BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Persons convicted of pedophilic crimes ought to be treated and not incarcerated in all instances.

Persons convicted of pedophilic crimes ought to be treated and not incarcerated in all instances. Pros Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to a child, while a pedophile is someone who preys on or does sexual things to children generally the age 11 years or younger. Pedophiles often feel attracted to children because they are innocent and are less likely to harm them. Some may ask Is treatment more cost effective as opposed to prisoners running the risk of recidivism? Study shows that cost savings would only increase over time, as the number of repeat offenders decreased after successful treatment. We should provide treatment for pedophiliacs because it can change the dynamics of how they view society and giving them a second chance among society Because it can alter their dynamics of how they view society and give them a second chance among society, will be beneficial Other negative consequences of treatment such as cost issues, the risk of denying treatment and side effects are acceptable in light of altering their dynamics of how they view society and giving them a second chance. We should extinguish incarcerating pedophiliacs because it"s a waste of taxpayers" money and may increase the chances of being more dangerous. Because it"s a waste of taxpayers" money and may increase the chances of being more dangerous, which is good. Other negative consequences of extinguishing pedophiliacs from being incarcerated such as victims" revenge, root cause isn"t treated and rises in prison population. ______________________________________________________________________________ 11. Given what we know,we should provide treatment for pedophiliacs and,we should extinguish incarcerating pedophiliacs. its essential that we provide treatment to pedophiles to reduce recidivism. Non controversial 1,2, Controversial- 4, 6 ,9 Because Treatment is more cost efficient taxpayers may have a little more to keep in their piggy bank as opposed to incarcerating them. Because Treatment may reduce pedophilic addiction and the chances of recidivism, the penal system may not be a good idea of reforming a criminal, because of influence in the prison. Because Treatment may be less expensive than a term of imprisonment, its said that According to New York Times "New York State was the most expensive, with an average cost of $60,000 per prison inmate."
The Death Penality Is Moral.

The Death penalty is a Human Way of Penalty. It has been around for a Log time And prevents further Problems from being made. A lot of time Sometimes the criminal escapes Prison And continues on with their killing but when death penalty is given. They don't have much time and some may argue that the Way is Not needed Since a lot of Death Row inmates die before execution date but The Average Time it takes for someone on death row to be put to death takes 20years In which That is enough to Look a last glimpse of life.
The Death Penality Is Moral.

I see What you're Saying but laws Like Statue to limitations or Double jeopardy Make it hard for Investigators to find a clean cut case and sometimes when the evidence isn't enough the case is Acquitted And the Message isn't necessary the show the Person who did the crime to show them they did bad but it's more to the People Who normally do bad things to show them that Every Crime has a Punishment. look at soldiers for a Minute they Can't go around killing civilians or they will be Court marshaled and Face High amount of time in prison. Innocent Killing is wrong and You May not bring back the Victims but It shows to the Perpetrator and the people that Crime has a Punishment. And who's to Say the Perpetrator That is Sent into prison Will kill other inmates or Not. Death row Not only shows that Killing of innocent is wrong but Protects Other inmates from Serial killers since How often People are killed in prison.
The Death Penality Is Moral.

A disadvantage to death penalty is that death penalty is viewed immorally by those not wanting death penalties. Many opponents of the death penalty believe that society should shift away from the “eye for an eye” revenge mentality if civilization is to advance. They believe the message of “killing a person who killed a person to show killing is wrong” is an immoral message. Opponents of the death penalty feel that this revenge philosophy inevitably leads to an endless cycle of violence. Killing the person who committed the crime will not undo the crime that has taken place. Though capital punishment can feel good for the families of victims, it ultimately does nothing to negate the crime. Even if it gives one peace a mind, the crime which affected them will still remain, as capital punishment does not bring back the deceased. Thus, many feel that it is important to send a message to society that striking back at one’s enemy purely for revenge will not make matters any better.
MS Paint Battle

MS Paint version: . http://s1194.photobucket.com... I'm a bit disappointed on how I did here. I wasn't able to use the tools in MS paint to their full potential, and I utterly failed on the fire. all in all though I think I did well. for Round2- Sunset field Original: . http://s1194.photobucket.com... Have fun! I'll post mine after you pot yours.
MS Paint Battle

For each round, we will each draw something in MS Paint. We will each draw the same thing, and whoever has the best representation of it wins the round. I will pick what we draw in rounds 1 and 3 while my opponent will pick what we draw in rounds 2 and 4. Round 1: The album cover of Rev Theory's "Light It Up" Original: http://imgur.com... MS Paint Version: http://imgur.com...
The Flash can defeat The Avengers

Apologies for thinking Con forfeited the debate, since it came with no acceptance note attached to the video I mistook his position, as is, I've lost a round. I'll begin by posting an initial display of powers that Flash has and address the problems of Cons post within them. Flash's powers comes from the Speed Force.I. Speed ForceThe Speed Force is essentially the source of all speed that has its own location/dimension that exists in another plane of reality. [1]Notable Speed Force powers are: Infinite Mass Punch (IMP): As Flash begins traveling at the speed of light he gains relative mass of such a great speed allowing him to strike with blows with the force of "a white dwarf star." [1][2]Speed Steal: Allows Flash to rob objects of their kinetic energy and inclusive he could use it to accelerate his own movements. [1][3].Accelerated Healing: Flash can heal from deadly injuries by speeding his healing process. This takes no energy out of him because he uses the Speed Force rather than his own energy (such as metabolism). [1]Intangibility: Flash has total control of his molecules and can vibrate through objects and have objects vibrate through him. [1][4]Speed Force Aura: This is passive and it's what protects Flash when he takes damage. He's able to resist a great deal of damage because of it (such as getting hit by Zoom). [5]Super Speed: Enables Flash to run faster than the speed of light. [1][6]II. Ways to defeat The AvengersJust to name a few.1 - Speed steal all of the kinetic energy from the Avengers.2 - IMP all of the Avengers. Before saying Hulk could take this, Flash could potentially IMP Hulk a thousand times in under a second. [7]3 - Send them into the Speed Force (which would remove them from the battlefield).4 - Phase out their brains.[8]The Avengers have no way of stopping Flash from doing any of the above and no way of touching Flash. Flash moves faster than they could even perceive.[9]III. Rebutting Round 2Black Widow could not break Flash's neck as the Speed Force Aura is too strong. Black Widow, Hawkeye, and Iron Man all have human senses, which would mean that they wouldn't be able to perceive Flash's movements and they are down for the count. Captain America is peak human and thus he's also not at the necessary level. Hulk could potentially reach a state in which he may perhaps contend with Flash (supposing he gets angry enough, I suppose), but it's massively doubtful he could withstand an IMP, let alone a barrage while in Savage Hulk state. I see no reason as to why Thor's status as an Asgardian would make him invulnerable to having his speed stolen or his organs phased through his body, rendering him incapable of fighting or dead.[1] - http://www.comicvine.com...[2] - http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] - http://static.comicvine.com... [4] - http://static.comicvine.com... [5] - http://dc.wikia.com... [6] - http://www.comicvine.com... (Light can't even travel a molecule in a zeptosecond)[7] - http://static.comicvine.com... [8] - http://static.comicvine.com... [9] - http://static.comicvine.com... I look forward to Cons reply.
The Flash can defeat The Avengers

The Flash can only outrun. The only thing that's good for is dodging Hawkeye's arrow. If he tries to run in a straight line and smash into someone, this would only be useful if he hits Hawkeye since Black Widow would simply break his neck in a second, Hulk and Captain America are too strong to smash and Iron Man would be air-borne for as much of the fight as he could. Iron Man has near-perfect aim and flash has energy to run out of. Hulk, a full anger, can also run very fast. Black Widow and Hawkeye probably won't be much use unless Flash stops beside Black Widow or within shooting range of Hawkeye. You defined defeat as being thrown into space but the Flash can't physically throw anyone into space or incapacitate even one of The Avengers. Thor can send lightning bolts after the guy and is a Demi-God. This means Flash can't run in a straight line for too long or lightning will zap him to death.
The Flash can defeat The Avengers

The Avengers' roster is composed of the members in the movie; Thor, Hulk, Captain America, Hawkeye, Iron Man, and Black Widow. Note, their powers are not limited to what is shown in the movies, but they are to their classic versions (i. e. Rune King Thorn is not Thor). The Flash is Wally West and because The Flash is merely a persona granted powers by the Speed Force, any character using powers granted by the Speed Force can be attributed to Wally West. All characters are limited to their basic weaponry (i. e. The Flash has used a Green Lantern's ring, but this is not standard and no feat of Flash with a lantern ring is valid). The location is an non-destructible Earth (in case Hulk gets strong enough to potentially destroy it, for example). All characters are blood-lusted and The Avengers have no prep-time. A loss is determined by death, KO, incapacitation (i. e. frozen), or removed from battle field (i. e. Hawk-eye being thrown into space with no way back).
The Flash can defeat The Avengers

Okay, in all seriousness Hulk is literally invincible and get angrier the more he's hit. Flash would be hitting beyond speed of light and Hulk would heal if he ripped his heart out so Hulk is the deciding factor and none of any of con's arguments matter.Hulk is the almighty, indestructible and infallible opponent. Hulk is always angry anyway, even the original Hulk is genetically prone to an aggressive response to any situation of danger, he doesn't panic; he just rages instead. Evidence is in the sources.Flash is also not full effective as my opponent thinks, Flash's brain works at human speed despite what his body is capable of. He might pause between fights to plan his next move, giving a split second for a thunderbolt shot from Thor or an arrow shot from Hawkeye. In conclusion, Hulk is the single argument I've fallen back on and I commend my opponent for thwarting me on all other opponents but he said all Avengers and Hulk is definitely indestructible. Flash can do anything to Hulk and Hulk will heal from it and be angrier than before. Thanks for this debate.Vote for Hulk.http://www.youtube.com...http://marvel.com...(Bruce_Banner)http://dc.wikia.com...(Barry_Allen)
The Flash can defeat The Avengers

Thor's hammer falling on Flash's foot wouldn't work due to intangibility.Intangibility: Flash has total control of his molecules and can vibrate through objects and have objects vibrate through him.Flash has the ability to phase through objects and become intangible. Thor's hammer would pass through Flash's foot.None of the ways in which Flash can defeat the Avengers were addressed by Con and they all still stand true.1 - Speed steal all of the kinetic energy from the Avengers.2 - IMP all of the Avengers. Before saying Hulk could take this, Flash could potentially IMP Hulk a thousand times in under a second.3 - Send them into the Speed Force (which would remove them from the battlefield).4 - Phase out their brains.Flash is also too fast for any of the Avengers.
I was an idiot 3 years ago

I would like to argue that you were not an 'idiot', but you have learnt and grown with this site and your arguments have become more stylized and thoughtful Definition of idiot; Informal . an utterly foolish or senseless person.From this definition of the term idiot, I do not believe you to be foolish or senseless for being misinformed or not defining terms, by that logic, I am also a idiot, as I have only just joined this site and am still getting to terms with the customs, to say you were an idiot is to say I am also an idiot? Simple typing errors such as Judeo/Judo are completely understandable for homophonic words, as they are both infrequently used words unlike 'their/there/they're' it is a completely understandable mistake and not 'idiotic', 'senseless' or 'foolish' I would further like to point out that you did not begin this debate by defining terms, does that mean you are still an 'idiot' or is this circumstance understandable? Openly insulting Christians in an unproductive way does reflect poorly, but that does not mean you are an 'idiot'. The fact you have learnt and grown from your mistakes by betting yourself also makes you far from an 'idiot'.
I was an idiot 3 years ago

I've been looking back at my older debates and posts and I'm appalled. I assume it's similar to getting timeline on Facebook and looking at all the terrible things I once posted. I wouldn't know, I've put off getting timeline for as long as I possibly can. Just look at my debates from back then. I wrote things like Judo-Christian war, I couldn't even spell Judeo right. I started debates without defining terms, I started a debate on the attack on Hamas in Gaza without knowing anything about the topic (I still don't), I openly insulted Christians in an unproductive way that reflected poorly on my character. Overall I was an idiot, maybe I still am. Now the question is, who would care enough to challenge me?
The earth is spherical

I accept. I'll be arguing that there is such sufficient evidence for the claim that Earth has a spherical shape that there remains no reasonable scientific basis for believing otherwise. It's been a while since I've debated Edl on this topic and I look forward to seeing how both of our arguments have changed. I'd request that any video evidence accompanying an argument be kept at or under 15 minutes per round, for the sake of the debaters' and the voters' time.
Help me

Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains. Help me. I'm dying. I wake up and see my life being flushed down the toilet. I want out. Free me from these chains.
The USA IS Superior | Change My Mind

Yes. Statistics are as statistics do. But you openly admitted that the U.S.A wasn't necessarily superior in all categories, which is contrary to your 3rd round assertion. The U.S.A. isn't the best at everything and certainly isn't the worst and any honest U.S. citizen would freely admit this. The best and only place to be is Planet Earth and there's nothing much we can do about that. Happy 7th of July.
The USA IS Superior | Change My Mind

Norway is pretty good, but not better. Taxes: Norway imposes a 1% wealth tax every year on all your assets over $144k (including money in your bank account, the house you live in, stocks you own, etc.). The government takes a nice monthly premium for its 'free' health care out of your monthly paycheck. 25% Norwegian sales tax (VAT) is way above the highest US state sales tax (9.45%) Cars can be taxed double normal retail (if you want a higher end car like a Volvo you can expect to pay more than $100k in Norway and about $45k in the US) Miscellaneous death-of-a-thousand-cuts taxes like the $450 annual TV license just to have a TV in your house. High Prices: $8-$11/gallon for gas, the most expensive in the world. High rents. Getting charged over $4 each time you drive into Oslo and other cities A modest combo meal from McDonalds costs over $14 (not that I'm a big fan of McDonalds, but we all know the Big Mac Index) A bag or two of essentials at the grocery store can easily run $75-$100 (milk is $8/gallon, chicken breasts cost $7/lb, etc.). America is also better as it is much freer. Norway doesn"t guarantee you freedom of speech, and doesn"t protect your right to bear arms. Also it"s pretty unfair to compare the US to 🇳🇴 as our population is SEVENTY times as big as Norway. 1. Sure, Norwegians live longer but not HEALTHIER. Having a lower GDP doesn"t necessarily we are worse than Norway. Our inflation rates are both 1.9 for 2018. How does having a lower population make you superior to the US? How does having Winter year round make it superior? The Us has a 0.5 higher growth rate than Norway. With more people and politicians comes more corruption. Norway"s unemployment rate is 0.1 more than the US. Less people = safer country. A perfect example of this is Vermont. How is having a much higher cost of living a good thing? Look, I"m sorry I totally anhilated your argument. Just admit it, America is the best. Most of your so called "facts" were either completely wrong, or were true because of the super tiny population Norway has. So... Good luck.
The USA IS Superior | Change My Mind

Norway is reckoned to be the best Country in the World in which to live. The U.S.A. is ranked 14th in the same survey. The criteria used to make this judgement were: 1) Life expectancy 2) G.D.P. per capita. 3) Inflation rate 4)Population 5) Climate 6) Growth rate 7) Corruption 8) Unemployment rate 9) Safety index 10) Cost of living. Norway was superior to The U.S.A. in all these categories. Therefore, Norway is a far superior place to be if you ask me. @Lifestyle9.org
The USA IS Superior | Change My Mind

What are your benchmarks for national superiority? What do you base your study of national superiority upon? Have you travelled the World extensively and made honest, first hand comparisons or do you rely upon edited and manipulated, second hand media information? Maybe you are simply biased. There's nothing wrong with a bit of national pride, but I would suggest that national pride is not an accurate measure of superiority. National pride is similar to religion, it gets lodged inside your head at an early age and is nigh on impossible to shift. So I almost certainly won't be able to change your mind. But that doesn't matter. Happy 6th of July.
The USA IS Superior | Change My Mind

The U.S.A. is superior to what? How is it possible to change a mind? Maybe superiority is the antithesis of reality and maybe Stockholm is the Capital of Sweden and maybe cheese is just to tasty for our own good. The U.SA. certainly isn't superior to a cheese and sweet pickle sandwich or a good quality pork sausage. Wouldn't you agree? Lake Superior is a really great lake, but the Northern half is in Canada. Therefore Canada is also superior to the U.S.A. It stands to reason doesn't it. The Pacific Ocean. Happy 5th of July.
Christopher Columbus found america

I never argued that Erikson didn't find America prior to Columbus finding America. I argued that Columbus did find America. Though he may have been in the third or fourth group to do so (after the Native Americans, Chinese, and Icelanders). Columbus found America. That's absolutely true. He journeyed to the outlying islands on his first journey as well as to the mainland during his later trips. I'm not suggesting that Erikson didn't find America. I am suggesting that finding America is not a mutually exclusive proposition. That without any discussion between the parties they both managed to find it. It's really big and was found several times before the knowledge that it was there was widespread (you can't exactly find something you know is there). Columbus found America.