BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Rap battle

You obviously dont know what you are saying, you were not taking your time you were just delaying, But I get what your saying, only if it was good, you would be the one that the viewers would be praising. they are not though, I know you understand vato, you loco, thinking that you can beat me, but you can't though. Why do you have to make verses towards my race, even if they were had the quality you'd still be in second place. they must be replaced. but I guess its too late, you already lost this debate. for all you know I could be Australian, but you'll never know mate. Even know this was simply, at the same time it was great. Every single word you say I just mutilate. So make sure on your next rap battle, just try to remediate. Are my rhymes making you woozy? Its like i'm shooting through your verses with a violin shaped uzi. So excuse me, if i'm hurting your feelins' I've never heard of a batman defeating a villain with a base ball bat. So what does that say? When you started this rap battle, Obviously you want to play, so lets play. Just like a friendly game of croquet. Like I said unlike croquet you don't have to delay. So may I finish this off. hopefully when your reading this make sure not to stutter or cough. Just to make sure that my lyrics would flutter, through your body. His raps are like a lexus while mine are like a bugatti.
Rap battle

Wow, hearing this guy must be like hearing a broken tape recorder All i hear is static, with tech. nowadays, people can't wait for a new world order Reading your raps, it feels like i'm reading a kid's diary If i took a job offered by your boss, he'd hurry up n' hire me You can't rap, i'ma poet, i spit so many lines, it's a masterpiece You still in a zoo, i pick you out, make your fur into a nice fleece Monkey see, monkey do, after i rap, you copy my lines, hail me as guru Your raps are so whack, if Satan cooked it, he wouldn't even chew the stew Woah, for a sec, that last line made me think you were Mary Poppins But with these stunts, you crapped em' out, they worse than bird droppins You talk the talk, but couldn't walk the walk, even if you wore leg stockins Your raps are far worse than Vanilla ice, mixed with puddin' n' rice I can rip em' apart, slice n' dice, don't play nice, to be precise It doesn't matter if you were Asian or an Afghan If i hit you with a baseball bat, you'd think i was Batman Your raps make you look like a kid who came out of private school Tryna battle with a real lyricist who the real busiest physicist rattlin' your body, back n' forth to n' fro, can't stop, must persist I take my time to take what's mine, cross my path, you'll be turned to slime cross the line n' there'll be more crime to push the fine, make you do the time I feel like i'm talkin' to a chicken writin' chicken scratch If i tossed you some seeds for you to eat, you'd ask "what's the catch?"
Rap battle

dope rap, just let me very quickly tip-pity tap, OK, You say you were squinting your eyes, and you called me out that I was Asian. Your so worn out its sadder than the flight with the Malaysians. Your spelling is so bad your an 18th century illiterate Cajun. This rap battle must be very important to you, If you were trying to dis me, well I never had a clue. You said that I would be a pastor, After this rhyme I'll be known as a hashing, thrashing, slasher. Then I will reclaim my city and everyone will call me master. Half your words don't rhyme, I guess that you were just nervous, I doubt that you ran out of time. I'm like the overshadowing coconut and you are just the puny lime. Your telling the viewers about all this gibber-gabber, Your lyrics are so bad we call them gibber-jabber, Your pace is so behind me, you are a hardcore lager. Kicking up my feet, going off the top of my mind, it probably took you 15 hours just to come up with your rhymes. They're so atrocious, while mine slide off the tongue like supercalifragilisticexpialidocious. Might as well stop while you are probably jaw-dropped. su"per"ca"li"fra"gil"is"tic"ex"pi"a"li"do"cious G6;soV2;opərG6;kaləG6;frajəG6;listikG6;eksp""G6;aləG2;d!3;SHəs/Submit adjectiveinformal 1. extraordinarily good; wonderful. "the only word to characterize Kepler's discoveries was "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious""
Rap battle

Lol, i see you tryna spit like a real pro, with rhymes within rhymes I'm not sure whether to set you off to get several meal or bed times Your name doesn't deserve a proper spellin' I'm squintin' my eyes to try to see that facial swellin If i had to conquer a city, i'd conquer yours, make you into a pastor Then when everybody hears your preaching like an old man, it's a disaster Don't go any faster, bow down on your knees like a good muslim before the master Notice how i didn't exactly establish your duty as a muslim I shove this rum into your esophagus, you be like yum-yum I swear when i saw Osama get murked in his own rich house Take his spouse, i bring his peoples to America, make em' live like Strauss Funny how you changed your profile pic to a Walrus No matter, you still get sliced up n' sent to black Angus First it was an old crumpled n' crippled ol' man Now it's a flabber fat piece of meat served with some ham I'm still takin' these words, makin' a new rap Jus' erased my last freestyle, but i can still stay strapped With a few couple of deliveries, i knock this dude out, i mean animal,look it's apart of animal discoveries This guy's raps are whack, i send him into a pile of a thousand miseries You copy my raps, must mean i'm so famous I stand firm, you fall baseless You show off, with a flow like brass knucles, i buss' Look at all this gibber-gabber All jumbled up like blabber This ol' animal had to write so much, he hurt his bladder
Rap battle

OK, let me start First off your rhymes ain't catchy, Your argument style is only real sketchy. You have bad grammar because you misspelled my name, My rhymes are so wild that they are not considered tame, Now looking back your lyrics were just a pitty shame. So you brought up religion? your verses are so bad you are not what god envisioned. As i'm sitting here typing these letters, I'm rappin up a storm better bring a knitted sweater. You say that you watch Osama die all times throughout all of your days, I got one question for ya, where did you get this tape anyways? You say that you will leave me defaced? well that entire verse was such a disgrace.I seems you're freaking out, did you get sprayed by some mace? After this rap battle I will sit you in your place. I have never had a fruit cake in my life, some things you will never have is a win or a life, i'm bringing you so much lyrical pain its like you are getting stabbed by a knife. Doubled edged dagger, i'm not much of a bragger, but once you read this it will make you walk with a stagger. As we both know, got a couple more rounds to go, although after I post this you will most likely be a no show.
Rap battle

Hahaha, look at who stepped in wit me, biggest mistake, it couldn't be any worse With a name like that, your the unfortunate one who missed the chance to spit first Don't know what's more terrible, battlin' the law or battlin' a momma Who has a poor kid who unfortunately has to have been Osama This kid claims he's from Asia, but he's really from Pakistan You better off hidin in tha caves protected by the Taliban I had to take a step back n' breath for a minute, this dude is so lost He better off convertin' to Christianity n' receive God on the day a Pentecost I just woke up don't really feel like rappin' so i want to watch an instant replay On my HDTV flat screen watchin' Osama gettin' killed each n' every day This kid said that he's going to spit his lines next round, but after this 1, he'll run back to his cave I'll bet you five hunna, the U.S military will bust in, shoot up the whole place, make that his grave Remember that time when they came in bang bang on yo brain? This kid is gon' light up like a grenade, bang bang, lose his mind like angry German kid, insane This fool thinks he is fit for a soldier, he can't commit sepuku to reclaim fallen honor like Mulan He's better off not readin' anything about religion, cuz he'll lose faith so quick in the book of the Koran On his profile, it says he's a Scientologist Neva said anything about being a realist He committed a logical fallacy, proven by a neurologist Thought i would let him win, but i'm a reverse psychologist Enough games, i will throw you into a gutter, bomb you, leave your face defaced I'll be in America's most wanted when the world sees you, you'll look like waste Splittin' your rap flow piece by piece, crushin you in this battle, a lot of time, i will face On your funeral, i can't get a soprano, alto, but i can surely get a singer who is a bass It's no surprise this kids name is "Iwillalwayslosedebates" I can bet you 50 grand he won't be losin' his fruit cakes
That human cloning should always be opposed on moral grounds.

The topic will be, "That human cloning should always be opposed on moral grounds. " I will give the definitions below. Full Resolution: Resolved: That human cloning should always be opposed on moral grounds. DefinitionsHuman Cloning: Human cloning is the creation of a genetically identical copy of a human. The term is generally used to refer to artificial human cloning, which is the reproduction of human cells and tissue. It does not refer to the natural conception and delivery of identical twins. The possibility of human cloning has raised controversies. These ethical concerns have prompted several nations to pass laws regarding human cloning and its legality [1]. Opposed: not agreeing with or approving of something or someone [2]. Moral Ground: The moral high ground, in ethical or political parlance, refers to the status of being respected for remaining moral, and adhering to and upholding a universally recognized standard of justice or goodness [3]. Rules1. No forfeits2. No trolling3. No kirtiks4. All arguments and sources must be posted in the debate 5. Don't follow rules= lossStructure1. Con states Rules/ Pro opens2. Con opens/ Pro rebuts 3. Con rebuts/ Pro defends, conclusion4. Con defends, conclusion/ Pro waives . .. Now let's get this started for the DDOlympics! !! Sources[1] . https://en.wikipedia.org...[2] . http://www.merriam-webster.com...[3] . https://en.wikipedia.org...
The U.S. should repeal the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984

The drinking age of 21 makes no sense. If 18 year olds are old enough to fight and die for this country, how are they not old enough to drink? The drinking age of 21 merely turns most college students into criminals and diverts police focus away from more serious crimes. According to Associated Content, "The United States has the highest legal drinking age in the world." [1] Other countries have much less Puritanical views towards alcohol; the U.S. needs to follow suit. I look forward to a fun debate. [1] http://www.associatedcontent.com...
Targeted killing is a morally permissable foreign policy tool.

Dear Con this is my first ever LD debate I hope it will prepare me for T-West. Targetted Killings- assasination outside of ones country by a person. (this exculdes drones) http://en.wikipedia.org... Thesis:Targeted killing is a morally permissible foreign policy tool. Value: peace and the value of life. Contenntion 1: Terrorists are dangerous. We must fight terrorist before they take the fight to us. I mean would you really want another 9-11 attack because we didn't kill and persure the terrorist into a submission and a hiding. Not only that but they are a unique threat so the don't count under the heading of combattant and would not count under international law. Last but not least we killed Bin Ladin by a targeted killing so if you say it's wrong we might not have killed him and he'd still be alive. Contention 2: Saving human life. Here is an example WW2 sure we could've gone thourgh WW2 or we could've assainated Hitler saving the Jews. It not only saves the victums lives, but it saves the lives of AMerican soilders from loosing their lives over seas and to never agian see there families. Contention 3: Hegemety Targeted killings are key for U.S. world power. We need to proove time and time again that we are the world power and can take care of our allies. That's what targeted killings are is a protection of our allies by killing terrorist. Impact: We boost American Hegemety and we save lives.
1 is equal to .999...

===Rebbutal=== "if 1=.999.... then 2 also =1.999." What does that prove?"I´m saying that 1 is number, .999... is a different number"I'm saying that they are the same number."and in math 1=1 not .999..."1=1 and 1=.999.... You still haven't proved that they don't.===Proof===1. x=.99999999... 2. 10x=9.99999999...3. 10x-x=9.99999999...-.99999999... 4. 9x=95. x=16. 1=.99999999...===Explanation of Proof=== 1. This establishes a variable x equal to .99999999...2. Multiplying both sides by 103. Because x=.99999999... I can subtract one side by x and the other by .99999999... and have a valid equation 4. 10x-x=9x and 9.99999999...-.99999999...=95. Dividing both sides by 96. They both equal x and therefore equal each other============================================Vote Pro!
Mental health records should be kept private

a health record is a collection of clinical information about a patient (http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...) mental health records refer to just a persons mental health. The problem is that a persons address and personal details are included in such records, so if the records were public (the alternitive to them being private), then it would be easier for people with malicous intentions to do whatever they want. There are guidelines for the sharing of medical records however the notion they should be public would breach privacy on an alarming scale.
New Member Tournament: Juveniles Tried as Adults

Full Resolution: Juveniles should be tried as adults only in some cases. Outline of the Debate: ‘In some cases’ can refer to a minor being charged with murder (capital, 1st degree, felony murder) or rape (gang rape, rape via causing fear using threats/violence to override consent), but mainly about murder. No semantics, and by that, standard debating rules/ethics will apply, with 72 hours of argumentation where the maximum character limit is 8K, also each debater has 4 rounds to argue then we proceed to voting, where the RFD voting style will take effect and votes lasting 2 weeks. R1- Acceptance of Debate/Terms/Definitions R2- Openings R3- Clash R4- Final Rebuttals/Summaries Burden of Proof: PRO will argue that in some cases, juveniles should be tried as adults. CON will argue, that even in some cases, juveniles shouldn’t be tried as adults. Definitions: - Juvenile/s {1} – (or a juvenile delinquent) is a person who is underage (usually below 18), who is found to have committed a crime. - Adult/s {2} - A person who by virtue of attaining a certain age, generally eighteen, is regarded in the eyes of the law as being able to manage his or her own affairs. - Try {3} – to examine and determine judicially, the guilt or innocence of (a person), to be put on trial. - Murder {4} – The unlawful/intentional killing of another human being without justification or excuse. - Rape {5} - Refer to the given link for specifics. Notes: {1} . http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... {2} . http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... {3} . http://dictionary.reference.com... {4} . http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... {5} . http://www.law.cornell.edu... --- I’m not exactly sure about my wordings here, but if CON wants to add a definition, suggests a change or has a question, please post it on comments to avoid semantics or unfairness.
New Member Tournament: Juveniles Tried as Adults

My opponent says that my statement about maturity being looked at by case, and not by number, is a stance for his case. This is not so. Maturity is different for everyone, and one doesn’t reach full maturity until the age of about 25. Because of this, teenagers need to be treated with a certain understanding. That understanding is that teenagers are not fully matured. Sure, some teenagers are more mature than others, but this does not mean that those immature teenagers should be treated as adults. Why? Because they are still developing, and need a chance to learn the proper way of doing things. A person struggles with having something on their adult record. A teenager should not be burdened even further from making themselves a value to society. Instead they should be given the tools and resources to learn from the mistakes that they have made at such a ripe and non-reasonable age.Pro also mentioned that the legal age of adulthood should be 16- 18. This in itself confirms the Con standpoint. An 18 year old is considered an adult. Anything younger than that and we are still dealing with a teenager. Like I said previously, every teenager matures differently, but with no cut-off point, no standards can be set. Eighteen is the appropriate cut off point.A good case was brought up about rehab increasing the chance of repeating criminal activity. I understand that I did not respond to this properly in the last round. I will refrain from arguing against his studies, but I would like propose a situation to you. Say you have a teenager who got in trouble. Would the appropriate way to punish them be to lock them in their room for years, or would it be to put short term restrictions on them and teach them about their wrong doings, and how to better achieve success in the future? Even if one misguided kid makes a change to the better from rehabilitation, it is worthy to commit teenagers to this program. Furthermore, I believe that the rehab recidivism doesn’t necessarily confirm the resolution. This shows that the system is faulty and needs to be approved upon, such as finding stricter and more effective programs. It does not show that teenagers should be held to the same standards as adults in a legal setting. Children should be given more fluid punishments than adults. This is because time in jail for a juvenile is as nervewracking as time in an adult jail. A person should not have their record tarnished as an adult because they made a mistake when they were young and not fully developed.I’d like to thank my opponent for this debate. I admit that I really dropped the ball last round, and that was my fault due to lack of focus. Give him the conduct point not just for my forfeit, but for his patience with allowing me to post my argument in the comments. Good luck to him in the rest of the tournament!
The CIVIL DISOBEDENCE DISPLAYED IN THE U.C. PROTESTS (recently) IS JUSTIFIED

I await my opponent's affirmation, definitions, and supporting information for the affirmation. Affirmation - an affirmation is a statement you are trying to debate for. Usually done in the "I affirm that _Topic___of___debate" format. In this case your affirmation would be I affirm that the civil disobedience displayed in the recent University of California Protests is justified. Definitions and Explanation: Here is where you should define the words: civil disobedience and justified, and set up a strict standard for the what is civil disobedience and what isn't and what is justifiable and what isn't justifiable. Make it clear where to draw the line between civil disobedience and civil obedience and between justifiable and non-justifiable. These lines should be clearly distinguishable. For example if I was to bring up another protest, I should be able to easily fit them into a category of either justifiable or non-justifiable and civil disobedience or civil obedience based upon your guideline. Supporting Information - This is where you would include reasons why the University of California protests lives up to your definition of justifiable. The supporting information should utilize your definitions and explanations. You should clearly show why it is justifiable. As the person who created the resolution, you have the burden of proof and thus must prove, (using your definitions and explanations) along with examples factual/logical information why the protests are justifiable. You should also give your opinion on other protests that involved civil disobedience. Should they be considered justified too? Thanks and good luck on the debate!
It is ok to kill an innocent person in order to save the lives of more innocent people

Readers will find my rebuttals below. Rebuttal 1) The reason I did not respond to the new scenario presented by Con was because it did not matter. I did not feel that it refuted my point, and later on I indirectly responded to the idea behind the scenario when I gave rebuttals 2/3. Rebuttal 2) As I stated in rebuttal 3, even if there is uncertainty it is worth the lost life because if you don't, the greater amount of deaths are your fault. Rebuttal 3) Well I guess I'll counter each point that Con makes here. 1) I have no idea where I stated that it is morally permissible in some scenarios. I'm assuming that this is a clarification, and not a jab at my argument 2) In this case, who is responsible does not matter. You are given a choice, if you choose to spare the one, you are at fault for the death of the 200,000,000. I understand that you will not be doing the killing, but it is still an obligation of yours to cause the death of as few people as possible in the given situation. If you do not make the call that results in the fewest deaths, you have done the wrong thing. 3) Con has skipped this number for some odd reason. Perhaps he's not a fan of prime numbers. 4) See #2 5) I concede that Con is in fact a fan of prime numbers. I'm not the one that brought uncertainty into this scenario. I was explaining why uncertainty doesn't matter in the given scenario. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It's not a cheap shot because the rules state that I may rebut in this round. If I were to not rebut, that would void rule #3 and I would lose the debate. Nice try Con.
It is ok to kill an innocent person in order to save the lives of more innocent people

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one" -Spock (Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan) I find this quote to be true. I'll give a hypothetical scenario for this. A man has trapped you in a room with an unconscious male and a gun with a single bullet. The only way to escape is to shoot the bullet. There is a catch though. There is a building filled with five hundred unsuspecting people that will be blown up if you do not kill this unconscious male. You pick up your gun and make the logical choice. You will be a murderer either way, but at least you know you just saved 500 innocent people from dying. In fact, as Con has not provided a number anywhere, readers should feel free to change 500 to 500,000,000. As Con stated, the people are innocent. one innocent person = one innocent person, or 1=1. Con's position states that 1 =/= 1, in fact, it really states that 1>2, which is obviously not true. 1>500 is equally not true. Logically, the more people that can be saved the better. my position is to prove that 1<500. In summary, as we are assuming that all parties are innocent, and therefore their lives are equal in value, it is logical to save the majority. I look forward to a response from Con.
It is ok to kill an innocent person in order to save the lives of more innocent people

PREFACEReally cool LD debate topic from ~6 years ago. I won't be debating this in LD format. It's going to be just like a regular debate on DDO. Good Luck to whomever may accept!Full Topic It is morally permissible to kill one innocent person to save the lives of many innocent people.FormatRound 1 Con: States RulesRound 1 Pro: AcceptanceRound 2 Con: Presents ArgumentsRound 2 Pro: Presents Arguments (No rebuttals yet!)Round 3 Con: RebuttalsRound 3 Pro: RebuttalsRound 4 Con: Rebuttals and Conclusions (No new Arguments)Round 4 Pro: Rebuttals and Conclusions (No new Arguments)RulesNo trollingNo forfeitingFormat I have stated must be followedFaliure to follow any of the rules listed above will result in a loss================================================Good Luck to whoever accepts. This is going to be one awesome philosophical debate.