BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Circles can be squares

um actually, I just wanted to see what this was about and where it would lead up to...this is totally a troll debate. The definition of a troll is as follows: "Internet slang, a troll (/G2;troA0;l/, /G2;tr;4;l/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion." ( http://en.wikipedia.org...(Internet) ) I feel that this debate will not go anywhere because it is obvious that at some point, you may have a squared number of people in a group (or as it is called here, a circle).
The United States was morally wrong to drop the atomic bombs on Japan to end WW2.

The crux of this argument and others rests on the notion of the dichotomy between two available military actions, and the definitive link between one action and resultant casualties. The way you have framed this issue would indicate that the U.S. Strategic Command could loose the power of the atom and inflict x casualties, or execute a campaign of mass amphibious assault and incur y casualties, x being fewer than y. However, the fundamental premise of your argument is false. It was not merely a decision betwixt two actions. By historical and journalistic accounts, the Japanese had engaged in negotiations with the United States, and Japanese hierarchy had verbalized a motion of compliance- the Japanese were willing to surrender to the Americans, provided Emperor Hirohito would be permitted to stay in power and would not be tried for war crimes. This was the sole condition in Japanese negotiations, and this request was made known to President Truman as early as May, 1945, four months prior to Japanese surrender on September 2nd. Now, the argument hereafter might resemble something to the effect of, "the dual nuclear strike on Japan remained requisite to peace, because the Japanese were unwilling to accept *unconditional* surrender." This statement is correct; the Japanese negotiation was strictly conditional. The disruption of their established leadership would cause a considerable degree of politico-social duress, as the government scrambled to assemble a new leader and a new model of rule. Their anticipation of these consequences made such a condition objectionable to them, for the deposing of the emperor would be a symbolic defeat of Japanese culture. Since before the Sengoku period, Japan had construed its leadership after Shoguns and Emperors, and such a political system was central to Japanese cultural legacy. This, in the author's opinion, is why the Japanese were more hesitant to accept political upheaval than they were to accept massive war reparations reminiscent of WWI and the economic devastation of Germany. Now, it is important to note that the conclusion of American-Japanese conflict was not unconditional. Hirohito retained his seat as Emperor until his death in 1989. He was not put on trial, and he never attained status as a war criminal. The "unconditional victory" against Japan had not been unconditional at all; it had been strictly conditional. So I ask my opponent, what necessitated nuclear warfare? The simple answer is that nothing did. The Japanese were willing to surrender to American command, and were willing to submit under the same terms as were accepted in the historical treaty. The atomic bombs served no greater purpose other than to add more civilian casualties to a thoroughly bloody war. I await my opponent's reply. References: https://mises.org... "Great Mistakes of the War" ~Hanson Baldwin writer for the NYT covering WWII http://www.history.com... http://www.doug-long.com...
The United States was morally wrong to drop the atomic bombs on Japan to end WW2.

To open I would ask that any opponent uses credible sources, and provides a website, like I have done as to where they found their information. Thank you, and goodluck! Morality- concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character Morality has only to do with the people harmed, not the technology used Estimated totals of deaths, on impact, and from radiation within 10 years down the road, according to history.com Hiroshema- 65,000 Nagasaki- 35,000 For a total of 100,000 deaths give or take 5,000 General MacArthur estimated that to continue the war, it would take at least 50,000 more American lives, 30,000 more British lives, and 100,000 (60,000 Military, 40,000 Civilian lives) Japanese lives. This estimate was found also on history.com, from a meeting between the USA, and Great Britain on their next acts in the impending war The problem was, the Japanese were beat, yes. However they were not out of fight, they were going to continue to fight, and continue to commit suicide taking out both Americans and themselves in the process. The problem is that the average ratio of Japanese suicide bombers to POW"s is 50:1 Most of the suicidal acts were committed by Japanese soldiers who were wounded, who would pull the pin on a grenade, wait for a corpsman to roll them over and blow the themselves, with the corpsman, up. If we continued the war then we, as an American people would"ve lost more lives, something we, as red-blooded Americans should despise. Yet we would lose more lives overall. We would"ve lost an estimated 80,000 More lives than if we had dropped the bombs. Also, these two bombings were NOT the most devastating bombings of WW2 on Japan, led by the US. We bombed multiple factories in, and around Tokyo with a flurry of B-29 Bombers, the deadliest of these raids had an estimated 129,000 deaths. Nevertheless, we ended the war in a way that disabled the Japanese so they would not simply rise again a few years later to attack the US again. If we had left them with an unconditional surrender, a "you surrender or we drop bombs on you" there is a large chance, they would do one of two things: Surrender and rise again a mere months or few years later to try to take on the US stronger than they originally were. Think that we are bluffing and not surrender, in which we end up bombing them anyways Dropping these bombs was the most clear cut way to end the war with the fewest casualties, ensuring that Japan would be crippled enough to know to not try anything for a long period of time, as well as loose the least amount of American lives as possible. Although there may not be a correct answer this is the least of the necessary evils.
There is no possible way god exists unless you believe in utter hate and evil Gary Lindsey Jr

Again I"m not going to allow you too much lead way here because there" no room for error on your part. 1.Did you watch the videos which prove that if you believe in your god that you have 0% Free Will? No. Obviously not. So you have nothing to offer to counter. PE-RI-OD. (1) "a one year old child cannot have free will to escape a bullet being shot at them." Its the same thing as daddy raping, and beating and torturing a 4 year old all the way up until 17 while punching her in the face, sometimes twice per week, all the way up until 17, and that was only the start of her horrors in which she had no free will to escape. She had no free will then. PE-RI-OD. I"m not missing anything. "Again, there is a difference between humans having the faculty of free will, and how humans exercise free will." What an utterly stupid statement. If YOU believe in your god, in no possible way is that possible because once again YOU and YOUR god are exercising power the people who are committing those who are abusers and violators + everything else on the map. "This is similar to: humans have the ability to move their bodies, but where they move will be different;" 4 years olds cannot escape from daddy committing these atrocities to move their bodies differently is A MISERABLE EXCUSE. Neither can mommy or children in which according to you, YOUR god creates these monsters to commit these crimes per year. "humans have the capacity to have emotions, though which emotions occur will be different; humans have the ability to think, though what beliefs they have will be different." Has 0% to escape rape. "Similarly, humans have the ability to choose, but what they choose will be different."NOT IF YOU ARE A 4 YEAR OLD, AND OR A 17 YEAR OLD AND OR A SPOUSE BEING TIED DOWN BEING RAPED OR AS THE TITLE OF THIS DEBATE (NOT REALLY A DEBATE THOUGH) There is no possible way god exists unless you believe in utter hate and evil Gary Lindsey Jr in which shot and thus murdered 4 children WHO DID NOT HAVE A CHOICE from this person WHO DID HAVE A CHOICE in which YOUR god GAVE ALL THE POWER TO. "God gives human the ability to choose," Where EXACTLY in your bible does it say that? In fact it doesn"t, not anywhere. You just invented an excuse.in which you know NOTHING about. And again, 1 year olds, nor 4 year old, not women being raped DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. Now you clearly 100% did not watch the videos, so until you do, I"m ending this.
A government has the obligation to lessen the economic gap betweem its rich and poor citizens.

I have made this as close to an LD round as possible. Round 1: Acceptance Round 2: Pro-Provides argument Con-Provides questions for pro, provides argument Round 3: Pro- Answers questions, poses questions Con- Provides answers to questions, rebuttal. Round 4: Pro- Rebuttal Con-Rebuttal Good luck!
Barack Obama

So I noticed you're now against the war on terrorism. You ruined our beautiful disagreement ratio :( But we'll talk about it later, this is about Obama. I don't support Obama for the following reasons. 1) He's not debating the issues often enough. Hillary is obsessed about her health care plan and she talks about it everywhere she goes, however, Obama doesn't risk to talk about what he wants to do. I watched a whole speech and the only thing he talked about has how he opposed Iraq from the beginning, which is easy to do when you're not in the Senate. 2) His health care plan is terrible from the economy. I read Paul Krugman all the time because he's always dead on on his predictions like the crash of the housing market. And Paul Krugman believes Obama's plan is not going to work because people will be showing up to the hospitals without insurance, and their costs will then be absorbed by doctors and hospitals that treat them, doctors and hospitals will then have to cover that expense so they include things like crutches and aspirins on their medical bills, and then insurance companies, having to cover that expense, higher the price of their premiums. That's why health insurance is so expensive, but if everyone has health insurance this won't happen. 3) Obama is living a pipe dream, he thinks that once president he can work out the good intentions he has for this country. I think that even if he does get in the white house, he's not going to handle it as well as Clinton would because Clinton has her husband and her own experience. Not to mention that in a campaign against McCain, McCain will throw dirt at him like there's no tomorrow. For example, Larry Sinclair (I'm not saying I believe him but he oculd change a lot of people's minds). Hillary Clinton will pound McCain because McCain has nothing new to say about her. Bill Clinton now has a 70% approval rating. If McCain says "Hillary will just be Bill Clinton all over again!" like the Republicans said when she ran for Senate, Americans will say "Great! It's better than Bush all over again!" and Hillary wins. I know some people just dislike Hillary for no reason. In a poll 12% of people said they'd have trouble voting for a woman and only 6% had trouble voting for a black. Not to mention silly attacks on Hillary like the ones about her clothing and her hairstyle. Obama doesn't get that at all. The pictures of him wearing those traditional clothes didn't even sting a bit. I'm not saying they should, but if Hillary dressed up like a Middle Eastern woman her numbers would go waaaaay down. Obama also called the prime minister of Canada a president and no one notices. Meanwhile everyone's talking about how Hillary can't pronounce that Russian guy's name. I'm 14 years old and I know that Canada has a prime minister, and it's not like Obama could pronounce that guy's name either. I'm looking forward to your response.
Speed debate 30min rounds (Legalization of prostitution).

Oh great. Just great. 7th debate forfeit in a row. Seriously, whoever put this curse on me, it's kinda lame.Anyway, vote con guys, pro failed their BOP. Vote con for conduct too, as pro failed to follow their round structure[1]. Since I sourced my opponent's round structure, I should get sources too.Sources1 - scroll up on this page
Speed debate 30min rounds (Legalization of prostitution).

Well, it's 1.23am over here, but I've had a massive streak of forfeits to me recently so I felt like proving to myself that my account isn't cursed. Desperately. I'm going to start preparing my case right away - I happen to remember quite a bit about this topic because I did a big debate on it two years ago. Hope I can remember some of it. Quick preliminary word: Pro has burden of proof. All of it.
Insult war

Your love life is so question able, heres your list of ex girlfreinds: http://godzilla.wikia.com... You want that pikachu booty, and maybe a little ash booty too if you represent any dance moves, youd be the dab If their was a rank for what kind of person you were, they wouldnt give you one, because thy dont have a rank for 137509842346493287976930248587624309672208673469067th place and You remind me of yogurt
WODC: Organ Procurement and Just Societies

PrefaceThis debate is for Larz's World Online Debate Cup Tournament. I thank Arc for this opportunity to debate him and I look forward to an excellent round. Also, there is a 1,500 minimum ELO required to vote on this debate.Full TopicA just society ought to presume consent for organ procurement from the deceased.DefinitionsOught - Morally DesirablePresume - to accept legally or officially that something is true until it is proved [or shown] not true [1]Consent - to give assent or approval [1]Organ - a differentiated structure (as a heart or kidney) consisting of cells and tissues and performing some specific function in an organism [1]Procure - to get possession of: obtain by particular care and effort [1]Deceased - no longer living [1]Just - treating people in a way that is considered morally right [1]Society - the people of a particular country, area, time, etc., thought of especially as an organized community [1]We will assume that a just society is just on balance, as no society can be perfectly moral. Rules1. No forfeits2. Any citations or foot/endnotes must be provided in the text of the debate3. No new arguments in the final round4. Maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere5. Violation of any of these rules or of any of the R1 set-up merits a lossStructureR1: AcceptanceR2: ConstructivesR3: RebuttalsR4: RebuttalsR5: Rebuttals and ClosingsContextHere is some background on organ donation if you're interested. [2] This is also the September/October LD topic, so it should allow me to test some arguments. [3]Thanks......again to Arc, and I await his acceptance :) . [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] http://www.speechanddebate.org...
Libertarians should believe that Hobby Lobby should pay for it's Employees contraception.

I will do my best. I believe that contraception should be covered for a few reasons. 1. People should not be forced to be parents. 2. The health of some women would be threatened by pregnancy and childbirth. I am one of those women. 3. Contraception would allow women to be in the work force longer. This would help the economy. 4. There would be less unwanted children born to be abused. I do understand opposing abortion, but it makes no sense to oppose abortion. Who is less likely to have an abortion than women who are not pregnant? If I am leaving anything out, let me know. Even if we disagree, I still respect you so please do not be offended.
Libertarians should believe that Hobby Lobby should pay for it's Employees contraception.

BOP is on Pro, Although I will make a case for myself too. Since the BOP is on Pro I request that he posts his argument in this round so I will have something to try and refute in Round 2 (I will also post a case for myself in Round 2). The time to argue is 48 hours and the maximum number of Characters is 6,000.
PC's are better than next gen consoles

First of all, I accept this challenge, but you must be aware that you comment on something that is almost unknown. Misconceptions, Blindness, and Time (Oh my! ) I find myself seriously questioning the integrity of this debate just by the title. For those who missed the orange bold letter at the top, allow me to inform you. This debate is called "PC's are better than next gen. consoles". I find the error in the title to be the fact that it doesn't say "Next Generation gaming consoles won't be as good as the PC". Since neither the Xbox One or the PS4 are out on the open market at the time, it would be hard to be able to scope out something being better that you had not played yourself. This is where I think you come out of the cave completely blind swinging a club at the public. In time, you may have found that you had in fact played BOTH next generation consoles. That is the time when it would be completely viable to say that PC is better than them. Since I can guarantee that you can't go to a store and buy one at the time, you do not know how the system works or what the pros and cons are. Accepting, only to offer a Resolution. Lets say that you were one of the few to win one of the next generation consoles through a sort of promotion. As a stock device, the next generation consoles will be a cheaper and a better alternative to the classic PC. Gaming PCs can get pretty expensive, and to buy these add on features you speak of would tower over the price of a PS4 or Xbox One. When you buy a gaming PC, one does not simply say "What is the cheapest and most unreliable thing I can get? ". It is more commonly said "What will be able to handle what I need, and still be affordable? ". Consoles are not in this way. When you buy a console, you know that it doesn't get better (Excluding memory upgrades) than what you purchase until a later time. Consoles work the same, whether that be good or not, and eliminate the barrier between models of increasing price and overall playability. In conclusion: I cannot rebut the comments about graphics, since neither next generation console is out yet. I have proven that you cannot be sure if something is better before something is released.
PC's are better than next gen consoles

I believe that PC's are better for gaming than the new next gen consoles (Xbox one and PS4) because of the fact that the graphics are generally better than the next gen consoles. PC's are also fully customizable with hardware to improve performance and texture quality of the games. Although many games are coming out on only the next gen consoles but the next gen consoles are about the same price for a decent gaming PC and the fact is you can do a lot on a PC such as if you are gaming and need to research something fast you can always pull up a browser and look up what you needed to know. All that for the same price as a next gen console. Everyone is arguing of which one is better, the PS4 or the Xbox one and not many people have opened their eyes to see that the PC just towers over both consoles.
Song Debate Part Two

Carrie Underwood- Jesus take the wheel. (Why do I try. I'm atheist.) She was driving last Friday on her way to Cincinnati on a snow white Christmas Eve Going home to see her mama and her daddy with the baby in the backseat Fifty miles to go, and she was running low on faith and gasoline It'd been a long hard year She had a lot on her mind, and she didn't pay attention She was going way too fast Before she knew it she was spinning on a thin black sheet of glass She saw both their lives flash before her eyes She didn't even have time to cry She was so scared She threw her hands up in the air Jesus, take the wheel Take it from my hands 'Cause I can't do this on my own I'm letting go So give me one more chance And save me from this road I'm on Jesus, take the wheel It was still getting colder when she made it to the shoulder And the car came to a stop She cried when she saw that baby in the backseat sleeping like a rock And for the first time in a long time She bowed her head to pray She said, "I'm sorry for the way I've been living my life I know I've got to change So from now on tonight Jesus, take the wheel Take it from my hands 'Cause I can't do this on my own I'm letting go So give me one more chance And save me from this road I'm on." Oh, Jesus, take the wheel Oh, I'm letting go So give me one more chance Save me from this road I'm on From this road I'm on Jesus, take the wheel Oh, take it, take it from me Oh, why, oh http://songmeanings.com...
Song Debate Part Two

I am glad you accept. Okay let me clarify, it has to be a SOLO FEMALE ARTIST. First Song: My Happy Ending by Avril Lavigne So much for my happy ending Oh, [Repeat: x7] Lets talk this over, It's not like we're dead, Was it something I did, Was it something you said? Don't leave me hanging, In a city so dead, Held up so high, On such a breakable thread. You were all the things I thought I knew And I thought we could be You were everything, everything that I wanted We were meant to be, supposed to be but we lost it All of the memories, so close to me, just fade away All this time you were pretending, So much for my happy ending. Oh oh, oh oh So much for my happy ending You've got your dumb friends, I know what they say, They tell you I'm difficult, But so are they. But they don't know me, Do they even know you? All the things you hide from me, All the sh*t that you do. You were all the things I thought I knew And I thought we could be You were everything, everything that I wanted We were meant to be, supposed to be, but we lost it All of the memories, so close to me, just fade away All this time you were pretending So much for my happy ending It's nice to know that you were there, So thanks for acting like you cared And making me feel like I was the only one. It's nice to know we had it all, Thanks for watching as I fall And letting me know we were done. He was everything, everything that I wanted We were meant to be, supposed to be, but we lost it All of the memories, so close to me, just fade away All this time you were pretending So much for my happy ending You were everything, everything that I wanted We were meant to be, supposed to be, but we lost it All of the memories, so close to me, just fade away All this time you were pretending So much for my happy ending Oh oh, oh oh So much for my happy ending Oh oh, oh oh So much for my happy ending Oh oh, oh oh, Oh oh, oh oh http://songmeanings.com...