BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Paintball is a healthy sport, which creates usefull skills.

1-Teamwork I can see, but stealth? C'mon, we're not all going to be Navy Seals. I can see where you are coming from but playing a game that can be considered barbaric is not a good way to appease the soccer moms. Paintball COULD be helpful, but learning such skills would be easier and more convenient if you went to a team building camp. That's more focused on getting you through multiple obstacles, not just getting shot at. 2-Laser Tag is safe also. I don't want to CP, but you could also go water gunning, nerfing, things like that, that could be more cost effective (Paintball guns are sorta pricey, I'm sure you have to make, or buy your own paintballs, which aren't reusable, and your own gear). These could be as cheap as buying a ticket, or paying a rental fee. 3-I don't believe it is misrepresented. It seems pretty mainstream, events have been on ESPN, I believe, and lots of kids at my school go do it. Maybe ten years ago (if it was out then), it was misrepresented, but not now.
Paintball is a healthy sport, which creates usefull skills.

I personally am an avid fan of the sport paintball, and upset at attempts to stop this sport, which builds character, teamwork, and both physical, and mental strength, I would like to debate someone who is familiar with the sport. 1-Paintball builds many skills which can be used later in life. Paintball is a sport which builds skills such as teamwork, stealth, respect, physical, and mental strength, awareness, and social skills, because the game is often played with people you don't know. 2-Paintball is safe when proper precautions are taken. When proper precautions are taken paintball is safe, and there is minimal damage to an aware, and prepared player. 3-Paintball is misrepresented. People often think of paintballers as the kids who drive around shooting old people with paintball guns. This is not the case, but is a rare few, and most of these people do not actually paintball, but only own a gun.
The PS4 is superior overall to the Xbox One.

Now, I can see that you have given up, so let me take this time to say that this is why the PS4 is somewhat inferior; the capabilities of the system are less OP than that of the PS4. It's time for Sony to backwards produce and make another system like the PS3 with some POSITIVE modifications and not the ones they made that suck. And the same goes for Microsoft, because while the Xbox One is certainly not perfect it truly is wonderful and somewhat better than the PS4. Although I truly lack hope in both for the most part, I see a brighter ray of hope for the Xbox One in the marketing business.
The PS4 is superior overall to the Xbox One.

Well, thinking about the people that work on the consoles can change your mind. The xbox has more advanced technology (i.e, the heart rate monitor). And things like that pull people into the market because they are interested. How people work is, if there is a product with cool features, they take interest in it. Marketing now a day has become more complicated because of the judgment of consumers. Consumers look for whatever they can find with the newest, latest and hottest technology. If I had my way, the PS4 would be that way...but it's not. It's a recycled version of the PS3 with the same features and less capabilities like the backwards compatibility that was taken away. And on top of that, the PS4 has no network store like the PS3 did. So, there's no online store. So, go to your local game retailer, like GameStop, E-B Games, or something along those lines. The Xbox One has some failing qualities as well. But the RAM on that system is beautiful, as is the gaming store. Where you can buy games from past systems of Microsoft and even systems like the NES, SNES, SEGA Genesis, NIntendo 64 and et cetera. With the Xbox's faults, some of the voice-activated commands don't function properly and the Kinect is really just annoying. But so the Playstation Move which, like the Xbox Kinect, was a ripoff of the technology utilized first in the Nintendo Wii. I really don't feel like either the PS4 nor the Xbox One are good, but actually, neither are bad. The Xbox one is incredible, as is the PS4. But, the Xbox has some advantages that the PS4 doesn't. If I had to say, I'd say the Xbox One is more, like the Xbox 360 was in comparison to the PS3, the "family console" which it is only when compared to the PS4.
The PS4 is superior overall to the Xbox One.

Unfortunately, you have strayed from the topic. The topic was that PS4s were better than Xbox Ones, and by default, you had to argue that the Xbox One was better than the PS4. PC gaming is also much more complicated than console gaming, due to the fact that you have to account for game crashes, viruses, bottle-necking, frame rate issues, and obsolete hardware. While with a console, you have hardware that will last you 10 years due to software optimization, but I digress. Please state an argument as to why the Xbox One is not inferior to the Playstation 4.
The PS4 is superior overall to the Xbox One.

Let me start off by saying thank you for the open debate. And second, I don't believe the Playstation 4 is superior to the Xbox One. But then again, I don't feel the Xbox One is superior either. I feel like PC gaming will always be better. Graphics don't matter and that's usually the card people play with Computer Gamers; "PC has bad graphics," crap like that. Honestly, if the game plays out well, graphics mean nothing to me. And on top of that, PC gaming is more simpler. Now some programs like Origin and Steam are somewhat difficult sometimes, but I can't say that the Playstation Network and Xbox Live stores are 100% smooth either. I suppose when it comes down to it, I'd prefer the Playstation 4 anyhow because of how much easier it is to do stuff on it. For example: Internet is free. But then again, it's not backwards compatible and neither is the computer. But you see, with computers, it doesn't need to be backwards compatible for you to play games from say...2003, you just need the game and a computer capable of running it (which would be any, especially Windows computers). Let's look at the Xbox history why don't we? First of all, the console is cheaper than the Playstation 3. I'm just going to compare the Xbox 360 and Ps4 and compare 'em for a bit. So, the Xbox 360 was cheaper, but the internet cost money. The Playstation 3 was slightly more expensive with an easily accessible internet connection that could be setup to be wireless or wired depending on the router and modem you have. The Xbox's games were also cheaper and the PS3's games were more expensive. But, the PS4 was better in quality than the Xbox. It had more RAM, meaning it could run games better, more memory and it was more popular; the world of PS4 internet was running wild with so many people! Higher than the World of Warcraft population, and for the longest time that had over a billion people on it! Let's now consider the Xbox One, it has no backwards compatibility and had a voice-activated system in it that read your pulse. Who would want that? Let's not forget that the Xbox One, has little RAM and it's megabytes are capable of running more games as well as the system does not overheat or wear itself out from use as easily as the Xbox. Overall, when it comes down to it, consoles don't matter and PC gaming is still dominate. No two ways about that. And the market of PC gaming is more successful and rich of financial supplement. It's wonderful. So, the PC gaming master race is still superior. I reign on the side of PC gaming, not console gaming. But, if I had to, I would pick the PS4 over the Xbox One. But still, PC gaming.
The PS4 is superior overall to the Xbox One.

I believe that for a number of reasons that the Playstation 4 is superior the the Xbox One. I say this for the following reasons: It is much cheaper compared to the XB1. It is 50% more powerful (according to developers) then the XB1. It can run virtually all games that have been released for it at 1080p 60fps, unlike the Xbox One. The controller has many more features, such as a touch pad, a head phone socket, a speaker, and increased egronomic shape, whilst the Xbox One's controller has been quoted as taking a step back from the Xbox 360 controller. The PS4's online service is cheaper than the XB1's. There is no forced camera that comes with it. It is focused on gaming, rather than TV. (Note that people buy gaming consoles for gaming)Prove me wrong.
White Shooter = Mental Health Problem Vs Brown Shooter = Terrorist!

We have all heard that when a whiteman attacks other people he is blatantly labelled "a very sick man ", " a very demented person " or "a lone wolf ", on the other hand a brownman is a terrorist withou establishing what his motivation was first. Why are some violent acts labeled terrorism and others not?. Such excuses have perpetuated to extreme mass killings by whiteman as they already know its a free ticket and there is no jail time. Are we just going to fold our arms and let this continue?. You wave goodbye to your daughter,son, mother,father etc in the morning and in expect to see themm again in the evening but you get a call that they have been brutally shot by a whiteman who receives a humanizing profile by the media as "someone who liked to gamble, listened to country music, lived quiet retired life. Sometimes I ask if there is a political or ideological agenda behind these attacks? FYI - Most mass shooters have been white according to multiple studies.
On Balance, Closing Sweatshops Would Provide More Harm than Good

I made this impossible to accept (mainly because I can't start this for another few days), so apply if you're interested in the comments. First round is acceptance only. No new arguments in the final round. Burden of proof is shared. Definition: Sweatshop: A factory or workshop, especially in the clothing industry, where manual workers are employed at very low wages for long hours and under poor conditions.
MAP and NOMAP should not be in the LGBTQ community

Not really sure what Pro is driving at. Is their argument just a roundabout way of discussing the comparable morality of acts of sexual gratification? If so then this debate is somewhat pointless. Because no one other than a paedophile is going to argue that paedophilic acts should be regarded as socially and morally acceptable. Nonetheless: 1) How does Pro regard paedophilic homosexuals, Lesbians and transgenders. 2) Isn't the whole thrust of the LGBT argument based on the acceptance that these conditions are inherent and therefore not something that one decides to be once they have exceeded a legal age of consent. Therefore being LGBT is undoubtedly an age related issue. 3) Therefore are acts of sexual gratification between pre-consent homosexuals and lesbians paedophilic? 4) Similarly: Realistically, Why can consensual sex be abhorrent to society one day and not so the very next day? I would suggest that this issue is not just simply about whether nasty old men should be allowed into the jolly gays club or not. Q: I've always thought that "Q" is somewhat counter-intuitive to the LGBT issue. Nonetheless, Shouldn't "MAP's" and "NOMAP's" be allowed into the LGBTQ club, As they seemingly meet all the necessary requirements for Q status.
MAP and NOMAP should not be in the LGBTQ community

How am I being discriminatory? I am saying that MAP's and NOMAP's should not be included with the LGBTQ community. I never said being a MAP or NOMAP is bad. I know this is a restatement but being a MAP is based off of the other person's age and not sexuality. The LGBTQ community is based off of sexuality and not age therefore MAP's and NOMAP's should not be in the LGBTQ community.
Presidental Debate: Subutai vs. KingHenrikLundqvist

f(x) = 1 + 6t f'(x) = 6 f(x) = 4t^2 + 2t^3 f'(x) = 8t + 6t^2 f(x) = (1 + 2t)^3 f'(x) = 6(1 + 2t)^2 f(x) = sqrt(1 + 5t) f'(x) = 5/(2*sqrt(1 + 5t) f(x) = (t + 7t^2)^1/3 f'(x) = (1 + 14t)/(3cbrt((t + 7t^2)^2)
Presidental Debate: Subutai vs. KingHenrikLundqvist

My Platform Foreign Policy: I believe in non-interventionism in conflicts like pro does. But I also believe that a country the size the United States is, the U. S. can isolate ourselves and become self-reliant on our own work. Domestic Policy: I believe in the nationalization of all industries. I believe in abolishing private property. I believe in free housing, free schooling, free transportation, and free health care. I believe that the press should be controlled and hold the opinion of the majority of the public. I am Pro-Legalization of Cannabis and LSD, I am Pro-LGBT rights, I am Pro-Abortion, I am Pro Gun-Control but I am not Anti-Gun Owning, I am Pro-Labor Unions, I am Anti-Death Penalty, I am Anti-Affirmative Action, I am and Anti-Wage Slavery. Economic Policy: I am a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist when it comes to economics. Which entails granting the means of production to the workers, ending wage slavery, and collectivizing labor. I believe that Capitalism is a system created to perpetually put the bourgeoisie in power to enslave the proletariat. I haven't listed all that I am so I may add more to the debate when we reach that certain policy.
Presidental Debate: Subutai vs. KingHenrikLundqvist

I am challenging KingHenrikLundqvist to my first ever presidental debate. In this debate, we will be putting forth and arguing for our various viewpoints on foreign policy, domestic policy, and economic policy. I wish my opponent the best of luck. Debate StructureRound 1: Stating PlatformsRound 2: Foreign PolicyRound 3: Domestic PolicyRound 4: Economic PolicyRound 5: Concluding StatementsDefinitionsForeign policy and economic policy should be pretty self explanatory. Domestic policy considers basically business, education, energy, health care, law enforcement, money and taxes, natural resources, social welfare, and personal rights and freedoms, but mentioning all of these topics is not necessary. Further, other topics may be added. Rules 1. A forfeit is not allowed.2. No semantics, trolling, or lawyering.3. All arguments and sources must be visible inside this debate. Nothing in the comments or from an outside link.4. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before you post your round 1 argument. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed in the middle of the debate. Voters, in the case of the breaking of any of these rules by either debater, all seven points in voting should be given to the other person. My Platform Foreign Policy: I believe in non-interventionism and the non-aggression principle, but not isolationism. I'll cover that more in round 4 with economic policy. Domestic Policy: I believe in the privatization of government industries such as transportation and health care; further, I agree with the breakup of government monopolies on specific industries. I believe in the discontinuation of social welfare programs and assistance. I believe in allowing oil to be extracted, but I also believe in nuclear power. Finally, I believe in extensive personal rights and freedoms - I'm pro gun rights, pro abortion, pro gay marriage, drug legalization, and homeschooling. Economic Policy: I believe in Laissez Faire Capitalism and Austrian Economics. This means I believe in free immigration, no taxes, and the gold standard, and ending labor unions, the federal reserve, the minimum wage, and stimulus spending. Note this isn't an all-encompassing list. I may list things in my argument not in this list.
Pastafarianism better than your religion.

My opponent attempts to deny that Pastafarianism is based off of other religions. He says, "The problem is that Pastafarianism is not based off of Christianity, but it is the other way around." I would like to remind my opponent that Christianity came more than 2000 years before Pastafarianism and in today's society if something is similar to something that came before it we say that the former is based off the latter, not the other way around. True, there are many religions that have similar values to Christianity, such as Judaism (which Christ copied) and the Egyptian book you mentioned (which Moses copied). I never said Christianity was the true religion. I'm not Christian. I'm arguing for Christianity because its followers oppose Pastafarianism the most and my religion is one that you would not know. My opponent also claims the Flying Spaghetti Monster gave Moses the 2 tablets. I can just as logically and truthfully say that God gave Moses those tablets. I can also say those previous values and traditions my opponent mentions were also put in place by God. My opponent also says that Pastafarians have never started a religious war or crusade. May I remind him that they are in one right now. Their enemies are the Christians and to win battles one doesn't kill, but pisses the other side off. True, pastafarians have never killed anyone over religion, but that's only because pastafarians don't own a country, so they don't have a chance to commit mass murder over religion. The crusaders of the Middle Ages all were serving a country, and thus they had power to go to war. My opponent also says that Christianity not only offends more people but has also killed more. Christianity has offended radical muslims, but your religion offends all loyal muslims. My opponent says that ethics are man-made and so can be manipulated. Some ethics can, but the most basic morality is agreed upon by all humans. Your religion does not encourage you to follow ethics. Your FSM may tell you not to steal, but he's not going to punish you severely if you do steal. My opponent then goes on to talk about heaven and hell. He says pastafarian heaven is better than Christian heaven, but says nothing on how. He also says that pastafarians are more afraid of STDs and stale beer than being surrounded by molten magma. I don't believe a word of it, but if you're really that afraid of STD's and stale beer, then that is what Satan's going to give you in the Christian hell, according to the Bible itself. My opponent continues to stress how the FSM created science. I can also say that God created science. Lastly, my religion is also fun, original, scientific fact, and the base for all other religions and values. It is a religion too sacred to be named and one that you would not know, so I won't bother explaining. Oh, and funny is by no means a way to judge a religion. Pro has not met his burden of proof: proving that Pastafarianism is better than other religions. Vote Con. Sources: Bible
Pastafarianism better than your religion.

First off, I will start with explaining why Pastafarianism is no better than any other religion: 1) Pastafarianism is based off of other religions: It's obvious that Pastafarianism is based off of Christianity, as shown by the The Random Number of Not Commandments. These commandments have a striking similarity to the Christian commandments. For example "1. I am the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Thou shalt have no other monsters before Me" is the equivalent of "1. I am the Lord your God. .. You shall have no other gods before Me" and "2. Thou ought not do stuff thou already knowest is wrong, like killing, lying, cheating, stealing, etc. Dost thou really need these carved into a rock? " is the same as commandments 6,7,8, and 9 in the Christian Bible. Some of the other Pastafarian commandments also come from the Christian Bible, such as "3. Judge not, for verily it be not thine job neither most likely to be thine business" and "9. Thou shalt remember that all the peoples of the Earth are equally My Creatures. " These come from the Bible statements "Judge not, that you not be judged" and "Thou shalt remember that all the peoples of the Earth are equally My Creatures. " The rest of the commandments come from having a god that is made of food and having a prophet who is a rebel. Having a religion based on other religions does not make your religion better than the original religion. If that was the case then all Jews should convert to Christianity. 2)Pastafarianism offends a lot of people: On . http://www.venganza.org... Bobbie Henderson posts a lot of hate mail. Though the messages are very entertaining, they do mean that pastafarianism does offend a lot of people. Taking this religion is probably not a good idea if you care about having friends. Other religions do not offend each other and therefore their followers make friends easier. 3)Pastafarianism does not encourage people to follow ethics: Heaven for pastafarians is not a very comfortable place. It's a stripper factory and a beer volcano. Nothing else. Other religions have a golden palace to live in and lots of scenery, as well as soul mates and resurrection. Hell for pastafarians is not a very uncomfortable place. The only difference between heaven and hell is that in hell the beer is stale and the strippers have STDs. No one cares about STDs when they're dead and if the beer is stale you can instead use the beer bottles as clubs or throw them at each other for fun. Everyone's already dead, so no one gets hurt. Other religions have lakes of fire, being reborn as low-life animals, getting locked in a dark prison, etc. Thus there really is no reason to behave when you're pastafarian. Other religions keep people in line with the threat of severe punishment. My opponent seems to be saying that Pastafarianism is based off of scientific fact. May I ask what scientific fact he is talking about. Until he can answer this I will leave his points (where are they? ) unaddressed. Sources: . http://www.google.com... . http://en.wikipedia.org...
is todays generation is better than the old one

I will be debating that the new generation is just as good as the previous one. To start: Respect. The new generation doesn't exactly respect the elderly, and I'm not saying thats good, but just because you're 70 years old doesn't mean you have some divine wisdom. In fact, lots of people from todays generation seem to have more knowledge and experience in certain fields than lots of old people. With technology, this has made SOME lazy, but not all. I know people from the new generation that use the computer a lot, and aren't lazy in the slightest. "They don't spend time together" Well, they kind of do. With emails and chat messaging, they talk and stay in touch all the time. I don't understand why its bad that they don't do it in person. In fact, chat messaging is actually better, as you have more time to think about what has been said, and what your reply should be making conversations generally better. I happily await your counter argument. :)