BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Philosophy and logic: Abortion rights equality

If the father was not responsible enough to have protected sex or pull out during emission and since said actions are mainly controlled by the father, he is already then morally obligated to the child if the woman were to get pregnant. Also, since pregnancy affects the mother in a manner much more severely than it does to the father, it would then be logical and reasonable to say that the mother's opinion whether or not to proceed with deliverance would be more valued than the father's. Lastly, if you do agree that moral obligation to the child already lies with the father choosing to emit inside the mother, would it not than be a moral crime if the father decided to just bail out of the whole situation?
iPhone5 vs GalaxyS4. Galaxy S4 is better

Both the S4 and the iPhone 5 offer some features that are greater than others, but I feel that in the end, as they are better than one another in different applications. Both phones are awesome in their own respects, and it boils down to personal need and preference. Power wise? Of course the S4 is better than the iPhone 5. Media consumption? An argument can be made for both, but iTunes is still ahead of the ever growing Google Play in terms of apps available, content available, and delivery, and leagues ahead of Samsung's "Hub" store. It comes down to this. What do I prefer? Raw power, camera quality, app compatibility, ect, and for each person, the priorities will very. The iPhone is a simpler phone, granted, weaker, but in some cases, simple is better. The S4 is a much more powerful phone, but with that, some complication occur, but for someone like Pro or myself, we can overcome an possible complications and use the phone to it's full capability, but this alone doesn't make it better than the iPhone 5. I love both phones, but for different reasons. The iPhone excels where the S4 fails, and where the iPhone fails, the S4 excels, but in the end, the decision of which phone is better lies in each individual's personal opinion.
iPhone5 vs GalaxyS4. Galaxy S4 is better

I fail to see how a list of features about the GS4 that appears to be copied and then pasted off of Samsung's website makes your case. Most if not all of the software features that Samsung boasts can be found in both the app store and play store. But again, I fail to see how this blatant copy and paste off of Samsung's website adds to the debate about how it's better than the iPhone 5, as it's not really much of an argument on its own.
iPhone5 vs GalaxyS4. Galaxy S4 is better

Why S4 is better than iPhone5? It is no surprise that Samsung Galaxy S4 is probably the best Android smartphone manufactured by the Korean electronics giant till date. Like all the previous Galaxy series smartphones that had enjoyed great success, the Galaxy S4 too has hit the 20 million sales mark in a record time period " a breakneck pace that Samsung has never experienced before.The Galaxy S4 is a spec and feature-rich smartphone, limited only by its cheap and flimsy hardware. At a first glance, the S4 looks near-identical to the Galaxy S III, with both being constructed almost entirely of plastic. To compete against the best (like HTC One, iPhone 5, BlackBerry ZTE, Lumia 925, Sony"s Xperia Z), Samsung has loaded it with some interesting and never-seen-before features. While the processor type will vary by region and model, versions sold in the U.S. come equipped with a 1.9GHz quad-core Snapdragon 600-series CPU with 2GB of RAM. In benchmark testing, it delivered performance gains over the HTC One and iPhone 5. The 5-inch full HD display of S4 with 1,920 x 1,080 resolutions delivers a pixel density of 441ppi far ahead of the most of its peers. One of the drawbacks of Super AMOLED, of course, is that colors can appear oversaturated at times, but ultimately it's a matter of preference. Despite powerful features, the Galaxy S4's battery life is exceptional, making it through a day's use without having to recharge 1) S4 has its own built-in infrared blaster The Galaxy S4 is the first Galaxy handset to feature a built-in infrared blaster, and Samsung puts it to good use. With the combination of Samsung"s WatchOn app and the third-party Peel, the Korean firm has created a single service that allows users to navigate their TV guide and control a television or set-top box all from within a single app. 2. Near field communication (NFC) chip The NFC chip allows you to talk to other devices with NFC. Thus, you can swap content like photos between phones just by tapping them together, make mobile payments, or pair your phone with a stereo with a tap.
Whose life is more difficult? Woman (Pro) or Men (Con)

My opponent has forfeited her round. Thus, there is no rebuttals to make, so I will re-paste my previous round and allow her to make her argument. If she does not uphold her shared BOP or she forfeits her round, the winner is obvious. Thank you. _______________________________________________________________________________________________ As we all know, there are two conflicting genders in the human race: Men and Woman. Each gender faces their own set of problems, however, women’s lives are more difficult. Over the next couple rounds, I will prove to the readers that women’s lives are more challenging than those of men’s. Thank you. {P1} Appearance Woman are under constant pressure to look good. Whether it’s pressure from men, or pressure from media, woman always feel the need to look presentable no matter where they go. When women don’t look presentable, they are scoffed at, as noticed in the common “Walk of Shame” a woman must do after a one-night-stand. Now, let’s look at the facts: According to a study that polled 1,000 U.S adults, the following information was found: “We found that 35 percent of women use one or two products daily, while 17 percent use three or four products a day. Meanwhile, the majority of men (54 percent) don’t use a single product when getting ready in the morning.” [1] This is the reason why, according to a study from Mint, the average woman spends about 15,000 dollars a year on makeup. [2] This is an interesting way to depict it: [5] {P2} Jobs The debate has gone on for so long: Why don’t women get paid as much as men? Obviously, financial discrimination against women is well-known and quite common. An article on the Huffington Post states the following, “Women still earned only 77 cents for every dollar that men earned in 2012, according to new data from the U.S Census Bureau.” [3] A similar discrepancy between the pay of women and men is still around today. Even though women fight for equal pay [4], men still dominate the workforce and are rewarded more in return. The article I provided [4] gives some very interesting points on this topic. {P3} Sex This is one of the hardest parts of a woman’s life. So many times, men pressure women for sex, and if they give in, they are considered impure. As well all know, ‘boys become men’ when they have sex, but women are deemed impure once they lose their virginity. In many countries, women are stoned for losing their virginity or even for marriage not approved by her parents.[6] A known phrase can sum-up this point: A key that can open any lock is a master key. However, a lock that can be opened by any key is useless. (Think about it) My fellow citizens, I have shown that women face harder challenges in life than men. I have shown evidence, support, and further research for my arguments. I will continue with more points next round. Thank you. - Shadow-Dragon - [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com...... [2] https://www.google.com...... [3] http://www.huffingtonpost.com...... [4]http://articles.latimes.com...... [5] http://iamgag.com...... [6]http://www.usatoday.com......
Whose life is more difficult? Woman (Pro) or Men (Con)

As we all know, there are two conflicting genders in the human race: Men and Woman. Each gender faces their own set of problems, however, women’s lives are more difficult. Over the next couple rounds, I will prove to the readers that women’s lives are more challenging than those of men’s. Thank you. {P1} Appearance Woman are under constant pressure to look good. Whether it’s pressure from men, or pressure from media, woman always feel the need to look presentable no matter where they go. When women don’t look presentable, they are scoffed at, as noticed in the common “Walk of Shame” a woman must do after a one-night-stand. Now, let’s look at the facts: According to a study that polled 1,000 U.S adults, the following information was found: “We found that 35 percent of women use one or two products daily, while 17 percent use three or four products a day. Meanwhile, the majority of men (54 percent) don’t use a single product when getting ready in the morning.” [1] This is the reason why, according to a study from Mint, the average woman spends about 15,000 dollars a year on makeup. [2] This is an interesting way to depict it: [5] {P2} Jobs The debate has gone on for so long: Why don’t women get paid as much as men? Obviously, financial discrimination against women is well-known and quite common. An article on the Huffington Post states the following, “Women still earned only 77 cents for every dollar that men earned in 2012, according to new data from the U.S Census Bureau.” [3] A similar discrepancy between the pay of women and men is still around today. Even though women fight for equal pay [4], men still dominate the workforce and are rewarded more in return. The article I provided [4] gives some very interesting points on this topic. {P3} Sex This is one of the hardest parts of a woman’s life. So many times, men pressure women for sex, and if they give in, they are considered impure. As well all know, ‘boys become men’ when they have sex, but women are deemed impure once they lose their virginity. In many countries, women are stoned for losing their virginity or even for marriage not approved by her parents.[6] A known phrase can sum-up this point: A key that can open any lock is a master key. However, a lock that can be opened by any key is useless. (Think about it) My fellow citizens, I have shown that women face harder challenges in life than men. I have shown evidence, support, and further research for my arguments. I will continue with more points next round. Thank you. - Shadow-Dragon - [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com... [2] https://www.google.com... [3] http://www.huffingtonpost.com... [4]http://articles.latimes.com... [5] http://iamgag.com... [6]http://www.usatoday.com...
Whose life is more difficult? Woman (Pro) or Men (Con)

Hi, I'll accept the side of men. I'm new to this site, so I'm not sure if I'm supposed to give some of my argument straight away, but I will state some facts. 40% of all domestic violence happens to men, just to put some perspective into the argument that women are the only real victims. Now that you know that men are actually victims too, I will give some other opening facts about this issue. 1 out of 10 male on male rapes are reported, making the 3% of men in the UK that admit to male on male rape and the 5% that admitted to the same as a child even more disturbing, not counting prison rape. The CDC reported males being forced to either penetrate or give oral sex to women being a surprising 4.8%; 1 out of 21 men. There was an experiment where at first, a male fought with a female (verbally) in public, in a crowded area, loudly so everyone could hear, and pushed her maybe once or twice, and people started whipping out phones to alert authorities and ran to go get help. The experiment then reversed the situation, waiting until different people were in the area and put the man as the character being abused, and the woman actually punched him a few times while yelling at him. The bystanders simply looked out of curiosity, sometimes laughed, and kept walking. That should show how people feel about abuse. I can link to the video if I need to, but I don't have it on hand.
Whose life is more difficult? Woman (Pro) or Men (Con)

The resolution is simple. I want to debate a girl on this who would try to prove that guys' lives are more difficult. I, a guy, will try to prove that girls' lives are more difficult. Note: This debate is only open for a girl to accept. A guy vs a girl both arguing for the opposite side. First round, Con must only state "I accept". Second and Third rounds are for arguments and rebuttals. Can may not make any new points in her last round. I look forward to this debate.
Obama is not a loser.

Thanks for the topic. My opponent states that Obama is not a loser, with the main justification being he won his presidential campaign. First to clarify my side of the debate I will use the following definition of loser from the wordnet princeton. failure: a person with a record of failing Thus we see a loser can also be defined as somebody with a record of failing. If anyone would like to follow the Rasmussen reports link underneath this statement, you would easily see his approval ratings have been going down faster and faster. Thus by utilizing my definition we can see a loser can also be someone with a record of failing. Obama's falling approval rating shows that he is a loser because he is also a failure in that his record of success is declining amongst the American people who voted for him in the first place. "The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -16 (see trends). " Although my opponent claims that winning the presidency is a great achievement, a lot of people would argue against him saying President Bush was a loser. So to say that just winning the presidency means their not a loser is not necessarily true. To reference another president other than Bush, I would reference Nixon who would probably also be defined as a loser because of the Watergate Scandal. . http://www.rasmussenreports.com... If you wish to talk over-all about his life, we are still not even 100% sure about his birth conditions as he has not released his actual birth certificate yet, so I can't really judge him for what happened then. Though that still probably means something suspicious is going on. I will not go into any further details about his past life, because my opponents wording implies that "Obama's entire life has resulted in him being a loser". This means that all his past events have come together to make him today a loser or a non-loser. Thus we must judge him as he is today as president which my opponent references. Again remember, his poll ratings have had a rate of decline and he is not doing good with Strongly Approving being less than Strongly Disapproving. Thus remember my definition that a loser can also be someone with a record of failure, and you can see that even if Obama was president this doesn't stop him from being a loser, because people would argue that America has had presidents with a record of failure who were losers. Thus the only way my opponent can use his presidency to prove Obama's a non-loser was if he had a positive success rate or if as of right now he had a great achievement. Obama has not had any great achievements yet, and the change he proposes is obviously one that Americans are not behind according to president approval ratings.
Obama is not a loser.

Obama is not a loser. He actually won his presidential camapagin. This is a broadened title, stateing that his entire life has resulted in him being a loser. But what is a "loser" exactly? Quite obviously, someone who does not win. In this singular instance of winning he presidential race, which is a great achievement, Obama overall, is not a loser. If he was a complete loser, he would not have won. Therefore he is not a complete loser. However, he can not be a partial loser either. It doesn't matter if he is a winner, but it only matters if he is a loser, which I have just proven he is not.
cause+effect=logic(cause and effect is logic)

You eat a poisonous mushroom, this is logic. The one eating must be you for the one the mushroom is being eaten by is identified as 'you' in the system of identity.You get poisoned. This is also logic, for no one else but you was poisoned in the context of that specific event of poisoning.I push you. This is logic.You fall off the cliff, this is logic. You die. This is logic.The fact that you assumed that anything there was linked is called a hypothesis. Logic will help you determine whether or not the hypothesis is true but it is not the method by which your guesswork happened to formulate the hypotheses that you so happened to do, dearest Pro.:)
cause+effect=logic(cause and effect is logic)

I am going to end this debating admitting that I have absolutely no idea what Pro's debate was regarding but it sure as hell wasn't his/her already severely incoherent resolution.Pro ignored my entire Round 1 set of arguments, never answered the question that I asked him/her in Round 2, again ignored absolutely everything I stated in Round 3 and then tried to finally rebuttal me in Round 5 touching very gently on a couple of points that I raise din Round 4 but did it so incoherently that I am almost cringing at how poor the debating style and structure are.Pro finishes off this debate states that Cause + Effect = Logic literally as a sum. He/she actually contradicts this statement twice in Round 5 itself:1. "When I say cause and effect is logic, that is only 1 part of it, there is another cause and effect relation before that."2. "Logic is like a loop, there is no beginning of logic, but there is a beginning of the loop of cause and effect."These statements were written by Pro and directly contradict the resolution by pointing out that there are fundamental differences between cause+effect and logic.Every single paradox I highlighted in Pro's case, Pro completely ignored and never addressed, every new point I raised supporting the con case Pro furthermore ignored not even indirectly hinting at it.Pro had full burden of proof in this debate and has completely failed to uphold it. In actual fact. only around 10% of their debate was actually relevant to the resolution and only 3% of their debate was supporting their side of it.This was an unpleasant debate and I forgive Pro for their incapability to coherently carry out a debate.Thank you for reading.
cause+effect=logic(cause and effect is logic)

any cause is caused by another cause, that is why when I say cause and effect is logic, that is only 1 part of it, there is another cause and effect relation before that. cause+effect=logic natural cause=random(not intended) randomness+logic=chaos=natural intent+logic=order=mechanical or supernatural these are the only 2 possibilities, 0 and 1, either its intended, or its not intended i am a causal agent, that's why i can cause you to fall down the cliff, by pushing you, and the effect of that is whatever it is yes, but if i didn't push you, that logic dosnt apply, so logic is like a loop, there is no beginning of logic, but there is a beginning of the loop of cause and effect (a simplified explanation for the randomness of evolution) invironmental pressure, imagine 2 bears, polar bears, one with shorter fur than the other, the one with thick fur has greator chance of surviving if the one with the short fur hasn't got thick enough fur to survive, so the one with thick fur survives and new ones with thick fur can live on if it get babies, random. like, the bear with thick fur has greater chances of surviving because of the logic that is the bears fur is better fit to survive the cold, and its all random, randomness+logic=ALL natural change over time(including evolution) the bear that has the thick fur, is naturally the one that survives, because of logic, and its random because why didn't the other bear have the same fur, but now it dosnt matter because the one with short fur isn't around, perfekt balance same with a bear with to thick for, if its to thick it wont survive and wont breed, random, no choise involved there can be no first cause, motion is the balancing point between 2 causes
cause+effect=logic(cause and effect is logic)

If cause is effect how can they need each other? They are the same thing according to Pro. Pro still disagrees that 1.0Cause = 0.5Logic yet asserts that Cause = Effect... This is getting really messy for Pro already and his/her debate has barely begun.First of all, the definition of cause and effect, in the context of this debate, are as follows:A cause is a person or thing that gives rise to an action, phenomenon, or condition.http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...An effect is a change which is a result or consequence of an action or other cause.http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...They are blatantly at opposite ends of an event and are in no way whatsoever the same thing. thus to claim that cause is effect and effect is cause is fallacious in every way imaginable.Pro states that all causes are caused by an effect, he/she does not explain how the first cause caused the first effect is this is true and has created a paradox. Pro then states that an effect is effect by a cause... This makes no sense at all...After mumbling about what makes a cause a cause and effect an effect, Pro suddenly states that Logic is the unit by which we measure reasonable something is. This is completely false and something Pro has made up on the spot the justify his/her already falsified resolution.Following this, Pro incoherently types some accusation with the number 8 about me twisting something some way and then says that if I push him/her off a cliff it is logic the he/she will die. This is complete and utter nonsense; what if Pro is a bird? What if there's a trampoline at the bottom with a huge mattress to cushion the fall? There are so many variables left untold that to even consider it logical the Pro would die is absurd logic in and of itself.Pro then states that morality is imaginary and then states that it is about what is real. I have absolutely no clue how this is remotely linked to the resolution and am going to just ignore it on the grounds of pure ridiculousness. This whole 'logic guides morals, logic is true' attack makes me wonder if the cause for the effect of Pro's nonsensical argument is that they are a troll.What in the name of the Flying Spaghetti Monster do bananas have to do with this? What the actual...Pro ends round 4 blabbering on about morality and reason as well as intent in some newly concocted equation that bars resemblance to the resolution's equation only in how utterly incoherent it is.
cause+effect=logic(cause and effect is logic)

cause is effect, and effect is cause, as they cant exist without each other, any cause is caused by an effect, and any effect is effect by a cause, or else they wouldn't exist, like, what is an effect if it didn't get caused, and what is a cause if it didn't cause anything, then its not a cause logic is the measurement of reasonable you are just twisting it m8, if you push me off a cliff its logic I will die.. what you think dosnt determine anything.. thinking is talking to myself morality is imaginary, its about what is real, so its guided by what is real, logic guides moral, and logic is true, information is nothing, mental, and the opposite of mental is physical, something, 0 and 1 you cant show me 0 bananas, but you can understand what I mean, because you can imagine a banana, or 10 bananas, but you still have 0 bananas if you don't know right from wrong you can be immoral(reason), if you don't have intent, you cant be immoral(intent)=(morality)