BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
John Adams should replace Jefferson on the nickel.

========= DEFINITIONS: ========= John Adams - 2nd President of the U. S. . http://en.wikipedia.org... should - used in auxiliary function to express obligation, propriety, or expediency . http://www.merriam-webster.com... replace - : to take the place of especially as a substitute or successor : to put something new in the place of . http://www.merriam-webster.com... Thomas Jefferson - 3rd President of the U. S. . http://en.wikipedia.org... nickel - a five-cent coin, representing a unit of currency equaling one-twentieth, or five hundredths, of one United States dollar. . http://en.wikipedia.org...(United_States_coin) ========== CONTENTIONS: ========== 1) Thomas Jefferson was the main author of the Declaration of Independence [1][2][3], the most important document in the history of the United States, as it officially established the United States. 2) As President, Thomas Jefferson presided over two of the most important events in the history of the United States- The Louisiana Purchase and the Lewis and Clark Expedition [1][4]. Without the Louisiana Purchase, the United States would have very likely never gone westward and would still have the original colonies they started with. The Lewis and Clark Expedition gained the information necesarry for Americans to go westward. 3) Thomas Jefferson beat John Adams in his reelection bid. Americans clearly knew who the better man was. If John Adams was a better man, he would've beat Thomas Jefferson, but Thomas Jefferson came out victorious. [5] 4) Thomas Jefferson was the main author of the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom [1]. The Statute "firmly established the principles of religious freedom and the separation of church and state and provided the basis for the First Amendment's clause on religion. " [6] 5) Jefferson's preamble to the Declaration became an enduring statement of human rights: "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. " 6) It would cost money to change the face of the coin from Jefferson to Adams. In the midst of a recession, it is foolish for the US treasury to waste money to print a new face on a nickel. There are much more important issues to deal with than a new face on a nickel. ======= SOURCES: ======= [1] . http://www.monticello.org... [2] . http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com... [3] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [4] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [5] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [6] . http://www.pbs.org...
In The Hunger Games , I, Noprisu, Would Win If Skrone was my only opponent.

Thank you for your arguments. I: In regards to your slingshot, I only need to hit you once to cause significant damage. You need to hit me multiple times in the same spot to even cause a bruise, not to mention killing me would take precision shot after shot. Skill is one thing, but the probability of hitting me in those places would be considerably lower than me hitting you once with a bow. II: In regards to your sword training, a fencing sword is not a totally light sword, at least the ones I worked with were not. While you may have experience with a Gladius, there are not just heavy swords in the cornucopia. And once again, I am trained in a faster style of fighting, so my first blood would secure my victory. III: You conceded your argument on tactical skill, since you did not respond to it in the last round. VI: In response to your questions, the situation would play out like this: the games would start, and we would be the last ones alive. Likely, no, but possible, yes. As for conventional weapons, no. The environment and supplies would be as they were in the book/movie. V: As for your movement argument, you cant move all the time. As good as you claim your endurance to be, no man can run for the length of an entire skirmish, not accounting for injuries and ailments that might befall you.
In The Hunger Games , I, Noprisu, Would Win If Skrone was my only opponent.

True the lethality of a slingshot is less, but the maneuverability on the ground or trees is much much better. Also, the speed in which I can run with it. Sorry for not explaining my sword training, but I trained sword techniques and my body with swords for about a week or so. Yeah it isn't extensive, but using a full weight sword rather than the light fencing blade makes me more used to the blades going to be in the cornucopia. One thing that I personally think we failed in addressing this topic is thus, this isn't really a Hunger Games. In the Hunger Games there won't just be both of us, but 24 other competitors. Truthfully, this should be that you would win in a duel of sorts. And another point, in this 'Hunger Games' are we having modern weapons, such as guns? I have had training from my FBI uncle in the use of ARs, SMGs, rifles, and pistols. I am a very good shot as well.
In The Hunger Games , I, Noprisu, Would Win If Skrone was my only opponent.

Thank you for your responseRebuttals: Firstly, Regarding your weapons argument, your slingshot cannot compare to the lethality or range of a bow. You could argue that you have a nearly unlimited supply of ammunition, but the amount of lethal material that you can find would be lower than the amount of arrows I would have. Not to mention, due to my survival prowess, I could tip my arrows with the poisonous berry juices to cause a normally insignificant wound to become a life-threatening ailment. There are not many spots that can be hit with an arrow that would not require immediate attention in order to be survivable. In contrast, the stones that you would throw would have to be heavier, which would make them less accurate. There are only a few parts that you could hit with a slingshot that would be lethal if they hit. Regarding your sword training, I would like to bring up two points. 1. you offer no authority in your training of your swordsmanship. I recalled a class that I participated in for years, while you offer "training" as your source. I am not doubting your honesty, just the fact that you cannot call a real authority on your training. 2. In a situation like the Hunger Games, even a small wound can tern deadly without proper treatment. My fencing classes used REAL sabers and foils. I was trained in the art of dexterity and speed, rather than power. Even a small cut, over time, would cause you to lose blood and concentration later on in the fight. This would end in my success.Regarding your survival skills, I can personally vouch for you and your skill, but I believe that we have an equal skill level. Regarding your tactical level, I can also vouch for this, but only on a minimal scale. I have only see references of a skill of leadership within games and simulators. I have led teams and squads in real-life encounters and competitions with real goals on the line.
In The Hunger Games , I, Noprisu, Would Win If Skrone was my only opponent.

(sorry for not formatting this all debate like like you did. I'm lazy) As of the bow, I am make and use a slingshot. I have hit squirrels at 20-30yds in the eye and killed them (no joke) I used to LARP and started training with a metal sword (full weight gladius) so therefore even with your fencing I may have the upperhand in sword fighting. As I am also a veteran boy scout, survivin is my deal. I can pick out which mushrooms and berries are edible and which will kill you. Also, some of these mushrooms and berries juices can be used as a deadly poison on the end of a blade. In the Hunger Games, you must remember the girl Rue. I, like her, am a tree climber and can move through the forest silently and quickly. True, you may have a physical strength over me, but I ran track for 4 years and can get away from anyone I need to. In tactical skill, I am an FPS and MMO player that works well leading a team, or taking out a team by myself. In many of these games, I would have to successfully observe the entire situation and map, and infiltrate the enemy base without their noticing. Which I did.
In The Hunger Games , I, Noprisu, Would Win If Skrone was my only opponent.

Alright, lets do this:I. I am a great marksmen/Fighter a. I am a regular archer. I own a series of bows and practice year round and I am a good shot. In Boy Scouts, there is an archery merit badge. It gives you 30 Arrows in 6 rounds to qualify for the last requirement. I qualified in four rounds, using only 2 arrows in the 4th round. In my class, over half of the participants had to retry the last requirement. b. At a young age, I was enrolled In fencing(swordplay) class for 7 years. While I do not continue, I do have a practice saber that I still hone my skills with. I was not the best in my class, but I was sufficient to advance every year, a feat that many could not say that they did. II.I am a survivalista. I am a Boy Scout and an avid camper. I have been camping for an upwards of 7 years and am sort of an "expert" on unconventional ways of camping. We have a camp out every year in November that poses a challenge to not use tents or cooking stoves during the camp out. I have accepted and have received the "Most Secure" and "Most Water-Proof" shelter reward in the past 2 years. I have also been able to prepare food for the weekend using fish that I caught, cut and cooked on a flat, thin stone using a fire and coals I made from a bow-wood fire and from an abundance of native, edible plants for filling like natural berries and roots. III. My Physical Advantage a. I have played football since I was young as a linemen. I can bench 170 on a good day. I have been trained in unarmed self defence and have recently started boxing as a workout plan. VI. My Tactical Skilla. As a child, I spent a lot of time playing games that required much though, and therefore I have a heightened sense of strategy when it comes to individual and group-based combat. I am an avid player of Magic: The Gathering and other card games that require a great deal of concentration and analysis of the game.
In The Hunger Games , I, Noprisu, Would Win If Skrone was my only opponent.

In this debate, I will argue my superiority in the skills required to survive and win the hunger games if, and only if, my opponent was only Skrone, a fellow DDO member. The rules are as follows: 1. No false information2. 4 Rounds, 1st is for acceptance.3. We will use the 1st Arena used in the Hunger Games novels as the setting if the question arises. I look forward to this Debate
In The Hunger Games , I, Noprisu, Would Win If Skrone was my only opponent.

I. The slingshot is actually very effective. It can break through bone if I shoot hard enough, and if I hit you in the temple you would either be knocked out or dead. II. If you recall from the movie, almost all of the swords were the strange curved swords like scimitars, and if you watch closely there are no light or semi-light rapiers. Also, power can beat speed if i can smash through your sword when you try to block. III. Guess I did, wasn't very awake when I wrote that. VI. For my movement, I wouldn't be solely 'running' Mostly that movement was based off of dodges and dashes to avoid your blade. Vote for whomever you want to!
Resolved: The National Endowment for the Arts should not be funded by the Government

Thanks to her, I learned something new today, mostly saddening things about how much of our federal spending goes to tax cuts, but hey! Essentially, my defense of NEA will be two-fold, one half an explanation of the good they do, and one half the minimal impact they have on tax-payers. SUPPORTING THE ARTSOne negative connotation that comes with art, or supporting art, or pursuing a life of art, is the sense that it is totally unproductive, that you're just throwing your life away. But I would ask you, is a life thrown away if it is lived happily? Most people with a 'purposeful' job are unhappy with it. If someone has a talent that they can pursue to live happily, we should be happy for them! Not only that, but, if it is do-able, we should assist them. We should assist them not only because we can make them happy, but because they can also make us happy. Just think about all the stuff we're surrounded by day to day. Music, movies, your favorite TV show, things like this are art. Our culture is full of art. By supporting art, we are supporting our culture. What if, by not funding and supporting those of artistic endeavors, we never get the next big painter, or the next big guitarist or singer? What if the next Christopher Nolan, or Stephen Spielberg doesn't get his shot at fame? What if the next Hans Zimmer can't get a loan for some recording equipment? What if the next Natalie Portman doesn't learn about her acting skills, because her town never got a grant to open up a live theater? It's easy to hate on art and artists as unproductive members of society, but in reality, they're the ones who give our society our flavor, our fun. So when we fund art, we are not only giving people a better shot at living fulfilled lives, but we are giving our culture a shot at having something more interesting to live with. COST OF THE NEAPut simply, the NEA is less than tenth of a percent of our federal spending. To be exact, the money given to the NEA is 0.00395380622% of our current federal spending[1][2][3]. So when we look at the positives in the above section, and then look at the tiny grain of sand of 'negative', we can see that there really is no logical reason to get rid of the NEA. Thanks for reading. Sources: [1] . http://arts.gov...[2] . http://www.heritage.org...[3] . https://www.google.com...
Aliens have a bigger chance of being real rather than BIGFOOT

Well all who read this debate please vote all points to me, and read the jefferson scott link to see what all the fuss is about. if your too lazy here is the summary of his 8 arguments Argument #1: Walk-the-walk Christians are never abducted Argument #2: Calling on the name of Jesus stops abductions in progress Argument #3: The link between UFO activity and the occult Argument #4: The psychological nature of alien encounters Argument #5: The religious nature of the aliens' message Argument #6: The fiendish character of alien and UFO behavior Argument #7: The interdimensional nature of UFOs and aliens Argument #8: The focus, in abductions, on extracting terror The common things between Alien Encounters and Demon possessions or encounters is so numerous its not even funny. Thank you for your time if you read any of it.
Aliens have a bigger chance of being real rather than BIGFOOT

I'd like to begin with some couer arguments......................................................................................................................wait, did I just win with the jefferson scott link?cool, okay. is never happens to me. You conceaded and I guess I win.Since you dont want to debate anymore even to play a form of devils advocate or something thats fine I wont force you to do something you dont want to, cant have fun doing that.BUT I DO REQUEST ONE THING OF YOU IF YOU WISH TO NO LONGER DEBATEpost something for the remaining round so that this debate will actally be seen in the voting period and read by people. thats all.thanks for being an open minded guy whos capable of changing his view when faced with logic and the facts. :)
The game of G--f ought to be eliminated.

I apologise to my esteemed opponent for the brevity of this response but I'm flat to the boards with work at the moment and, unfortunately, I do not have the time to devote to this debate that it deserves. Nevertheless, in response to my opponent's arguments that golfers are both inhuman and inherently corrupt, I should argue that surely society would be a better place without them? With this being the case, the water hazards, sand traps and bunkers that he cites as proof of the dangers golf poses to its participants should mean that we should actively encourage these dirty, cheating, money-grabbing, parasitic, upper-class swindlers to play as much golf as possible in order to maximise their chances of meeting with an ‘unfortunate' accident. Now, moving on to the subject of fashion; whether it be for golfers or chavs. I happen to agree with my opponent's comments on the subject, but the voters should dismiss both our opinions because fashion is for young people and we are both old - I am old enough to remember the First Gulf War and the Falklands War and my opponent, at the ripe old age of 101, is old enough to remember those wars plus the Vietnam, Korean and Second World Wars: indeed, he may even have a dim recollection of the First World War which ended when he was 8 years old. In conclusion; my opponent has not supplied sufficient evidence that golf should be banned and you should, therefore, vote for me. Thank you.
Obesity

This round of mine is going to be really short since, to be frank, there's not much left that I have to do or say. The round breaks down really simply.The con's BOP, as stated by con in Round 1, was "Con will argue that there must be ways to stop the obesity." Con has not done this, but rather has pointed out potential illnesses from becoming obese (Round 2), and causes other than fast food that can make someone obese (Round 3). The only attack my opponent makes on my case is that fast food isn't the only cause of obesity and that people can still not gain weight from eatting fast food, however this is faulty for two reasons:a) I never claimed that fast food was THE ONLY cause of obesity. This completely takes out virtualy all of my opponent's last round where she's pointing out other things that can lead to obesity. b) Fast food is still one of the leading causes to obesity,[5][6][7] and with fast food still in play then there's no chance of solving back for the obesity problem, which is my opponent's BOP. Thus, by saying that fast food is irrelevant, she is failing to uphold her BOP. By arguing for fast food being removed, she bites into the negative impact of nuclear war and makes me fulfill my BOP. This is the classic double-bind situation where no matter which route she takes, she still fails to win.Thus, the only vote here is for the pro debator. Thank you.SOURCES (for this round):[5] http://www.cbsnews.com...[6] http://www.livestrong.com...[7] http://www.bariatric-surgery-source.com...;
God vs. Evolution

First round my opponent must state why Evolution is correct. I will reply on my second round. Any source including opinion is valid. No rude hateful comments but true hateful facts against not the opponent but the opponent's belief are allowed. Voters: Choose not by opinion but by who ruled the vote. Lordgrae: If I feel that I did not manage to say what I wished I can start a Part 2 of which you must accept! No long tiresome speeches or pages of wiki. References stated by opponent must be checked by their opponent. All points must be stated when a competitor is rebutting. If you do not wish to state any rebuttal to that point you must say Forfeited rebutting - -. Topic: Anything relating to Evolution vs. God - Creation, "inventors" of evolution etc.
God vs. Evolution

I have not much time, am not a experienced debater, nor will I change my position under any circumstances in this debate. So I have one more thing to put out there. Warning: This does NOT mean that I cannot rebut any of your comments but rather that I have not time to type an answer as it is Easter Sunday and I am busy. The earths Magnetic Field - The Dynamo Theory is ultimately incorrect and has many faults. The Rapid Decay Theory - If you use the Rapid Decay Theory to predict what the magnetic field was like in the earth's past, you find that the earth had to be formed less than 10,000 years ago. Otherwise, the electrical current necessary to sustain the magnetic field would have been so large that it would cause the earth to explode! Thus, since the rapid decay theory assumes that a world-wide, cataclysmic event such as Noah's Flood occurred sometime in earth's past, and since the rapid decay theory concludes that the earth must be less than 10,000 years old, most geologists reject it. They reject it despite the fact that it is the only theory consistent with all of the data collected. P.S. Back to the Clown Fish - If the Sea Anemone did not sting, then it too would be extinct as many fish would eat it before it could grow again. . .
Divorce in General isn't Bad and Homosexuality is Good

You have been reported for your "use of profanities or swear words" and "use of racial, sexual, or religious slurs." I find the use of those emotionally-charged words unnecessary for the debate. I am also offended at your profile picture. This debate is closed. Anyone who votes will be reported, possibly under violation of "Will not use the Service in any way that violates the terms of this Agreement, or that aids, encourages, or purports to authorize anyone else to violate the terms of this Agreement." If you vote, you ought to read the debate, and therefore ought to be liable here if you vote.
Divorce in General isn't Bad and Homosexuality is Good

Man and woman were never meant to have one partner. Look at the divorce rate these days for fcks sake. Doing both men and women is fun, who cares what people label it ad. They're all cunts anyway. Speaking of cunts btw, i love it. WHat's wrong with one woman eating out another woman, and then sucking cock too? Its not bad, its fun, and exciting, and it quells your desire for a bit, so how is that not good? If you get divorced it means you can have more than one partner, and thus have more fun and enjoyment in life :) Thanks hon xx
Divorce in General isn't Bad and Homosexuality is Good

Okay, I will extend. I'll extend my dildo into your anus, you weak little cunt. Prepare to get raped. The only reason you're against homosexuals is because you're a closet one yourself. Why else would you be releasing your insecurities like a child in a desperate attempt for attention. It also explains why you are "offended" at my profile picture. Does it remind you too much of mommy when she used to come home from work? (I'm saying your mom is whore btw, if you didn't pick that up, you unlearned uphill gardener.) I guess one of her clients was a little too lax with the protection, thus resulting in you. The old coat hanger abortion trick didn't work as well for her as she'd hoped, its seems. But she must have gotten far enough to at least do some damage. That's clearly evident in this miscarriage of an argument. And, speaking of miscarriages, I'm betting your mom has one or two more tales to tell. Adios you cunt. Hopefully next time someone ventures down into your basement they'll find you at the end of a rope, instead of at a computer screen. That result is much less harmful to us all.
Americans like to blame Muslims eventhough its not muslims fault

there are many muslims terrorist groups but i dont think the members of the groups are more than six hundred million.The terrorists want everyone in the world to be a muslim by killing/destroying america and the west but it is not the right way.As a true muslims,we want other people to join islam but we cannot force them to be muslims.thanks.peaceTrue Muslims? Who is to say that you are not a true Muslim and they are? After all, the The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter. [1]You also provide a textbook example of the No True Scotsman Fallacy [2]As a true Muslims[1] http://www.thereligionofpeace.com...[2] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...
Americans like to blame Muslims eventhough its not muslims fault

What i meant was not all of the americans,but they are americans who think like that.What do you means by islamic terror?what is modivation?there are many muslims terrorist groups but i dont think the members of the groups are more than six hundred million.The terrorists want everyone in the world to be a muslim by killing/destroying america and the west but it is not the right way.As a true muslims,we want other people to join islam but we cannot force them to be muslims.thanks.peace