object, we will discuss in comments alternative definitions and I will edit this debate to include the definitions/rules we agree upon. Con should offer alternative rules/definitions in comments if they object. To help con out, here is a previous debate I had on this topic. Feel free to look through it to see how I argue for cooperatives. . http://www.debate.org...I will probably bring up quite a few of the same points I did there, but I will also present some new information as well. Sources:[1] . https://en.wikipedia.org...[2] . https://en.wikipedia.org...[3] This is my own definition, based on what I know of traditional businesses, since I can't seem to find an exact definition for the traditional business model online.
Net neutrality

Timmy, Rye Oscillates Left-to-right Literally Every Day, You Old Useless Sack Of Horses, Always Riot Drump. Take the first letter of every word in that above sentence, and you'll see what happened to you. So, instead of arguing net neutrality, which I agree with you on, I'm going to teach you a lesson on how to spot when a statement is obvious satire online. The first flag should be the opening line: "Hello everybody, it's your friendly neighborhood rich corrupt business owner!" First of all, If you look at my profile, I am 15 years old, which means I am probably NOT a wealthy business owner. Also, why would they admit that they are corrupt? Right away you should see that this is clearly not a genuine post. " When I'm not working with the Illuminati shadow government to figure out how to implement mind control," How does that line NOT scream "THIS IS NOT REAL!" Maybe next time you can avoid making a fool of yourself.
Net neutrality

I believe in net neutrality but I don't when reading your response I noticed that you only thought about "providing your son that yacht he always wanted," and "WE SHOULD HAVE EVEN MORE POWER," and what I want to say is that net neutrality is NOT about providing people like you with more power and your son with a yacht it is about how the Internet service providers must treat all data on the Internet the same, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, etc. So again net neutrality isn't just about you and what you want it is about what is best for everyone. I believe if everyone is provided with an equal kind of Internet than the world will have less people like you.
I think Were supposed to only follow the 10 commandments of Moses, and the 2 promise ones from Jesus

In the last round, the con observes three major points of concession. 1) The pro agrees that not all or even the majority of Debate.org believes in the pro's religion. 2) The non-religious members of Debate.org do not have an obligation or duty to follow any laws in the Bible. 3) In arguing the scope of the religious debate, the pro concedes to my case for every member of Debate.org that DOES NOT ABIDE BY THE PRO'S PERSONAL RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION. That being said, the pro's main argument now is that this argument pertains to only the religious sector of the Debate.org community because the resolution pertains to religion and the debate is under the "Religious" debate section. The main fault in the pro's argument is that regardless of what he or she may say, this debate is a public round. In the challenge phase, every single debate regardless of labels or resolution, appears just like any other debate in the challenge phase. When the audience chooses whether or not to voice their personal opinion and select a victor of this round, the audience will hopefully be comprised of a diverse majority. Next, the pro defends his point by saying that his Bible is shared with all religions. This is false. As one example, the voodoo practice and about 10,000 of its forms, don't observe the Bible. Every religion beside that of Abraham's lineage does not observe the Bible. Even moreso, within the Judeo-Christian faith, huge discrepancies in the versions, texts, and commandments themselves make choosing just one version unreliable. For example, some Bibles reveal 12-13 commandments beside the proverbial 10. Sources will be provided on request.
I think Were supposed to only follow the 10 commandments of Moses, and the 2 promise ones from Jesus

I remind you that the exact wording of your proposed resolution was and still is "I think Were supposed to only follow the 10 commandments of Moses, and the 2 promise ones from Jesus". That being said, the con provides an interpretation of the word "were" as a contraction of the phrase "we are". When talking about "we" or "us", because the entire Debate.org community can prospectively be involved, "we" and "us" are taken to indicate a collective community on Debate.org.The con also provides a definition for "supposed to" as "Used to express obligation or duty". (http://www.thefreedictionary.com...) Prefer my definition because it is taken from a largely available public source thereby eliminating author bias.Continuing on, the collective Debate.org community is not obligated to or even has a duty to follow Moses' 10 commandments nor the 2 "promise ones from Jesus". As the Christian faith is not one that represents %100 percent of the Debate.org population, unless the pro can provide empirical evidence that the Debate.org community is comprised of a Christian majority, it must be assumed that, because Debate.org has no specific religious affiliation, the collective does not have an obligation to follow any laws or commandments of said religion.REBUTTAL:Refer to my case, none of your Biblical evidence can be applied to a utilitarian standard of debate.
I think Were supposed to only follow the 10 commandments of Moses, and the 2 promise ones from Jesus

The bible says: Jas 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all. You gota obey all of them, now lets see what the law says: Ex 35:2 Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the Lord: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death. Do you obey that law? Next: Gen 17:12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which [is] not of thy seed. Do you obey this law?.. Now the bible says Mt 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. Why did he say that? Because The law says: Deut 18:15 The Lord your God will give you a prophet from among your people, like me; you will give ear to him; Deut 18:18 I will give them a prophet from among themselves, like you, and I will put my words in his mouth, and he will say to them whatever I give him orders to say. that was told in the old testament, now Jesus completes the law my confirming the prophecy given to Moses. Acts 3:18 But the things which God had made clear before, by the mouth of all the prophets, that the Christ would have to undergo, he has put into effect in this way. Acts 3:19 So then, let your hearts be changed and be turned to God, so that your sins may be completely taken away, and times of blessing may come from the Lord; Acts 3:20 And that he may send the Christ who was marked out for you from the first, even Jesus: Acts 3:21 Who is to be kept in heaven till the time when all things are put right, of which God has given word by the mouth of his holy prophets, who have been from the earliest times. Acts 3:22 For Moses said, The Lord will give you a prophet from among your people, like me; you will give ear to.everything which he will say to you. Now Christ put a whole new law: Jn 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, [but] grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. Jas 1:25 But he who goes on looking into the true law which makes him free, being not a hearer without memory but a doer putting it into effect, this man will have a blessing on his acts. Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. And how do you know what's a sin? U know because the law lets you know what's bad. and why does it say it made us free from the law of death? Because Jn 8:5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
Jody Highroller's Karate Class is the best Karate Class on the Planet

Again... all opinion based. That means everything is false. 100% incorrect. Practical Self-Defense Jujitsu, Palace Hand, Kenjutsu has a 100% success rate and one ammature from Practical Self-Defense Jujitsu, Palace Hand, Kenjutsu would easily defeat Jody in a simple two minute sparring session. They are also known for their ability to compete in difficult places such as on telephone wires. They have the ability to elevate themselves on one finger. Some people can do interesting flips. I have a yellow belt from 4th grade #bye
Jody Highroller's Karate Class is the best Karate Class on the Planet

YOU ARE USING RACIST ARGUMENTS aND I DO NOT APPRECIATE IT. JODY IS VERY CULTURALLY DIVERSE AND CAN BEAT ANY OTHER KARATE INSTRUCTOR OUT THERE IN A DUEL. FINAL THOUGHTS, JODY HIGHROLLER HAS THE MOST SWAG AND IS A VERY IMPORTANT MAN IN THE KARATE WORLD. THANK YOU #VERSACE #OOHKILLEM
Jody Highroller's Karate Class is the best Karate Class on the Planet

The information of which you have provide is most entirely opinion based and thus false. Practical Self-Defense Jujitsu, Palace Hand, Kenjutsu is the place to go if you would like the most prastigious karate instruction in the world with swag. This place is in Japan, so they are Asian and more skilled at Karate than Jody.
Jody Highroller's Karate Class is the best Karate Class on the Planet

KARATE CHOP (SKEEMIX) IS ONE OF THE MOST ADVANCED AND FORTHCOMING SONGS IN THE KARATE WORLD. JODY HIGHROLLeR DOESN'T NEED TO BE ASIAN, HE ROCKS HIS VERSACE BLACK BELT AND CAN BEAT UP ALL THE ASIANS WITH HIS MISCHIEVOUS BRAIDS.!!!!!!!!
Evolution is proven fact. Prove the biblical god exists. That BOP is always upon believers

Evolution is proven factAntibiotic resistant microbes is 100% confirmation and certification and proven fact that evolution is taking place right here in the here and the now. Antibiotic resistant microbes are evolving every single second of every single day to become more resistant to antibiotics.http://www.youtube.com...;- Frontline - The Trouble with Antibiotics Documentary http://www.youtube.com... - Hunting the Nightmare Bactiria http://www.youtube.com...;- Rise Of Superbugs Resistant To Antibiotics | Full Documentaryhttp://www.youtube.com...;- Antibiotics ResistanceThe so what nothingness god of the bible (thankfully) is not proven factNo matter which language you speak. god is NOT proven fact. 1. My opponent cannot win the evolution argument in which was just listed and proved. So only religion is left to argue in this debate. 2. Rules: The BOP to prove god is always up to theists. No exceptions. None. dsjpk5 will not be allowed to vote in the voting process.
Evolution is proven fact. Prove the biblical god exists. That BOP is always upon believers

Very well, if you wish for this to be a debate about the existence of God, then I shall oblige. 2nd Samuel: God loved David, and it hurt him to do what he did. This was the punishment for the sin. But if we entertain God as real, we must realize he was sinless. "If you remain hostile toward me and refuse to listen to me, I will multiply your afflictions seven times over, as your sins deserve. 22 I will send wild animals against you, and they will rob you of your children, destroy your cattle and make you so few in number that your roads will be deserted." Leviticus 26:21-22. This was in the law of the Hebrews. If they were hostile to God, then this would happen. But God created this out of love. It's like saying any parent whose spanked their kid was just as evil as God is to you. Many of those other nations were messed up. One was sacrificing their newborns! God had to destroy them to stop the spread of their practices. He only worked out of love. Exodus: The Egyptians were brutal to the Israelites. God had to find a way to stop their suffering. OTher things 1. Jesus IS a real historical figure. It has been confirmed that he did live by extra-biblical sources. 2. Pontus Pilot has also been confirmed as a real person who lived. The Christians knew these thousands of years prior! 3. The impact of Jesus's life and his teachings makes it impossible to see Jesus as a liar or a lunatic. During the activities recorded in the book of Acts, they had no recordings of Jesus's teachings. Those teachings went from memories to letters, then FINALLY to what we have as the New Testament. 4. In the Old Testament, Jesus and the New Covenant had not yet come as well. What God had to do was to keep Isreal intact until Jesus was born. 5. And if Jesus was only a good moral teacher, then he would have lied about being the son of man. other Evidences: https://irp-cdn.multiscreensite.com...
Evolution is proven fact. Prove the biblical god exists. That BOP is always upon believers

1. I believe in God and in Intelligent Design/Creation. The argument of God begins with creation, and there is such a thing as a believer in God and Evolution. 2. Your first point was that bacteria has "evolved" to become resistant to antibiotics. This, however, is not true. Each bacteria has a certain set of genes. They can connect to other bacteria via transduction. If one bacteria has the information to resist a certain antibiotic, then passes it to others, then they will also become resistant. THIS is how bacteria has "evolved." Not through evolution, but through transduction and conjugation. 3. Another thing scientists use to affirm evolution is the geological column. The geological column shows that the further you go into the earth, the more primitive the creatures become. But the geological column is highly selective. 95% percent of all fossils are clams and other similar organisms. Yet another problem with the geological column is that we have yet to find a full section of the entire column with all the strata. The final problem with it that I will state is that it was originally said that the geological column would form with all the strata over thousands of years. But with volcanoes, multiple strata can form instantly. 4. Intermediate forms. Evolution states that there must be some sort of intermediate form. Recently, it has been said that they change too fast for them to fossilize. But we have fossilized cowboy boots. Things can fossilize incredibly quick under correct conditions. 5. Cytochrome C. Cytosome C is a protein that is used in metabolism. According to evolution, the simpler the life form, the more closely related the CC sequence. Yeast's sequence for CC is far more different from a bacteria than a Horse, which is a "complex" organism. This is just one CC example that demolishes Evolution. 6. Finally, Evolutionists claim that evolution happens through mutation. But no positive mutation has ever occurred in a lab. Mutation never adds information to DNA, it only destroys it. And say that it did, but the new organism would be reproductively isolated and die out. To get two different organisms of the same species, a male, and a female, to mutate in the same way at the same time, is insane. 7. Belief in God, at its core, is belief. There is evidence to support it, but those are better found through personal study with another in person. If you want to find one from a nearby church, go to http://www.dtodayinfo.net... to find a church and a person to go over the evidence. Sources: Wile, Jay L., and Marilyn F. Durnell. Exploring creation with biology. 2nd ed., Apologia Educational Ministries, 2005. McKeeman, Lori. Biology, https://www.pottersschool.org.... Sept. 2017-May 2018. Science Dept, The Potter's School. 13 Sept 2018
Worshipping poltergeists is not that bad of an idea

My concession speech: I am defeated. Never again shall I argue that worshiping poltergeists isn't a bad idea (at least this month). My position was unfounded, ill-thought out, and unsanitary. My arguments were insufficient. My evidence weak. I misunderestimated my opponent. I have lost. I promise now to: a. Quit worshiping poltergeists b. Quit defending them c. Quit using Dan Aykroyd's existence as evidence of my arguments Highlights: Quoting my own source-text (Mozi) against me was brilliant. Expanding on the Wizard of Oz references was brilliant. As to the rules of the final statement, thank you for asking and you can do what you like. I look forward to reading over other debates you're in. I think there's a few points I may have been able to chew on a bit more (and probably fail), but you really devastated me in the later refutations. No contest.
Worshipping poltergeists is not that bad of an idea

This debate assumes poltergeists exist as disembodied or subtle-bodied sentient creatures. It does not, however, assume whether they are spirits of the dead, demons, spirits of dead demons, or aliens like E.T., the Predator, and Will Smith. The opponent may issue refutation in this round. My argument is as follows: 1. Poltergeists are worthy of worship insofar as they can vouchsafe for us a direct experience of the supernatural, proving life after death, a spiritual realm, and the existence of other things beyond our wildest dreams!!!!1 2. Being disembodied, poltergeists are potentially more powerful, and may be able to acquire things for us like health, wealth, self-esteem, the ability to leave the house once and a while instead of playing Nintendo games, etc. Worship would favorably dispose them to us. 3. There is no actual evidence that poltergeists are murderous, or if they are murderous, they murder very infrequently. 4. Many cultures have worshipped poltergeists and have suffered no ill-effects from doing so. 5. It is possible that the poltergeists may take us into their magical land, away from the burdens of having to work at Taco Bell or Pet's Smart, and our sad lives in a studio apartment where we can't even have a pet without paying a special "pet deposit". And even then it cannot be bigger than a box of tissue-Kleen-ex. Other terms for poltergeists: ghosts, things that go bump in the night, shades, wraiths, shadow people, Shreks.
Rap Battle (Practice for TV's Tournament

You think your the best and you wonNah retard its not over its starting to get funI got soething called skills Thats how I always get my killsI rule DDO b!tch your the loserYour only a fvcking poserYou got your fake blings and rundown carI roll in a Ferrari because I am superstarCome on dude is that all you gotIf you rap like that you gonna get shotYou think your loyal DDO kingNah @ss sh!t you a jester I make you singYou are the DDO's new loserSuch a cr@ppy wannabe poserYour known as a boozer a drug userWhile I got style rolling in my cruiserLet me tell you that you just got beatI am sorry noob just make sure to tweetThat Nerdykiller taught you the sadness Of losing your first debate throwing you into madnessI got my girls and my crew on the blockI got my game on please call me docI am such a pimp while your a wimpYour such a shrimp after this you walk with a limpI smoke my high rated drugsWhile I shoot you with slugsFrom my automatic gunSorry you just got pwnI got my diamond ringI have my bling blingMy style is like methIt always bring you deathI am gonna grill youI am gonna kill youPlease give up or face my wrathIf you don't face my aftermathPeace out brainmaster or known as failureThis is Nerdykiller you lost say your prayer.