BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Alex Rodriguez in the Hall of Fame

Alex Rodriguez deserves to be in the Major League Baseball Hall of Fame because of the following reasons. Alex Rodriguez was born on July 27, 1975 in New York, New York. His family would later move to Miami Florida where he attended Westminster Christian High School. He was on his school's national championship team. Alex was an All-American prep team in his senior year. He was selected as the USA Baseball Junior Player of the Year 1993 and Gatorade's national baseball student athlete of the year. He even was the first high school student to try out for Team USA in 1993. In 1993, Alex was drafted first overall by the Seattle Mariners. He made his major league debut in 1994, but officially joined the Mariners in 1996 as shortstop. He was the youngest shortstop in All-Star game history. The Associated Press and Sporting News selected him as Major League Player of the Year and almost was the youngest recipient of the MLB MVP. While in Seattle, he receive 2 Silver Slugger Awards. After the 2000 season, the Texas Rangers signed free agent Alex Rodriguez. He spent 3 years in Texas and broke many records and received the 2003 AL MVP Award. He was traded in 2004 to the New York Yankees where he remained to present day as Yankees third basemen. So what has Alex Rodriguez done to receive a Hall of Fame honor? He did the following: 14 time All-Star 10 Silver Slugger Awards 4 Hank Aaron Awards 3 AL MVPs 5 AL Home Run Champion 2 Gold Glove Awards 1 World Series win 647 Home Runs 1,898 Runs 1,950 RBIs He has set the following records: Most home runs by a player of Hispanic descent Most runs in a season for a shortstop Most extra base hits in a season for a shortstop Most total bases in a season for a shortstop Most home runs in a season for a shortstop Youngest ever to hit 500 home runs Most stolen bases in a 50-home run season
The God of Abraham probably does not exist

Strucuture:1.Acceptance2. Opening arguments3. Refutations/ new points4. further refutations5. Any brief clarification/ refutation and closing. BoP: Shared.Abrahamic God: "The Abrahamic God in this sense is the conception of God that remains a common attribute of all three traditions. God is conceived of as eternal, omnipotent, omniscient and as the creator of the universe. God is further held to have the properties of holiness, justice,omni-benevolence and omnipresence."http://en.wikipedia.org...
Spogebob should die off

(1) I don't really have much time on me to go on this website and post my arguements and such, so it's pretty difficult for me to come on and post my arguements. I have school and such, you should understand. Anyway, I couldn't find the website that showed the Spongebob thing. But I can tell you this, a commercial for Nickelodeon came on and showed the world how famous Spongebob had become. This was in 2013 or 2014, but it said over 1 billion people have watched Spongebob. I just want to say that the creators of Spongebob are actually reading what us, the internet users, the fans, the people who know pop culture and such. They read all these comments and memes about pop culture, and try to implicate that into their episodes. Such as for the 12th season, they plan on bringing back what they created between the 2000-2004. I am in a hurry so I could only post this much. Stay yellow my friend.
Spogebob should die off

Rebuttals: when you said the show won awards in 2013 and 2014 you brought up no links to prove this. in your only link it said in one part and i quote "The stories are funny. " - Said by Rodger Bumpass voice of squidward this is an opinion not a fact. "Another key to the show's success is that the humor hits for all age groups" let's see, ripping off a person's toenail (squidwards visit) and Mr. Krabs causing Plankton to almost commit suicide (one coarse meal) those are REALLY FUNNY JOKES (sarcasm) now for my final rebuttal it's all about your link all it is is the cast giving thier opinions and how a episode is made nothing else. now onto my argument There's been complaints on spongebob [1] it's like family guy and simpsons it has ALOT of bad episodes and only 1 or 2 diamonds in the rough every once and awhile. spongebob needs to die not out of hatered but out of mercy. All that i need to use the seasonal rot test if i can explain each character in 1 or 2 sentences then that means become flanderized which i quote means The act of taking a single (often minor) action or trait of a character within a work and exaggerating it more and more over time until it completely consumes the character. Most always, the trait/action becomes completely outlandish and it becomes their defining characteristic as are peripheral characters in shows with long runs. [2] Now back to the test here it is Spongebob: Creepy stalker who has no sence of morality, Patrick: jerk who doesnt CARE about morality, Mr krabs: a greedy man who will do illegal things or just plain out evil things. Squidward: the butt monkey who mostly doesn't deserve the tourture. Links: . https://answers.yahoo.com... [1] . http://tvtropes.org...[2] Good luck to you. also 10/10 on Eat_IT_SUKA sorry i had to point it out. Still i look foreward to seeing what you have in store for me
Spogebob should die off

Spongebob is the only show from the 90s which has not died off yet and is continuing making new episodes. Spongebob is famous and won awards in 2013 and 2014 for having the most audience, which was more than 1 billion people watching the show. Another is that the show is popular and is rated as number 1 in top American children shows. Not only that, Spongebob shows what adults and children want to see. As in this link given to you, it shows the proof on why Spongebob is famous and should NOT die off. http://abcnews.go.com.... Spongebob is one of my personal favorite shows and will continue as my favorite until it eventually dies off, which is in probably 8 more years, hopefully more than 10 years. For now, it's your turn and good luck.
Spogebob should die off

Well, It was a good match agaisnt you mate, and I still agree, with millions of other people, that Spongebob should continue. Plus, Nickelodeon is an awesome channel that just tries to get the people's attention. I don't think Nickelodeon is at all terrible, it's just trying to appeal to what children have now become accustomed too. Let's be honest, our taste in television is going to be much different to a child living in this time. Spongebob is one of America's favorite tv shows. It will stay like that for a few more years. Paul Tibbit plans on giving Spongebob around 5 more years, or more depending on how well it stays. I have and always will be, a spongebob fan. There are so many dedications for Spongebob and they will continue to grow and grow. I just hope Spongebob episodes become better and funnier.
Spogebob should die off

ok, Sorry for that i understand i was really tired when i typed that so sorry for being rude. Rebuttals:"They read all these comments and memes about pop culture, and try to implicate that into their episodes." So they try to appeal to the lowest common denomintator? "the creators of Spongebob are actually reading what us, the internet users, the fans, the people who know pop culture and such" So Why do reviews of episodes get taken down like how viacom takes down reviews of spongebob? And if they read what us fans say why dont we ever see it, they still have squidward suffer not because of his own fault? Now on to the final part of my case. i need to keep this short. There are problems with modern spongebob and since i dont have much time i'll put the link here {1} alot of people have made rants on spongebob and how certain stuff is, spongebob has to use fart jokes to get a cheap laugh all the characters are flanderized up to 11 so they're not even characters just cardboard cutouts. 2000-2004 of spongebob wasn't perfect either. Even if they go back to the original that won't mean that the damage wont instantly be healed we need to mercy kill it like an infected friend. That is my final case goodbye Links: [1]
Use of soul and does it exist

First lets decide what do you want the soul to be. Do you want it to be the processor, the hardware or the software? I am really confused. This debate can be immaterial as you cannot take this site out of this computer screen, but will it mean it has a soul? As for knowledge and information, it can be made material by writing, making videos and representing it in other ways. If the soul is the immaterial part of me, then is my body just storage? Isn't the brain responsible for our workings of the mind, for you don't really carry on anything if rebirth is possible, how do you know there is an additional soul for us and we are not surviving by our brain only? Software is immaterial, but that doesn't give the computer a soul. Why then 'As to you actually seeing a soul, do you experience any of the immaterials? Do you believe or doubt? Do you disagree or agree? Do you have a position on anything? Do you think? Do you learn? Do you have plans about your future? Do you like or hate something? Do you have any principles? Do you have ethics? If you have any of these you have a soul because these things are immaterial. And the soul is the immaterial part of you.' these would give us a soul? Plus most of these would require intelligence, and intelligence is developed in the brain, so how can these be attributed to the soul? The brain also has memory so 'If you didn"t have a soul, you would not have a mind, which means you can"t strategize on your video games you play. You won"t have any friends, because for social relationships to function it requires memories which is parts of the soul (just imagine walking up to the same person again and again and never make any progress in knowing him\her because the person is a stranger every time you meet). Having careers in anything would be impossible because you could never learn anything (knowledge or information is immaterial) you ask what use is it' even without soul I would be able to do these. Also the mind dies along with the body, and also is not yet proven to be separate from the brain, so the mind can't be given to the soul. You wrote that the soul is me. But wouldn't I be different in the next life? How do you know that soul is from this life or a new one? Do you know who were you in the past life? Do you remember your journey from life to death to life? If you don't, how do you still know this empty soul is even present? I ask again, What use is the soul and does it even exist?
Use of soul and does it exist

Well so you define the soul as an immaterial part of us. You account knowledge, belief, thoughts etc. for the existence of soul. But then all these go on in our brain, how do we know soul actually carries on, and is not just another idea? As for my question about memory, what I meant to point towards was rebirth. If you are reborn, how do I know it is you or a new soul? What if we all don't get to enjoy immortality, we just die as bone and flesh? What is the use of this soul and does it even exist? Its just like saying the hardware of this computer is blown, even the hard disk but you managed to transfer data without any physical connectors to another dormant computer. It lacks sense. Please tell me what use is this soul and is there anything to make me see its existence??
Use of soul and does it exist

Thanks for the debate. Since I didn’t see anything that indicated round 1 was for acceptance only I’ll go ahead and continue on The meaning of soul Well first we need to establish the meaning of the soul before we continue. As it is generally understood as the soul is the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal. The Computer Analogy I’ll explain it this way. I personally believe we are biological machines. I think this because it doesn’t seem that underneath the skin things spontaneously operate without any reason whatsoever. To me everything in the body has a sense of order like that of machinery (e.g. blood flows throughout like electricity does in electronics). Now it is interesting to note that there are some machines that seem to operate off of the immaterials… Namely the computer. A computer can be divided out into two things, the hardware and software. Now what’s software? If you search google for “software define” you’ll find that that software is defined as “the programs and other operating information used by a computer.” Now what I’m going to claim is that software is immaterial to the most part, it’s made out of language, and language doesn’t exist, though I speak this in the material sense of existence. Like a computer has hardware and software… You have flesh and bones which is essentially the hardware of you, so what’s the software? Well we have beliefs, we have principles we live by that defines our character, we can know things… but all this stuff is immaterial, knowledge, ideas, ambitions, principles don’t materially exist. Everything about you that is immaterial means something (e.g. your ambitions about your career, your ideas) and if you accept this is true, meaning can be expressed in language. So your soul would be as immortal as words are immortal. So yes, the soul is immortal in a manner of speaking, to answer your question. You asked if you forget everything, is it the same or new? This is kind of a difficult question to answer as my encounters with people with full blown amnesia is quite few, like down to 1… I did know an elderly lady whose memory was so bad, that she forgot her husband that she’s been married to for the last 20+ years. When I was talking to her, she didn’t seem to be a different person in the sense of having any major character changes (e.g. turned into some psychotic egotistical bloodthirsty menace)… She seemed to be fundamentally the same person, just didn’t remember things. So I’m going to lean towards a probably not, as I think the soul is the same in a sense, just lacking memories. The logic behind it. 1. Knowledge, character, beliefs, thoughts, and personal experience are the parts of you that are immaterial.2. The soul is the immaterial parts of you.3. If you have knowledge, character, beliefs, thoughts, and personal experience… Or at least one of these, then…4. You have a soul.
I nominate Amy Winehouse for the category of Most Messed-Up Female Entertainer.

Exhibit A: "Amy Winehouse and her druggie husband, Blake Fielder-Civil got into a brawl while staying at a hotel in Soho. Both were seen walking the streets bloody and swollen." http://www.imnotobsessed.com... Exhibit B: "Amy Winehouse arrested whilst on tour in Bergen, Norway" http://www.holymoly.co.uk... Exhibit C: "[Winehouse] got booed and people walked out after she began to rant about her husband, Blake Fieldcivilcase, being in the clink." http://dlisted.com... Exhibit D: "Dissoriented Amy Winehouse Wanders Streets in Only a Bra and Jeans" http://www.imnotobsessed.com... Exhibit E: "Amy Winehouse Out with White Powder in Her Nose" http://www.imnotobsessed.com... Really though, the girl needs some serious help.
Why or why not large marsupiels should be spliced with amphibious reptiles

"Large air breathing marsupials should definitely be spliced with reptiles." Pro's enthusiasm is certainly appreciated, and the point almost seems as it should immediately conceded, as just consider the recent epic "Spliced" : "Meanwhile, Dren has become amphibious and omnivorous with a toxic sting and retractable wings. ... Soon after, Clive is seduced by Dren and has sex with her." [1] Now just imagine instead of being able to engage in sexual intercourse with that wonderful creation : http://www.scificool.com... the possibility would be obviously far more attractive if Dren had a pouch to curl up in after coitis. Further, this would obviously open up possibilities and who would not want to see the ultimate pet for home protection : http://tkcollier.files.wordpress.com... and what could be more cuter than http://www.rationalitynow.com... The contention though is immediately obvious - if we do such splicing as originally proposed then what happens to all the small non-air breathing marsupials who are being ignored? Do we really want to face the obvious ACLU charges that are going to erupt and endure these court costs simply so we can have sex with a half alligator half kangaroo man/women. Ok, maybe we do want it, but really should we? I would argue no, we are in fact much better off if we would splice large aquatic birds with small avian amphibians. In this way we would have pets which we could utilize for transportation in both land, sea and air, and they are obviously far sexier as well. Now I realize that the obvious rebuttal is such creatures do not exist, and the response is equally as obvious, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence - open your imagination to the possible, do not be so constrained to the immediately obvious. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Medical Coverage (insurance) for genetic disorders/Genetic counseling

Fear of discrimination is a common concern among people considering genetic testing. Gene discrimination is people who are treated differently by their employer or insurance company because they have a gene mutation that causes or increases the risk of an inherited disorder. GINA prevents employers from using genetic information in employment decisions such as hiring, firing, promotions, pay, and job assignments. . The regulations governing implementation of GINA in employment took effect on January 10, 2011 and are implemented by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). On March 10th, 2005, a bipartisan group of over 100 members of congress introduced the GINA that passed the senate by a vote of 98-0. The GINA was passed refusing the genomics based clinical test. With that being said, more people support the act instead of refusing it. They wish to help others and more people need medical coverage or they will just end up in debt. That will not help the economy at all.
Medical Coverage (insurance) for genetic disorders/Genetic counseling

As I have already clearly mentioned the term genetic discrimination is a sketchy term that can vary from person to person and should not be used for insurance companies because there is multiple variables in an insurance companies choice whether or not someone should be insured by them or not. While the GINA bill protects against "genetic discrimination" the term genetic discrimination itself is a sketchy term and therfore shouldn't be used for insurance companies.
Medical Coverage (insurance) for genetic disorders/Genetic counseling

GINA prevents employers from using genetic information in employment decisions such as hiring, firing, promotions, pay, and job assignments. Furthermore, GINA prohibits employers or other covered entities (employment agencies, labor organizations, joint labor-management training programs, and apprenticeship programs) from requiring or requesting genetic information and/or genetic tests as a condition of employment. The regulations governing implementation of GINA in employment took effect on January 10, 2011 and are implemented by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Protection towards these people his highly needed to the fact they are not treated fairly.
Medical Coverage (insurance) for genetic disorders/Genetic counseling

While the GINA bill mentioned by opponent is a valid bill protecting against "genetic discrimination", the term genetic discrimination is a sketchy word whose definition could vary from person to person. It is not easy to call something genetic discrimination when an insurance companies decision could be multiple variables. It is not fair for people to have the right to claim an insurance companies decision to decline their services is solely on the fact that they have a genetic disorder. The hard cold truth is that someones genetic disorder is a liability, just like a smoker or an obese person is a liability.
Medical Coverage (insurance) for genetic disorders/Genetic counseling

Fear of discrimination is a common concern among people considering genetic testing. GINA protects Americans from discrimination based on their genetic information in both health insurance (Title I) and employment (Title II). Title I amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the Public Health Service Act (PHSA), and the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), through the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), as well as the Social Security Act, to prohibit health insurers from engaging in genetic discrimination. These new laws have helped a lot of people. There are more people trying to help this issues rather than to push away people with this issue due to money expenses.
Medical Coverage (insurance) for genetic disorders/Genetic counseling

While Genetic Discrimination may be wrong, it is something that is unavoidable. Like earlier stated it is impossible to give people with genetic disorders health insurance because of the cost it would take to give these people health insurance is to much for insurance companies to keep up without going bankrupt or having incredibly high prices for everyone. As stated by Telegraph.co.uk it costs 100,000 British pounds to cure 1 child of a genetic disorder with gene therapy.
Medical Coverage (insurance) for genetic disorders/Genetic counseling

Most people can agree that gene/genetic discrimination is wrong. If there is still any confusion on what gene discrimination is, it is people who are treated differently by their employer or insurance company because they have a gene mutation that causes or increases the risk of an inherited disorder. Fear of discrimination is a common concern among people considering genetic testing. A lot can see that people who cannot protect themselves need protection by others. Senate and congressmen can agree to that. They are the main ones to help the GINA pass a law. On November 8, 2005 health and human services expressed the support for federal genetic non-discrimination legislation. On March 10th, 2005, a bipartisan group of over 100 members of congress introduced the GINA that passed the senate by a vote of 98-0. The GINA was passed refusing the genomics based clinical test. With that being said, more people support the act instead of refusing it.
Medical Coverage (insurance) for genetic disorders/Genetic counseling

My opponent has claimed that insurance companies denying people with genetic disorders is genetic discrimination is "Genetic Discrimination", but this is not true, because the simple fact is that insurance companies don't provide insurance for people with genetic disorders because it is too impractical. As stated by Becker Hospital Review the average cost to stay in a hospital for a night in Colorado is 1,885$. As also stated from Becker Hospital Review every week spent in a hospital averages to about 12,985 $ . People with genetic disorders would be in hospitals weeks every year draining insurance companies of all their money, or hiking up the price for health insurance for everybody exponentially. The reason insurance companies don't accept people with genetic disorders isn't because of their genetic disorders, its because its impractical
Medical Coverage (insurance) for genetic disorders/Genetic counseling

People are treated differently by their employer or insurer because they have a gene mutation that causes or increases risk of an inherited disorder. This is called Genetic Discrimination. There are all ready several laws that protect people from this discrimination. The Genetic Information Non discrimination Act is designed to protect people from this form of discrimination. It makes it illegal for health insurance providers to make decisions about a person's insurance eligibility for coverage. No person should have to suffer just because they have a gene mutation and this is why people should have coverage or insurance.