BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
PC is better than Mac part II

I see you were you are coming from, however just looking at the market share is not an appropriate indicator for which product is better. For example, in 2011, Ferrari sold 639 cars in the US while Mazda sold 103,072. [1] Now if you only look at the market share you might think that Mazda builds better cars than Ferrari, but of course few people would argue that that is the case. There are a multitude of reasons why Mazda sells more cars than Ferrari other than building a better product, for example they sell cheaper cars or cars that accommodate different needs.The same can be said about PCs and Macs. Macs come in a few configurations, and are built by Apple following detailed specifications. Apple not only sets the specification for the hardware, they also provide the software, which allows the machine to run more efficiently than a PC that is built together from parts that come from several manufacturers and run another manufacturer's software.Even though Apple still has third party components in it, they are designed to work in a unit. Macs are more expansive than most PCs because of several reasons, including the old supply and demand, but also because of a higher quality. MacBook Pros have an aluminum unibody which is robust and light, compared to the plastic body of most Windows laptop. They have functional designs as well. An iMac for example comes with one cable and that's it. You pull it out of the box and there is no mess on your table.Every mac also comes with useful software. You have software to burn dvds, make photo albums, video and music right when you buy it and you don't need to be a pro either.On the other hand, a lot of professional in fields such as photography, music and video still use Macs.A Mac also has fewer viruses and comes with one year warranty and technical support over the phone, and unlike a PC that cannot run Mac OX natively, a Mac can run a Windows operating system, and as I have pointed out in the other debate, a Windows Mac is faster than most other PCs using the same operating system.[2]The Mac gives you more flexibility and options, and is easy to use as well. There are tons of games designed to run on a mac [3], and in case you really want to play a title that's not available, you can always run Windows on your mac.There is no doubt that Macs are more expansive, but they also offer a higher quality product.VOTE CON [1]http://online.wsj.com...;[2]http://www.maconintel.com...[3]http://store.apple.com...
PC is better than Mac part II

Sorry. I went to bad and didn't realize the time would be over by the time I would come back.So basically my argument is simple. The market share of Macs is around 10%. If Macs were better than PCs, why wouldn't the market share be higher? The fact that people prefer to buy PCs show that they are better.Also, Macs are way too expansive and don't even allow to play games on it. The way I see it, is that Apple stuff in general is hip and totally overpriced and this is why people think they are getting a better product when they buy a computer that costs double as much as a pc.
To be characterized by any LGBT traits is to have a mental disorder.

Let me reiterate that there is nothing inherently wrong with having a mental disorder, a child with ADHD is not discriminated against neither is a sociopath (until that sociopath gives into their urges) and I believe it is much the same for the LGBT. Our brains are set in a way to be sexual attracted to someone with what it presumes will provide the right genes to created a healthy and successful child. ( http://www.prevention.com... ) It is no question that people get into a relationship for companionship above all else and I support this but the fact of the matter is that a homosexual relationship is a contradiction to our human instincts. Let me be clear I am not saying this is a bad thing and I don't support any form of legislation that would discriminate against the LGBT as I am in this community myself. But that doesn't change that the situation a LGBT person may be in goes against our instincts to preserve the species.
To be characterized by any LGBT traits is to have a mental disorder.

Thank you for clarifying that. Some of the main reasons most people are in a relationship is sex and companionship, as many people simply can not, or will not want to reproduce. Many people if not most people that can reproduce and want to reproduce do so with in a short period of time (a few years) and then decide to stop. So the vast majority of us will spend the majority of our life in a relationship in which we are not reproducing. Meltal health is not contignet on reproducing or our ability to reproduce (with the exception of infertile women). Being attracted to someone for thier reproductive abilities is rare, as most people are attracted to attractive people, this is not a metal illness, and it is quite normal. To call homosexual's mentaly ill because they can't reproduce is to call all men (with low sperm counts, who have had vasectomies, or who have another type of reproductive disorder, the same for women who are post-reproductive age, infertile due to illness, or who have undergone sterilization surgery), mental ill. I believe that your argument is an exercise in bigotry as it has no factual basis and is promoting stigma and discrimination agianst a group that is already excluded and marginalised.
To be characterized by any LGBT traits is to have a mental disorder.

Allow me to rephrase, obviously a homosexual relationship cannot result in a child being born. So I would argue that because you are willingly placing yourself in a situation where you are not likely to continue your species, which as I stated in the previous post is a basic purpose of having any form of relationship. I would argue that because someone is sexually attracted to someone else who cannot produce a child with them it is a dysfunction of the human reproductive prosess thus making it a mental disorder.
To be characterized by any LGBT traits is to have a mental disorder.

At our basic human nature our primary purpose as animals is to survive and insure the survival of our species. ( . https://blogs.scientificamerican.com... ) If a person is a homosexual it is biologically impossible for that person to reproduce thus contradicting their basic human instincts it is because of this that I view homosexuality as a mental disorder as it is a clear "disruption in. .. daily functioning". Now I do not believe homosexuality is morally wrong as I myself am bisexual, however I do feel it is a disorder much like a sociopath in the sense that there is nothing inherently wrong with being a sociopath it is only wrong when that sociopath commits a murder. To be a classified with any of the LGBT characteristics is a mental disorder and that is not a bad thing.
To be characterized by any LGBT traits is to have a mental disorder.

I will be arguing that the statement the title says is true. For round one please present any definitions you wish to establish I will start the debate in round two. Mental Disorder: any of a broad range of medical conditions that are marked primarily by sufficient disorganization of personality, mind, or emotions to impair normal psychological functioning and cause marked distress or disability and that are typically associated with a disruption in normal thinking, feeling, mood, behavior, interpersonal interactions, or daily functioning.
Bashar al-Assad and the Syrian government (Pro/For) or FSA and other opposition forces (Con/Against)

I hope this debate will be very informative for the readers. So, my opening argument for Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian government, and the Syrian Arab Army is that in a recent poll done by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (commonly known as NATO) is shown that they are supported by 70% of the Syrian population, which is more of a percentage then the US President Barack Obama was elected at. Even though that percentage is large, the support for the rebels is at a low percentage of 10% due to 20% of the Syrian population taking a neutral stance. In the next rounds I will focus on the policies and the possible outcomes of each side. SOURCES: NATO reveals 70% of Syrians support Bashar al-Assad: . http://www.voltairenet.org...
Bashar al-Assad and the Syrian government (Pro/For) or FSA and other opposition forces (Con/Against)

I thank KingHenrikLundqvist for this debate. I'm looking forward to reading his arguments. I take the position that the Free Syrian Army(the FSA without other groups) is a better path for Syria, and I say "better" because my humility prevents me from specifying which is the "only true path for the Syrian people. "
DO NOT ACCEPT THIS DEBATE. nac

*talking* Oh my god Becky, look at her butt It's so big She looks like one of those rap guys girlfriends Who understands those rap guys They only talk to her because she looks like a total prost***** I mean her butt It's just so big I can't believe it's so round It's just out there I mean, it's gross Look, she's just so black *rap* I like big buts and I can not lie You other brothers can't deny That when a girl walks in with an itty bitty waist And a round thing in your face You get sprung Wanna pull up tough 'cause you notice that but was stuffed Deep in the jeans she's wearing I'm hooked and I can't stop staring Oh, baby I wanna get with ya And take your picture My homeboys tried to warn me But that butt you got Make Me so ****** Ooh, rump of smooth skin You say you wanna get in my benz Well use me use me 'cause you aint that average groupy
DO NOT ACCEPT THIS DEBATE. nac

EH IZZZ GODZRILLAIAIAIAUAIAUAUAUAUUAUAUAUAUAAIAIAIAIAIAIAIIAUAUAUAIAIUAIAUAIAIAUAIGFHFBETDJDYFJCCHCHDHDYDNDHDHDBGDHDBCGDBDHFHFHCJHC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! nac
Should kids go to school in the winter

I don't think we should go to school in the winter time because it is still going to be wet on the play sets and almost all of the equipment. I just don't think it is safe to go to school in the wintertime. plus they can put all the salt down they want some ice will still be there. plus i think that if it under 20 degrees or less kids should not go to school witch in some places it gets down to 10 degrees and kids still have to go to school how can you say that is ok its almost a definite that you will get sick that is crazy!
Should kids go to school in the winter

I think that that we should go to school during the winter because although the kids are tired by then, I rather have more summer. Also I think that we should lower our vacation days in the winter so we get more of the summer off. Like you brought up that it has more risks and everything with the ice just delay school for a couple of hours have someone put salt down an get on with the day. But what if the people don't put salt down, go slow in those areas. I ride the bus to school, I go out in the could weather and wait its not that bad people tell you their opinions about the cold how they hate it. I can go out in shorts and not be cold. They could dress in warm layers. They don't have to look so nice every day.
Raising the minimum wage won't solve anything

MINIMUM WAGE IN 1968Who's relying on Internet memes? I used one to show a point, but either way Gold and Silver retain their value almost exactly over long periods of time, so they are the best way to measure value or inflation. So let's take the minimum wage in 1968, 1.10$, {1} at this date, 1 Dollar was defined as 0.984 ounces of silver. The current price of silver is 16.80$ {2} (this could go up a few cents tomorrow). Adapted to the current Silver Price the minimum wage in 1968 was 18.22$. THE FEDERAL RESERVEThe point of the Federal Reserve was to combat the new trend that arose in the 1910's called a middle class so the Federal Reserve was invented to rob them of all their wealth through inflation and manipulation of the money supply. It is a private bank that serves the interests of its shareholders, the big bankers. They'll just inflate the money, and make 15$ a hour worth less than 7.25$ a hour. They did it before they'll do it again. WEALTH INEQUALITY?It isn't wealth inequality that has caused these phenomenally low wages, someone else earning more doesn't somehow mean that you earn less as a result. Wages are so low because the market is no longer competitive for it. And that is likely because nonsensical regulations make hiring workers very hard, jobs are being sent overseas because of massive corporate taxes and regulations, and all the big businesses are colluding these days. {1}. https://www.dol.gov...{2}. https://www.moneymetals.com...{3}.
Hernandez is guilty of murder

Hernandez's accomplices themselves admitted he did it. Hernandez was and probably still is involved in gangs. Hernandez himself has made himself look guilty. Why would he slam the door on the police's face? Why would he destroy his cell phone coincidentally when the police asked they see his phone. Obstruction of justice much? While the case is a bit early, I believe based off the information we have now Aaron Hernandez is guilty.
Hernandez is guilty of murder

I want to apologize for missing my round, in case anybody did not read the comments section. I unexpectedly did not have Internet for a day so I could not do it. I understand if voters find it reasonable to dock me points because of that. You do not seem to understand what you have to do to prove a murder. You cannot rely on circumstantial evidence and assumptions. You must present conclusive evidence of his guilt. All the evidence that you have given is circumstantial or irrelevant. The question is not if he seems guilty, nor is it if we think he is guilty. It is if he is guilty. I have given you reasons why your circumstantial evidence is not necessarily showing that he is guilty. You cannot say that he is a jerk, therefore he is guilty of murder. Until you show hard evidence, such as his prints on the murder weapon, you cannot successfully claim that he is guilty.
Hernandez is guilty of murder

All of those things are circumstantial. He might have slammed the door in the police's face in order to protect his friends who committed the murder. Same with the cell phone and, even though you didn't mention it, the home security system. Yes, he obviously obstructed justice. Yes, he is obviously somehow implicated in this. But until irrefutable evidence appears showing that he committed the murder himself, we have to assume he is innocent.
NHB Insult War

SO YOU SIT THERE, WITH YOUR SMALL D!CK IN HAND, CALLIN' ME A PLEB, IMPLYING IM A PHONEY, WELL LETS SEE WHAT YOU'RE MADE OF BOI. WELCOME TO A RAW< LETHAL, NO HOLDS BARRED INSULT WAR. You say i'm a phoney, fam i bet you still watch my little poney. Thats how sad you are, thats how say you are. You an old man past his prime, bet you forgot how to recognise the time, OH YES I AM SUBLIME. You run ya mouth, saying I'm cheap, boi you have no idea of the tears I weep. You can not defeat me, please just try deceit me. Yes I am sinner, but everytime a winner. For those who know me, they say i'm nothin but a loner, only god knows i am the new Mona, sell hard like Lisa. Simpson, i'll kill ya like OJ Simpson Thats right i went there, went where? Over there, turn around, you can't stop me. Wait.. I got a huge ego, everytime Hugo, so pray tell me, where did you go??, boss At night, do you fright? Scared without ya momma's light, boss I see the light, its a miracle, jesus friends with me, man says you want his D, why you wearing lip gloss Oh snap you just died, a thousand times denied. Looks like i'll have to start again Hello, nice to meet you, wanna fight? OK just tell me when? Cos I'm always ready, don't faggot to bring ya teddy YA FINISHED ALREADY Are you on crack? smack smack smack Fam, you best think about a comeback, maybe mention how mans a porn addicted virgin watchin cum back. Oh no you can't cos i am an open book Dads a drunk, turned famous crook He about to steal the loot Millions, plus a zoot Man just gave ya the boot You ain't gonna heal, i make you a meal cos you'll be in hospital after i am done with you they'll get fed up, send you back to the zoo. Cos thats were you belong, fed to the lions, apes, gorillas, and pigs I know you rockin fake wigs WHY??? COS YOU ARE THE PHONEY PLEB MOTHER FUC&ER
Google is better than Bing.

"Google gets an average of 188 Million visitors a day. Bing gets a measly 60 million a day. If Bing is better than Google, how come Google gets more visitors?"Just because Google gets more visitors, that doesn't mean it's necessarily better! Google has just been around longer, so Bing is starting to catch up. "As for Bing sounding better than Google, I'm going to have to disagree ;)."Think about it. The word Bing! sounds all happy and jumpy while Gooooooooooogle sounds more like an echo in a cemetery. "Con said "33% of Google users saying they'd be using Bing more often after taking part in the tests." This actually bolsters my case, because it shows that 67% of people would not ever use Bing instead of Google."It doesn't show that 67% of people will never ever use Bing instead of Google, on the website where I got my info, it didn't say anything about the rest of the people liking Google better than Bing. For all I know, the rest of them might only use Bing now!
Google is better than Bing.

I'd like to start with a couple refutations. Con said "33% of Google users saying they'd be using Bing more often after taking part in the tests." This actually bolsters my case, because it shows that 67% of people would not ever use bing instead of google. This clearly shows that google is better. As for Bing sounding better than Google, i'm going to have to disagree ;).Google gets an average of 188 Million visitors a day. Bing gets a measly 60 million a day. If Bing is better than Google, how come Google gets more visitors?Well, I'm out of material. I will use next round for refutations and for reiterating my constructive argument.
Google is better than Bing.

Hi! Firstly, I want to say than Bing! sounds better than Gooooooooooooogle! Here are the statistics after a survey for google users.......... Apparently 64% of respondents were surprised at how good Bing's search results were. A further 50% stated that their opinion of Bing had improved after seeing their results alongside Google, with another 33% of Google users saying they'd be using Bing more often after taking part in the tests. So, good luck! :)
Adults, without violence related felonies, should have the right to carry a concealed firearm.

Honestly you really can't compare gasoline to a firearm. For an arsonist it takes a longer time to kill someone, but for a murderer it's just hit and boom the person's seriously injured or dead. Plus to be an arsonist you have to place the gasoline, which plenty of people can see them while they do it. The fact that we can't prove that something will or will not happen, scares people. When people are scared or worried, we do what seems right and to people, banning firearms is the right thing to do. Washington DC is where the president lives, not everyone likes the president. Which can lead to higher violent crimes, people trying to kill the president, people just showing their hatred, and etc. The .0054% of murderers that were committed by legal gun owners, is a problem. People still have to watch their backs where ever they go, they have to wonder: Does that guy have a gun I can't see? Will he kill people? What if he does? It is a huge problem!
Adults, without violence related felonies, should have the right to carry a concealed firearm.

There are an infinite amount of scenarios that could go wrong. Just because something can go wrong does not mean that it will. You can not say that something should not happen simply because it could go wrong, unless there is proof that it will go wrong more times than not, which is not the case. 30-34% (70-80 million people) of adult Americans in the USA admitted to owning and regularly carrying a gun at some point. 4,346 murders were committed with a legally owned firearm in 2010. .0054% of the murders were committed by legal gun owners That is not anywhere close to a problem. That is like saying gasoline should be controlled and only kept available to certain qualified people because there are arsonists that will uses the gasoline to start fires potentially killing people. Qualified citizens having guns is not just a right but the opposite of a problem. Taking away the right to keep and bear arms will only cause more crimes to be committed. People will start illegally importing guns at much more of a vast rate and continue selling them to everyone including murderers or people who should not own guns. Statistics show that when gun control is implemented violent crimes increase. Example: Washington DC Sources: http://gunvictimsaction.org... http://www.justfacts.com...
Adults, without violence related felonies, should have the right to carry a concealed firearm.

I see what you're saying, but even if they don't have violence related felonies, they could still do damage. They could use that concealed fire arm that they carry, to force someone to do something, to scare someone or even get carried away with that power. Sure criminals might be less likely to attack the person with the gun, if they knew it was there, and even if they don't know that it's there they might take it from the gun owner. And if the gun owner actually got to the point where he had to use it, most likely it would go wrong. Police take weeks, maybe even months to train with their guns, while gun owners usually train for a day or two. Also what would happen if that gun went off accidentally? Someone or some people could be seriously injured or worse killed. Leave the gun handling to the professionals. This is why I believe that Adults, without violence related felonies, should not have the right to carry a concealed firearm. Sources: http://concealedcampus.org...
Adults, without violence related felonies, should have the right to carry a concealed firearm.

To start out carrying a concealed handgun in public is permitted in all 50 states as of 2013, when Illinois became the last state to enact concealed carry legislation. Some states require gun owners to obtain permits while others have "unrestricted carry" and do not require permits. Proponents of concealed carry say that criminals are less likely to attack someone they believe to be armed. They cite the 2nd Amendment's "right of the people to keep and bear arms," and argue that most adults who legally carry a concealed gun are law-abiding and do not misuse their firearms. Opponents of concealed carry argue that increased gun ownership leads to more gun crime and unintended gun injuries. They contend that concealed handguns increase the chances of arguments becoming lethal, and that society would be safer with fewer guns on the street, not more. The only state/district in the USA that prohibits carrying and concealing firearms (Washington DC) has more than double the highest violent crime rate in the US. This does not include American Samoa and the north Mariana islands. SOURCES:/ http://www.usacarry.com... https://www.census.gov...