BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The backlash against all symbols, names, and places relating to the Confederacy are unnecessary.

It is justified towards the Battle Flag which has since come down from next to the Confederate Memorial on State House grounds.(Of which the flag I believe was padlocked so it couldn't be lowered unless the legislature said so) But their call to rename everything named for them parks, schools, streets among others and to Sandblast monuments and tear them down and even go so far as grave desecration relating to Mr. Forrest. It is an attempt to erase a part of Southern history into nothing on top of a biased education of the war which only teaches the Northern View. This also has very modern implications. The South has consistently according to military demographics made up close to half of our nation's all volunteer force at exactly 41.2 percent. That being said I've seen stories of Southerners leaving the military due to this policy.Also those that support it are denying my and others rights to celebrate those brave soldiers who fought and died largely for their homes. (Slavery was a political issue and the Confederacy had slavery yes, but only 6 seceded over the specific reason of slavery and 4 seceded over Lincolns call for force against the others and Florida never gave a reason but it's assumed to be one or both.) We have a very moral right to celebrate out history as we Southerners are the only section of Americans who have been invaded, conquered, robbed and looted our homes burned and put under military occupation. Now you will be correct in saying slavery is evil. But let's broaden that aspect, all states voluntarily joined our Union and may voluntarily leave it. It was an accepted fact then and it is now. The reasons it is legal and Constitutional are cited in the Declaration of Independence, as well as the Tenth Amendment and many examples prior to 1860. So a state or Confederation of states attempting to leave withing their rights are forced back at bayonet point and under military occupation. Ask yourself if the South has not effectively been made slaves themselves? (This is to explain reasons as to the why of causes for celebration.)
The backlash against all symbols, names, and places relating to the Confederacy are unnecessary.

The shooting of 9 christian negros by a white racist in South Carolina has sparked justifiable rage amongst the local community and nation. The symbols, names, and places relating to the Confederacy are the cause of the young white racist's descent to hate. These anti-union and often anti-not white symbols placed at government institutions is a constant reminder that the government does not believe this nation is, one, under 17 bars and 50 stars.
Model Debate : Kids

" It's Thylane :3====" This is not a penis. If it was a penis, why is there no head? Stop being a smart alec, it's obvious he just forgot to put the capital D on the end. A little girl whose full name has been provided is being sexualized whether intentional or not (I think intentional). "Regarding Dtaylor, there is nothing wrong with loving another child, if they are at the same age. There is also no evidence that Dtaylor loves Thylane based only on physical appearance. " It's inappropriate to sexualize and objectify little girls and boys no matter what age you are. These types of beliefs have a way of becoming ingrained and carry over to adulthood. DROPPED ARGUMENTS 1. Showing kids being judged on their appearance can have other negative effects such as children putting too high of a value on superficial things related to their appearance. 2. Having a modeling debate of any sort but especially the type that highlights children is bad for more than just the sexualization of children. It also sets up kids for unreasonable expectations and career goals. There are very little people who can make money modeling and of those few who do, they can't make good money for long. Showing kid models makes kids think they have a chance at making a living doing that and they will spend less time studying and working hard to get a good education and more time bleaching their teeth dyeing their hair and other unhealthy things to pursue pipe dreams. 3. "the Role of the Ballot is basically how a voter should evaluate a debate. My opponent seems to take for granted that debate is a "game," wherein debaters follow a set of rules and then "win" or "lose," regardless of consequences outside this round. " "If debate is all a game--if debate has no consequences outside of the debate round--then my opponent would be absolutely right that the rules should be followed with no question. " "The people on this debate site, especially my experienced opponent, may become policy-makers or voters, and many already are. This debate site is not a bubble--the way we debate has a real effect on the world. Making that real change is what debate is all about. "
Model Debate : Kids

Its pretty obvious that I already won. I'm going to point out a few things of Wylted's 'arguments'." It's Thylane :3===="This is not a penis. If it was a penis, why is there no head?Regarding Dtaylor, there is nothing wrong with loving another child, if they are at the same age. There is also no evidence that Dtaylor loves Thylane based only on physical appearance. In summary, I didn't dropped any argument that my opponent made. I clearly rebutted his arguments last round, even though these arguments don't matter in this debate.Now for the last model...---Name: Stella Harrington------Age: 12------Heigth: 138cm--- Sister of Lake Harrington! Vote Pro!http://exposureinc.co...;
Model Debate : Kids

First, I want to point out that just about every argument I made was dropped. I should win based on this alone. I have several good reasons why my opponent doesn't get to make the rules and Why his rules shouldn't be directed. "This debate is in no way sexualizing the children." Whether my opponent's intention was to sexualize children or not this is what happened and this is why he should lose. Some comments by people observing this debate, clearly indicate children have been sexualized. In the comments " It's Thylane :3====" Clearly Rev was depicting an erect penis, while commenting on a child. Whether he is a child or not (and we have to take his word for it), he has still sexualized a child and XLAV has as well. Dtaylor has also made a lot of comments professing his love for a child model. Notice that no comments have been posted up to this point about these children's modeling skills, only the erect penis and expressions of love based clearly and only on the physical appearance of a child. In summary, my opponent dropped almost every single argument I made and has sexualized children. I urge voters to reverse some of this damage and discourage future debates which sexualize children by voting for me.
Model Debate : Kids

I already won this debate since my opponent forfeited again, intentionally broke the rules, and refuses to participate. My opponent should have talked to me about the rules before he accepted this debate, so when he accepted this debate he should have abide by the rules. My opponent also shouldn't have accepted this debate if he is not going to participate in it. Clear win for me. This debate is in no way sexualizing the children. I asked the voters to vote whoever gave the best child models, so its up to them on how they will decide which models are better. Not once did I use any inappropriate adjectives to describe the children and in no way is this debate doing any harm to children. In real life, we have models to advertise products and fashion, and child models are never used for anything sexual like bikini calendars and adult magazines. Not everyone wants to be a model, so its vague to say that child models encourage kids "to spend less time studying and working hard to get a good education and more time bleaching their teeth dyeing their hair and other unhealthy things. .. " and its absurd to say that this debate will cause harm to anyone. Now to continue this debate. Next up, we have what all the 13 year olds screaming in the comment section asked for. .. ---Name: Thylane Blondeau--- ---Age:13------Height:175cm--- She's from France!
Model Debate : Kids

"My opponent forfeited round 2 by not posting pictures of a child model, and failed to give out the name, age and height of the given child." I intentionally broke the rules of this debate. According to KBUB: "the Role of the Ballot is basically how a voter should evaluate a debate. My opponent seems to take for granted that debate is a "game," wherein debaters follow a set of rules and then "win" or "lose," regardless of consequences outside this round." "If debate is all a game--if debate has no consequences outside of the debate round--then my opponent would be absolutely right that the rules should be followed with no question." "The people on this debate site, especially my experienced opponent, may become policy-makers or voters, and many already are. This debate site is not a bubble--the way we debate has a real effect on the world. Making that real change is what debate is all about." http://www.debate.org... Kbub's right. If what happens in this debate had no effect on the outside world then the debate's rules should be followed, no question. However the voters have a moral obligation to insure that people who initiate debates that could contribute to the real world sexual violence to children, lower self esteem for kids and unrealistic expectations of their future, are deincentivized from doing so in the future. I urge the judges to please not let my opponent be rewarded for the irreparable harm he is doing to children. Use your vote as a weapon in defense of defenseless kids. Vote Con: Also it should be noted, that my opponent has dropped all arguments. He has failed to show why his rules should be mindlessly obeyed. @XLAV, let's end this debate in an honorable way with you apologizing for contributing to content that harms children and forfeiting.
Model Debate : Kids

My opponent forfeited round 2 by not posting pictures of a child model, and failed to give out the name, age and height of the given child. Alana Thomson, a.k.a: Honey Boo Boo, (the person in the pictures Wylted posted) is not a child model, she is an actress. [1][1] http://www.imdb.com...Now on to my next model...---Name: Lake Harrington------Age: 9------Height: 128cm--- On to Wylted! http://exposureinc.co...
Model Debate : Kids

1. My opponent shouldn't be instigating this debate. I refuse to pit one child against another to be judged based upon looks. My opponent should lose this debate based on the fact that sexualizing children is immoral. It can lead to a society where child predators feel more comfortable and even justified in pursuing their sick urges. This is clearly something that should be fought at every turn so we don't inadvertently contribute to the victimization of children in the future.2. Having a modeling debate of any sort but especially the type that highlights children is bad for more than just the sexualization of children. It also sets up kids for unreasonable expectations and career goals. There are very little people who can make money modeling and of those few who do, they can't make good money for long. Showing kid models makes kids think they have a chance at making a living doing that and they will spend less time studying and working hard to get a good education and more time bleaching their teeth dyeing their hair and other unhealthy things to pursue pipe dreams.3. Showing kids being judged on their appearance can have other negative effects such as children putting too high of a value on superficial things related to their appearance. "A study recently published in the American Journal of Health and Educationn showed that women who read health and fitness magazines were significantly more likely to have practiced unhealthy weight control methods than were moderate or infrequent readers, says Steven Thomsen, Ph.D., the study's author and an associate communications professor at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah. Nearly 80 percent of frequent readers had induced vomiting, 73 percent had taken diet pills and 60 percent had used laxatives. And women who limited their daily caloric intake read health and fitness magazines more frequently than those who did not restrict their diets." http://www.psychologytoday.com...With that being said, I will post some fun pictures of Honey Boo Boo but those in no way do anything to sexualize children unlike the photoes my opponent posted, since she lost her show and is a little overweight it cerainly won't lead to a loss of self confidence by little girls or to them developing eating disorders such as bulimia or anarexia. A positive message for girls of all sizes. Honey Boo Boo speaking out against homophobia Honey Boo Boo exposing the fact that Elvis did fake his death.
Model Debate : Kids

Wylted vs MeWith all these hot model debates going around, I had an idea to make one for kids.Each round the users will post 6-7 pictures of a child model. The mininum age is 4 years old, while the maximum age is 13 years old. The pictures should be the same model in one round.Name, Age and height are required for each model posted.DefinitionsKids - A child/ a human being who's age is around 4-13 years oldModel - A person emplyed to pose for an artist or photographerChild model - A child employed to pose for an artist or photographerStructureRound one is for acceptance only.Round two is for model posting for both Pro and Con.Round three is for model posting for both Pro and Con.Round four is for model posting for both Pro and Con.Round five is for model posting for both Pro and Con.RulesForfeiting is an automatic lose.No semantics.VotingWhoever you think gave the best child models should win.
African Americans deserve the right to vote

Those of African-American decent do not deserve the right to vote. The White settlers risked everything they had coming to America. Sure, African-Americans have been here just as long, but they came in chains. White settlers came to build a new life, and built one. African-Americans weren't imported until the White settlers had things built up, at least in the general area. Sure, the contributions of African-Americans are undeniable, but the US was founded by white hands and white minds standing on black backs. It wasn't the people's country, it was the white men's country. The Northerners may have condemned slavery, but they didn't dare put it in writing because the Southerners would never agree to it. The White Americans built America from the ground up, risking their own lives, and the African-Americans don't deserve the right to vote in it.
African Americans deserve the right to vote

I'm not sure what you mean by came first. The MayFlower landed in MA, and jump started the Puritan movement who's descendants wrote the Declaration of Independence, and Constitution. Human life started in Africa, and the first people were black. Is that what your getting at? They were the ancestors of all of the humans in Eurasia and Africa. Just because the humans in Europe grew pale skin, doesn't mean that their ancestors were younger, they were the same people. Europeans just changed more than Africans did. Europeans were the founders of the US, and the African-Americans that just hung around for the ride don't deserve a vote.
Young Earth creationism.

I am perplexed by my opponent's arguments. I will attempt to break this down and - to put it bluntly - tear it to pieces without causing further confusion to the audience."I never accepted MysticEgg definition of year." True, but saying nothing to be deceptive later is trickery and reflects poorly on my opponent's conduct."I will be quoting my opponent and me.Me ( First round ): A year is a time unit.Me( Round 3) :You agreed than a year is a time unit.Do you deny that time is relative?" I have already answered this: Yes and no."MysticEgg (Round 3) :Yes, a year is a time unit. And yes, time is relative.So my opponent agrees that time is year unit and time is relative." I do.Now, my opponent employs faulty logic, although it might seem sound at first glance.P1) A year is a time unit.P2) Time is relative.C) Therefore, a year is relative. - That is my opponent's argument, set out formally. Does it work? Well, allow me to be more specific to demonstrate the fallacy. P1) A year is 365 days. P2) 365 days are relative. C) Therefore, one year is relative.If you haven't noticed, one year = 365 days. Therefore, premise two can be logically changed to: "one year is relative". This is all fine and dandy, until we see the conclusion. It's the same as premise two, just rephrased! This is called circular reasoning[1] and is not logical. The fallacy committed is refuted. (It is deductively valid but gives no supporting evidence, so it is fallacious).Maybe I completely mis-interpreted this. However, my opponent has given me little to go on. I feel like he's "winking" and nudging my shoulder saying: "You know what I mean, right?" But I don't! I request that, to help everyone, please set out your argument as formally as you can."Now with a little help of my friends the black holes I can win this debate with ease.Of course as long as my opponent doesn"t deny my definition of year.I think my opponent nows what i am planing sonce he had a very similar debate ." Please, tell me about these black holes in an argument; so that I can refute them! I'm lunging at shadows, and it's probably confusing us all. I do know what you're planning, but you need to set it out before I can refute it. Anyways, until then, I will extend my contention and sign off. For now.Thanks,JSource(s):[1]http://en.wikipedia.org...
Young Earth creationism.

I never accepted MysticEgg definition of year. I will be quoting my opponent and me. Me ( First round ): A year is a time unit. Me( Round 3) : You agreed than a year is a time unit. Do you deny that time is relative? MysticEgg (Round 3) : Yes, a year is a time unit. And yes, time is relative. So my opponent agrees that time is year unit and time is relative. Now I will Quote my opponent in his first round. Lastly, I would ask that, if possible, all definitions come from www.oxforddictionaries.com, as they have the most trustworthy and expansive definition. My response in my second round: Of course that I will use Oxford I'm waiting for your first argument. So I accepted to use Oxford Dictionary. Definition coming from Oxford Dictionary: 2.1 a period of 365 days starting from any date. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... Now let"s quote my opponent first round: As they have the most trustworthy and expansive definition. (They=Oxford dictionary (added by me)). So by definition my opponent should not have anything against this definition. Well That makes a year independent from Earths revolutions. A year being only time is relative making the year that Earth exists relative. Now with a little help of my friends the black holes I can win this debate with ease. Of course as long as my opponent doesn"t deny my definition of year. I think my opponent nows what i am planing sonce he had a very similar debate . And now the most inmportant question : Why so serious ?
Young Earth creationism.

It is a shame that this is going to be one of the so called "troll debates". I wish it were not so. Ah well, I will continue on, anyway, in the hopes of salvaging something from this. Yes, a year is a time unit. And yes, time is relative. However, does that mean that, the number of revolutions the Earth has completed around the Sun is relative? No! And that is where my opponent's argument falls. A simple misunderstanding. I extend my contention. While I was planning to expand this round, in the light of recent revelations (i.e. "Joker out !"), I will keep my arguments to a minimum. I will only put in effort my opponent has earned it. Thanks and apologies for the disappointment, everyone. J, out.
Young Earth creationism.

Ah, very well!Contention One: Dendrochronology. For those that don't know, dendrochronology is "tree-ring dating"[1]. Now, if I can just show that the Earth is at the least 6,001 years old, then I have fulfilled my burden. But I can do better than one year older than fits the definition of young. I give the King Clone desert bush as my example, thought to be ~11,700 years old[2]. This was dated by simply counting the rings. A pretty fool-proof method! Due to school time, I have been away, so I apologise to the audience for proposing such a short contention. However, I will not only expand upon it next time, but I believe that, this time, my burden is fulfilled! I rest my case! (For now...)Thanks again and I expect my opponent's openening contention(s) to be good!Source(s):[1]http://en.wikipedia.org...[2]Long-Lived Clones in the Mojave Desert, Frank C. Vasek, American Journal of Botany, Vol. 67, No. 2 (Feb., 1980), pp. 246-255
Young Earth creationism.

First off, a huge thanks to my opponent for challenging me to this debate, today. I'm more than glad to face you.Second, despite my opponent's generous offer, of me using both my first and last rounds for arguments, I want to keep things as fair as possible. Therefore, to ensure that we have the same amount of room for debating (i.e. 40,000 characters each), I will simply use this round for acceptance. I accept to the rules, but I suggest an expanded definition of the word "year": noun "the time taken by the earth to make one revolution around the sun."[1] I hope my opponent will accept this definition.Lastly, I would ask that, if possible, all definitions come from www.oxforddictionaries.com, as they have the most trustworthy and expansive definition. Many thanks and good luck to all!See you on the other side,JSource(s):[1]http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...
Knowledge Requires Experience

Pro states "know=physical experience=true". While I don't contend that knowledge is arguably true, there is no reason to suggest that knowledge is always gained through physical experience. Pro continues to say that truth is the memory of knowledge...which makes no sense. Pro also says that true is the opposite of false, which is correct but has nothing to do with the resolution. Pro states that truth can only be in the past, which makes no sense either. In fact, Pro hasn't proved anything besides that he can use equal sign.=Case=Since the resolution pertains to the absolute, I only need to find one example of knowledge existing without experience as a precursor to succesfully negate. 1. Instincts. Certain animals have instincts that tell that what to do during certain seasons. For example, birds in the northern hemisphere migrate south for the winter and return north when spring comes. They are wired to think this way, and there is no evidence to suggest that birds do this because of physical experience. They simply *know* when to migrate and how to act during different seasons. In this example, experience is not a precursor to knowledge.2. Identity. People have a sense of identity their entire life. Gender is an example of this, in which people know which gender they belong to. No one can say that they knew that they were a male or female based on their physical experiences, but rather they simply contain the knowledge that they are one or the other. Gender Identity Disorder[1] is a good example of how physical experience does not come into play because of the inherent knowledge that one's self is male or female. While bodily experience suggests otherwise, people know which category they belong to.Those are just some examples, but they're enough to negate the resolution.[1] http://tinyurl.com...