BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
family guy vs the simpsons [continued]

Okay, you have a point there. yet most schools get dismissed at around lets say 3 20? if you tune to a cartoon channel like CW 39 [Houston] they have cartoons on. a child is expected to be in bed by 9 pm . that means they have to get home, watch tv, eat, do homework. go outside and play with friends, dinner. shower. and sleep. the kid gets home at 3 30 tunes into CW 39 [Houston] watches television and cartoons suitable for children of any ages. [there goes his television time] this goes on for about an hour so it is now 4 30 now about 30 minutes to eat something his mother cooked for him :] it is now 5 pm maybe an hour of homework? so now is 6 pm id love to keep going for for sake of less reading you get the point that if a chil follows all proceures set up by society he shouldnt be watching family guy
family guy vs the simpsons [continued]

pbs has cartoons in tha morning only. n yes i dont know why i know that but i do. so kids are at school at dat time having no time to watch tha pbs cartoons. and after school they come home n want to watch cartoons. n whats on?? family guy. with their bad, racists, sexual, n disgusting jokes. Just making kids watch n listen to dis stuff. while the simpsons dont show any of that stuff but things that are suppose to be shown in cartoons.
family guy vs the simpsons [continued]

sometimes family guy is tha only kind of cartoon there is on n kids who dont hav cable or sumthin have to watch it cuz they just wanna watch cartoons like any other little kid so when they do watch family guy they get ideas from there. but see when they watch the simpsons, its ok because the simpsons dont hav anythin bad like family guy has. so yeah my point is the simpsons are better. =D
Territory suffrage amendment

To respond to his main points in his response: Point 1 - The other territories are smaller, and do not deserve even a single electoral college vote. Rebuttal - The key reason one would want to award full representation to Puerto Rico is that their citizens do not have the same voting rights as those of the 50 states. Why are these reasons not transferrable to the other territories? The citizens of the other four inhabited territories (American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, and the US Virgin Islands) are all Americans, and all but American Samoa are granted full citizenship at birth (American Samoa works slightly differently, for reasons that need not be explained here other than saying that they do not want citizenship at birth). They may be slightly smaller, but do not all Americans deserve a vote? Point 2 - Puerto Rico should have voting rights at the federal level because they are large, and the idea of a federal vote is not controversial. Rebuttal - How is it not controversial? 46% of Puerto Ricans were fine with the way things are (territorial status) in the first stage of the referendum. As for the governor, Puerto Rico has three parties, two of which get 95% of the vote or so - one that favors statehood (the New Progressive Party) and one that favors the status quo (the Popular Democratic Party). They are essentially single-issue parties, so it is a big deal that an anti-statehood governor was elected. Now, on to his critique of my amendment:Response 1 - If voting rights for territories is not condemned in the Constitution, how is my andmendment breaking it? Response 2 - The term 'permanently populated territory' is very important. America has many more territories than just the permanently populated ones (AS, Guam, NMI, Puerto Rico, and USVI) - we have control of ten small islands that have no permanent non-military population. [1] The only one of these that has a population, Wake Island, is a military base with 120 active service members on the island at any given time. [2]Response 3 - D. C. has electoral votes, but does not have the right to vote for Congressmen. Because of this, they are included in Sections 1 and 2, which pertain to Representatives in Congress, and they are ommitted from Section 3, the relevant section on electoral college votes. Aside from that, the Amendement is perfectly fair. I am not sure how my opponent gets his percentages - the total would actually be 0.14%. [3] However, a single electoral vote is the smallest number available that represents territorial autonomy. Further, the electoral college would expand to accomidate the new votes (as has happened with every new state), not shrink, so his last point is moot. References:1. . http://en.wikipedia.org...2. . http://en.wikipedia.org...3. . http://en.wikipedia.org...
Territory suffrage amendment

My amendment is for Puerto Rico and any other territory that might make a 1,000,000. So yes for now the amendment pertains to Puerto Rico. The other territory's are smaller and don't have a big enough population to even represent 1 vote on the electoral college, to even accuse me of making Peurto Ricans more important is crazy. And the other territory's are simply to small to handle representation anyway. I don't think that other territorys would feel unspecial in anyway. Puerto Rico does not completely endorse statehood because of many different reasons but the ability to vote and be a part of America elections is not one of them. I am proposing political rights to a very large territory that should have got them a long time ago. An anti-statehood governor may have been elected but that doesn't mean he was elected for being agianst statehood. Now this is very intresting, my opponent has proposed his own amendment. Your amendment has quite a few flaws such as: 1. Your proposed amendment breaks the constitution just as much as mine, voting rights for territory's is not condemned in the constitution 2. It does not have the needed permanent population required to have representation (unless you meant any populated territory) 3. There is already an amendment in the constitution that the makes District of Columbia legal to vote, so the mention of the district is completely unneeded and may cause problems. In the case you meant any permantly populated territory here is a BIG reason why that shouldn't be passed: With the other four populated territory's population combined it still only makes 0.20% of the United States population. With that being said the territory's on there own don't have the nessacary popupulation to even represent one point in the electoral college. Also other sates with a bigger population won't get the representation they deserve. So it will actually leave more people unrepresentative then represented. Sources: . http://en.wikipedia.org...
Territory suffrage amendment

For this debate I've come up with an amendment of my own I call it territory suffrage. .. . Here it is ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TERRITORY SUFFRAGE Any territory that has a population exceeding one million has the right to participate in political elections and will have a voice in the government by having the customary 2 senators and a number of the house of representatives based on population. The territory will be a part of the electoral college, with its college number based on the number of representatives it has in the federal legislative houses. - Territory's this pertains to Peurto Rico And any other territory reaching the population of one million ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I would love for this bill to passed in congress (if I could ever propose it) INSTRUCTIONS: 1. As con you must prove that this bill should not be passed while I pro must prove that it should be passed. 2. You may start your argument in round 1 3.
Children should be spanked on their bare bottom, and paddled through their underwear or pants.

Pro has forfeited this round, extending arguments and moving on to rebuttals. "The newest generation of kids are NOT being spanked, and guess what? They are the LEAST intelligent and LEAST considerate batch of kids the world has ever known." Well, is there any correspondence between these two concepts? Until you have proven that, I don't believe this claim. I would propose that narcissism in this country is on the rise because of a few different components of our society, none of which are routed in discipline. Consider 'nature v. nurture' psychology here. 1. Students are often encouraged to behave a certain way in order to appease society; whether they adapt a taste in music, a liking for a drug substance, or a certain clothing style. 2. Kids often adapt to a certain condition or state of mind from an outside source, therefore it is logical to assume that if they are bratty or entitled, they picked up a concept of ego or high self-esteem based on society's reaction to their presence. This often happens when wicked attractive people are aware of how attractive they are, which inflates their ego, simply because they are hunted for by people who desire them as a partner.
If you understand Mathematics, it is not difficult ..... .

Good arguments Pro. Once again, I'd like to reiterate my previous point, but in its entirety. You bring up a lesson in which you learned how to find a quantitative amount of numbers that are palindromes and are divisible by seven. Yes, it is true that you understand this concept, but even if I morphed the equation to be slightly more difficult you would have trouble solving it. If I asked how many 79 digit palindromes are divisible by 3, I could give you hours tiring over a succinct way to approach a problem that you theoretically understand, but you, like many other mathematicians would be stumped. Even if you did devise a way to solve this problem, I think it's safe to say that it took you hours and that it can be effectively classified as 'difficult'. I am positive that you have grasped all that fundamentals of mathematics that include basic arithmetics and simple combinatorial problems but if I asked you to mentally calculate 988387 23879 = x, it is still bound to be strenuous. I argue that geometry problems are the most difficult to tackle because they require critical and out of the box thinking, which many of us do not possess. Only a select few members of the mathematical society are able to consistently and correctly answer hundreds among and infinite selection of difficult geometry problems. During our school studies and education, we are provided with a basic framework of concepts that revolve around surface area, side lengths of a triangle, relationships between angles and sides and relatively simple and advanced formulas. The issue is that we are taught with the same reiterated pedagogy, and the same set of concepts and problems. Once again, the morphing and inter-usage of mathematical concepts is impossible on a grand scale, and rapidly and accurately answering a diverse range of geometric problems is absolutely absurd to consider. To answer all geometric problems is to have 'seen' all geometric problems and to have integrated them into your memory with nil room for error. Even the top mathematicians in their field of study, Terrence Tao and even Newton, have been unable to disclose themselves to all of the unique derivations that geometry presents and they too, have a lot to learn about application of known concepts. Rainman, a mathematical and memory genius, has the ability to absorb up to 99% of the knowledge he reads and store it into his active lexicon, but in an idealistic mathematical desire for perfection, that is not up to par. And even if his memory capacity was up to one hundred and he fully understood the practical applications for the concepts that he derived from books, he would no be able to digest all of the diverse mathematical publications of the world and thus even understanding a simple concept that involves say, Absolute Values, can stump you when it is morphed into different forms. Thanks for the great debate!
If you understand Mathematics, it is not difficult ..... .

I see that you have got the right thread and i heartily congratulate you for it is rare. Let me illustrate the point we have reached for us and for all readers/judges/voters/friends. I narrate the following from personal experience. At school, our syllabus was designed by The University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate (UCLES). I was we can say, proficient, as you put it. At SC level it was excellent. However our school was taking part for the first time in the Australian Mathematics Competition (AMC). Practicing the preparation papers, i was astonished; there was some exercises i couldn't even attempt and i was surprised. One such exercises taken from the 2009 paper is about palindromic numbers ( 1221, 5885, ...). In the paper it is asked how many 4-digits palindromic numbers that is divisible by 7 exists (the question was not as straightforward as that). Under the syllabus we were following, we would never have learnt it. Checking the answer booklet, i grasped (understood) the mechanism. Other variants became easy. The point you raised is the heart of the problem. There exist the basics and complication of the basics. Examinations are unfortunately designed to prevent even those who understand the concept from passing. They take pleasure in mystifying students. Who pass then? The answer is those who understand the basics and also understand the traps/mystification of the examiners. Such students may be those who have practiced lot of papers. After sufficient practice, they know how to proceed because they understand the setting of the question.There is the understanding of concepts and the understanding of steps/processes. A debate is not merely to defeat an opponent but also to seek an explanation with the help of a contender. I feel that this debate is more of an explanation for a better understanding. As you would conclude this debate, i request you to include any point i have missed and to consider the points i have brought to our attention.The task awaiting you is to present the final picture as this debate is a pioneer of it's kind and will serve as a reference for later times. A notice to all those present: if you are experiencing difficulties in Mathematics, if possible, try the following; 1. Look for a well versed and passionate teacher. 2. Concerning a subject ask him how the subject came about/how was it discovered/it's derivation (you will be surprised). 3. Ask about it's use. 4. Ask about the mechanism well. Make sure you understand. 5. To prove your understanding, try teaching/explaining it to somebody else. -Thank you very much for having read this in it's integrality.
If you understand Mathematics, it is not difficult ..... .

The reason why there are many associations that host math competitions is to put students' skills to the test. It requires mastery of many strands of a subject, and throughly understanding mathematics as you would put it. Many of us understand mathematics but we are unable to put it into practical usages due to our lack of practice or lack of critical thinking and creative implementations. You can understand mathematics but that doesn't necessarily mean you can apply it. That explains why, although many students who attend math competitions are mathematically proficient, do not score perfect or near perfect scores. Once again, the 'difficult' word in the premise is very ambiguous.
To show that Solarman is one seriously messed-up person with regards to Islam

Ok, Solarman. I will give some background information. I am a devout Muslim who defends my religion with every chance I get. Since you are so ardent in your belief that Islam is a "death cult" (how ridiculous) and that no Islamic countries have women's rights (such an absurd thing to say), and other shocking and inexcusably wrong things, then I would like to prove to you why I follow my religion and why I do not do the horrible acts radical terrorists do. Now, here are your rules. You cannot quote the hadith. I do not follow the hadith for religious advice since the hadith has contradictory statements with the Qur'an. The Qur'an is the pure Word of God to me, and therefore, if you have problems with my religion and you want to say my religion is bad, then you must take it from the Qur'an. The hadith is not fully credible since it was passed down for some 600 years before written down. Although the hadith was written in a very scientific fashion, the only thing I take for the Word of God is the Qur'an. Also, to keep from copy/pasting a page full of quotes from some site that promotes hate (which leads to violence) against Islam, you must post a maximum of five quotes that you think are the WORSE things you can find. I will debunk them using the Arabic they originated from. Another thing: I have experienced many times ad hominem attacks in debates, and since I know that you are likely to do such, I will ask that you refrain from doing it. You only lose your credibility if you do. I will share the same respect. Have at it.
xbox

Xbox is better than the PS3. Overall, the online atmopshere is better because there is more competition. More chances to go pro plus theres more competitions with money involved. Xbox has the Halo series making it special in its area as Halo is a game that is highly anticipated around the world. The controller is made to fit your hand comfortably. It is also designed more for game play. The Xbox is not known for lagging like its rival the PS3. The marketplace is convinent for all as its a quick stop place for add-ons to game, custimization of your own avatar (PS3 does not have avatars) as well as apps. The Xbox system has never crashed or been hacked, unlike the PS3. PS3 had record high defects unlike the Xbox. Would you want something that has gotten shut down before? OR get something like the Xbox, never been hacked? More players and more fun online.
xbox

The xbox is clearly shouldnt have been the same price as the playstation. It does not offer as much features as the playstation does. Last but not least i will point out how the playstation offers a blu-ray drive and comes with a bigger hard drive for the same price of the xbox, when it originally came out. ultimately if you want quality, and both consoles are the best price, dont go for the xbox. playstation 3 is clearly the best console.
xbox

The xbox came out before the PS3. Given that Microsoft should have taken its time, but if you truly loved games the battery pack is an investment for you. They have cabled xbox controllers as well. People pay for quality. Thats why microsoft charges for Xbox Live. Its better competition, less lags and even lower percentages of you getting hacked unlike the PS3 which has their own little fiasco. Its simple, you want quality, you have to pay for it
xbox

Also the xbox has its plans and prices for its xbox live. on the other hand the playstation offers free online gaming with the the exact same games like call of duty for example, and with better graphics. The playstation isnt as disfunctional as the xbox is. i leave it on for hours and it does not overheat what so ever. The sony make sure the users doesn't have to spend a penny after the console is bought. The playstation controller is rechargeable unlike the xbox controller,you would have to go out and buy batteries and or a rechargeable battery pack, which is pricey.
xbox

The Xbox only gets red rings depending on how the user abuses it. The system is originally made for game play but people use it for other needs as well. Overdosed amounts of usage it what causes it to get these "red rings" which simply relates to overdosed use of anything can lead to bad effects. I've had my xbox since it came out and never had a problem with red rings as I don't over use my system. Depending on certain models, one is more likely to get red rings faster. Its highly recommended that you do your research on the xbox and limit you usage to non extreme times.
xbox

I will debate how xbox is a poorly made gaming system. One main reason why i was very upset with the system is the "red rings of death" after you get this your console is complete fried and its useless. Their are tricks that can help your xbox to get back and running but it will only damage your xbox even more. Also after the chip gets the red ring of death most likely something will get messed up with the system. this has happen to my xbox several time.
Debate.org is too American oriented

"...about the very broad subject, cannot be done with green and red lights." Although this may apply to some, they are very regional minded thongs and the best way to create productive debates is for the profiles to reflect the general values of each person, which can cross mere national divides. There are many global issues that can be talked about, and shouldn;t we be thinking about philoshpies, moral issues, tax ideals, social programming, and other issues ratehr than regional quarrels? You also asser that there is not much manifested demand, but many non-Americans are signing up for this as this fourum grows... making them feel welcome will come along way in opening more markets.
Debate.org is too American oriented

I've put forward a few arguments which my opponent hasn't addressed. - "Too American" is too subjective - The Decision should be based on the intentions and judgements of the owner - Lack of manifested Demand The thrust of his argument appears to come down to this: >"But instead of labelling these issues "doing more to deter illegal immigration" or somehting more broad that could refer to any country, they dub it with the American definition. This complelty in opposition to their mission statement " to create a global online arena " when they are containign it to a single nation." But the word "Global," again, is attached with no timeline and no criterion. One could very well argue that the American audience even is a global audience, having the highest rate of internet use as well as a massive number of expatriots around the world. One could also imagine that a future timeline exists for debate.org to better address the world audience in due course as the site grows. But the interpretation of the word "Global," and it's intended usage, is not for us to decide, being neither owners, nor investors, nor employed in the marketing or positioning of debate.org. Nor is there a purpose attached to the inputting of one's national origin. My opponent seems to operate under the assumption that it is meant to distinguish between different types of users, when it may be intended simply as a tool for data collection, the results of which we are not privy to. Finally, removing the Americanness of the profiling system would remove the point of the profile, which from the measures and statistics provided, may be inferred as helping to draw comparisons between two debators. But comparing what an American thinks about "doing more to deter illegal immigration" to what, say, a Pakistani thinks about the very broad subject, cannot be done with green and red lights.
Debate.org is too American oriented

Although the debate topics chosen are completly up to the users to decide, and the people come from a variety of countries, mainly Anglophone ones, most prominently of all the United States. But the majoirty of Internet users are not just American, and can come from a variety of different countries. But when they first sign up for debate.org they are faced with editing their profile which is filled with a vairety of wholy American issues like whether or not they support George Bush or buildign a Mexican-American border fence which they dub "Major Issues". This is a faulty statement. Most people in the world barely know anything about George Bush and couldn't care two hoots about how many illegal immingrints the United States has. But instead of labelling these issues "doing more to deter illegal immigration" or somehting more broad that could refer to any country, they dub it with the American definition. This complelty in opposition to their mission statement " to create a global online arena " when they are containign it to a single nation.