BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Stormcloak Rebellion (Con) VS Imperial Legion (Pro)

This is an old topic considering that the Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim has been out for a while but it is still a fun argument to debate between two people. I will represent the Stormcloak Rebellion (Con). All I ask is no swearing, no mud slinging, show some sources if you can find any, and just have fun with this. This is a fun topic and that's the way it should be. The Stormcload Rebellion is just, for Ulfric Stormcloak is only doing what he believes is right for Skyrim and acting on behalf of the majority of what the Nords of Skyrim are thinking. Skyrim deserves to be free and all folks of Tameriel have the right to worship any God, Goddess, or Daedra they deserve. I give the time over to my opponent after my brief opening. Good luck to you.
The highest number is 254

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 There we go!
corporal punishment

In my opinion, corporal punishment is brutal and too severe a disciplinary action. Corporal punishment can often be very traumatic to the person it is inflicted upon. So much so that a child subjected to corporal punishment more often than not grows up to abuse physically not only his own family but other acquaintances as well. Thankfully, this practice has been banned in several nations and is a punishable offence in a few others. There are more humane ways of admonishing a child. Take for example grounding him or her. This leaves space for the juvenile to ruminate over his or her bad behaviour and even offers a chance for reformation. However, if a child is beaten up in order to drill in some moral lesson, there is a high chance the innocent will fall back on its lesson and commit a similar offence, leading to a vicious cycle. In summary, corporal punishment is detrimental to a child's overall growth and can impair his/her self-esteem and cause lasting damage.
corporal punishment

Should corporal punishment be be banned or kept in schools, daycares, etc? I am a student and I think that with the way children/teens act in today's society they need to be disciplined in some way shape or form. Give me your opinions, should we bring it back or not? If we have more punishment in schools and daycares just think how much more respect kids would give their parents. I think it should be brought back, and kept .
We should honor notable figures on USPS postage stamps.

Round 1: AcceptanceRound 2: CaseRound 3: Rebuttal and ConclusionReso: We should honor notable figures on USPS postage stamps.Let's not be lawyering c*nts with arbitrary rules, okay? I think we both know what the words in the resolution mean and can argue effectively without myriad links, no semantics f*gs or source wh*res.
We should honor notable figures on USPS postage stamps.

I'm ready to roll. Consider the lucid fatuousness of affirming the resolution. Not because choosing a notable figure to honor is trivial: it is not. However, ascribing that figure to something as trivial and outdated as a postage stamp is fatuous. Who would I choose, of proper cultural significance, to assign to a large amount of United States Postal Service stamps? Who would anybody choose? The truth is that this is irrelevant. The choice, therefore, could be totally arbitrary or of sound intellectual argument. It does not matter. Mailing letters has been declining steadily since the advent of email, and for good reason. To begin, it is important to note the shift away from stamped packages or letters and to higher technology and more sophisticated communication. Instead of the hassles of driving to the nearest post office deposit box, waiting in line, and paying for stamps, one can be contemporary by lounging in a comfortable chair, opening email, and sending messages without payment. The US Postal Service itself is bleeding its federally subsidized funds out due to sheer lack of volume and cutting workers in the process. So, to place a relevant figure on such an irrelevant technology does not do justice to that person. Furthermore, why illustrate that figure on an item that has an immediate negative emotion attached prior to seeing it: the feeling of being swindled into purchasing grossly overpriced, outdated procedural minutia. We don’t remember our leaders in Gregorian chant for the same reason we don’t assign a sublime degree of meaning to postage stamp people. There are myriad ways to better celebrate our contemporary and former heroes. Popular songs, statues, awards, documentaries, the list continues almost interminably. Commemoration in televised ceremonies, remembrance in eponymous architecture, and memorial in seminal works of art all reach a far broader audience with more profundity and continuity than all the stamps in the world combined. A brief video clip can lead the audience member to better understand a gifted individual’s character, to detect the inherent nuances, and to provide a basis for emotional as well as cultural significance. Fond memories are the foundation from which the most commendable houses of eulogy are built. Commemorating a figure on a postage stamp almost tacitly demonstrates that the cultural celebrity has past its prime, is in decline, just follow the trend line.Cool
I think kids should learn about the origin of school

But if they taught you about school then I would think people would as a possibility stop saying they hate school and throw fits about it and watch why they need to learn in school otherwise it will keep going on today kids saying "School stinks" and in some cases run from school or even attempt suicide if we taught the origin of school wouldn't you think that people would in further years when your a grandma or a grandpa you may tell your children that this is the reason to learn in school.
Zimmerman does not seem like a good guy

Key phrase being, "usually". I refer to my former point that bad things happen to good people. You say "kill boys" like Trayvon was nine or something. Zimmerman obviously was attacked judging by the wounds on his head. I refuted all other points. Well, what a le epic debate bro! U sure trololo'd me! At least, I *hope* this is just some half-hearted troll (if so, you could have done a lot better). If not, thanks for the useless debate.
Zimmerman does not seem like a good guy

I would like to point out that Pro refuted absolutely none of my points, save for the judge and Jewish ones. **"...in order to be a judge in the U.S., you have to be corrupt." And for once, I thought I was going to have a serious debate. My point here speaks for itself. This statement is flawed to the point of complete silliness. Okay, whatever, let's just assume (hypothetically, of course) that your quote is correct. Like, it's actually a requirement that judges must be corrupt. This still has nothing to do with the fact that Zimmerman comes from a corrupt family- it's not like corruptness is genetic or even taught. How many people come from bad families and turn out to be good themselves? **"If you're jewish, then just admit it." Unlike my last point, I can't even pretend like this has anything to do with his 'badness.' This debate is wasting my time. If you have no valid points, I'll forfeit the next round without concern for winning or losing. Even if you're trolling, at least make an attempt. This half-assery is childish.
Zimmerman does not seem like a good guy

Well you know, in order to be a judge in the U.S., you have to be corrupt. You simply can't be a judge in America if you're an overall good guy. How many good judges does any of us know? Shill excluded. Anyone who isn't brain washed knows the U.S. regime is corrupt from top to bottom, therefore, the fact that his father holds some power within the regime points to the fact that he comes from a corrupt family. As far as him concealing his Jewish roots. Why conceal it? Does he have something to hide? If you're Jewish, then just admit it.
Zimmerman does not seem like a good guy

His cousin accused him of rape. [1]First, there have been many cases of people being falsely accused of rape. Second, those charges were only made after the Martin case went public. Throwing in another accusation on top of this could just be a way of kicking Zimmerman (whom she could have had a grudge with) while he's down.He was recently arrested for attacking his wife. [2]"[Zimmerman] 'accosted' her father and 'punched' him in the nose, leaving a 'mark' on his face. But fire officials who responded to the scene 'checked everyone physically' and found that 'no one had any visible marks or needed any treatment,' according to Hudson."Obviously, this has no real evidence. Later on in the article, it's mentioned that Zimmerman's ex-wife has a history of lying to the point of being charged over it.He killed Trayvon Martin. We could have a debate on this alone. He acted in self-defense, both parties acted poorly, and Zimmerman was found not guilty. End of story. If you would like to continue this conversation, I'd be happy to.His daddy is a judge. He is concealing his Jewish roots.And this pertains to Zimmerman being a bad person how?He has a history of violence. He has a police record. [3]Zimmerman was charged with "resisting officer with violence," and the charges were then reduced, and then waived completely. Zimmerman and his ex-fiancee filed restraining orders against each other due to domestic abuse, and both were granted. Oh, and Zimmerman was caught speeding. Now, obviously Zimmerman's record isn't clean, but it's nothing unheard of. My mother-in-law has a restraining order against her for attacking her ex's mistress. But she couldn't be a nicer person. And since the first charge was waived completely, it's hard to take it seriously in the first place- if Zimmerman had any truly bad record, those charges would never have been lowered, let alone dropped completely.And let's not forget that Zimmerman helped save a family of four from an overturned vehicle. Now, he could have kept driving, and no one would be any the wiser. But he did stop and saved a family- two kids included. Meanwhile, he and his family and anyone even remotely connected with him are receiving death threats. The American people seem to think that violence begets violence, even though Zimmerman's doing his best to continue life and live down his past. [4] I'd never say that Zimmerman's perfect, or a hero among men. Life happens, bad things happen. But Zimmerman is clearly doing his best to turn his life around, and I think that speaks volumes about his character.Sources:[1] http://www.mstarz.com...[2] http://usnews.nbcnews.com...[3] http://www.allvoices.com...[4]http://www.foxnews.com...
'cookie cutter' ideologies are a huge problem in politics and religion

Hi dairygirl. I accept your debate. I agree with you that the truth should not be skewed by ideology, and that parties tend to politicize even the most cut-and-dry affairs. However, people have the right to support whatever party they want to, as well as hold any prejudice they want to, regardless of how much others disapprove of it. I know that this stance, taken to its logical conclusion, would permit the likes of nazis and violent nationalists to be condoned in the public life. I say: let the demagogues exercise their freedoms of speech and assembly, so long as they commit no crimes. I think what this debate boils down to is how to mitigate the negative effects of granting freedom of speech to everyone. Unfortunately, there are charlatans everywhere. But, it is still every individual's right to judge for themselves what is right or wrong, and who they should follow. As long as nobody's freedoms are infringed upon, "cookie cutter" proponents of an ideology, in themselves, aren't really a problem.
'cookie cutter' ideologies are a huge problem in politics and religion

a cookie cutter conservative or liberal is someone who believes things because that's what they are suppose to believe to be liberal or conservative. all social issues, all economic issues, down to the party line. the problem, is that truth is not a party line thing. historically, we have two random parties that exist with an arbitrary array on how the issues are sorted. there's all kinds of historical and ideological ways to create a party, yet people want to adhere to what the current infrastructure is politically. they often don't put much thought into it. it's pamphlet material. it's sad when you can tell about someone by just by reading propaganda and a pamphlet. and they hardly ever defend the opposing candidates even when merited. no politician is perfect, but no politicians is completely without merit too. yet, the cookie cutter can't find it in themselves to speak favorably of an opposing candidate of their ideology. for example take a random event like the benghazi scandal. there is no ideology here, either a mistake was made or it wasn't. and not to get into the politics of that scandal specifically, but you will never hear the cookie cutter say things to defend the opposing candidate even if they are favorable. in religion, the problem is cookie cutter fundamentalists who are usually only fundamental only to things that modern fundamentalism has socially been said to espouse. bible is the word of god. non christians can't be saved. salvation by faith. faith along. bible alone. eucharist is figurative. etc etc. the problem is that there's more than one way to be a fundamentalist, even on arrays of issues, but they believe what they are suppose to to fall in line with a preexisting social order.
'cookie cutter' ideologies are a huge problem in politics and religion

a lot of this will boil down to semantics. i said it was a huge problem. con recanted his second post, and admitted it was a 'growing problem'. but not 'urgent'. he cited a study that said forty percent of people are independent. that means of the rest that are left, it is safe to assume most are cookie cutties, with some who are genuine in their beliefs of x and y party adherence. so let's say we have thirty percent of the people as cookie cutters. that seems pretty huge of a problem, doesn't it?
'cookie cutter' ideologies are a huge problem in politics and religion

Ok, so I was targeting the wrong thing. This debate is about the problem of people adhering to the status quo, or just picking parties, while not questioning the existing infrastructure. If America is supposed to be a democracy with citizens actively influencing the legislative process, then I agree that it would be dangerous to have crowds blindly follow the agenda of any political party. To be honest, I agree that uncritical political advocates are a growing problem in America right now, but compared to the pre-existing faults in our government (e.g. deficit spending, failure to regulate derivatives..), it is not an urgent matter. In fact, most people are unquestioning supporters of whatever political culture they grew up with. I think we can rely on peoples' curiosity for the truth, and that this situation can sort out itself. Want proof? According to the 4th annual TV News Trust Poll in 2013, the majority of Americans no longer trust cable news, with the exception of PBS. (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com...). A poll conducted by Rasmussen Reports in April 2014 suggests that the majority of Americans no longer trust legislators to represent them. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com...) Finally, Gallup polls for the August 7-10, 2014, show that 40% of Americans identify as Independent, more than either Democrat or Republican, respectively. (http://www.gallup.com...) So, although there are some people who decide to hide behind party lines, it seems like most of us are sick of propaganda and want compromise in Congress.
'cookie cutter' ideologies are a huge problem in politics and religion

i'm not aguing against these ideolgoies havng rights or not. but con is making the deate that way. con says cookie cuttes have rights just like the nazis have and had rights. sure, but i never said they didn't / con points out cookie cutters are not an issue with freedom of politics so they aren't a problem. but they ae a problem, at last in terms of original thinking and getting things done politicallly
Religion battle! Debate 1 of ten

Let me start by saying I, in no way itend to offend your belief in our heavenly father. I only intend to show that the SDA is not a church. I will not represent any church because some of my views do not fit into any of the belief systems that are in the churches of today. I personally believe Jesus practiced no religion(although I am a Christian) but I will not force this view upon readers. I will however, try and show why I disagree with the SDA and some of their practices.
Toxicity should be handled better in MMO RPG (LoL, Overwatch, Dota 2, ect)

While, yes, it would be expensive and make the game less playable if the company that made the game were to make a program that records every game. An alterative to this is by accessing the person's account and watching their replays. Yes, I am aware that it can cause some privacy issues, but its an idea. While yes new players will come to said game, getting rid of toxicity could mean a lot because it can make them stay in the game. To be honest, I sometimes think about whether I should play LoL because of the people on it. Yes, you do have access to a mute button, not everyone is going to know about it, and it could cause poor communication, especially when you want someone to do something. This could also go for people who are potential hackers/cheaters. I was playing a game of LoL on day and one of enemies hack by one shooting everyone. After reporting the person, almost three days after the report, he was in another game. You would think that they would crack down on cheating more, but it seems not, key word being seems. Basically, what I'm trying to get through here is that I think toxicity should be handled more, whether it be from the people who made the game, or the players themselves.
Toxicity should be handled better in MMO RPG (LoL, Overwatch, Dota 2, ect)

You have stated about the people who made the games should make a program which monitors all the games where reports happened. The idea is quite expensive as there are countless games which you can see. For example, in League of Legends where in millions of players play everyday, It is quite difficult for creators (or game developers) to create such "program" to monitor all reported games. Toxicity makes a community worse. Yes it is true, but it can never bring you any harm. It depends on how you will handle it. Most players suggest you to use the "mute" button so that you won't see what the "toxic player" is saying. For the Verlisify argument, Yes he is one toxic youtuber. But youtube can't do anything about him as long as (I've stated above) he cannot harm anyone. And after all it depends on how you understand his toxicity, Of course for entertainment because that's his job. (but hey he's the one made me play competitive pokemon) For a community to get better, you have to learn from the "toxic people" you cannot remove them in a gaming community. New players occur everyday, you would not know if they are toxic or not.
Toxicity should be handled better in MMO RPG (LoL, Overwatch, Dota 2, ect)

I believe toxicity should be handled better in MMO RPG. For example, I play League of Legends and there are toxic players, no doubt about that. I feel like the people who made the game should have some sort of program where it records all of the games so where if someone reports another for toxicity or hacking, they can watch that game and know the truth. I honestly believe toxicity is what makes a community worse. For example, Verlisify (a PokeTuber on YouTube) is basically cancer on YouTube, and yet no one does anything about it. Verlisify makes the YouTube community and the PokeTuber/Pokemon community worse, not single handedly, but helps with the toxicity. My point is, for a community to get better, I believe that the majority of the toxicity in these MMO RPG should be taken or pervented.
Something CAN come out of Nothing.

Pro seems to be speaking not simply about an area of space with no matter in it, But in a place devoid of any kind of dimensional space, Time, Physics, Etc. Such a concept is something we know hardly anything about, And is most likely beyond human comprehension. That being said, Anything we can state about it is pure speculation, And therefore the claim that something can come out of "nothing" remains unproven. As con, It is not my job to rule out the possibility. It is first the pro's job to explain how the claim they are making is possible, And then the con explains how the claim is NOT possible. Pro has not given sufficient evidence to support their claim that something can come out of nothing.
Something CAN come out of Nothing.

Pro has not claimed " Something comes out of Nothing". Pro uses the word "CAN". CAN as in possibility. I have clearly presented my argument for the possibility. No the pro has not speculated. Pro's position is all the possibilities are open when we cannot observe, Test and run experiments on the "nothing". Instead something HAS to come out of nothing is mere speculation because no one had performed experiments on the Nothing. For anything to exist requires powerful. . . . . " This is speculation. How do you know that? You don't know what happened before and outside the Big Bang. Once again my position is not "Something COMES out if nothing" but something "CAN" It is therefore to the CON that the burden if proof lies to completely rule out the possibility.
Something CAN come out of Nothing.

"but the whole of space-time, Which was non-existent before the Big Bang. " How do you know this? Pro's argument is mainly just speculation, Without any evidence to back up said claims. Logic dictates that nothing can be spontaneously created, For anything to exist would require something powerful enough to break the laws of logic and science, Such as a God, And pro evidently is not arguing for this. I repeat that as pro is making the claim, The burden of proof lies on them, And proof is something they have not yet presented.