BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Wife vs Husband Round 1!! (Rebirth of an old Series) Black Friday Special!

I do not want to sleep with Donald Trump. I might just go play some golf with him, learn some economic tips from him, watch him on his plantation in Georgia. that kind of stuff. I will never miss you. i don't know why I married you. The wedding cake cost thirty dollars. The wedding put me in debt for years. Why did we have to buy that fricking Christian minister? I'm not even a Christian. I'm a Zoroastrian. You know, you don't need a priest to marry people anymore. You can just go down to the county courthouse and have a judge legally marry you. It's only twenty bucks or so. I'd much rather have done that. Instead, it had to be a big affair, with a big chocolate fountain and Uncle Mike was there and he kept telling those stupid jokes of his. And then your grandpa choked on the shrimp casserole. It was a big ordeal. It cost so much that I almost had to pay with my shirt. I don't know what my son's name is. I didn't know it was Johnny. Why does he have such a dull, generic name? personally, with kids, I prefer unique, abstract names. It makes everything much more interesting. You only get to name your kids once, we should have named him Garbledoodle or something. He'll have to be called something forever, so he might as well be called something interesting. I am a workaholic. I love work. It's great. I just sit in my cubicle all day and push a bunch of buttons. It's very fun. Then I file some paperwork. Ok, I admit, it's not THAT fun, but it still beats being woken up at two in the morning. From now on, I'm going to spend the night in my cubicle. I'll move a little couch in there. I might live there. After all, I get to work there for free. i could just move in and the boss probably wouldn't object. I'd cook eggs there, eat some potato chips. Meanwhile, you can do whatever the heck you want. Marriage is a living hell and I want out. My Elvis hairstyle is incredibly appealing and I use a lot of hair grease on it, so don't mess it up, ya stinker. You ain't nothing but a hound dog.
Wife vs Husband Round 1!! (Rebirth of an old Series) Black Friday Special!

Ha! Donald Trump is A great person? Pfft I might buy that logic if its on a Black Friday sale. But you might as well Call him Donald Hump since you are so infatuated you him! Go sleep in his bed since you want to see him so bad. Why bother marrying me in the first place if you wanted to sleep with Donald Hump? You obviously don't follow your own moral code because Donald treasures family values and you don't apparently so why would you want to spend time with him? You never play games with the in laws. So you know what?? I got a game called...you going to miss me with that Bullsh*t! I'm Borderline done with you! I'm trying to make this work. It your making this difficult. What's with the uncharacteristic animosity? I shown nothing but love to you. No family values tsk take. No wonder when I went to your side of the family you were disgusting and rude at the dining table I heard that fart slip when you sneezed but that's not my business though. But you teaching your son how to be. Disgusting pig his name is johnny stop trying to change his name to Donald You say you want to live in isolation omg again why did you marry me for? Did you like my booty my money my books the sex what artificial reason was it huh? Did you stay because you thought I was pregnant? Explain yourself! Because right now you sound dinner than a pile of bricks! You say you love your job? What in he world do you do again? Maybe you should get a liar and. Low self esteem prick. You can dish it out but you can't take it. I remember at our honeymoon dinner that little kid made fun of your Elvis hairstyle I thought it was cute but your little feelings got butt hurt. You can't take a joke but you sure walk around looking like one Funny how people start sh*t then wonder how sh*t got started isn't it funny how people get mad when you treat people the same way they treated you?Let's drop the act. Start over be civil human beings you numbskull and talk to me like I'm your wife if you going to treat me like a dog at least provide dog food. Again be civil hunny :) don't get me started because I don't know how to pump the. Breaks.
Wife vs Husband Round 1!! (Rebirth of an old Series) Black Friday Special!

I don't care about having a family. I just want money. Money is all I care about. Do you Like Donald Trump? He's a great person, and I want to be like him some day. You are a sick person. You stress family values, then you imply that I'm a bigamist. I hate you. Why do I have to be married? I might enjoy isolation. I might go up to some mountains and live there like a hermit. A rich hermit. And I'll wallow in my money and buy all the gold in the world, then you'll be left alone in the street, a desolate beggar, and you'll be eating cracker jacks from the garbage can, and you'll have to expel your feces in a chamber pot. You're a sick person. I might go live with Donald Trump. He seems like a nice guy. he has a lot of money, and if I have all the money in the world, then everyone else will die from poverty. You'll die too, you sick beast. You have a dirty mind and you don't know what sex is for. I think I'm going to call my divorce lawyer right now. I love my job. I'm going to take our baby, and raise him by myself. Your name sounds like one of those candy bar things. but you're not as delicious. I love working, every day, forever. I;m going to push buttons until the day that I die. I never bought a blow up doll, you're having bizarre hallucinations. I'm not going to have my son be raised by a sick person.
Polticans expensies in the UK are outrage and should be stopped.

thank you for clarifying were you stand. one point i shall make right now before i say anything else. http://www.mirror.co.uk... thats ï¿½93,000,000 in poltical expenses , now unless my opponent can justify were in a country like the u.k polticans are expected to shell out ï¿½93,000,000 of their own money so they can do their job , remember you claimed that this money was for the good of their job you therefore have the burden to prove that the 93 million pounds they claimed , helped them do their jobs and take into consideration the amoun of mp's in the uk before you answer. i have proved my first point , i have gave the burden of truth that ï¿½93 million is outrageous. unless you care to argue that spending ï¿½93 million in a current credit crunch , is acceptale when it has been widley acknowledged that , the majority of their spendings are not work realted. Now i shall prove that the expensives beign stopped shall be justified. If we set up large cheap hotels near parliment , then thats where the polticans can live. therefore they have no reason to claim expenses for houses , if we provide them with a couple of large buses to tansort them , it will elimate the need for mp's to spend thousands of pounds on taxi's EACH. poltical expenses should be halted as it has been proven over the last couple of years , the polticans expect the taxpayers to shell out for whatever they want.
Polticans expensies in the UK are outrage and should be stopped.

thank you for accepting this. i shall start of by defining what i reall mean even though its already in the title and you should not have took this up if you do not know what i mean when i refer to a poltician. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- politician Noun a person actively engaged in politics, esp. a member of parliament -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- now let me define what poltical expenses are. poltical expeneses - money provided by the taxpayer for polticans to cover the cost of polticans using their own money for work. _________________________________________________________ now in your last comment you said , that "just be referring to politicians spending money on things that are perfectly legal like cars, homes, furniture to furnish those homes, and yes... oh yes, pornographic films. My opponent does not warrant, or even warrant by implication as to why this would not be justified." my response - basically you are saying it is acceptable for a poltican to claim money from the taxpayer for items which are completey non-work realted and they did not use their own money for. I would like you to justify why polticans can use my money to spend on items which are not work realted , when the have their own sallery to pay for this. they earn ï¿½55,000 a year and that is their money which they may spend on whatever luxerys they desire , they claim expenses which are spent on luxerys , but are only suppose to be used for work realted costs. Polticans treat expenses as a second wage . The majority of polticans buy a second house near their work on expenses , fair enough , but when they are done they may sell this house and keep the money made. My local mp Adam Igrim who is retiring after being exposed has FIVE jobs outside polticis and was still one of the highest claimers of expenses , what the hell ? I would like to ask my opponent one more time , why he has said it is justified for polticans to claim expenses from the taxpayer , ansd use them on non-work related items.
Polticans expensies in the UK are outrage and should be stopped.

Good luck opponent. First off, I'm not exactly sure what this resolution is meant to say. I for one hope this doesn't turn into a round of a moving target affirmation (primarily because I will have to do the dirty work of pinning the affirmative down. ) so, to clarify the resolution, and to articulate what each side must do to win I will now cover some burden analysis. BURDENS: 1. ) the pro must show that on balance or taking everything into account that, politicians salaries are out of control or "outrageous" as prescribed by the resolution. 2. ) the Pro must show that some entity, whether it be by divine force, jack bower, Oprah Winfrey, biggest loser contestants, or perhaps three of the American Idol Judges ( excluding Paula she's somewhat incompetent. ) would be justified in stopping these people from getting paid. since the resolution is a statement this statement cannot be proven true unless these two burdens are fulfilled. if my opponent meant something else by this resolution, than they my clarify what they really meant R2. until this time I did not actually read the comments made by the affirmative, so my guess is that he could quite possibly just be referring to politicians spending money on things that are perfectly legal like cars, homes, furniture to furnish those homes, and yes. .. oh yes, pornographic films. My opponent does not warrant, or even warrant by implication as to why this would not be justified. people have the freedoms to spend money, and are encouraged to do so by the man. perhaps the question should be, is the man justified in always making people spend their' money? I think he is, so that's probably not the question that should be asked.
Keeping Animals in Zoos is unethical

Great. Ultitarianism.Well, first I have to say....Animals have rights like humans do. Do innocent people end up in jail? Not if we know they're innocent for one hundred percent sure. Do innocent, non-crime-commiting animals end up in jail. The answer is yes. The inescapable prison, behind bars, for people to look at, with food and sleep but no allowance out...why, this is just like jail. Why do animals have human rights?The answer is right in front of you. No, the answer IS you. You are an animal. A highly capable intelligent dominant animal of the world, yes, but an animal nevertheless, as classified by Wikipedia and many (scientific) websites. [1][2][3] As seen here clearly humans are animals. If we deserve the right to keep the innocent out of jail, then innocent animals should be allowed out of such a jail-like environment. Not to mention that zoos are only just about as well kept as jails. Pretty much everything important in nature is lost to them, and not only that, many escapes have been mentioned, showing that these animals really don't want to be kept in zoos. [4][5] In fact, to stress this, animals, although not having as much of conscientiousness as human beings, are quite intelligent and manage to escape quite some times, showing that they are very human-like, even if they can't understand what philosophy is. [6]Also, not to mention many animals are mistreated in jails, asbused and neglected. Whoops, I mean zoos. [8]Now, my opponent tries talking about the re-breeding of animals, those endangered species. However, although putting these animals into zoos may be beneficial, the suffering defeats their benefits. Source [7] states that "In the 2010 update of the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Red List of Threatened Species, 17,315 species were listed as vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered. That's out of 1,740,330 described species (which is probably only a fraction of the number of species actually in existence)." As clearly seen here, if every single animal were to be captured, only 17,000 over 1,740,000 would recieve this benefit. That's 1 to 1000 ratio. You're telling me here that the endangered animals' benefits outweighs a thousand times more animals' freedom and escape into naturality? Please.Back to you, Uchi.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...[2] Tattersall Ian, Schwartz Jeffrey (2009). "Evolution of the Genus Homo".Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences37: 67–92.doi:10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100202.[3] http://www.answers.com...[4] http://www.peta.org...[5] http://www.cnn.com...[6] https://www.thedodo.com...[7] http://curiosity.discovery.com...[8] http://www.lcanimal.org...
Keeping Animals in Zoos is unethical

Thanks, Pro. That was a very creative acceptance rap. Pro is correct in observing that the majority of the BOP lies on him. In fact, I'm not completely sure why I didn't structure this debate so that he could give his opening argument first... Nevertheless, I will provide a single contention against the notion that keeping animals in zoos is unethical. C1) Conservation Efforts Animals do not possess the personal autonomy necessary to have "natural rights", in the traditional sense; the only thing that distinguishes them from the rest of the amoral universe is an ability to feel pain (and pleasure, in some cases). For this reason, it is appropriate to apply a utilitarian system of morality when deciding what is just and what is not, in regards to animals. This naturally leads us to the conclusion of Collectivism (because "the collective" = "the majority" in utilitarianism). With a collectivist framework established, keeping animals in zoos becomes completely ethical, because many zoos serve as centers for the animal conservation effort, which benefits animals as a whole: "...the procedure for acquiring animals has also changed. Whereas zoos previously captured most of their specimens directly from the wild, they now get many animals through captive breeding programs and other zoos. Some breeding programs also help to restore threatened species. After 10 years of working to strengthen the population numbers of the endangered Californiacondor, a type of vulture, the Los Angeles and San Diego zoos were able to rebuild a population of fewer than two dozen birds to around 170 birds... Successful breeding programs brought the Pere David"s deer back from extinction. Though this Asian deer ceased to exist in the wild, Chinese and European zoo programs enabled four of the deer to be released back into the wild in 1985, where they"re now self-sustaining [source: Encarta]." (http://www.globalanimal.org...) Thus, even if we assume that containment in zoos causes animals suffering (which I will certainly contest, when my opponent inevitably brings it up), it would still be ethical because it would still advance the well-being of the animal kingdom as a whole at the expense of a few individuals' suffering. The resolution is negated.
is math more useful than english

I thank Con for opening up this debate, for it is my first. I hope we are able to have respectful discourse about this topic. As Pro I will be arguing that the attainment of the knowledge and understanding of math, the universal language/science of numbers, is more useful than that of the attainment of English, a local language to countries like the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, and so on. Instructions were not given by Con regarding what I should do for this round so I will use this round as acceptance only. Good luck to my opponent!
Opponent picks Topic

"Without Time Break, your arguments hold nothing and Sonic is dead," thanks for the tip. Sonic or Perhaps more likely his friend Tails would sneak pearls into the mushrooms, and therefore might not actually have to run around collecting pearls as he could have snuck pearls into all of the mushrooms before the fight. Another plausible scenario in which Sonic could get pearls without running off or alerting Mario too soon is that Bowser surprise attacks them both in a ship that they can only handle together. As you claim, ". .. time break. .. Require defeating enemies," Sonic could defeat a lot of enemies just with his speed and Homing Attack. By defeating all those enemies, his soul gauge would undoubtedly fill all the way up, giving him more than enough of it to use it advantageously. Another scenario is that Sonic repeatedly hits a block containing many pearls, and he collects them before Mario can. Mario cannot collect them because he is not only too slow, but also does not know what the pearls from "Sonic and he Secret Rings" are. By the time he figured Sonic out, it would be too late. Because Sonic is overall not that much of an idiot, his hubris would have little influence on the fight. You also never rebutted my "Homing Attack" argument. Conclusively, it is game over for Mario, and your arguments are all invalid.
Opponent picks Topic

Okay, so you seem very very dependent on time break. Have I not already stated that Mario has slow flower and Speed flower? Yes, I have, so they're not new arguments. As for Sonic sleeping, well, just look at this photo below and tell me whether he's sleeping or not. Besides, nothing has ever hinted that Sonic is unaffected by any of Mario's powerups that affect other enemies. And again, you didn't even bother rebutting my statement in the first round concerning Sonic's arrogance. How could he possibly know that Mario was gonna do something important by reaching into his pocket? Mario might as well have just been extremely unnerved by the awkward situation of facing an enemy he had never seen before, and just stuffed his hands in his pocket in confusion. As for the time break, it uses up a "soul gauge" that requires pearls and defeating enemies. As the latter is unavailible, the only way for sonic to do his epic ability that would defeat Mario is collecting pearls. This would seem extremely suspicious to Mario. I mean, who would go collecting pearls while within a death battle? Mario could use a mega-mushroom, making him insanely gignatic, blocking the pearls, making it impossible for Sonic to use his Time Break Ability. Without Time Break, your arguments hold nothing and Sonic is dead. Game over.
Opponent picks Topic

Counterpoint 1: "Sleepy Sheep. .. Stop Watch. .. Both of these power-ups would leave Sonic the Hedgehog entirely vulnerable," not if he could respond quickly enough. He would probably be immune to Sleepy Sheeps as (1). He is always wide awake during an adventure or a fight and (2) Sleepy Sheeps do not work on all enemies. As for the stopwatch, Sonic has fast reflexes and could figure out in a flash when he saw Mario reach into his pocket that he was going for one of his most important weapons, and then he would use a Time Break to slow time down and run up to Mario before he could get it, and then snatch it out of his hand and stop the Time Break, then either smash it or freeze Mario with it. Counterpoint 2: ". .. Mario could use a lightning bolt to shrink Sonic and inevitably slow him down leaving him vulnerable to Mario's stomp or hammer smash," he would be, but Sonic can boost to go faster, and you are also forgetting that he can slow time down with a Time Break. These together should be more than enough than outlast either of the power-ups mentioned in that section of your argument and the effect of the lightning bolt. This would also leave enough duration in the Time Break for Sonic to boost straight into Mario OR do a Homing attack on him, and then end the time break and keep Homing Attacking him to death. As for the 1,000+ weapons in Mario's arsenal? During the time break, Sonic could shake everything out of Mario's pockets, then get speed and use it to kick Mario far away but end the time break in the middle of the run, and then run back to the pile of Mario's weapons and set fire to them by running in place on them, creating enough friction to set them on fire, thus rendering them all useless by the time Mario gets back. Counterpoint 3: "Sonic the Hedgehog can only truly express his powers in round levels. .. " Actually, there are two powers you forgot about: the Homing Attack and the Time Break. Sonic could use the Homing Attack for some cheap shots and to make up for his inability to use his speed to his advantage. There are also tons of different tactics he could use a Time Break for. He could kick Mario face down on the ground, then hide in a warp pipe, then listen for Mario and exit when Mario is near enough, and pop up behind Mario out of the pipe and surprise attack him. Or he could wait for Mario to get his hammer, use a Time Break, and grab Mario's hammer and then whack a slowed-down Mario with it repeatedly. Or he could do a striking dash on him, and if Mario wasn't bleeding in five seconds, he would both literally and figuratively be on fire. He could throw Mario straight down a pit. He could sneak a bomb out of Mario's pocket, and then leave it there and go into a warp pipe, then dash off. By the end of the Time Break, Sonic would be so far away that Mario could not see him, but would look for him, and he would not notice the bomb, and it would explode and kill him. Counterpoint 4: You argued that Mario can sit down and slide on round surfaces. Even if this tactic worked on Sonic, however, he could use a Time Break to slow Mario down, leaving him vulnerable to a Homing Attack.