BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Football is better than basketball

As his topic focused around some of the benefits of basketball, I will provide some points of my on. Since we are saying better, I will show why I believe it is a better sport all around First- As con state, most of the nation watches this. It is significantly more popular than basketball. If we were to argue in terms of which sport just purely generates the most revenue all around, this is football by far. Even as far as the NCAA they generate close to the amount the NFL does. It is a billion dollar industry itself Second- I will actually build this around his statement that there are injuries. I think that is what makes the sport a physical high impact sport. These players are taking this with that knowledge. Sign contracts around it and prepare for it. They are taking steps to limit concussions and other forms of injuries as well, by making helmets and gear more secure. They have even put in rules, that prohibit unnecessary hitting of the quarter back. It is a penalty now as we know. Late hits work the same way. The point to showing that they all agree to these terms is that physical impact sports are more fun o watch than a sport with hardly no contact. Look how popular hockey is in Canada. Why football takes on this roll for us, it works the same way. We enjoy watching people tackle and hit each other. It is entirely more entertaining to watch. This is a personal belief, but backed by a majority of the nation. Third - It also offers more money to players overall. Due to the sport being popular and so many people watching it, the base player salary is way more high than a base player in basketball. Even the practice squad makes triple digits. It is a good sport to strive for, and a majority of people do for that reason. I would also like to address cons point about the shape of the ball. It is made for aero dynamics. If you were to take a football and make it round and tried to throw it on a football field, it would not go as far. Due to the design of it. Why this is acceptable in basketball, the size of the court is built with that in mind. In closing I have shown why football is better than basketball, and why a majority of our country thinks that as well.
Football is better than basketball

I really don’t do debates on subjects like this, so I hope to have a little fun with it. I will begin with three main arguments. Argument 1: Equipment Basketball can be played with a minimal amount of equipment. All that is needed is a ball and a hoop [1]. In fact, a hoop can be an old laundry basket or even a box tied to a wall. In contrast, in football, aside from the large space and the ball, you will need expensive bulky equipment such as helmets and shoulder pads [2]. The additional equipment needed can increase the cost prohibitively, making basketball the obviously superior choice. Argument 2: Fewer Injuries Simply speaking, football is more dangerous. Compared to many other sports, especially football, basketball is a low contact sport. The contact that does occur is minimal and incidental [3]. Injuries are not life threatening. In contrast, football is a full contact sport. The object of everyone on the defense is to grab the guy with the ball and wrestle him to the ground. There is a whole section of the offense designated just to be bodyguards for the quarterback. Bleacher Report posted an article ranking US professional sports according to dangerousness. Basketball was #10, Football was #3, behind only Hockey and Boxing [4]. Argument 3: That Ball Balls are round. How any “sport” can look at itself in the mirror each morning with a ball shaped like that is amazing to me [5]. Really, this should have been my first and only argument as to the obvious superiority of basketball over foot “ball. ” Conclusion I feel I have adequately presented the obvious case that basketball is a far superior sport than the odd-shaped-ball-gridiron-sport so many of my countrymen are obsessed with. [1] . http://www.buzzle.com... [2] . http://www.electro-mech.com... [3] . http://bleacherreport.com... [4] . http://bleacherreport.com... [5] . http://1.bp.blogspot.com...
Ovals are a product of a new world order

The oval, a shape not used in scientific or practical use and are a product of an ancient new world order ideology in order for humans to get into mathematics as humans are attracted to abstract shapes. They used the intrigue to get humans to develop new technologies leading to globalization such as the wheel and a number of new technologies based on mathematics gained by the interest in ovals, have you ever wondered why circles are a much better alternative to ovals? Such as the wheel if humans didn't realise that ovals were abstract we would have never developed the wheel, therefore allowing a more connected society eventually leading to the not too distant reality in which we have a global leader.
1st Time Rap Battle

Hello everyone. Opponent. The topic is "1st Time Rap Battle" and I am con. In other words, I stand in opposition to this rap battle. First of all, it's not a rap battle. My opponent essentially had infinite time to write whatever he wanted. This is more of an abrasive poetry battle. Second of all, my opponent is just weak in general. With a major portion of rhyming words likely coming from the top-rated section of urbandictionary, time spent writing abrasive poetry in response could be better spent criticizing the idea altogether, or working on some real music. It is apparent that my opponent's mindset was to sound as deep as possible by using as many syllables as possible in as few words as possible. It came out atrociously verbose, and very difficult to read. There is something in the hip hop community referred to as "flow". My opponent has none. I would've liked to have critiqued his content, but I couldn't stay focused for long enough to get through a stanza. He says something about Alice in Wonderland, tries to rhyme quickly and antiquity, draws a line between "peering" and "seeing", and plenty of other stupid shite. If you don't vote for me, you're voting for stupid shite. If you're stupid, and you like stupid shite, vote for my opponent.
1st Time Rap Battle

This is my first attempt at a rap battle, so don't go easy on me. Bring your best game. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Now before you begin your critique of me in what you think ain't phat Sit back down in your chair and let me tell you where I am at I'm intangible, beyond the realms of your clasp I'll watch you writhe on the floor trying not to succumb to my grasp Your rhymes are dated, your flow ain't got squat In fact, let me paraphrase The Dude – you're just human paraquat! You want to get into the realms of rapture and the transcendent? Well allow me to instruct you that my evinces put me within the incandescent I'll run circles around like how a Boa constricts You're only here because this is my game and you my conscript Think you have got the tools to do the job?.......You are ill prepared! You can't even figure out that to get to 9, is just 3 squared. You can stand in your guise of armour proper, bullet proof Though you cannot see that you're not bombastic, merely aloof You can kid your friends into thinking it is all for jest, But at the cost of you trying to make me look stupid, I must protest That I am disinclined to acquiesce to your request To bow down before your stalwart stature in my own grimace I will fight until the end and will never lose face. So just as Achilles was touched by Apollo's arrow You'll be left as mobile as a wheelless barrow I'll get right to it, and try as best to be thorough I can master a sentence and always have room for semantics But don't fret; don't worry, we won't laugh at your antics You see capers aren't just for a clown, what's that? Don't frown! Follow my rhyme down the hole with Alice to meet the white rabbit I'll show that lyrically you are just a creature of habit. You can't move with the times or learn from its antiquity Just sit in a corner rocking to-and-fro murmuring something quickly Hoping that enough syllables and speed will give you what you need But please pay heed, and listen to a righteous creed Your words fall from grace out of your maw and onto deaf ears The reverberations of everything but your voice leaves you in fear I have esoteric knowledge like the illuminati top tier - Look Here are some binoculars to help you see and to stop you from having to peer. Now let me begin my final rendition A configuration of a vocal conflagration This was no confabulation, just a conversation No, not even that, a solution to my own resolution Now drink my philtre and adulate me ‘cause of my potion Leave you with the notion that you love me - that is your emotion Do you get ever get that feeling when you see formulated poetry in motion?
Should the death penalty be allowed in Australia

My opponent didn't actually outline a case against the death penalty.The death penalty isn't just about enacting revenge, as my opponent assumes. 1. The Death Penalty protects others from potentially being infringed upon in the future.2. The death penalty is an actual punishment. Prison is not. Some people will purposely get themselves into prison, just to survive off the government.3. Justice is not strictly about revenge. Due cause does not have to erase the bad things someone did, and it never will. It's about giving the criminal the same treatment they gave their victim to equivilate the crime to the punishment.4. Again, why just Australia? Should the Death Penalty be allowed everywhere else?
Should the death penalty be allowed in Australia

The Death Penalty should be allowed anywhere, where justice is due to those who have committed heinous crimes, mainly Murder in the First Degree, IE with a pre-meditated intention. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... But I don't see why you think Australia should not get the Death penalty, compared to any other country in the world. The BOP is on my opponent, so I will assume the debate will begin in R2. Good luck.
- Dictature is better than democracy !

"Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner." R13; James Bovard, Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty "The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don't have to waste your time voting" R13; Charles Bukowski - Democracy is more like a lie we are livin in, or the people live in a moderated dictature like modern day slaves with their head in the clouds, incapable to see the bars of the cage they are locked in. Democracy this dream of ours to be free has become an realistic illusion while our lives are pointless, as they say better to be slapped by the truth than to be kissed by a lie... Thats why i think dictature is a better choice cause the people know the truth and accept being ruled from a leader who has the power and the courage to represent them and their interests, someone who is a real patriot and loves his country, loves the people and fights for their rights, its not impossible to find that kind of man. While democracy and its hypnotising instruments are driving people crazy, planting wrong ideology in human society where the unjustices seem to be the right thing to do, where wars mean peace and where all the negative things that are momentally happening in the world are being made in the name of democracy. One of the most important components of democracy is equality, we all living in democracy but we are not equal, is state a coorporate that we work for? Or the leaders should actually work for us, where is that power that the people are meant to have in democracy? To answer these questions man has to become realistic and admitt that its actually the same dictature or democracy, the difference between them is that dictature would be more realistic and not offending others intellegence while democracy is a dream and its destructive and bad interpretted ideology is ruining everything about mankind. i preffer the truth, do you... ?
- Dictature is better than democracy !

My opponent asks, how are we controling are government. I live in a country that has a republic, which is a form of democracy. In the society that I live in, there are multiple ways to deal with this. Petitions can be signed to call for reelection for mayors and governors. Are rights are protected by a constitution. Any president that violates this constitution or the law, can be impeached. In the society that I live in, no one is above the law. In a dictatorship, the dictator is the law. Free to do what ever he wants, with no consequences. This is not how a society should, function. My opponent says that there us only soft leaders who become cruel after the election. Look at Joseph Stalin, who was the leader of the Soviet Union. He was known for being brutal, before he came into power. He was involved in man criminal activities, as a young man. When he cam into power he caused millions of his people to die. The best way to stop a cruel leader, isn't just stopping him from getting elected, but to make so if they do get elected, that the government doesnt have power, so he can use his cruelty. You also say that the dictator should be someone who respects are rights, but if no leader is cruel until he comes into power, then how would you find this person. After reading my opponents last response, it was hard to stop my self from laughing. It seems clear that my opponent belives in all kinds of conspiracies, saying that the United States fakes terrorist attacks. My opponent says he rather be given the truth the a lie, yet he has been given the truth and he chooses not to accept it. Now I'm going to end this part of the debate before he starts a argument on how 9/11 was done by the government or that the Boston bombing never happened. I am sorry to say that because of time I am going to have to end this round, but I will countine it next as well as going over his response.
- Dictature is better than democracy !

"That government is best which governs least." -Thomas Jefferson As people we are all born with rights, Rights that in this country are protected by the constitution. In a dictatorship, you have now rights, no freedom, your life is owned by the government. The people whose lives are dictated by one man have no way to argue with him, no way to change any bad policies, and sometimes no way to leave the country, if they don't want to live there. This is a very different situation than a nation that allows the people to choose their own leaders and to choose the people who pass the laws that affect their lives. In a dictatorship, you can't choose your own leaders, the people of the nation have no power over there own lives. It is the people that must control the government, not the other way around. My opponent states that democracy is dictatorship in disguise, this is false.n a democracy, especially the one I live in, we have the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, and the freedom to pursue our dreams as long as it doesn't violate the law and others rights. Right now i can write blog, making fun of Obama , saying that he is a terrible president and so on. In most dictatorships, if you do that, your going to disappear over night. My opponent also states that it would be good to know that you are ruled by a man who "real patriot and loves his country, loves the people and fights for their rights." The only thing wrong with this is that its a dictatorship, so you don't get to decide who rules. Do you really want some one like Kim Jong-un or Castro in charge of your life.
xbox better than ps3

It is far too obvious that the ps3 is far better than the xbox for a plethora of reasons. Chief among these reasons are the graphics, retail price, and customer satifaction. Along with the many features that the ps3 allows. Such features include online gaming, which is free for the ps3, but 50 dollars a year for xbox. Another such reason is the graphics of the ps3 which gamestop rates as the 8-10 range. Other critical components such as blu-ray and the satisfaction of many customers and friends I know ultimately make the ps3 a more desirable and more potent console than the xbox.
Orca Captivity

Orcas in Captivity live to 50-60 years. Average ages at Sea World who have expired were 13 years old. These mammals have attacked and killed three Sea World employees, Killer Whales are more experienced in their wild habitat in the ocean, Orcas can become stressed and this causes an injury or death. Orcas wouldn't have any space to swim freely in the the tank they are captive in, the company says that their condition is "common" - In the wild, this is rare and it is a sign of a bad health condition or injury. Imagine swimming in a bathtub for your whole lifespan. Sea World bounds Killer Whales, whom could swim up to 100 miles a day, However in a tank they would need to swim over to 1,208 laps around the bathtub sized tank.
Democracy is no longer the best form of government.

Your title is "democracy is no longer the best form of government". This acknowledges that democracy was the status quo as the best type of government. Therefore you have the burden of proof to assert that democracy is no longer the superior form of government. This means that it is my job to cast a reasonable amount of doubt on your claims. The type of government you proposed that was "better" than democracy was a benevolent dictatorship. I will start by pointing out that this is not a type of government. Government- The organization, machinery, or agency through which a political unit exercises authority and performs functions and which is usually classified according to the distribution of power within it [merriam-webster] Calling a dictatorship benevolent is simply a way of describing the dictatorship. In this context benevolent is just an adjective. The same can be done for other governments for example a benevolent democracy a malicious theocracy a benevolent monarchy. The difference is as leaders die and are replace the type of government stays the same (democracy dictatorship monarchy theocracy) but the adjective used to describe the current regime is subject to change (benevolent or malicious) because these are not types of government. On to the rest, the goal of any government is to be fair and just or benevolent. Democracy places the power in the hands of the people because of the assumption that the majority of people will be benevolent and since the majority rules in democracy, the government will be benevolent. However in the case of a dictatorship it is a toss up as to whether the one man in charge will be benevolent or malicious. I challenge you to look up the innumerable deaths and tragedies caused by malicious dictators and tell me if a dictatorship is worth the risk of the man possibly being malevolent. Another fault of dictatorships of any kind is you cannot insure that a "benevolent" dictatorship will not change. Even good people have been known to eventually turn evil. When there is this much risk involved in any type of government it cannot be reliable. In conclusion it is absurd to believe that a dictatorship is a better form of government than democracy. I do understand how you misinterpreted the "benevolent" dictatorship though. It was no fault of your own it's just worded pretty ambiguously.
There is no point in doing anything.

OK. Let's conclude this debate.I would like to establish something. Oranges are way better than apples. Especially clockwork oranges. Save it for another debate.Also, let's stop all this silliness about monkeys and humans and dolphins and whatnot. I think I got the point across with what I originally said. That is, humans are special and separate from other creatures. To clarify, you would never get a monkey asking the question, "what is the meaning of life?", nor a dolphin, or whatever. Humans have the ability to speculate and ask questions, and are meta-cognitive. They are aware of their own minds.So now my opponent uses my argument in the situation of a poor starving boy. I never said that those who were not happy are insignificant. I am saying that they are not living life to the fullest. Of course, the child cannot live life to the fullest because of his terrible predicament. We do not convict him of this, but we say, he is sad and his life has no point, because he needs to worry about food.Look at it this way. All humans have a hierarchy of needs. Google "Maslow's Pyramid" for a visual representative.Unless the lower parts of this pyramid are fulfilled, the higher parts cannot be fulfilled. You go in order. First you secure survival. Basically, making sure you are breathing and not on fire. Then we have safety, blah blah blah, blah blah blah, and then finally "self actualization". This is the exploration of the meaning of life. This boy is obviously still on the first part of the pyramid, so in order to fulfill life he must reach the top.The fact remains, our point here on earth is not to make a lasting impression on society, but to be content with one's own life.Thus, I have proven that there is indeed a point to doing "anything"
There is no point in doing anything.

As I stated earlier, this won't apply in the future. Yeah, you feel great now, but you won't feel anything once you're dead. Maybe it is important to oneself to live a good life. But what is the point in that if there are people who aren't feeling that? Are they not existing? Are they un-important to us? I'm gonna make you feel guilty now. A small, starving, incredibly skinny child approaches you. He says, "Please, I need some food! "You respond, "You are clearly not enjoying your stay on this planet; therefore you are insignificant. " My next argument surrounds curious monkeys. When you say that monkeys don't ask humans any questions because they can't believe that they are concious, doesn't that contradict the time you said, "What separates us from animals is our miraculous conscious of mind, that exists in no other creatures. "I hate to bring this quote back, but you clearly stated that you can't believe that other animals have the consious of mind to answer questions that we have. I like apples more than oranges.
There is no point in doing anything.

That is true. We are not the only sentient beings. What I meant, rather, is that we can understand that others have minds around us too, and have knowledge that we can't percieve. We have trained monkeys to use sign language to communicate with use, but they have never asked a question. This is not to say that they are not curious. They are very curious. They just can't imagine that there are other consciouses experiencing the same things as them around them. So, humans are special make the most out of it. Oranges are delicious. My opponent does not refute my point about self-fullfillment. The point of life is to feel good, whether it affects the next man or not.
There is no point in doing anything.

Thank you for properly introducing the topic.You say, "The point of our existence is self-fullfillment. We exist simply as scientific matter. What separates us from animals is our miraculous conscious of mind, that exists in no other creatures."Is that to say that we are the only sentient beings? That we are the only creatures that roam the Earth searching to feel?http://en.wikipedia.org...Look in the Behavior section.I do agree, however, that, "We exist simply as scientific matter." But I mean just that.We have no purpose on this Earth except to simply be, and we even managed to screw that up. Of course, that is an entirely seperate debate.I loved your comment about the orange, though.