BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Joke Competition

I've seen a few of these in the past, and thought I'd give it a try...the rules of the competition are as follows: 1. Each round a new joke will be posted as your "argument" 2. The Pro and Con positions mean nothing in terms of the arugment. 3. There is a limit of one joke per round. 4. The loser will have to individually wash the corns of the winner's feet. Scratch rule #4. Let the Joke Competition begin! One midsummer's evening, two sight-seers were captured by a native jungle tribe. They were tied up in ropes and vines to chairs, and placed in the center of the tribe. The tribe's leader, a fat, sweaty, cannibalistic man with multiple nose piercings, approached the two sight-seers. "You white pigs!" he said. "You see our people as nothing more than eye candy to snap your flashy lens things with! We punish you people for your disrespect to our esteemed tribe!" The tribe leader sneered. "But, we kind and generous enough to give you two choices. You!" he pointed at the first sight-seer. "You may choose between death-or oogie." The first sight-seer paused for a moment to think. "Well," he said, "I suppose anything is better than death. Even though I don't know quite what it is, I choose oogie." The next day, the first sight-seer was brought out to the village of the tribe. A tribal guard stripped him of his pants and undergarments, everyone in the tribe lined up behind him, and proceedd to give him anal sex. After the first hour his butt started to ache. After the second hour it began to bleed feverishly. After the third hour it felt as if it were to burst. By the end of the day, he was babbling uncontrollably, his eyes dilated, his face bright red. Now, the second sight-seer was a bit of homophobic. When the tribe leader asked him of his choice of punishment, he replied "Death! Please, give me death! Please!" The tribe leader smiled, and called out to all of his tribal members, "Death by oogie!"
Joke Competition

I was a very happy man. My wonderful girlfriend and I had been dating for over a year, and so we decided to get married. There was only one little thing bothering me...It was her beautiful younger sister. My prospective sister-in-law was twenty-two, wore very tight miniskirts, and generally was bra-less. She would regularly bend down when she was near me, and I always got more than a nice view. It had to be deliberate because she never did it when she was near anyone else. One day her 'little' sister called and asked me to come over to check the wedding invitations. She was alone when I arrived, and she whispered to me that she had feelings and desires for me that she couldn't overcome. She told me that she wanted me just once before I got married and committed my life to her sister. Well, I was in total shock, and couldn't say a word. She said, 'I'm going upstairs to my bedroom, and if you want one last wild fling, just come up and get me.' I was stunned and frozen in shock as I watched her go up the stairs. I stood there for a moment, then turned and made a beeline straight to the front door. I opened the door, and headed straight towards my car. Lo and behold, my entire future family was standing outside, all clapping! With tears in his eyes, my father-in-law hugged me and said, 'We are very happy that you have passed our little test. We couldn't ask for a better man for our daughter. Welcome to the family.' And the moral of this story is: Always keep your condoms in your car.
Joke Competition

admin June 11th, 2008 A crusty old Marine Sergeant Major found himself at a gala event hosted by a local liberal arts college. There was no shortage of extremely young idealistic ladies in attendance, one of whom approached the Sergeant Major for conversation. ‘Excuse me, Sergeant Major, but you seem to be a very serious man. Is something bothering you?' ‘Negative, ma'am. Just serious by nature.' The young lady looked at his awards and decorations and said, ‘It looks like you have seen a lot of action.' ‘Yes, ma'am, a lot of action.' The young lady, tiring of trying to start up a conversation, said, ‘You know, you should lighten up a little. Relax and enjoy yourself.' The Sergeant Major just stared at her in his serious manner. Finally the young lady said, ‘You know, I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but when is the last time you had sex?' ‘ 1955, ma'am.' ‘Well, there you are. No wonder you're so serious. You really need to chill out! I mean, no sex since 1955! She took his hand and led him to a private room where she proceeded to ‘relax' him several times. Afterwards, panting for breath, she leaned against his bare chest and said, ‘Wow, you sure didn't forget much since 1955.' The Sergeant Major said in his serious voice, after glancing at his watch, ‘I hope not; it's only 2130 now.'
Joke Competition

An 18 year old Italian girl tells her Mom that she has missed her period for 2 months. Very worried, the mother goes to the drug store and buys a pregnancy kit. The test result shows that the girl is pregnant! Shouting, cursing, crying, the mother says, "Who was the pig that did this to you? I want to know!" The girl picks up the phone and makes a call. Half an hour later, a Ferrari stops in front of their house. A mature and distinguished man with gray hair and impeccably dressed in an Armani suit steps out of the of the Ferrari and enters the house. He sits in the living room with the father, mother, and the girl and tells them: "Good morning; your daughter has informed me of the problem. I can't marry her because of my personal family situation but I'll take charge. I will pay all costs and provide for your daughter for the rest of her life. Additionally, if a girl is born, I will bequeath a Ferrari, a beach house, 2 retail stores, a townhouse, a beachfront villa, and a $2,000,000 bank account. If a boy is born, my legacy will be two factories and a $4,000,000 bank account. If twins, they each will receive a factory and $2,000,000. However, if there is a miscarriage, what do you suggest I do?" At this point, the father, who had remained silent, places a hand firmly on the man's shoulder and tells him, "You f*** her again."
Joke Competition

One foggy night, a United States Aircraft Carrier was cruising off the coast of Newfoundland and the junior radar operator spotted a light in the gloom. Here is a transcript of what happened next. USS Lincoln: Recommend you divert your course 15 degrees to the North to avoid a collision. Civilian: Negative. You will have to divert your course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision. USS Lincoln: This is the Captain of a US Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course. Civilian: No, I say again, you divert YOUR course. Americans: THIS IS THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER USS LINCOLN, THE SECOND LARGEST SHIP IN THE UNITED STATES' ATLANTIC FLEET. WE ARE ACCOMPANIED BY THREE DESTROYERS, THREE CRUISERS AND NUMEROUS SUPPORT VESSELS. I DEMAND THAT YOU CHANGE YOUR COURSE 15 DEGREES NORTH--I SAY AGAIN, THAT'S ONE FIVE DEGREES NORTH--OR COUNTER-MEASURES WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THIS SHIP. Civilian: This is a lighthouse. Your call.
Joke Competition

One day in the future, OJ Simpson has a heart-attack and dies. He immediately goes to hell, where the devil is waiting for him. 'I don't know what to do here,' says the devil. 'You are on my list, but I have no room for you. You definitely have to stay here, so I'll tell you what I'm going to do. I've got a couple of folks here who weren't quite as bad as you. I'll let one of them go, but you have to take their place. I'll even let YOU decide who leaves.' OJ thought that sounded pretty good, so the devil opened the door to the first room. In it was Ted Kennedy and a large pool of water. Ted kept diving in, and surfacing, empty handed. Over, and over, and ove r he dove in and surfaced with nothing. Such was his fate in hell. 'No,' OJ said. 'I don't think so. I'm not a good swimmer, and I don't think I could do that all day long.' The devil led him to the door of the next room. In it was Al Gore with a sledgehammer and a room full of rocks. All he did was swing that hammer, time after time after time. 'No, this is no good; I've got this problem with my shoulder. I would be in constant agony if all I could do was break rocks all day,' commented OJ. The devil opened a third door. Through it, OJ saw Bill Clinton, lying on the bed, his arms tied over his head, and his legs restrained in a spread-eagle pose. Bent over him was Monica Lewinsky, doing what she does best. OJ looked at this in shocked disbelief , and finally said, 'Yeah man, I can handle this.' The devil smiled and said .. 'OK, MONICA, YOU'RE FREE TO GO.'
Joke Competition

A young man was strolling down a street in south London. As he passed a large building with a fence around it, he heard a group of people chanting "Thirteen, thirteen, thirteen" over and over again. Curious, he tried to see over the fence, but couldn't. Then he spotted a knot in the wood, and put his eye to the hole. He just managed to spy some old people sitting in deckchairs chanting, before a finger came out of nowhere and poked him in the eye. As he staggered back, the old people started chanting, "Fourteen, fourteen, fourteen …"
Joke Competition

It was Entertainment Night at the Senior Center and the Amazing Claude was to appear. A large crowd had gathered to see the famed hypnotist do his stuff. Claude stood in front of his audience and announced, "Unlike most hypnotists who invite two or three people up here to be put into a trance, I intend to hypnotize each and every member of this audience." The excitement was electric as Claude withdrew a beautiful antique pocket watch from his coat. "I want you each to completely concentrate on this watch. It's a very special watch. It's been in my family for six generations and has special powers." He began to swing the watch gently, back and forth, back and forth, while quietly chanting: "Watch the watch, Watch the watch, Watch the watch ." Slowly the crowd became mesmerized as the watch swayed, the light gleaming off its polished surface. Hundreds of pairs of eyes followed the swaying watch. Suddenly, it slipped from the hypnotist's fingers and fell to the floor, breaking into a hundred pieces. "CRAP!", said the Hypnotist. ….it took three days to clean up the Senior Center.
is halo better than COD

Although I agree Halo does have variety, I believe Call of Duty has more quality to their modes, add-ons, etc. Like how Call of Duty has extensive, tactical maps come out every 2-3 months in each map pack. On a strict sales standpoint Halo is dwarfed. http://teckdaily.blogspot.com... Call of Duty is better in the money and units sold market.
is halo better than COD

Very good point. My first argument is variety. Call of Duty has, throughout the years, brought us many traits that any other game would be just copying. These traits are listed bellow. - Game Modes. Call of Duty has given us many great game modes. The first of which is a stunning Campaign mode, followed by a revolutionary Multiplayer. The next being the always fun Zombies mode, which its full of its own variety, next comes the challenging Special Operations ( Spec Ops ) mode. All of these modes come with a wide array of weapons, vehicles, and maps. - Add-on content. Call of Duty has brought us several new map packs and weapons through add-on content. This content is some of the largest available by First Person Shooter games.
is halo better than COD

Hello and good luck I have always thought halo is better for 3 reasons 1 reason for each round 1 while COD has more weapons, halo obviously has more advanced, powerfully, weapons that are weak on one type of unit but strong on others. Then there is knifing. In COD you just walk up to them and knife but in halo it's harder and it does it s different way each time.
Homework should be banned

Let's begin! Research shows that homework is great. Kids to better if their grade was partly homework <1>. It is extremely beneficial to kids. Homework provides a way to review concepts learned in class <2>. "A typical homework-completing high school student will outperform students who do not do homework by 69% on standardized tests. " ~ . http://lrs.ed.uiuc.edu... . Homework teaches discipline <3>. Critical thinking is improved. Homework helps kid learn study habits and teaches time management. Homework also teaches responsibility and develops a concern in studies <4>. Homework gives a chance for students review or learn concepts that they either did not understand or if they missed the class <5>. <1> . http://lrs.ed.uiuc.edu... <2> . http://lrs.ed.uiuc.edu... <3> . http://lrs.ed.uiuc.edu... <4> . http://www.forandagainst.com... <5> . http://www.family-homework-answers.com... We all know that parents dislike their kids when they jump on the couch, scream, or run around the house breaking some items along the way. Homework solves the problem of breaking items. If homework is not banned, items around the house would not be as broken as if homework was banned. ==> Conclusion After reading these arguments, I hope that you can understand why homework is beneficial. I have nothing to refute and defend, so I will conclude my side of Round 2. Thank you and happy holidays! Sincerely, Yami Yugi
Bad Debaters Should Be Removed from DDO

The instigator has failed to define terms, meaning he gives me the power to do so now. Any attempt to deny this as the official definition of the round will be considered as an offense worthy of a fofeiture of all 7 voters points. I'm sick and tired of insitgators starting debates when we have no idea what the hell to debate because they don't define their terms. The reason these definitions are set in stone is becasause I will have joined the match under false pretences if the debate means something else. Furthermore I can assume that the instigator wants me to define the terms given that she has refused to do so herself.Bad: As in 'the child is actcing bad'.Bad Debaters: Debaters who generally create or have misconduct and bad behavior.
Bad Debaters Should Be Removed from DDO

My opponent's last statement might have actuall been true if he didn't just drop literally everything in his last round. Let's make a list of all the things that were dropped and I'm extending across: - The reasons you're preferring my definition of bad over his definition of bad. - the reasons why this isn't a forfeit because I didn't set definitions in round one (this one is also the game over mistake for for my opponent, which I'll get to in a bit.) - the reasons why we shouldn't kick off bad quality debaters from the site. - the reasons why we shouldn't kick off behaviorally bad members from the site. - the seven-point response to the K, especially the turn I make where I argue that only my side allows for solvin for the harms of the K. So at this point the debate is essentially over. There's physically nothing left that he can show to say that he's refuting my case. There's no way he can preven me from winning the debate. Don't let him make new responses to these in the last round because, as the rules for this debate *actually state*, there should be no new arguments in the final round. The only thing he extends across is saying that not defining things in the first round leaves it up to him to define things because the resolution can mean inuitively different things to different people and it's unfair to make him debate something he didn't intend to debate. But there's a few problems with this: First is that he drops a response to this from when I said "applies the same way the other way around -- it's unfair to me for him to force his definition onto me when my intentions were to discuss bad quality debaters, not behaviorally bad debaters." So his argument here is non-unique. Second is that he drops the second reason I give for preferring my definition when I say that it's the definition that best meets the spirit of the debate. There were better words I could've chose for the resolution instead of bad if I wanted to discuss behavior meaning that I have a more objectie base via dictionaries the actual meaning of words for my definition. Third is that even if you buy this and we use his definition, I still win anyway because 1) he doesn't provide a single argument for why we should kick people off the site and b) he drops my reasons why we shouldn't, meaning I'm winning regardless of the definition we end up using. So the debate is a really simple negative vote at this point: - I'm winning the debate on either Definition - the K literally doesn't do anything in the debate - he doesn't provide arguments of his own rather spent the entire debate trying to refute mine.
Bad Debaters Should Be Removed from DDO

I was being dramatic, I a forfeit is too much, but the definition shoulsn't be accepted.The reason is because( as I stated and as was ignored by Z)"When an individual accepts a debate there is a certain standard which must be upheld. So the deal goes that the instigator will provided the topic of debate and for the contender, having spotted the debate can agree that they want to do this debate. Yet if a debate is not defined then what's up for debate relies on intuition, yet intuition varies widely, especially on a website where people from the global community conjoin. Being that this is the case, two people who view the same topic think they are debating seperate issues. For the Native American who views the resolution 'god is real' he simply scoffs, because for him this is obvious, for him perhaps the trees and the movement of the leaves blowing in the wind represents god. Yet for your average Western empiricist clearly one cannot prove a singular, defined deity exists. Thus both accept the debate yet with a completely different debate in mind. Thus intuition is not a sound basis of creating resolutions and debating them, we need something objective. Thus we make it the absolute requirement that an instigator define his debate and in doing so create a debate which can be, at least substantially more, objective. Failure to define your debate religates the task of defining to the contender, as it is unfair to force someone to debate something they did not intend, although the instigator must suffer this consequence it is justly so, in this way we create a reliable system for creating good, objective debates, and violation of that system represent a negligence through wich allowance of the contender to define the debate preserves order; furthermore we prevent debates meant to entrap and shift goal posts."I only did the K for the VP's benifit but it doesn't mean anything to me, so I simply leave it up to the voters to decid if we should label people as quote "defective" debaters....Nothing else in the debate really matters, if we zaradi should use my definition he loses plain and simple
Conscientious objectors should be obliged to make the same sacrifices as conscripted soldiers

Pro proposes that as part of a rigorous interview to apply for CO (conscientious objector) status, an applicant must be asked whether or not they are prepared to die for their country. He says that if their answer is no, their request should be rejected and sent to fight. 1. The entire purpose of answering "no" to that question is why the CO option exists in the first place. It represents a category of individuals who don't want to fight, even if it's for their "country." If you're going to reject everyone who says no, then there's no point in having the CO section to begin with. 2. One shouldn't have to apply for this status anyway. If you don't want to fight, you shouldn't be forced to fight. There is no such thing as fighting for your country; your country (land) doesn't have any ideals. Individuals don't collectively make up a cohesive ideology. We all have our own opinions and values. It is the perpetuation of your values that is of utmost importance. That is why it is okay to sacrifice your own life for something that you extremely value or believe in; however, it would be a disgrace to your own humanity to die for something you don't. If something meant enough to you, you would die for it. If it doesn't, you shouldn't have to.
Conscientious objectors should be obliged to make the same sacrifices as conscripted soldiers

With many thanks as always to theLwerd for her thoughtful contributions, I should like to respond as follows: 1 – My opponent has made the mistake of stereotyping CO's as cowards. Perhaps most are, but just because they are not prepared to fight doesn't necessarily mean they aren't prepared to sacrifice their lives for their country. In some cases, it may be possible that CO's have a genuine moral or religious objection to inflicting suffering on their fellow human beings. 2 – If my opponent is correct in her assertion that an individual has no responsibility to protect his country then it therefore follows that his country has no responsibility to protect him. So, for example, if a CO's house is bombed by an invading army and catches fire with him still in it, why should firemen risk their lives to save him? Furthermore, if CO's don't recognise the law of the land why should they have any recourse to it? Finally, since my opponent failed to refer to my proposal that military doctors should be required to murder then butcher conscientious objectors for their body parts, we must assume that she has objection the scheme. Thank you.
Protect The Purple Australian Tree Octopus

I'll admit that the species can be productive to the environment, but that's not enough to risk letting them run rampant in our civilization. The Purple Australian Tree Octopus is evolving. They used to be simple amphibious octopuses. Now they are semi-robotic beings that lay waste to cities. There is no practical way to contain them. The threat that these creatures pose greatly outweighs the environmental effects of their eradication.
Protect The Purple Australian Tree Octopus

I believe that not only the Purple Australian Tree Octopus, but all types of tree octopus should be eradicated as soon as possible. They are a menace to society. First, I must explain the history of the tree octopus. The first variety discovered was the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus, but now several varieties are known of. (1) The Purple Australian Tree Octopus is a particularly elusive species, largely due to their natural camouflage with all the purple things in Australia, as shown in the image linked below: http://www.debate.org... That was merely an infant. They grow to much larger sizes later in life, until they are big enough to fight off their only natural predators, kangaroos. However, kangaroo populations are declining due to rapid urbanization of the Australian countryside. The Tree Octopus population may be declining now, but it's only a matter of time until it begins to flourish. Even now, they are adapting to life in cities. This photograph was obtained at great expense from a dear friend of mine. http://www.debate.org... His last act was to send that to me. He gave up everything to warn humanity of the impending threat. His sacrifice cannot be in vain! 1) http://zapatopi.net...
Protect The Purple Australian Tree Octopus

I think that the Purple Australian Tree Octopus should be considered and protected as an endangered animal because of it's extreme population drop in the past year. For one, the Tree Octopus produces a rare saliva that nourishes trees and other plants keeping the environment safe. Opponents do not think that it should be endangered as the saliva itself does what most other animals can. While this may be true, a rare animal such as the Purple Australian Tree Octopus should be protected as it is worth loads of money to poachers. 89% of the total population is already gone and more are disappearing every day. In conclusion we should stand up to these poachers and make sure that the Purple Australian Tree Octopus remains fruitful and living.