BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
prostitusion is morrally wrong

Since ScarletAtheist has forfeited the last round I will just bring up more points to why prostitution is wrong. When a society does not hold sexual intimacy in high regard it devalues the specialness or even sacredness of the sexual relationship between husband and wife. "Marriage and divorce are both common experiences. In Western cultures, more than 90 percent of people marry by age 50. Healthy marriages are good for couples" mental and physical health. They are also good for children; growing up in a happy home protects children from mental, physical, educational and social problems. However, about 40 to 50 percent of married couples in the United States divorce. The divorce rate for subsequent marriages is even higher."1 It is not moral to defraud someone prostitution is defrauding women, giving people money for momentary pleasure and short term gain not looking at the long term affects of harm to there physical and psychological health. "She said: "Prostitution is an extremely dangerous thing to do. It involves violence and abuse, and fundamentally effects the woman or child who is prostituted. "With the hazards that prostitutes have to face daily, I would be extremely shocked if anybody who was involved for any period of time did not show signs of stress disorder." 2 The prostitute is defrauding the person who uses them as well getting them to pay them so that the person can have short term happiness. If a man uses a prostitute ten times in his life and then finds the woman he wants to marry should he tell her? Some might say no, what happened in his single life was his own business but I say this what would happen if he marries her and she finds out how will she feel? She would feel angry and betrayed. If it is not morally wrong to use a prostitute then why would she feel this way. 1 American Psychological Association 2 BBC News http://news.bbc.co.uk...
Sexual Orientation is a choice.

sexual orientation is not limited to the attraction felt to a specific gender, granted these forces are never stagnant and cant be measured however they can be scoped on to a scale of sorts by intensity and direction. sexual orientation can point to other spectrum like age. it is most common for people to have an attraction to adults aged 20 - 40 just as it is common to be attracted to the opposite gender. however it isn't common but accepted that there are a few people who's orientation point higher or lower than the average, some people are attracted to younger people gender regardless from the ages of 6 - 13 and some people like older people 50 - 70. sexual orientation can point at different levels of different spectra such as gender, age, inter species, intellect, masculinity, femininity and desire. these cannot be decided upon, they occur based on subconscious decisions by past experiences and not conscious decision making, or genetic inheritance.
Eggs are better scrambled than sunny side up

dude how can you say that scrambled eggs are better than over easy or however you want to say it. I mean, this isn't even a possible debate because some people either don't like the yoke runny or they don't like eggs at all. But on an overall statement i believe that more people like over easy because first you have something to stick your toast in when the yoke gets over your plate, two because of the runny yoke you actually have to pour cheese and other things onto it to make it delicious. That's my statement if you can come up with a better one be my guest.
the culinary institute of america is the best culinary school in the world

1) Student:Teacher Ratios Read into the wiki source Pro cites. It says, "Classes with too many students are often disrupting to education. Also, too many students in a class results in a diverse field of students, with varying degrees of learning ability and information uptake. Consequently, the class will spend time for less academic students to assimilate the information, when that time could be better spent progressing through the curriculum. In this way, student-teacher ratios are compelling arguments for advanced or honors classes. .. Numerous sources argue that lower student to teacher ratios are better at teaching students complex subjects. .. " Therefore, a school with a lower ratio ought to be better at teaching complex culinary skills. The "turn-over" my opponent cites is irrelevant, student teacher ratio tells you how many students a teacher must simultaneously teach on average. Again, the FCI can accomplish far more than the CIA in a far shorter time period. 2) "CIA/Master Chefs" Pro says that students are more likely to get a master chef. If students turn over classes every three weeks, then they spend less than a month with a Master Chef, if at all. At the FCI and other schools, more face time is achieved through lower student:Master Chef ratios. 3-4) Pro's Personal Testimony The title of this argument should tell you what to do. Please dismiss these arguments. Unfortunately, as a high school student geared towards math and science, I know little of the culinary arts. However, what I have read and researched for this debate points towards other schools. I cite facts, Pro cites opinions. 5) CIA's success based on its size. The CIA has more notable alumni because of its size. Period. Let's say that School A has 1,000 people, and School B has 200. School A pops out 50 notable alumni to School B's 20. You'd think that School A is 'better, but you'd be wrong. It turns 5% of students into notable alumni, compared to 10% in School B. Similarly, other schools have a higher percentage of notable alumni than the CIA. Simply speaking, if you attend those schools you are more likely to become a notable alumnus. Pro has dropped his arguments on Le Cordon Bleu and L'Academie de Cuisine. I strongly urge a Con ballot, as I have provided facts and sources shoring up my argument, while dismissing Pro's. Many of his arguments are personal testimonies, and should not be taken into account.
the culinary institute of america is the best culinary school in the world

"1) Student: teacher ratios. " My opponent in this point of argument does not present the facts of the case. If a school has fewer classes and a shorter time of education it will have a lower Student: teacher ratio because of turn over. The fci has a 6-month course and a 9-month course whereas the CIA has a two-year program as well as a 4-year program that ranges in further aspects of culinary arts, allowing for a higher rate of employment. This is proven evidence of the CIA being the best when it comes to teaching complexity in culinary arts. . http://en.wikipedia.org... Comparing these two carefully will prove the difference. . http://www.ciachef.edu... . http://www.frenchculinary.com... "2) CIA's success based on size. Master Chef employment. Simply because of its size. " Proves that the CIA has better instructors whether the size is bigger or not… the CIA is a block system, the likely hood of a student being taught by a master chef is higher then the fci solely because of the system. "The CIA has 16 master chefs and 2713 students. That makes a master chef: student ratio of .0059. The FCI has a ratio of .01. That's almost 2 times better. " The block system negates this statement, as the turn over per block is every three weeks. Students get a new instructor teaching in different subjects every three weeks. "3, 4) Completely unfounded contentions. These are just Pro's words. " Eyewitness is very relevant in debate. I see it every day… people that know anything about culinary arts school can also attest. The fact that you have not seen it is evidence that you are not educated on the subject of culinary schools. Looking on a website and reading one paragraph does not classify you as an expert to take up a debate in which you know little about. "5) The CIA, again, produces more notable alumni simply because it is a large school" This would make sense if you approach this with out knowing much about culinary school. The CIA has more notable alumni b/c they do not settle for just anyone. It is a tough program to get into, and only the best show up.
the culinary institute of america is the best culinary school in the world

1) Student:teacher ratios. Small student teacher ratios don't imply a small school. Large schools can have low student:teacher ratios by employing more teachers or teaching more classes. It seems that the CIA cannot have small classes, which means it cannot afford its students the quality education given by them. 2) CIA's success based on size. Master Chef employment. The CIA has more instructors that are master chefs than the LCB or other schools simply because of its size. It is a large school, therefore employs more master chefs. Again, please look to http://www.cookingschoolscompared.com... . The CIA has 16 master chefs and 2713 students. That makes a master chef:student ratio of .0059. The FCI has a ratio of .01. That's almost 2 times better. 3, 4) Completely unfounded contentions. These are just Pro's words. 5) The CIA, again, produces more notable alumni simply because it is a large school. However, larger percentages of notable alumni are created by other schools. See my arguments in the previous round.
the culinary institute of america is the best culinary school in the world

"The FCI gives high intensity practice," But nothing near the level of intensity set forth by the CIA… I have been to both places… I have staged at both and can tell you that the CIA is in another realm of intensity. 1) Student: teacher ratios and their importance in learning. The importance of student teacher ratio is irrelevant to the culinary arts… smaller classes at the CIA are at a huge disadvantage. The CIA feeds the school through there classes so if the class is not big enough you do not have to cook for service… meaning that you miss out on real time experience. The experience of having a fell of what a kitchen is really like… that's what makes the CIA the best… when we get out of school we are more prepared to handle the real world then any other school. 2) CIA's 'success' is based on size not quality. It churns out more master chefs, but not as high a percentage of master chefs. First of all the CIA does not churn out master chefs. Master chefs are chefs that take a rigorous test to have that title… the CIA has more instructors that are aster chefs which means only the best chef instructor work there. 3) LCB, despite all of Pro's criticism, creates 2.4 times as many notable alumni for every 100 that enroll. But they can not cook when they leave… they push students through even though they do not qualify… I see it everyday… their students do not know how to cook. 4) The FCI's Total Immersion program. I do agree but not as much as the CIA… therefore it makes the CIA superior 5) It is impossible to objectively rank schools. Ultimately (as Pro shows in his arguments), things come down to personal preference and human variability. It comes down to production… that has the most successful chefs… the CIA… who is more prepared out of school… the CIA students… I see it everyday…
the culinary institute of america is the best culinary school in the world

I'll get right into the debate. "To get good at my job there a has to be a lot of practice involved..." The FCI gives high intensity practice, and an amazing student:teacher ratio of 12:1. All the schools I cited have better ratios than the CIA. This face-to-face time with master instructors is a key part of learning. Smaller classes allow individual students to ask more questions and receive more aid than larger classes. As star chef Alain Ducasse said about their Total Immersion program ,"it is truly amazing what The FCI accomplishes with their students in as little as six months. It is the equivalent of years of a traditional apprenticeship." The rest of Pro's arguments are personal testimonials. If he sourced some of his arguments on the quality of other schools, perhaps they would have some weight. Pro has also dropped a lot of my points. I shall provide a list of these arguments below. 1) Student:teacher ratios and their importance in learning. 2) CIA's 'success' is based on size not quality. It churns out more master chefs, but not as high a percentage of master chefs. 3) LCB, despite all of Pro's criticism, creates 2.4 times as many notable alumni for every 100 that enroll. 4) The FCI's Total Immersion program. 5) It is impossible to objectively rank schools. Ultimately (as Pro shows in his arguments), things come down to personal preference and human variability.
the culinary institute of america is the best culinary school in the world

Alright, I see your points but they have to be disputed. In terms of culinary greatness, The CIA does have longer classes as well as more students for a reason. To get good at my job there a has to be a lot of practice involved. The CIA gives you that kind of practice before letting you out into a world were practice is no longer offered. Such is the case if you enter the work force to soon… you are put in positions where practice needed to be had before entering… which is every successful restaurants in the u.s. I will break down those schools for you as I have visited all of them before making my choice on the best culinary school in the world… the CIA… The fci does have a good program but there classes are dominated by home cooks that just want to learn how to cook better. It is a program that tries to shove as much info in a short period of time… offering you no externship opportunities as well as an acc or bachelors degree at the end of your schooling. I will say that the fci dose come in second in the united states as far as instruction but falls short of the CIA when it comes to the level at which you are when completing the programs. Lcb really is a joke… the only respectable one is in Paris… after that they prostituted there name out as a franchise in the united states not holding the same standards as the ones it was founded upon. I say it is a joke b/c it is one… like I tried to express that I have worked in kitchens of graduates from a united states lcb certificate and have been fired or sent back to a more superior culinary school b/c of there lack of respect for the kitchen as well as technique. Lcb has become a business more then a true culinary school. I have talk to a lot of students that are attending my school after graduating form lcb and have been told that they did not know that they were wasting time and money till they realized that finding a job was nearly imposable… transferring to the CIA and leaving as true chefs… We can go back and forth on which is better but I have proof… I see it everyday… The CIA has boasted some of the greatest culinary minds and have been ambassadors of others… as I said… people from Japan and France come to the CIA to learn how to cook… the food of there culture b/c the CIA is just the best in the world… Fci is good and lcb is ok… ultimate it comes down to the individual and the CIA is the best b/c it does not settle for just anyone… it is a tough school to get into… it took me a long time to get accepted and we do not allow just anyone into our school... you have to pass a few tests as well as having a lot of res.exp.
the culinary institute of america is the best culinary school in the world

Commoncents presents some interesting arguments; nevertheless, I am still winning this debate. RE: C1 "That's not right... if law schools or med schools can be evaluated..." Colleges are ranked on various factors, which tell you very little about the quality of the institution's teaching. Such factors include student retention, graduation rates, and faculty resources (class size, faculty size, fulll time faculty) (http://en.wikipedia.org...), among other things. "I turn the alumni should be evaluated..." Alumni evaluation is unfair to the three schools I presented. The FCI, LCB, and LAC enroll 600, 500, and 100 students respectively, compared to the 2,713 of the CIA[1]. Of course a school with such large enrollment is going to crank out master chefs. The CIA has a notable alumni:enrollment ratio of 34:2,713, or 1.25%. Le Cordon Bleu has a 15:500 ratio, which is equal to 3%. The FCI has an 8[3]:600 ratio which becomes 1.333... percent, again greater than the CIA. "...lets look at what the job rate is in job placement if you attend the CIA." Job rate is not solely based on skill. Applying for a culinary job requires a base amount of skill, but also job openings. The CIA has campuses in New York and California. These locations are population centers - alumni don't have to travel very far to find job openings. There are hundreds of restaurants waiting to snap up these young cooks. The FCI is also in New York, granted, but it teaches less than a quarter as many students - making it easier for CIA students to get employed. RE: C2 "FCI does not even have an accredited program" Really? The FCI is accredited by the ACCSCT[4]. "in 6 months you can roll out of school with a certificate..." Pro is referring to their Total Immersion program which "ensures you get the maximum real world learning in the shortest appropriate time"[4]. Star chef Alain Ducasse says,"It is truly amazing what The FCI accomplishes with their students in as little as six months. It is the equivalent of years of a traditional apprenticeship." "Le Cordon Bleu is a joke..." This is a personal testimonial. Unless Pro provides some evidence, pleas disregard this. Take note of something in commoncents' source: the student-teacher ratio. The three schools I list (and others) all have better ratios. The lower the ratio, the more face-to-face time students get. If students attend 36 hours of class, an FCI student 1.5 times as much face-to-face time as a CIA student. Similar numbers exist for the LCB and LAC. Vote Con! [1] http://www.cookingschoolscompared.com...... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] http://en.wikipedia.org... [4] http://www.frenchculinary.com... (scroll down to the appropriate question)
the culinary institute of america is the best culinary school in the world

Thanks for taking this debate… but your facts are twisted a bit. "C1: It is impossible to properly evaluate culinary schools." That's not right… if law schools or med schools can be evaluated so can a culinary school. I turn the alumni should be evaluated. Who graduated from the CIA who are big named chefs today. 34 who are today some of the greatest chefs in Americas if not the world http://en.wikipedia.org... "However, it is easy to see that evaluating cooking skill is very difficult to do." it really is not… lets look at what the job rate is in job placement if you attend the CIA. http://www.cookingschoolscompared.com... 2. "The school offers traditional associate and bachelor's degrees, and the world's largest staff of American Culinary Federation (ACF) Certified Master Chefs." http://www.acfchefs.org... We even have the best French chefs sending their children to the CIA to learn how to cook. In the case of… "It's the best culinary school in the world." Paul Bocuse, world-renowned French chef "C2: Failing C1, there are better culinary schools."… That's crazy talk A: FCI does not even have an accredited program… in 6 months you can roll out of school with a certificate states that you completed a basic test of culinary skills… wow really impressive B: Le Cordon Bleu is a joke… I have people who graduate from there school and then come to our… and you can always count on one thing… even day they can not keep up… and that's after graduating from LCB going into our beginners course… Julia child is quoted saying, "the CIA is the Harvard of all culinary schools"
the culinary institute of america is the best culinary school in the world

I negate the resolution; the Culinary Institute of America is the best culinary school in the world. I apologize for any perceived sharpness in my words, but I am limited to 3,000 characters. C1: It is impossible to properly evaluate culinary schools. The objective of a culinary school is to teach its students how to be high quality cooks. Therefore, the best culinary school in the world ought to produce the highest quality cooks in the world. The number of cooks created is irrelevant, as it is a factor based on location and capacity, not quality of instruction. However, it is easy to see that evaluating cooking skill is very difficult to do. Ultimately, any results come from a taster's individual preference. Ultimately, the 'best cook' (provided such a thing exists) could be outvoted by a high-quality cook who makes food suited to an individual's preference. This is not the tester's fault, it is human nature to be biased in such a way. Human objectivity is impossible, and we therefore cannot judge the best culinary school. C2: Failing C1, there are better culinary schools. A: The French Culinary Institute[1] (FCI) B: Le Cordon Bleu (LCB) C: L'Academie de Cuisine (LAC) The intention of this contention is to prove my case if C1 fails. If I lose the objectivity argument, then turn here. Until then, consider this contention moot. I will not present any further arguments under here until then. Sources: [1] http://www.frenchculinary.com... [2] http://www.lcbottawa.com... [3] http://www.lacademie.com...
Gay Marriage should be legal in the United States

This is a topic that the Con side (my side) generally fails to defend properly. Most contemporary Christians are "luke warm" in their faith and would rather be regarded as 'fair' toward humanism than their creator (which they profess, confess but do not follow). I have no delusions of winning the debate. I fully expect voting commentary to appear like this:"But they're people! Equal rights!" That being said, I'll gladly defend my faith, not that God needs me to be his advocate.
Gay Marriage should be legal in the United States

I totally believe that gays should have the same rights as straight people because they are also human beings. In America we are supposed to be a free country. What free country is only free sometimes? They should be allowed to marry and love each other in the same way the straights are. I want to point out the flaws in the common statement it is againt the bible or god. The second commandment states "Love thy neighbor as thyself" it is also stated in Christian religion that GOD loves all of his children the same. Would these two facts not be contradicting christian belief? I would also like to point out the U.S. constitution beginning with We the people. The people referring to United States people. It also states all men are created equal. What equality comes from not allowing gays to marry the same as straights leading back to my beginning statement of what kind of free country is only free sometimes?
Should students use phones in school

Technology is a wonderful thing when used appropriately. For all the pros of technology there are cons. As social media grows the rates of suicide,anxiety, & depression increases. Throughout the last five years over 14% of teens between the ages of 15-19 have considered suicide, mainly because of mental disorders caused from cyber bullying. That is very alarming to me that schools are considering making it easier to cyber bully on their grounds. This needs to stop.
Should students use phones in school

Did u know wifi is actually a form of radiation? The wifi waves are electro-magnetic and a study published by Princeton university shows that they actually can be harmful to children. Yes children with disabilities can benefit from specific programs but why do they need their own personal devices to do so? Technology is very important in the modern day but schools need to find a way to balance between traditional schooling while keeping up with our rapidly changing world. BYOD isn't the way.
LoL vs DotA2

General Information on the Games Involved League of Legends: . https://en.wikipedia.org... DOTA 2: . https://en.wikipedia.org... Full resolution: On balance, League of Legends is a better game than DotA 2 Definitions Better: more desirable, satisfactory, or effective: League of Legends: The MOBA game released by Riot Games DotA2: The MOBA game released by Valve Corporation On balance:when all factors are taken into consideration: