BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Marijuana Legalization

Marijuana is NOT a pain killer, according to the Smithsonian.com. Here is a link: http://www.smithsonianmag.com... Also, I am glad you agree with me that marijuana can cause lung cancer. Which is actually one of many of it's side-effects. Also, I think these "10 dealers" in your "400 person town" is a very unrealistic statistic, and the numbers seem too perfect, they are obviously made up. According to several sites I found, about 1 out of every 700 people actually deal pot, so either your town has approximately 17-18 times the amount of the average pot dealers, or you are just giving a false argument. I HIGHLY doubt that your town has 17 to 18 TIMES the amount of the average pot dealers. Please don't give false arguments. My next piece of evidence is the fact that Marijuana also affects brain development, and when it is used heavily by young people, its effects on thinking and memory may last a long time or even be permanent. A recent study of marijuana users who began using in adolescence revealed substantially reduced connectivity among brain areas responsible for learning and memory. And a large long-term study in New Zealand showed that people who began smoking marijuana heavily in their teens lost an average of 8 points in IQ between age 13 and age 38. Importantly, the lost cognitive abilities were not fully restored in those who quit smoking marijuana as adults. Marijuana eats away at the brain cells. My site: http://www.drugabuse.gov...
Marijuana Legalization

That's why it will be regulated and tax the hell out of and college kids can get it as easy as alcohol now anyways. You can go to and street next to a college campus and find pot. In my small town of 400 there are about 10 dealers. If you are trying to. say that its bad for you I agree with the cancer causing effect when it is smoked because anything inhales that's not oxygen is dangerous to the lung and can cause cancer because it is foreign to the body. but its health benefits outweigh the negatives. I use it for the constant pain i have in my knee and to help me sleep became i have insomnia. I'm glad you agree with me with medical marijuana but displeased you don't think it should be allowed for recreational usage.
Marijuana Legalization

"Have you ever tried cannabis?' Hell no. "Use the persons ID to keep a track on how much they buy and keep them to a certain amount each week." We can not control how much, or little, of anything a person consumes, we don't control the amount of alcohol people consume. "You think the farmers are going to let all the drugs dealer come onto their land and take their profit? if they do that then every drug dealer in the area will want to have some and sell it off but it is not legal for them to do that because it is not getting taxed so they will get in trouble with the state government because they have all this money coming in with no record of where it came from. So there is honest pot farmers who will not get in trouble because they follow the rules." That was not my concern, my concern is that dealers could sneak into these pot fields, get some weed, and leave. It wouldn't be that hard to do. I did have a lot of fun debating with you, and I noticed tons of improvement in your debating. Good luck, and I hope to debate with you again.
Marijuana Legalization

That is why there are laws set up for people to start smoking around the age of 21 so the brain is done developing and it will not harm the development process. The state government that have legalized it have smoking laws set up as drinking law so you have to be 21 to buy it, smoke it and have it in your home. You can't carry it around with you or smoke up in a public place to influence our youth. You think it is stupid for marijuana fields? You think the farmers are going to let all the drugs dealer come onto their land and take their profit? if they do that then every drug dealer in the area will want to have some and sell it off but it is not legal for them to do that because it is not getting taxed so they will get in trouble with the state government because they have all this money coming in with no record of where it came from. So there is honest pot farmers who will not get in trouble because they follow the rules. Have you ever tired cannabis? You need to because it will give you more of an understanding of how it isn't harmful to society and our government officials are old and are still believe the ad campaigns during the late 30's. Its now the 2014 we are not a bunch of degenerates who just want to do all the drugs that are available to use. Let the people make their choices on if they want it legalized or not we can not let the government control what we want. We only want to have a joint that we can smoke without having jail time or an unnecessary fine for something that has not been the cause of a single death since its first recorded use in 7000 B.C. Its impossible to overdose. The government already lost the war on marijuana so legalize it, tax it, and regulate it. Read this actually I said "regulate" it use the persons id to keep a track on how much they buy and keep them to a certain amount each week. Thanks for the debate I actually enjoyed it and was fun lets the people decide who had a better side and hopefully ill debate against you again in the future.
Marijuana Legalization

"Smoking pot does not affect your driving skills" I call BS. That's complete B.S. And no, pot does affect the brain even in small amounts, especially towards children who are still developing their brain. (Normally this age is from birth to the age of 21 i.e. why you have to be 21 years or older to drink in the U.S.) Also, do you really think pot fields are a good idea for industrial hemp? Really? Come on, think it through.
Crysis 1 is better than Crysis 2

I honestly think, that Crysis 2, very much lacked many many things from the first game, such as:Open world: Crysis 2 is very limited in its choices of travel, moving down paths already layed out for you, and not being able to traverse a nice empty land doing it yout way.Aliens: The aliens have suddenly evolved to stand on two feet, when exactly do they explain this again?Gameplay: On Crysis 1, the suit was split into many different powers, and could have been used for lots of combinations, such as cloaking up and then quickly switching to strength and then throwing the person for miles, BUT, Crysis 2 has melded the suit into a lot less abilites, and to e honest, has made it weaker. Also, how simple they have made the game, by laying out the option right in front of you, it's insulting to peoples intelligence, it's pretty much telling us how to play right.
Crysis 1 is better than Crysis 2

I've played both games to completion, and I am glad to see a video game debate that is actually not about Call of Duty, so I'll take this debate. Addressing the lack of a more open world in Crysis 2, I defend this choice by the developer for a few reasons: 1. It is more appropriate for the urban setting of the game - this is self-explanatory. 2. Sniping was incredibly overpowered due to the open world in Crysis 1. My method to get through the game consisted of me acquiring the sniper scope, slapping it on the FY-17, and proceeding to silently kill everyone across the map. This was entertaining, but not challenging at all. Granted, it's even easier to by stealthy in Crysis 2, but I'll address that later. 3. The levels are actually quite large. Plenty big enough for sniping. I wouldn't say they are as large as the maps in Crysis 1, but there is much more detail and variety in Crysis 2, which necessitates smaller maps. The progression of the aliens would make sense, considering how Crysis 1 is the first encounter with them. It makes sense that they've gotten better since then. I would have to say that gameplay has improved overall in Crysis 2. The honest truth is that the speed and power modes were rarely used in Crysis 1, since it meant giving up your armor entirely. With the functions of speed and strength merged into regular functions, they get used more often. I would not say that the suit is weaker, either. It is much stronger. Try using stealth mode with the regular pistol, with a silencer. Shooting with that only takes away 10% of your suit energy, meaning you can pretty much kill anything and everything, silently, up close and personal. In this respect, the suit is now extremely overpowered. The suit visor function has some aspects that even I have to admit trivialize aspects of the game. For example, the enemy marking function. You know the one, the one that lets you track enemies through walls. As someone who primarily stealthed, I can affirm that it is very overpowered and should have been limited to at most 2 or 3 enemies at a time. However, the tactical feedback function was quite helpful. It helps players consider options that the developer intended for the player to use that the player may have not known about. For example, look at the cannon in the area immediately after the stealth tutorial. If you passed by it without knowing about it, I suggest playing again to that point to use it. It is fin, and something that most players might never notice normally, if it weren't for the tactical option display.
Should Children be allowed to sleep in class.

Everybody should know how early school starts, too early. We've probably all experienced wanting to fall asleep in class, so why should't we be able to? Kids should be able to take naps during lessons. Example if your teacher is teaching about fraction (bleh) you should be able to sleep and not have to listen to the useless stuff. Or you stayed up till 1:00 and can barely focus now, we should be able to catch up on sleep! WHOS WITH ME!
Dr. John Money should have been arrested for crimes against David and Brian Reimer.

As per the outline, and as my arguments seem to have been misinterpreted, I will repeat the crimes alleged by the brothers, as well as the consequences. Also, I have limited knowledge, yes, but I do know a little about criminal justice and psychology. Schizophrenia can be triggered by a traumatic event. (http://schizophrenia.com...#) and seeing as how both Brian and his mother both had no recorded issues, it would seem that Dr. Money was responsible for at least a portion of this. The doctor who initially circumcised Bruce was to blame for his transition to female, but not for his suicide. Brian killed himself after a battle with depression brought on (at least partially) by Dr. Money. David killed himself due to similar circumstances. Many victims also do not come forward until after they reach adulthood (http://www.chicagotriallaw.com...) Also, my apologies for violating my own outline, however I felt I should clarify myself, also a reminder that this is a CONCLUDING round. In conclusion, as I have found some evidence (again , no proof, just citing Con's source) as to the abuse, I would state that Dr. Money was at least partially to blame for these two brothers' deaths, it is reasonable to conclude that, at least on the molestation charge, Dr. Money should have been arrested. "David did eventually marry a big-hearted woman named Jane, but his dark moods persisted. He was plagued by shaming memories of the frightening annual visits to Dr. Money, who used pictures of naked adults to "reinforce" Brenda's gender identity and who pressed her to have further surgery on her "vagina." " Also in Con's source is another refutation of his own point. "In some press reports, financial problems were given as the sole motive in David's suicide. While this is absurdly reductive, it is true that last fall David learned that he was the victim of an alleged con man who had hoodwinked him out of $65,000"a loss that ate at him and no doubt contributed to his despair. " Con's own sources contradict his points. Also, I forgot this source in my listing, which validates much of my Wikipedia points. http://www.shb-info.org... Thanks go to Con, for the simulating educational debate, my apologies for my poor wording and violation of the outline to Con and the voters. With that, I pass it off to con, and recommend that Con use this round for rebuttals of my points if he should wish.
Dr. John Money should have been arrested for crimes against David and Brian Reimer.

Thank you Con, I look forward to a good debate. Also please note I may forfeit the next round due to a bad Internet connection. List of crimes ( as alleged by the brothers and as results of his crimes) WARNING-Potentially Explicit! Murder of David Reimer (psychological damage from other crimes prompted suicide) Murder of Brian Reimer (Overdose- psychological damage) Molestation of both brothers Possession of child pornography (alleged by the brothers, same with above) Story of the Brothers On August 22, 1965, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, Brian and Bruce (later Brenda/David) were born. Then, at six months, urination problems were revealed. In a bid to correct the problem, Circumcision was performed on Bruce (Brian was not operated on), but irreparable damage to the penis was done, prompting the family to see John Money, a doctor who worked with sex changes and intersex individuals. Money suggested that Bruce became Brenda. The family agreed, and at the age of 22 months, Bruce died, and became Brenda. The doctor then, according to accounts of the family, (evidence was never found to prove this, as all those involved have since died) the doctor did "genital inspections" on the twins. These included "child sexual play" with Brenda playing the bottom role. The doctor was even said to have photographed this on at least one occasion. These then occurred once a year until the age of 11-15 ( I have not found the exact age), after which Brenda threatened suicide if she had to visit the doctor again. Brian later developed schizophrenia, which has been known to occur as a result of a traumatic event (http://www.nhs.uk...). The family then confessed that Brenda was a male. Brenda then underwent an operation to revert back to a male, naming himself David. Aftermath of the Brothers In 2002, Brian committed suicide by overdosing on antidepressants. David was devastated. He tended the grave until his own suicide by being shot in the head with a sawed-off shotgun in 2004. These two died due to severe mental problems caused by PTSD caused by Doctor Money. Aftermath of Doctor Money Doctor Money died of Parkinson's Disease in 2006. Sources- http://www.nhs.uk... https://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.findagrave.com... http://www.findagrave.com... https://en.wikipedia.org... Note- My apologies for my overuse of Wikipedia, as it was not the best of sources. It, however, was all I could glean on the subject that would give the full story. With that, I pass it on to Con.
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is Correct (most likely Plausible)

In this debate, I will try to show that Kalam Cosmological Argument is most likely NOT plausible. For this debate, we will use the William Lane Craig's version of the argument:1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.2. The Universe began to exist. 3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.Please note that this will be a debate over William Lane Craig's version, and not any other variant. Good Luck to whomever accepts.R1: AcceptanceR2: ArgumentsR3: RebttalsR4: More Rebuttals and Conclusions
Capitalism does not require democracy.

Thank you for making this debate and allowing me to debate with you sir. I just wish to point out that everyone has different views on everything and therefore making debates possible, I do not believe that we should start fights or cause any type of stirred anger towards one another in this debate and would like to keep the comments as civilized as possible so that everyone can have a good time reading this and posting more comments for us to look at. seeing as my opponent opened the floor for the debate, I will allow him to go first so that I may present my case afterwards and my rebuttal. Good luck in the debate, and I hope this will be fun for the both of us!
Insurance.

Okay, for some reason Round 2 skipped to Round 3—I am guessing this was intentional but a problem with the DDO server or something. My opponent said he made his argument but based on what I read in Round 1, it is not actually an argument but just an unsubstantiated personal opinion. So, as the late Christopher Hitchens used to say, “What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.” Thus, Con has not contributed to the debate. Because of this, my defense of insurance as a concept will be relatively short. Insurance has been a net benefit to people, economies, and the world. That is to say, it mitigates problems that are bond to occur, including death, sickness, natural disasters, fires, gas leaks—examples are virtually limitless, so that is my bridged version. Anyone reading this debate has experienced some circumstance or life event where insurance of some kind helped mollify problems would have been worse than in a scenario without insurance. People understand, businesses understand this, and governments understand that insurance is a necessity in an imperfect world, this is just a simply an unpleasant fact. Here is a concrete example: The father of a household is the main breadwinner for his family, say mother, son, and daughter. He dies from [insert a realistic choice based on your personal preference]. Ask yourself isn’t better for everyone involved for the father to have a life insurance policy than not. With insurance, the family is less likely to have to worry whether they will be able to keep their house, pay for the funeral, or worry about having to find a job immediately after the husband’s death.
Violent Video Games have a Bad Influence on Teenagers

As my opponent forfeited the previous round, I will present some new argymentsMy new argument is regarding the characters. In most violent video games, the character who you play as is almost always huge and unnaturally muscley (1)This is just showcasing the message that strong muscley men are superior to those who are not, more "manly" if you will, and this can make for poor self esteem in players who believe that their physique doesn't match up to the one shown as "manly" in the game. This can lead to teenagers using stereoids and similar physique enhancements to make themselves seem more manly, as subconciously they have grown up to beleive that "real men" are big, muscley killing machines. By absenting these absurd killing games, it will be one step closer to elliminating this unreal expectation boys have for themselves.1. http://people.southwestern.edu...;
Violent Video Games have a Bad Influence on Teenagers

The reason why I believe that violent games have a negative effect on people, is that there is a positive connection with killing, rather than the fact that the game contains killing at all. In many games, when you kill a character you win points, such as in the game Carmageddon where you win credits by hitting pedestrians in a car. Games make this connection between killing and winning something, which is what I find appaling. Example: Thrill Kill is a 4 player game, where characters fight to the death. It includes many ways to dismember, torture and kill your opponent. Of course there is a positive outcome, once you kill everyone else you win the game. There is no doubt that these kids of games could create a connection between "killing" and "good" in people's minds. I don't believe that these games have a negative impact because people think "I'm bored, and COD tells me killing is fun!" but more that they will have that subconscious connection between killing and winning. Thanks!
Violent Video Games have a Bad Influence on Teenagers

Isn't everything a bad influence on teenagers these days? It's all about how the person takes what they see and applies it in situations. There's always a scapegoat for everything, but really it comes down to how the person was raised. Sure, in Grand Theft Auto, a person might see a nice Lambo driving by and they might think to themselves 'If I was playing Grand Theft Auto I would hijack that car.' But if they were raised with good morals, they would know better than to steal the car. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE MORALS!
Feminism is about equality.

Feminism - The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.This is my definition of feminism, this is also the definition that comes up when you search "What is feminism."Can my opponent please explain why in his definition of feminism it says, "equality of the sexes." Isn't that our whole debate about whether feminism is about equality? My opponent has already proved my point. Thank you.
Feminism is about equality.

I will be arguing against the above resolution. My opponent will be arguing for the above resolution. DefinitionsFeminism: Definition 1: the theory of political, economic and social equality of the sexes. Definition 2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interestsEquality: the quality or state of having the same rights, social status, etc. -from merriam-webster.comBurden of Proof will be shared. Above definitions are not subject to change. RULESRound 1 is for acceptance ONLY. Any arguments will be disregarded by myself and the audience.Round 2 is the beginning of the Debate. Opening Statements only, no rebuttals.Round 3 is for Rebuttals. Pro and Con may only attack the argument that has been presented by his/her opponent. Previous points may not be defended.Round 4 is for Defense and Cross Examination. Pro and Con may defend his/her previous position by attacking the rebuttal presented in Round 3. New evidence may be presented. No new arguments are allowed in this round. Pro and Con may ask a clarifying question of his/her opponent, in order to move into round 5. Cross Examination may NOT be based upon circular reasoning. The answerer of this question (the person being asked) must address HOW the question contains circular reasoning in order for them not to be required to answer. Round 5 is for Answering the CX question, further Defense and Closing Arguments. Failure to follow the above rules will result in a 7 point loss. Forfeiture of a round will result in a 4 point loss. Further ClarificationArguments may be made regarding the way feminism and feminists has affected the lives of ALL people, this includes laws, media, literature, etc. However, I will be basing my argument from a North American Standpoint. If my opponent wishes to address other countries, this must be discussed in the comments section.