BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The University of Michigan is the Greatest College Football Dynasty In The World

The most successful and prestigious College Football Dynasty is not U of M, but instead the Notre Dame Fighting Irish. -Notre Dame has won 8 wire (AP/Coaches Poll) National Championships -Notre Dame holds a record 11 Consensus National Championships -Notre Dame's career winning percentage is only .001 behind Michigan's. -47 players and coaches in the College Football Hall of Fame -Tied with USC for most Heisman Trophy winners (7) -33 players have finished as a runner-up to the Heisman Trophy -9 Players in the Pro Football Hall of Fame (Second to USC with 10) -As of 2007, 459 players have played in the NFL (most all-time) -12 undefeated seasons, 10 one-loss seasons, and only 12 losing seasons in its 118 year history. -Holds NCAA record for most consecutive wins over one opponent (43, Navy) -Out of five matchups as a #1 team playing a #2 team, Notre Dame has never lost (4-0-1). -The Sporting News in 2007 names Notre Dame's stadium second best in the nation to University of Tennessee's.
The University of Michigan is the Greatest College Football Dynasty In The World

I firmly believe that the University of Michigan has historically put forth the most powerful football dynasty of any NCAA team. The most obvious place to begin is total wins, where U-M dominates with more then 860 wins! That's a winning percentage of .745! No team in any division can come close to these stats. To this day University of Michigan has won ELEVEN national championships, We have produced THREE Heisman trophy winners, and have maintained and are soon to greatly increase the largest football stadium seating in the country. The M-Den commonly hosts more then 111,000 spectators, an awe inspiring number by anyone's standards. If it's coaching legacies you are looking for, we have plenty of those as well. From Fritz Chrysler to Bo Schembeckler to Lloyd Carr, Michigan has always been home to great coaches. Dedicated to their players futures, U-M coaches have held their athletes to near academic perfection. Coaches from the University of Michigan have always and will always be regarded as some of the best in any sport. I put forth this article to challenge anyone to find a team that can find an NCAA athletics program that can trump the OVERALL dynasty o the University of Michigan. From its coaches, to its incredible win totals and averages, to the grade A football players and members of our comunity that the University produces, the University of Michigan is the ultimate football dynasty.
Phone Guy is the killer in Five Nights at Freddy's

yes I can! Phone guy SHARES the occupations with Dexter, BUT I'm pointing at pink guy being Phone guy! why? "Foxy was always my favorite" and Pink guy looks to be smiling in Foxy's minigame. yes... I'd never lie about this but, maybe pink guy was smiling because he just killed some kids. Easy victims, but harsh after effects. Also, who did the purple guy kill? Freddy, chica, bonnie, and Foxy in FNAF3. but I'll get to that later. the Distorted voice you hear in N5 in FNAF1 comes from the purple man, but that is just speculation. psh, *slams fists on desk* TAKE THAT!now let's see who has the better side to this theory. It's just a theory, A GAME THEORY! THANKS FOR WATCHING! NOW TIME FOR SUPER AMAZING END CARD TOURNAMENT, AND LAST TIME, THE WINNER WAS LOPUNNY BEING OVERLY SEXY. AND THIS TIME IS WHO'S THE BETTER MLP FiM PONY? Pinkie pie / applejack / fluttershy / rarity / twilight sparkle / rainbow dash PS you can't #youcan't
Phone Guy is the killer in Five Nights at Freddy's

So I think I get what your saying: Dexter is the Purple Man, and Pink Guy is someone we have not yet met. But I think "Pink Guy" Might be Mike Schmidt, because according to MatPat's 1st FNAF theory, Mike is stuck is the job because it's his own never-ending nightmare/punishment for killing the people. I see where your going. so Dexter is trying to kill Mike, but Mike ended up killing himself in FNAF 3. So, Dexter wins! And so do I! Or unless you can prove Pink Guy is actually Phone Guy, but can you link the 2? Without resorting to saying Phone Guy is actually Dexter, which that wouldn't make sense.
Phone Guy is the killer in Five Nights at Freddy's

Oh, so Purple Man is Dexter the Serial Killing cop then. And, yes, Phone Guy did do the day shift at that time, but how do you figure Purple Man is a day shift employee? Or do we say a 2nd day shift employee is the cop? Oh, I get it now! Jeremy's the cop! But how does all this fit in? Jeremy also took the day shift, after N6, before the place closed down, Forgot about that part, sorry!
Phone Guy is the killer in Five Nights at Freddy's

for purple man being a cop I have this video and I don't give up! I know he's an SK BUT this is all speculation. so it's up for grabs, and the purple man in Foxy's mini game is different then the one in the S A V E T H E M minigame. so... there is 2 killers? Because the purple man in Foxy's mini game, killed a child in the Give Cake mini game. do you see what I'm pointing at? 2 KILLERS! and I think the one from Foxy's minigame IS NOT Phone guy! BUT the one with a badge! A badge?? A BADGE?! eeyup. a badge! so he wears a badge! HE WEARS A BADGE!! mmm... I think purple man is a day shift guard. why day shift? because night shift was taken.
Phone Guy is the killer in Five Nights at Freddy's

Apparently you forgot that Phone Guy takes the night shift in FNAF 1, which takes place after N6. Here's the chain of events: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Purple Man hacks the animatronics -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fritz Smith takes the night shift, then gets fired for tampering with the animatronics -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeremy Fritzgerald takes the shift -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Purple Man's killings reach public, forcing the company to shut down -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Freddy Fazbear's Pizza reopens as the events in FNAF 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Phone Guy takes the shift --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mike Schmidt takes the shift ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is the picture for the newspaper you get after N6:http://ts1.mm.bing.net...
Phone Guy is the killer in Five Nights at Freddy's

I think that Phone guy is Fritz ... why you ask? "I"ll probably take the night shift myself." - Phone guy Night 6. yes NIGHT 6! and who do you play as the next night? FRITZ SMITH! eeyup. I can't pull the soundfile... BUT... there are videos abut this too! and fritz = Phone guy = Purple man. see? it all makes sense now!
Phone Guy is the killer in Five Nights at Freddy's

Some people probably think Phone Guy = Purple Man. But I say otherwise (and so are some other people) I'm starting with some basic facts. Phone Guy is a night guard, who helps you along the week. Purple Man probably wouldn't do this, even though his main target is children. Also, some assume in the SAVETHEM minigame, that Purple Man is holding a phone. But why would he use a phone to attack Freddy? I believe Purple Man is using a hacking device, and who hacks the animatronics? Fritz Smith, the night guard in the custom night. I believe Fritz Smith is Purple Man. Also, Phone Guy died by the animatronics in the first game. Purple Man died by going into Springtrap, and failing. Anybody think that Phone Guy is Purple Man?
Wikileaks

To be honest, I am not surprised he forfeited that round. I will continue with what I had not been able to say previously because of the character limit. I will start by quoting my opponent's passage here: "President Obama called cyberwarfare "one of the most serious economic and national security threats our nation faces." But America's response has fallen far short of the mark. The government must devote the research and money necessary to exponentially increase cybersecurity. Former White House terrorism adviser Richard Clarke proposed creation of a Cyber Defense Administration. This new defense system will ban wikileaks as well as current military television and internet shows." Not only is Wikileaks not part of cyberwarfare, but if we were to hypothetically say they were then my opponent would have just used a logical fallacy (logic which does not make sense or logic which is a lie within itself). He used appeal to authority. Appeal to authority is when someone says something is true because someone of higher power or position said so. Obama is not an expert on cyberwarfare. He is not an expert on Wikileaks. He taught Constitutional Law and sat on the Harvard Law Review board, but Constitutional Law does not involve cyberwarfare in any way. If he were to say something about the first amendment, then he might be more credible. But on the subject of Wikileaks, his ideas on it are pointless. And of course he is going to say something negative about them. Wikileaks revealed information which was not in favor of the US. They are doing exactly what they want to be doing, "Keeping Governments Open". If we were to still hypothetically say that Wikileaks is part of cyberwarfare, then his second statement would be even weirder. Richard Clarke wants to help create an organization that will not only defend the internet but ban "military television shows" and "internet shows"? Why? How does the military have any involvement with Wikileaks? And even if they did, should we merely ban that form of freedom of speech to make sure the US keeps things classified? No. All in all, Wikileaks isn't a part of cyberwarfare. To they get access to information? Yes. Is it a war? No. Is it even merely cyberwarfare? Not at all. A lot of it is written down info that is written up on computers and passed to Wikileaks. The only reason they call it a cyber war is to make it sounds more serious than it is. Anonymous is not connected to Wikileaks. They have the same agenda in specific cases, but not in all. I have a feeling that my opponent will also forfeit he next round.
Wikileaks

Wikileaks should be classified as a terrorist organization bent on the downfall of the United States of America. This will be the Pf debate style. Contention- Wikileaks should be shut down because it is a terrorist organization with only one goal in mind and that is to destroy the United States of America.The latest breed of anarchist is not a protester who takes to the streets, Molotov cocktail in hand. His weapon of choice is the laptop and his battleground the Internet, which he uses to steal information or to disrupt life in the digital age. The personification of these Internet intifadists is Julian Assange of WikiLeaks infamy.Retaliating for his arrest on rape charges and his pariah status in Internet commerce, a band of hackers known as Anonymous used denial-of-services attacks to crash the websites of Visa, MasterCard and other corporations that refused to have anything more to do with Assange.Surely enough, Anonymous got the world's attention. But the scary fact is that group is just a visible example of growing cyberwarfare.A concentrated attack via the Web could disrupt any facet of American life, from banking to medicine to transportation - and with the same murderous effect as a conventional act of terror.Make no mistake: America's enemies will work that game if they can.Already, Web-savvy jihadists are scouring the WikiLeaks documents for signs of American vulnerability. According to the Middle East Media Research Institute, "a member of the jihadi forum the Shumukh Al-Islam initiated a 'workshop' aiming to collect, categorize and pinpoint all U.S. interests worldwide mentioned in documents released by WikiLeaks." That information will without question be transmitted - digitally, most likely - to those most willing and able to harm the United States.America must block such a catastrophe from happening by mounting a massive and ever-evolving cybersecurity drive.Someone recently demonstrated how effective an attack can be by, for the first known time, successfully wielding a cyberweapon against a real-world target. A virus called Stuxnet infiltrated Iran's nuclear program and damaged its processing equipment.The end was fantastic; the means were terrifying. Suppose the tables were turned on the U.S.?Assange has been arrested on rape charges unrelated to his cyberanarchy. The government appears to be moving to indict him under the Espionage Act. It's a pleasing prospect but would no more prevent cyberattacks than sending Osama Bin Laden to the nuse would quell Islamic terror. President Obama called cyberwarfare "one of the most serious economic and national security threats our nation faces." But America's response has fallen far short of the mark. The government must devote the research and money necessary to exponentially increase cybersecurity. Former White House terrorism adviser Richard Clarke proposed creation of a Cyber Defense Administration. This new defense system will ban wikileaks as well as current military television and internet shows.
Special-effects were not the cause of Avatar's huge success

This is a lighthearted, probably moderately opinion based argument. I am not a huge cinema buff or Avatar worshiper by any means. This is my first shot at creating an argument so I wanted to do something fun. Definitions special-effects: anything computer generated in a film. success: popular and financial Resolved: Special-effects were not the cause of Avatar's huge success. There is no doubt that Avatar was a huge cinematic success. The question is "What was the cause of the success?" The first answer seems to be the mind blowing special-effects, in 3-D to top it off! This is not the case; the real reason for Avatar's success is the storyline. Many people who admittedly liked the film were somewhat harsh on the story: "It was very predictable." "It was just Fern Gulley/Dances With Wolves/The Last Samurai ect. in space." My answer to these claims would be yes to all, but these reasons are the very things that made the story great and Avatar a success. Avatar is just a modern day fairy tale or myth. Fairy tales and myths are very formulaic and predictable as Avatar was, but this gives them their classic and universal appeal. Stories like Jack in the Beanstalk or the trials of Hercules have staying power and are told for hundreds and even thousands of years. Fairy tales and myths use lots of symbols that appeal to what Jung called "the collective unconscious" Very similar myths and fairy tales can be found in hundreds of cultures that have had no contact with one and other. There are certain characters and motifs that pop up in man's stories that are universal. The most basic example is "good vs. evil", these are most often protrayed in the characters of a "Dark Lord" and "the questing hero". for example Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Zelda. This is why Avatar is successful. The story appeals to the collective unconscious of man and uses many symbols and characters that occur in timeless stories in all of Western and Eastern Civilization. It is a mistake to attribute the success of Avatar to something as superficial as special-effects when the true appeal of the movie is the fairy tale or mythological quality of the storyline in the film. There are dozens of other movies with special effects as or nearly as impressive as Avatar; however, these were not anywhere close to the popular and financial success of Avatar.
rap battle lets go

Whack, wish you were black?To that piece of crap, you call a rap, that's my most constructive feedback...Now for the real rap you little fool,Do you realise your brain not just a blob to be abused but a tool?It's a tool to be used,When you feel stupid and confused,But you are both at once, you dunce, I gave you a chance,My poetry is gay,Oh got something to say?It's happy, so enlightened in every single way,Oh deary dear I do fear that you thought of I meant to say,I'm a homosexual, if I am is that not okay?I like to jack off to other people jacking off to me,jacking off to them, I like to do this cycle perpetually,by the time i die 4000 porn vids into the sequence,I have no life, tons of free time and my jack off buddy's my only friend,But what if my jack off buddy is me?This is narcissism and I feel so free... get it?I feel so cheap and used and abused, and confused at how I just confused myself,By the fact that my confusion is at the fact I confused myself by being confused.
rap battle lets go

I don't know who taught you how to rhyme, but it should be a crime, when I rap it is oh so sublime, when you rap its as ugly as shower grime, oh wait look at the time, looks like I have enough for another few lines, just like the sun shines, so does this battle, although you are as bright as a herd of cattle, your have a poor vocab, I have seen better rhymes on a caveman's slab, I'll help you hail a cab, cuz your quite bad, you see I grew up without a dad, its actually quite sad, just like your bars, best stop now you're leaving scars, your a dog and I'm a bunch of cars, you are drawn to me, while your owners plea, it was probably that flea, ohp too late you just got ran over, maybe next time you decide to accept my rap you'll be sober,:) we are like two knights in shining armor, the only thing is that you are a farmer, so I slay you, without you having a single clue, and your lips turn oh so blue, by the way I heard about your boyfriend drew, how is he...I heard he is rather shrew, I'm out
rap battle lets go

You could not even finish the last line of your crap,It's your fault for setting 1,000 character limiting, your forward thinking skills are crap,You act like captain jack sparrow, whack, wild and any chick you've fucked gives you a slap,You sucked at sex, that's probably why, you must be tired of your lameness, go take a nap.Second stanza, of this piece of poetic demolition,I will destroy, will deploy my heavy ammunition,I will unleash, the beast in me, at least, I'll let it feast,On you, you tasty prey, oh not scared yet? Well that's okay,If you don't run, if you don't choke, if you keep spitting I'll still get the vote,It will just be more funny because when the prey has died,The predator can laugh at how hard it tried,Se that skill? I just talked about us in third person,Every line that you write, your reputation seems to worsen,Whatever man, I'm done, had fun, Next time less metaphors... More puns,I use my skill to write like a gun, Ba-dum tssh; epic finale on the drum.
rap battle lets go

cool video bro, although, it is you who will lose this battle hoe, not I... I'm too good for you, unlike you I actually have a clue, my bars are dope, I will make you look broke, I guarantee you that you choke, when you lose you will resort to a smoke, to ease the tension of your loss, cuz when I rap I am the boss, like Jesus I chill high up on a cross, you so old you got wrinkles on your face, allow me to take you on an adventure, deep into space, when I rap my bars are like a scripture, your already losin', so you might as well take a picture, of the future winner, you can only afford one t.v. dinner, by the way you should try to get thinner, cuz' all that food is making you fat, you're uglier than a Siamese cat, and you smell like scat, you see I am cooler than extraterrestrials, wiser than the ancestrials, I stand high up in the pedestals, unlike you I aint' dope, now I'm leaving you to cope, so get up scrub off, you wish you were as wealthy as David hasselhou
Free will and determinism can both be true at the same time

Semantics:My opponent maintains that I have no idea what I'm talking about in terms of "free will" and "determinism" by definition yet he himself never actually defines them to his preference! So in essence he makes a bare assertion fallacy; he's just claiming I'm wrong without actually showing via definition that I am wrong. Now if we look at my definition of free will, we see that the robbery hypothetical is clearly not an act of free will. As the agent in question never actually intended to rob the store. That intent is the defining notion of what is free-will and what is determinism. As someone with a lack of blood-flow in the parateolobes has a desire to kill (psychopath) does so via impulse, this seems to suggest a certain level of determinsim, while someone without this defficency still killing suggests free-will (assuming no other mental disorders)Essentially what my opponents argument seems to suggest is that 1) I cannot tell the difference between the two, and 2) that both are different, but are essentially the same. This argument (with exception to the semantics committed) might be logically valid (compatabalism) but the content is absurd as I have shown. Determinism simply does not exist. We've seen this in Quantum Physics (empraclly) and the uncertainty principal. In fact Neuro-psychologist James Fallon is a psychopath, who never committed a crime in his life! Finally, my opponent's comments regarding to my analogy's logical conclusion to believe that there is no such thing as free-will is a reducto ad absurdum. In the context of the hypothetical I don't think there is free-will. I would want to save my family too, but in the general context of the world? Whole different story. Nice try to my opponent! Predictions Under Determinism:My opponent launches an ad hominem against me, I ask for a conduct point, that was uncalled for and offensive. He also completely drops my argument, and claims that the computer is infallible. But this doesn't make sense and implies a strict determinism perspective if that is the case in his hypothetical! Becuase if the computer is without error it lacks the free-will to committ that error when the human programs it! My opponent contradicts himself here. showing the two indeed are not one in the same! Are They Compatable? Dropped argument ... thanks!Fallacies Committed:My opponent clarified his position for me: thank you!The problem with his position? If he were right (which thankfully he is not) we would not have the neuro-sciences, in which we actually do see where emotions are produced in the brain, and the impacts of certain emotions (i.e stress) on the body. Those have been empirically tested, and shown to exist. This "discourses" stuff is nonsense, and not up to par with what the sciences have tested already. Psychopathy is still predictable (see video) http://www.youtube.com...Thank youHitchslapped!