BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Diversity is not our strength.

I will be arguing that cultural diversity is a weakness in a nation.I am referring to culture, not race even though many cultures are divided along racial lines.I am talking about multiple cultures with major differences existing beside/amongst eachother in one nation.Some main points I plan on covering:Culturally open societies are more vunerable to hostile manipulation.Significant internal cultural distinctions are inevitably destabilizing to a nation if they are allowed to persist.Cultural diversity inevitably leads to elimination/expulsion of all but one of the cultures in that nation.If you FF, the content of all your dreams for the next 7 years will consist of only a rotation between the two movies Hellboy 2, and Fast Getaway II, but excluding the cool animation in the first ten minutes of Hellboy 2. Yes, it's a very specific curse.
I have the biggest Penis in the world.

Thanks, grobino. ==BOP== ++I agree with my opponent, there is no way that I could disprove him if he asserted that his was bigger++ I'm glad my opponent agrees. My penis IS bigger than his. He cannot disprove this, thus he fails the BOP. ==Rebuttal== ---Truman Theory--- I demand my opponent test this theory. In the movie The Truman Show, Truman tests this theory by disrupting his normal routine, counting the number of times certain cars and bicycles passed his house (they passed repeatedly, in predictable cycles), and eventually attempts to escape the show's "set" by running as far away as he could. For this to be a fair debate, my opponent must stop his normal routine (if he usually goes to school or work, he should skip these), he must start counting how many times every car and bicycle passes, he must go up to strangers and see if they recognize him (from the show), and he must then run as far away from his home as he possibly can. Only then can we continue debating this point. C1) Extend my argument from Matt Ridley that aliens would likely not even have a penis because they would be asexual or polysexual. It is prohibitively unlikely they would have the exact same sex organs as we do. If my opponent keeps asserting that he is an alien, then I assert that he has no penis. Extend the argument that my opponent says in the comments section that he is 7 and 3/4 inches. This is considerably smaller than 8 FEET, which is the length of the blue whale's penis. My opponent could not win a pissing contest with a blue whale. Extend my argument that his profile picture must be of my opponent. ++geek sheik++ I showed his picture to my friend who is a fashionista and she said, "that's not geek sheik, that's just geek." C2) Extend my argument that my opponent did not "hit bottom" in his previous sexual encounters. This means that his length is well below 7 inches, which is the upper limit of vaginal canal length. He is thus smaller than 14 inches, which is the largest human penis on record. C3) I put my opponent's purported penis length into a penis length calculator, and it said that 10% of white men are larger than he is and 44% of black men are larger than he is. This means he falls far short of "biggest in the world," especially when comparing his length to that of black men. C4) I ask my opponent whether he uses condoms. This question is of vital importance to this debate. I look forward to his response.
I have the biggest Penis in the world.

I agree with my opponent, there is no way that I could disprove him if he asserted that his was bigger other than the fact that I know this to be a fallacy because I have the biggest in the world. As mine is the biggest in the world it is an impossibility that his could be bigger. I put forward to my opponent though the Truman Theory. The Truman theory is the theory that one person (in this case, myself) is the subject of a large television series and everybody and everything around him is a faï¿½ade for the camera. This being the case, then, I hypothesise that my opponent does not have a large penis at all and is in fact only an elaborate rouse on the part of the television company to stop me discovering the truth about my large penis in order to create a reaction of the purposes of entertainment. I put it to my opponent to disprove this. C1) As for the assumption my opponent continues to make about the origin of myself I put forward to him this rebuttal. Firstly, whilst the person in my picture is not cool enough by American standards to warrant being used as a fake picture, it must be noted that I am living in Britain. Due to cultural differences, such as Geek Sheik being the more normative fashion in Britain as opposed to the more masculine American fashion style, it is highly plausible that I would use the image if my aim was to appear cool in Britain. I would like to ask my opponent also where exactly he gained such a vast knowledge of the Alien psyche? I think it is a fallacy for my opponent to claim that these are not the actions of an extra terrestrial being as my opponent, I think it is safe to assume, has never knowingly met an extra terrestrial and as such would have no knowledge of their motives. I again cite my opponents lack of extraterrestrial knowledge when he claims that if ones penis were to be large ones brain would be small. This is based purely on knowledge of Earth anatomy, and it is highly possible an extraterrestrial could have a large penis and a large brain as the laws governing our evolution do not apply to them. C2) I would like to point out to my opponent that I am asserting I have the largest penis in the world. If there is a penis that is 14 inches long, it is implied by my statement that mine is bigger as mine is the largest in the world. C3) I again put forward to my opponent that as I may be extra terrestrial, and as my picture may not be my own, that my opponent is not knowledgeable to the colour of my skin. I also put forward that whilst Shaq may indeed be black, this does not automatically mean that his penis is larger than mine as it is unknown what percentile Shaq may be in.
I have the biggest Penis in the world.

Thank-you for giving such an indulgent reply to my whimsical debate Bluesteel, it is much appreciated. In rebuttal to your case I put forward the follow points- C1) Non-human penises Granted my opponent has a a point- I did not specify Human penises. However, my opponent also makes the mistake of assuming that I am human when I have not at any point stated this to be the case. It is entirely plausible that I am extra-terrestrial. I merely claim to have the biggest penis in the world, I did not state that I had a human penis. If my opponent wishes to discuss the existence of extra-terrestrial life I put forward that many scholars who are considered to be sound of mind, for example Stephen Hawking (http://www.timesonline.co.uk...), support the argument that life can exist outside this planet. Granted that a Blue Whales penis is longer than my body length, the possible extra-terrestrial nature of my body means that it may not be longer than my own penis. C2) Largest Human Penis Whilst I cannot argue with the statistics that my opponent has put forward I must point out that as my penis has not been seen by either Kinsey or Reuben at any point in their careers their findings cannot be bought into this debate. If they were to see my penis, it is possible that it would exceeds their previous measurements of the worlds largest penis. C3) Proportionate to height/foot length As large as Shaq may be my opponent has, with this point, fallen victim to the classic myth that shoe size is relevant to penis size http://www.4-men.org.... This is based on rumour and not on scientific fact. Also, I put forward to my opponent that human beings suffering from Dwarfism actually have larger genitalia in proportion to body size than their non-dwarf counterparts, http://wiki.answers.com.... As this is the case, the size and shape of my body actually will have no effect on the size of my genitalia; the two are not relative. As for my opponents rubuttals, whilst I cannot argue with the psychological points regarding the 'Goldilocks Response' I can put forward a significant counterargument to the practice of taping on prosthetic penises. Firstly, I highly doubt that prosthetic technology has not reached the point to which we can create prosthetic penises that are able to reproduce an orgasm using a substitute fluid. We are able to make hands that can 'feel' by sending signals through the human synapses to the brain. Compared to this a prosthetic penis that could be used for the 'money shot' would be extremely easy to create. I also put forward to my opponent that whilst my sample size may be small, his sample size is also equally as small. Whilst I am not doubting my opponents Uncles position within the pornography industry I must point out that he is not a representative for the industry as a whole, and that my opponents sample size is equally as limited as my own.
I have the biggest Penis in the world.

It has come to my attention that I have the biggest penis in the world. These are the reasons that this truth has been revealed to me- *Every girl I have slept with has commented on the size of my Penis, and always in a positive manner. *Of these girls around half of them claimed that it was the biggest penis they had ever seen, the other half refused to comment which, whilst it didn't prove my theory, also did not disprove it. *I have never seen another penis in my life apart from in pictures and on the internet. Photo-shop exists, and I have seen evidence of pictures of penises being enlarged through photo-shop. I have not seen any evidence to suggest that all of these pictures have not been enlarged digitally. *I have seen a pornographic video in which the males prosthetic large phallus falls off, to reveal a penis smaller than my own. I have not seen any evidence to suggest this method of penis enlargement is not used in all pornographic films.
Debate.org ought to use Lincoln Douglas formatted debate as required

1. True, I did not define Public Debate myself. This would have taken an unessecary amount of time, when the parameters of said debate are explained by Wikipedia. Please note that I presented this definition in the SECOND round. My opponent has had plenty of time to address this point. However, he has not done so. Therefore, since my opponent cannot prove LD superior, there is no reason to restrict debate on debate.org to this format, excluding other formats. "I've already presented reasons why we must prefer LD already: such as it's not a team event (1 on 1) and it's more formatted than any other debate." My opponent had not presented the 1 on 1 argument until the final round. Please disregard this. My opponent fails to warrant "more formatted". All debates are equally formatted. Again, my opponent cannot show LD to be superior, so his argument falls. 2. I restate that cross-ex would be logistically impossible. My opponents suggestions are implausible and unwarranted. I want to re-emphasize that cross-ex is a voting issue, and therefore essential to LD. 3. LD debaters are already attracted by this site. They are free to debate as they wish. However, this change would force laymen to leave the site. They cannot "preform (their) way of debating" as this resolution would restrict the format to LD. The ease of altering this site is beside the point. The alteration is uneccessary. AFF 1. This problem is extremely rare, and entirely outweighed by my impacts. 2. LD debaters exist on debate.org. However, they do not compose the majority of users. This change would alienate the majority, certaintly a negative impact. VOTERS 1. This would alienate all laymen on this site. As they compose the majority of this site, this would have severe negative repercussions. 2. LD is possible on debate.org. Those who wish to use this format may do so. The site does not prohibit LD debaters in any way. 3. Cross-ex is essentially impossible 4. LD is in no way superior to other forms of debate. Therefore, there is no reason to prefer it. Thank you for the debate, and thanks for reading. I urge a vote in the Contradiction.
Debate.org ought to use Lincoln Douglas formatted debate as required

1. I provided a link which fully defines Public Debate. Its superiority (online) lies in its lack of cross-ex. It also appeals to the layman as a judge and debater. The burden is in no way unfair. My opponent believes that we ought to use the LD format exclusively. Therefore, he must demonstrate why LD should be chosen from the multitude of debate formats, and the others banned. He has not done this. 2. It is my opponent's responsibility to provide a warrant that run-ins would be universal. I have stated that, within a 48 hour period, the opportunity for cross-ex would be unlikely. I have also negated the concept of a cross-ex forum. Yes, judges must not vote "exclusively" off cross-ex. However, cross-ex is a key part of the debate, and should be present in voting. A skilled LD debater utilizes cross-ex as a tool to present flaws in an opposing argument. 3. Perhaps the value structure is applicable to any debate. However, it is largely incomprehensible to the layman, which ultimately reduces the appeal, and usage of debate.org. We ought create a new site because the current population of debate.org would be under-served by an exclusively LD system. Aff Case: 1. a. People who wish to debate LD will debate LD, this is self-evident. Debate.org does not prevent LD debater from debating in LD format, nor does it bar non-LD debaters from debating as they wish. b. My opponent does not show why the site must be confined to LD. 2. I do not concede this "fact". Yes, LD debaters are attracted to this site, because they can debate in an LD format, if they wish. However, they in no way compose the majority. Thank you.
Debate.org ought to use Lincoln Douglas formatted debate as required

1. "Well let's start by saying Public Debate isn't part of the National Forensics League, so how am I supposed to even use this?" I don't believe that the National Forensics League has any relation to debate.org. Additionally, Public Debate is a perfectly legitimate format used in several states. For my opponent to prove the resolution, it is necessary for him to demonstrate that LD is indeed, the best form of debate. Why would we institute a mandatory LD format, if superior alternatives exist? 2. A "run-in" is rather improbable. It is fairly unlikely for two opponents to coincide during a 48 hour period. LD cross-examination requires numerous questions and follow-up questions. This cannot be achieved during a 48 hour period. Often, cross-examination is used to examine flaws in an opponent's case, and is therefore a key part of argumentation. Voting would be complicated by the need to read said forum or chat, another example of why LD is not the style best suited to debate.org. 3. LD debate formatting restricts topics to those to which a value and criterion may be applied. This limits topics to those which concern values, rather than debates about economics, sports, etc. These weighty topics can already be discussed on this site. It is not difficult to find similarly inclined LD debaters. If there is truly a need for a purely LD site, it can be created independently, leaving debate.org for those who see debate as something not restricted to high school competition. Pro Case 1) LD is Structured My opponent is proposing a total restriction to LD format. I am arguing that LD format, along with other formats, can be achieved on debate.org, as is. 2) LD is Commonly Used This site, as a debate forum, already attracts LD debaters, as they can, in fact, debate in an LD format if they wish. Yu have provided no evidence that LD debaters compose the majority of this site. ----------- Summaries 1) The argument about functionality. "But, you see that the CON side has agreed that Debate.org already carries many of the tasks of LD debate! Quoting my opponent, "Evidence, contention numbering, and impact calculus can easily be achieved on debate.org." So that solves that argument right away." Because debate.org already has these capabilities, it can accommodate both LD, and non-LD debates. 2) Appeal to the masses "The CON doesn't argue much in return, simply that the topics would be limited and thus, the debates. The PRO comes back and states that there are both past, present, and future topics that can be used, so we're not really limited. Moreso, the PRO argues that we can create topics and use LD formatting to debate them, so this isn't a limitation at all." LD formatting cannot be applied to all debates. Thank you.
Debate.org ought to use Lincoln Douglas formatted debate as required

I was not referring to Policy, but Public Debate http://en.wikipedia.org... 1) My opponent fails to warrant LD's ease of coordination 2) My opponent states that he cannot prove LD's superiority over these other forms. Therefore, this restriction is biased and without reason. 3) We are debating whether or not LD should be the exclusive debate.org format. 1) a) Live chat will be unsuccessful given that opponents are often not online at the same time. This would also complicate voting. b) A forum used for questioning would take a vast amount of time, for the reason I have listed above. 2) Public can be run far more easily. 3) Cross-ex is not present in Public Debate. 1) By instituting a purely LD system, we narrow the debate topics to those few presented by the NFL each year, rather than the many currently on this site. 2) LD debaters can utilize this site in order to develop argumentation. If the need to debate in this format is entirely necessary, another site should be created. -------------- Now, on to my opponents arguments. 1) LD Is Structured Evidence, contention numbering, and impact calculus can easily be achieved on debate.org. 2) LD Is Commonly Used and Desired Debate.org is a forum in which persons of various backgrounds may argue a variety of topics. Restriction to only LD debaters will limit this vast educational opportunity. Thank you.
Debate.org ought to use Lincoln Douglas formatted debate as required

I am eager to see how things develop. First, I'm going to match my opponent's burdens, and then present arguments. Let's look at his first "observation" per say. My opponent says there are other forms of debate in which I must show LD to be superior to. I assume he meant "policy and public forum", so I'll go by that. I can definitely do that. 1) Lincoln Douglas debate is superior simply because of the fact that it takes a lot less effort to co-ordinate online. 2) It'd be impossible to show one debate should be preferred over another. Every debate has its flaws and its pro's. They'll balance each other out and then, all debates will be equal. 3) Regardless of the fact that I have to prove LD as preferred, we still have to look at it for this round. Otherwise, what do we have to debate? On to my opponents second "observation" about cross examination. 1) It's perfectly feasible to carry out. For example, a live chat system can be used to question your opponent. Or, a small "forum" per say, just for that debate. 2) But even if it's not, exceptions can be made. Obviously, it's not going to be perfect to run LD on an online site. But cross-ex isn't exactly critical to the debate as a whole; it's the speeches that really carry the arguments. 3) We can't really claim that cross-ex is bad, because it exists in the other debates as well. So it's non-unique to LD. Finally, his last observation, about the scope of LD's nature. 1) LD topics are typically very logical and hot-topic issues. "Reggie Bush has had a successful carrier" is automatically limited scope, because very few people would want to debate that resolution as a whole. LD topics, on the other hand, carry weight and are easy to find evidence for, rather than an opinionated statement. 2) LD would appeal to LD debaters as a whole. Knowing from personal experience, it's hard to debate on this site in that format because no one either 1) Wants to or 2) Even knows how to. You'd attract LD debaters all over looking for a site just like this, but with the actual structure, to debate in their preferred style. So the scope will actually increase! -------------- Now, on to my own arguments. 1) LD Is Structured Structure is one of the biggest things lacking on Debate. org. It's hard to do quite a few things. Amongst many others, it's hard to structure and properly refer to arguments, weigh them to judge who won the round, or even common civility and evidence. Because Debate. org lacks these resources, debating in a LD format would bring a lot of ease of use to its users. 2) LD Is Commonly Used and Desired Like I already brought up, a lot of debaters who debate LD style want somewhere to practice. I myself want to do exactly that. If a website like Debate. org uses specifically LD style, you're going to attract a lot of those debaters. Moreso, a lot of people want the structure and therefor, it's preffered.
Debate.org ought to use Lincoln Douglas formatted debate as required

Lincoln-Douglas is not the only format of debate. Other formats include Public and Public Forum. Therefore, my opponent must demonstrate how Lincoln-Douglas is superior to these. Lincoln-Douglas requires cross-examination. This is logistically rather difficult given the nature of debate.org. Therefore, my opponent must prove this to be feasible. Lincoln-Douglas restricts topic selection. As it requires a value and criterion, numerous debate topics, e.g. "Resolved: Reggie Bush has had a successful career." cannot be debated. This limits the scope and population of debate.org. Thanks for posting.
Debate.org ought to use Lincoln Douglas formatted debate as required

I'm just going to use this round to set up the debate. I urge the con to do the same as well. So what is Lincoln Douglas (also known as "LD") debate? Well, it's a structered debate used in high school Speech and Debate tournaments. Nationally recognized and practiced, the National Forensics League of America (also known as "NFL") maintains a roling set of rules regarding this debate. For those who don't know the structure of Lincoln Douglas, it's a formatted, timed, alternating speech debate. Specifics can be found just about anywhere online. After all, Google is your friend :]. So what does this debate come down to? Essentially, we're asking whether or not Debate.org ought to use LD as the only form of debate. Every member debating on this website would be required to use this format. The CON is essentially arguing that we shouldn't use LD. The PRO, of course, has to argue that we ought to. We're not going to argue in LD style for this debate; after all, how hypocritical would it be for the CON to argue in the style that he/she is trying to disprove? Should this be a fairly legitimate round, I urge the administration and webmasters of Debate.org to consider this debate and whether or not we ought to. My thanks go out to those who view and to the person who accepts this. Thank you for your time!