BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Detroit Public School System (Michigan) Populations Statistics and Depopulation

To support my stance on the Detroit Public School System (Michigan) Populations Statistics and Depopulation Debate review the following email correspondence from the National Education Association (NEA): Dear Educator, I wanted to pause to say, "thank you." There is no doubt we are influencing the current education debate in Congress, in the news, really, everywhere. This is a big deal for our students. I recorded this quick video to thank you for your activism so far, and to ask you to keep it up. Take a look. Enable images - Lily has a message for you. The main education law (also known as No Child Left Behind) is moving, and we need your help now more than ever. It affects literally every aspect of student learning. But we have reason to be proud. Together, we have already sent over 200,000 messages to Congress in just a few short weeks. Thank you. But now is not the time to let up. I really need you to step up again. Watch Now To thank you for your work so far, I wanted to share one special letter that music teacher Patricia Deming of Renton, Washington, wrote to her senator, Patty Murray. Watch me read her letter here. - Lily P.S. We knew all along we would have to give everything we"ve got to make sure our students" and our voices are heard. Now is that time. Thank you for standing up for our students.
Zimmerman is guilty

Why would someone who assaulted a cop and an ex fiance be put on neighborhood watch??? Idk how long he's been living there but he knew the area well enough to get police there without having to get out of his car to get an address...we all know he wasn't in fear of his life..I'm not choosing side nor am I racist but we all know what happen that night and zimmerman needs to be behind bars..there's know reason treyvon Martin should not be at home right NOW with his family
Zimmerman is guilty

You state that Zimmerman had an address directly in front of him. Based on the video walkthrough, the address is clear as day. But, as the defense pointed out, no one knows if the lights were on the evening of the incident. But, beyond nit-picking the details, the case lies at the feet of the prosecution to prove that Zimmerman acted with hatred and ill will and depraved heart. Based on the evidence, and only the evidence, they failed on this point. No one can speak to what Zimmerman experienced or how he felt during the incident. Because of this, Zimmerman is not guilty of 2nd degree murder.
Zimmerman is guilty

To be honest I'm tired of this trial and done with this debate George had an address directly In front of him yet he continues to pursue treyvon and he says in an interview I started walking toward treyvon he's the initial aggressor and he didn't identify himself or anything close to it therefore treyvon was in fear of his life and acted upon those feeling but he did it the right way like a real man used his hands not a pistol With that being said it is his fault treys not here and he needs to be locked away ILL intent was there for me but I guess it's up to the jury but regardless he needs to be in jail and I can't wait for the verdict
Zimmerman is guilty

By your last statement, I noticed you are playing from the prosecution"s handbook. Since there is not enough evidence to warrant a 2nd degree murder charge, the state added on the possibility of a lesser charge of manslaughter. This is, in my opinion, a horrible flaw within our justice system. But, that can be another topic for another day. For this debate, you argued in support of Zimmerman being guilty of 2nd degree murder. Based on the evidence provided by the state of Florida, Zimmerman should be found not guilty. There has been no proof, by evidence or statements prior to or after the incident, which show Zimmerman had ill intent. Through your own statement, you said "possible ill intent". Is it right to convict someone on a possibility? You can argue that his statements on the phone show the ill intent, but where did he say he was going to stop this? Where did he say he was going to teach this person a lesson? Where did he say I am going confront this person? He didn"t say any of those things. Instead, speaking out of frustration and prior experience, he says the "f"ing punks always get away". It was a poor choice of words, but not enough to send a man to jail for possibly the rest of his life. The main point is that no one knows how George Zimmerman felt at that the time of the incident. He may have been a nerdy kid who never got into a fight and was scared to the point that he was in fear of his life. Based on the prosecution"s key witness, it was Martin, not Zimmerman, who initiated the confrontation. Based on the prosecution"s own closing arguments, Martin was on top of Zimmerman. I think that if Zimmerman truly believed that he was in imminent danger, then it was self defense. None of the evidence or testimony from the prosecution has shown me different.
Zimmerman is guilty

If you had almost been ran off the road several times in the past and if you had took that's persons life it would show I'll intent. We know that twin lakes had past break ins and this didn't sit well with zimmerman, when he saw treyvon maybe he thought now I can finally do something about it..that shows possible ill intent. He could have had alcohol in his system when he assaulted the cop as well as when he took treyvons life but we'll never know. There are only so many streets in that neighborhood which is all he needed to know and he could have said I'm in this color truck. Another thing is if he had waited on the police like he was supposed to what were they gonna do go looking for him in the dark.its not like he caught him halfway through someone's window..treyvon belonged in that neighborhood although he technically the yard he crossed was private property it doesn't mean he should have been followed. No I didn't miss any part of the case it's on right now..almost no fighting ability sounds like a joke to me but that's just me...I am currently serving in the military and I understand weight difference isn't everything but its more the age 17..yes I believe I would have easily controlled a 17 year old and I would love to go up against any 17 year old I just can't see myself being over power but again that's just me... If I were treyvon I wouldn't have led a suspicious man with a pistol straight to my house where my brother was either..treyvon thought he was in danger and was defending himself If second degree isn't awarded he need to spend a very long time in jail
Zimmerman is guilty

This morning, while driving into work, some idiot in a Mitsubishi Montero about ran me off the road. My response was to hit my horn and state something along the lines of "These f"ing idiots have no idea how to drive!". That statement does not show ill intent on my part. Neither does George Zimmerman"s statement about the "f"ing punks" always get away. If we begin to convict people based on words, I need to apply for asylum to Venezuela . You mentioned that he assaulted a police officer, which he did. But, in reviewing the case, you see that he was most likely intoxicated and suffering from a case of liquid courage when he attempted to defend his friend. By no means am I defending that assault of a police officer, but I do believe in understanding all the circumstances surrounding the issue. This case does not show a predisposition to violence. Instead, it shows a predisposition to low alcohol tolerance. Yes, he was told not to follow, and even through your own statement, you show he was returning to his vehicle. He stated he was getting out to find a street address could be considered a valid point. I know plenty of people who would need a GPS to get to and from a grocery store in their neighborhood. Just because you live in neighborhood does not mean you know every street and every building number. You mention that he was taking grappling lessons. Did you miss the testimony from his own trainer, that while he had lost weight, he almost no fighting ability. Having served in military, I could introduce you to a large group of men, who while small in stature, could easily take down someone 50 pounds bigger. You state that if it were to happen to you, you would simply overpower the smaller person. To that, I say that how you say you react and how you would actually react are two totally separate things. You or I were not there. We did not get hit and knocked down. We did not have someone jump on top and begin to hit our heads into a concrete sidewalk. For either of us to say that we know exactly how we would have reacted would be foolish. Once your adrenaline kicks in, who truly have no idea how you would react, unless you have trained for years in countless different situations so you know exactly how to react. But, to the point of your debate, Zimmerman was not in depraved mind during this incident. Because of that, he does not meet the most minimal parts of the statue to be convicted of 2nd degree murder.
Zimmerman is guilty

These f'ing punks they always get away..he was angry about the past break ins and he was gonna make sure this one didn't get away. who's to say zimmerman wasn't high on crack but of course he didn't have to give blood.. After he was told not to follow him I believe his excuse was I was going to get an address so he didn't get back in his car and he didn't need the address because he could navigate the police there without it.. it's hard to believe a grown man who was taking grappling lessons and working out on a regular basis who was in fair shape and weighed 50 pounds more was in fear of his life and unable to defend himself without using deadly force...if I was following a teenager that was minding there own business on there way home and an altercation ensued and I was being attacked I simply would have over powered him got on top and held them down..I definitely would not have shot especially when i started following him remind you I have my concealed carry permit. For martins history..what teenager doesn't get into fights and he had picture of a gun on his phone not on his person and the the the thc wasn't enough to effect his state of mind said the expert. Again why is someone who hits females and assaults cops put in a position to help protect the neighbor
Zimmerman is guilty

According to Florida statues, a person is guilty of 2nd degree murder when they unlawfully kill another human being evincing a depraved mind. Where, has anyone, proven beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman was in this mental state. Look at the facts of the case. The neighborhood, The Retreat at Twin Lakes, had experienced an increase in crime over the previous six months. The captain of the neighborhood watch was patrolling the area when he notices a strange person walking between houses. He calls the non-emergency number for the Sanford Police Department to inform them of this suspicious person walking between houses. Then, the watch captain exits his vehicle to follow the person. He is then informed by the police dispatcher that he does not need to follow the suspect. After this point, no one knows exactly what happened. Did Zimmerman continue to follow Martin? Was Zimmerman confronted by Martin as he returned to his car? What we do know is that an altercation ensued where Zimmerman was taken to the ground, his head hitting the concrete sidewalk while Martin jumped on top of him and continued to strike at his face, breaking his nose. During this struggle, Zimmerman shot Martin in the chest, killing the teenager. To your statement, "we all know he wasn"t in fear of his life", that is completely and totally unintellectual. The man had a person on top of him, throwing strikes to his face and hitting his head on the concrete sidewalk. In the heat of the moment, one could see why a person in that situation, would possibly be in fear of his life. I would like to know how you would react should someone punch you in the face (breaking your nose), jump on top of you and attempt to hit your head on a concrete sidewalk multiple times. By stating "we all know" your argument loses a lot of validity. You also start your point by bringing up Zimmerman"s past. What I find interesting is that you do not mention any of Martin"s past. You neglect to mention that Mr. Martin was suspended from school for fighting. You neglect to mention that Martin had THC in his system the night he died. You neglect to mention that he has photographs of guns on his telephone. You neglect to mention that his brother (not sure about the relation) texted Martin, asking when he was going to teach him to fight. Zimmerman has his faults, but to have a valid and educated argument, you should take the time to layout the prior history of both parties, instead of attempting to skew it in one direction. George Zimmerman, based on the evidence provided at the trial, is not guilty of 2nd degree murder.
Suicide is a morally justifiable choice

Hi! New here and looking to create my first debate on an issue that's super important to me. I'll be taking the side that affirms that "Suicide is a morally justifiable option". I think the fairest way to go about starting this debate would either for my opponent to get started right away, in which case they shouldn't use their last round since that would make for uneven number of times to speak, or I can start things off in the next round with my opponent just accepting, and we can proceed on normally from there.And, just as a PSA to those who may read this and are struggling, I am not making this debate to encourage you to commit suicide. Speaking from personal experience, there are ways to fight against it and find help. It may be hard to see that in that instance, but people who's sole purpose is to help those who are struggling do exist, and you will not ever be a burden to them. The fight will never be easy, and you'll fall down here and there, but it is a winnable fight. A relatively comprehensive list of resources to look to, over the phone, online, and even through text in a few instances, can be found here vvhttps://www.reddit.com...That being finished, good luck to whomever decides to accept.
the Japanese should not hunt whales

I hope this will be a great debate. ~~~~~~~ Rebuttals ~~~~~~~ /// 1. It's illegal /// This contention implies that an actions state of legality should determine whether or not it ought take place. Ultimately it is a hollow contention because the resolution of the debate is about the morality of Japanese whaling. This is evidenced by the inclusion of the word "should. " The law is not does not explicitly deal in morality. An action being illegal or legal does not make that action immoral or moral. For instance, at one point in time it was legal to keep black people as slaves. Does that make it moral to keep slaves? Another example is that in the early 1900s drinking alcohol was illegal. Does this make drinking alcohol immoral? This contention is negated. ~~~ /// 2. Whale meat tastes gross /// So what? Taste is a matter of preference. I may enjoy eating something that tastes horrible to my opponent. In fact, I probably do. This specific point does nothing to show that the Japanese should not hunt whales. In this contention my opponent also states that the amount of whaling that the Japanese do brings in so much meat that there is a great surplus of supply. There is a simple solution to this problem. That solution is to hunt less whales. ~~~ /// 3. Mercury Poisoning /// This is a very good point. Pretty much all fish has some mercury in it, and it is recommended that one limits their intake of fish [1]. However, with this contention my opponent mainly focuses on the notion that children in Japan are forced to eat the meat. While this may, or may not be true, it has little bearing on the debate. The only difference between whale meat and salmon in terms of mercury is that whale meat has more in it. The fact that most fish contains mercury is a commonly known and easily accessible information. If a person chooses to eat it, then they take that risk. It doesn't mean that the Japanese should stop hunting whales. /// 4. Bad for the whales /// Well, of course whaling is bad for whales. It by definition causes them to die. My opponent's main points in this contention are that the actual killing is inhumane, and that whaling is driving certain species of whales to extinction. To the first point I ask, why is this is problem? While I may not personally condone the inhumane treatment of animals, I don't condemn it. The hunted whales basically become the property of the whaling company that catches them. Who am I to dictate what another person does with their property? To the second point I ask my opponent to show how the extinction of whales would significantly and adversely affect human life on planet Earth. If their extinction wouldn't cause problems then I see no reason why hunting them to extinction would be a problem. ~~~ I await my opponent's response. [1] . http://en.wikipedia.org...
For Elite Colleges, Standardized Tests Should Be More Important in Admissions Decisions Then GPA

Gender Bias- According to a study by the College Board, the group that makes and administers the SAT, males score 33 points higher on the SAT-Math than females who earn the same grades in the same college math courses, because a fast-paced, multiple-choice format favors males over females. [1] Racial Bias- I won't discuss the racial gaps in SAT/ACT scores, because there is no conclusive evidence that they aren't the result of other factors. However, there is evidence that standardized tests' predictive ability is far less for minorities than for whites. ACT explained only 6.8% of the differences in first-semester college grades for African Americans, while for Whites the ACT predicted approximately 28% of the differences (high school grades predicted equally well for both groups). [2] Coaching- The fact that these tests can be easily 'coached' for sheds serious doubt on their fairness, objectivity, and predictive ability. For example, the Princeton Review tutoring service advertises that it can increase students' SAT scores by an average of 100-150 points. First of all, the fact that this coaching, which obviously has nothing to do with success in college, can increase one's score on a test that is supposed to predict success in college casts doubt on that test's accuracy. Second, these coaching services are expensive. They offer an artificial and unfair advantage to affluent students. The SAT vs. GPA on predicting success in college- According to a College Board study, the SAT alone predicts 22% of the variation in freshman year GPA, while high school GPA alone (not counting subjective evaluations of course difficulty) predicts 30% of the variation in freshman year GPA. [3] Bates College decided to make submission of standardized test scores optional in 1990. Comparing those that submitted to those that didn't, their study found that although non-submitters averaged 160 points lower on the SAT, their freshman GPA's were only an average of five one-hundredths of a point lower than submitters. [4] "If one looks beyond college grades, information from The Case Against the SAT by James Crouse and Dale Trusheim actually points to the SAT I's poor utility in forecasting long-term success. Data they analyzed demonstrated that using the high school record alone to predict who would complete a bachelor's degree resulted in "correct" admissions decisions 73.4% of the time, while using the SAT I and high school GPA forecast "correct" admissions in 72.2% of the cases." [5] [1] http://professionals.collegeboard.com... [2] http://www.education.com... [3] http://www.fairtest.org... [4] http://www.maguireassoc.com... [5] Crouse, James, and Dale Trusheim. The Case against the SAT. Chicago: University of Chicago.
For Elite Colleges, Standardized Tests Should Be More Important in Admissions Decisions Then GPA

1. Applicants to elite colleges do tend to have uniformly high GPAs. They also have uniformly high test scores. You say that very few people have perfect or very high test scores, compared to the many that have high class ranks and GPAs. What evidence is there that there is a significant difference between the quality of a student with a 2200 SAT and a student with a 2300 SAT? Just because the scores are less common doesn't mean they are a valid predictor of college success. 2. Obviously, a certain GPA doesn't mean the same thing for students taking different classes or students at different schools. However, since elite schools do not just look at the GPA on the transcript alone, this is irrelevant. When looking at GPA, elite schools consider it in the context the difficulty of the classes and the school. They aren't going to admit someone who got a 4.0 GPA, but only took easy classes. They look for students that got good grades in the hardest classes available to them. 3. While few high school classes are as difficult as the classes at elite universities such as MIT, that doesn't mean they don't show college readiness. As almost all the students that go to MIT and similar colleges manage to do well, their current system seems to be pretty good at measuring readiness. It's also interesting that you're arguing that one's grade in, say, AP calculus, should be less relevant than one's score on a multiple choice test consisting of 8th grade level math questions. Conclusion- Elite schools know what they're doing. Their admission philosophy is basically that anyone who scores above a certain score is smart enough to do the work. They then look at their high school record to see if they are willing to work hard. Is someone with a 2300+ SAT score smart enough to do the work at elite colleges? Certainly. But so is someone with a slightly lower score. It isn't enough to be smart enough to do college level work. Colleges want to know that the students they admit will actually do the work. How do they determine this? They look at how hard the student worked in high school. They look at if the student was willing to put in the effort required to get good grades in their high school courses. If someone has a high test score, but a relatively low GPA, colleges see a bright but lazy student, which isn't what they want. Sources: http://professionals.collegeboard.com... http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu...
Metaphysical Naturalism is False

"I came here for a VERY SIMPLE REASON!! To show that the abrahamic god IS A SICK JOKE!!!! YOu cannot refute this and play WORDGAMES about smetapysics!!! Yadayadayaaa!" My opponent failed a twice. He has not made any arguements for Metaphysical Naturalism, nor has he shown any of my arguements to be false. I maintain and contend my position as true since I showed evidence for it. My opponenet has failed to show how X, Y, and Z to be false.
Metaphysical Naturalism is False

"WORD GAMES!!!This website is a STUPID JOKE!! JUST LIKE THE ABRAHAMIC GOD!!I want nothing more to do with idiots and fake atheists!!!GOODBYE"My opponent unfortunately broke the rules of the debate. He was supposed to give an arguement for Metaphysical Naturalism, but instead went off on a tandrum and ad-hominem attack on me.To be fair, I will give my opponenet another opportunity in round 3 to go ahead and make an arguement.