BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
MLP:FiM Should Keep on Going

1. Simpsons Comparison The Simpsons should not have lasted as long as it did. Either way, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic is a kids show, so it's in a different category. It's not expected to last very long before the Franchise receives a reboot. 2. Power Rangers I shalt forgive thee of thy heinous blasphemy this once... Nah, it's fine. I suppose you kind of have to be a long time fan to really like it. That or a little kid, but the former is more likely. Anyways... 3. Dumb Song that Pro Sung Um...no comment. 4. Outdated Graphics I must admit that MLP:FiM has a higher "resolution" than the original Digimon (note that it seemed somewhat distorted), but at the same time notice how simple (might I say it, crude/primitive) shapes and character/background designs. Also, Digimon Adventure 01 being an anime does not negate the fact that it was aired in the year 1999. 5. Franchise Reboot Pro asked the following question: why? Well, the reason for this is what I call "Series Burnout". Here's a classic example with the 2003 Ninja Turtles reboot, which went on for too long: http://turtlepedia.wikia.com... The same is likely to happen to MLP:FiM if it goes on much longer. If you want your precious series to die with dignity, end it now, before it burns out. You said that would cost too much money, but the series probably made the producers a lot of money, enough to make a new series and hire a good writer. Question: Why does a reboot necessarily mean that the reboot won't be as good as MLP:FiM? 6. Disappointed Fans, Money Wasted on Promotion and Advertising Fans can suck it (if there was a massive brony riot that'd be entertaining to watch) and Sunk Coast Fallacy. The new reboot series would arguably make more money than the FiM is capable of making now. Think about it: probably every Brony already has the Apple Jack, Rainbow Dash, Fluttershy, Twilight Sparkle, Spike, and Princess Celestia plush toys. They have no reason to buy another one. They already have the dvds and the "I am a gay brony" bumper stickers. But if they make a brand new series, the hardcore bronies will buy all the new merchandise. Kaching! Even if some of the bronies boycott the new merchandise, probably most won't, especially if this new series is popular. And of course, to some degree they may continue to sell the old toys to keep raking in a profit. Back to Pro.
Truth is an objective feature of reality

Needless to say, I am disappointed that the previous round was forfeited. However, I do believe that it serves to reinforce the fact that the denial of objective truth implodes on itself. I will only re-state an illustration used in the first round. Trying to deny objective truth is like trying to write an essay in which you argue that the written word cannot convey meaning. Or like a professor giving a lecture on the notion that language cannot convey meaning. Or building a logically air-tight case that logic does not exist. These things cannot be done because each of them use the very thing the try to disprove. In this case, one must make the objective claim that objective truth does not exist. But that can never be done because you must use the thing you try to refute. You end up sawing off the branch that you are sitting on; the argument defeats itself. Therefore, it is imposable to argue that objective truth does not exist. Given this fact, the only vote which can be cast honestly is in favor of the proposition.
Truth is an objective feature of reality

I contend that objective truth (not merely subjective truth) is real and knowable. My opponent will argue that truth is either not objective, not knowable, or both. First round is acceptance only. 6,000 character max Definitions: Truth - the real facts about something; the things that are true; the quality or state of being true; a statement or idea that is true or accepted as true.[1] Objective reality - [would] refer to anything that exists as it is independent of any conscious awareness of it (via perception, thought, etc.).[2] Subjective reality - [would] include anything depending upon some (broadly construed) conscious awareness of it to exist.[3] To be sure that my opponent understands the nature of objectivity vs. subjectivity, it is imperative that we come to know that subjective truth's are dependent upon a subject, while something that is objectively true is wholly independent of anyone knowing it. Subjective truth then, might be different from person to person or culture to culture (such as a favorite ice-cream flavor or the 'right' side of the road to drive on). On the other hand, objective truth does not change, irrespective of people's opinions. By accepting this debate, my opponent accepts the definition of these terms. [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com... [2] http://www.iep.utm.edu... [3] http://www.iep.utm.edu...
Burritos Are Better Than Tacos

Let me start off by saying that the standard taco has on average 20 more calories than the average 100g burrito. Burritos also have more magnesium. Studies show that Mexicans prefer burritos to tacos. They are the pros on this kind of thing. The Asian minority of Idaho says that burritos are better. As we can clearly see, burritos are the more ethnically friendly of the two. These studies came from Mexico. Google also said these things. Burritos have the ability to contain much more flavor. A taco can only have so many layers. Depending on the girth of the tortilla, a burrito has more potential to be filled with healthy things, like lettuce, and bacon.
Burritos Are Better Than Tacos

We seem to have an assumption here. You believe that this "Alan B." is a student who often attends class at the local high school. This is not true. The Alan B. that I speak of is 100% pure Mexican. He is the most Mexican Mexican I know. He loves burritos, hates tacos. So does the rest of his family ( which is composed of about 30 Mexicans). That is a fairly large chunk of people who love burritos and hate tacos. One of the problems with tacos, he said, is that they are not portable. Imagine this: you are camping with your family, when suddenly a bear attacks your camp. He is distracted by a can of beans that you throw at him (which you were just using to create a healthy, better-than-taco, chunky burrito). You manage to run off into the forest with your family. Assuming that you don't kill and eat your family members in order to survive, (this is not a very likely option seeing as your brother, Jose, weighs about two hundred and thirty five pounds (pure muscle, might I add)) your best bet is to make a burrito. You search for your supplies but, alas, you did not bring the correct supplies (a tortilla). You reach into your pack thinking that you will be saved by these so called "tacos" but you then realize that the only remnants of the taco shells is a very fine dust. They have completely shattered within your backpack! You then kill your entire family, only to have the bear drawn to their remains by the fresh smell of blood, and are eaten. You get the picture. In order to get this so called "taco salad", you must break your taco shell, thus showing the woman sitting next to you that tacos are inferior in every way. What if your taco shell breaks while a homeless man is sitting next to you? What then? With a burrito, you can open the bottom very nonchalantly and begin to receive a " burrito salad". You can open your burrito on your own terms, thus making sure that no homeless man will ever be in contact with your junk. A burrito appears to look like a dick, thus attracting women to your side when you eat. A taco, however, resembles a vagina. This will only attract lonely, bi-sexual men to your side while you eat, witch will get extremely uncomfortable.
Burritos Are Better Than Tacos

Tacos, Tacos are what i would like to call multi functional. not only are they ever so tasty, but after you are done with a taco and everything that has fallen out is in your lap you can ask the attractive Mexican woman next to you if she would like a "taco salad". It is a proven technique for young businessmen in Mexico city to get Handy Js filled with sour cream, or the occasional woman that just needs some ground beef in her thatch. i would like to point out that pros resource (alan b.) is in fact an Asian and would only have been a reliable source if this debate were regarding to small breasts, sushi, or suicide to preserve honor in conclusion, Tacos are obviously the victorious food in this case because only a true man would choose a taco, because tacos look like vaginas. Men ,other than Pro Burrito extremists, generally like vaginas, and tacos. case closed
Burritos Are Better Than Tacos

A very reliable source once said that burritos taste like sweaty balls and he was a Mexican he was also on cocaine. Regardless of this fact, burritos just dont have the texture your every day taco contains. Tacos can have a variety of things on them like sour cream, hot sauce, baby cats, and much, much more. Tacos obviously have the upper hand in this ongoing battle to free the world from burrito poops. Burritos are awful for the septic system and cannot be broken down once flushed. One night your laying in bed and the next day there is your burrito floating back up in a sewer flood. That cant be vacuumed up. www.absolutepunk.net " Forums " GeneralR06;
I Should Have Won This Debate

I putting my rebuttals in bold to avoid confusion."A form of plagiarism is merely a type plagiarism. Copy and pasting whole paragraphs without quoting them properly is considered a specific type of plagiarism. The analogy between murder and manslaughter is different. Murder is seperate from manslaughter, however, an inadequate paraphrase is a type of plagiarism. Therefore, a form of plagiarism is plagiarism, just a specific type. Let's go back to my Harvard University website, shall we? What Subutai commited whether intentional or not, was an inadequate paraphrase."My point is that his form of plagiarism is not the same at intentionally plagairizing. He referenced the source and failed to put quotes around it. The analogy I made works. Manslaughter is a form of murder although you wouldn't call it murder. Failing to put quotes but citing the source is a form of plagiarism, although you wouldn't call it plagiarism.You reference Harvard University as if it were the standard on which all citing is referenced. It's a prestigious school, but the requirements of Harvard and debate.org are not one in the same. "My opponent states that plagiarism wasn't evident to any of the 4 who voted and it didn't detract much from the debate. However, one of the voters (rross) realized after the debate that what Subutai did was clearly plagiarism. If you look at the debate again, rross criticized Subutai in the comments section. Yes, voters aren't machines, but what I'm saying is that I should have won sine Subutai plagiarized (given the evidence from Harvard University). Con also states that he won fair and square based on the decisions and information the voters acted on. However, the voters didn't know that Subutai plagiarized. Did he win fair and square? Rross figured it out too late; she only realized this after the debate."As I stated earlier, voters are not machines and have to make their best judgement with the evidence they have. At the time of the debate, none of the 4 voters noticed the lack of quotation marks. It is silly to go back through debates that are already decided and claim to have won based on voter criteria that was made in the best judgement of the voters. They have a double-jeopardy rule in court where if you are found not-guilty, you cannot be tried again. The same rule should apply here. Especially for a minor technicality like this."If we go back to the analogy about the jury, airmax1227 would be the judge. Airmax1227 deducts conduct and arguments from the plagiarizer, and since he's a competent voter, he probably would've given me them. By that logic, I should've won since plagiarism isn't accepted in DDO."That is based purely on speculation, and I have reason to believe armax1227 would agree with me since the debate has already been decided by best judgements of the voters. Voters were given the power by design to decide the outcome of a debate. Since none of the voters noticed the mistake in quotation at the time of the vote, his win should remain. The claim that you should have won the debate is false based on this evidence.Thank you
I Should Have Won This Debate

It would help if you didn't criticize me on not reading the debate then use a broken link to it. I did read it and look at the voting section through your profile."Con also states the this form of plagiarism was unintended because he referenced the source he got it from. As true as this may be, this doesn't change the fact that it's still plagiarism."You admit that it is a form of plagiarism, but then say it is plagiarism. It was a case of incorrect sourcing, which is a form of (unintentional) plagiarism, not plagiarism. It is not the same. You could say that people who accidentally kill other people in car accidents are murderers, but it's unintentional manslaughter.The conduct points were tied but arguments weren't. You say that he should've been deducted by plagiarizing. If the plagiarism wasn't evident to the 4 people who voted, did it really detract that much from the debate? Voters aren't machines, they overlook some details just like a jury might overlook minor evidence in court. The same rule we have in court of double-jeopardy should be applied to that debate. He won fair and square based on the decisions and information the voters acted on.Making an unintentional mistake on a job application in the reference source is relevant to this debate, since he made a mistake in how he referenced a few of his sources. Ultimately it us up to the employer to decide whether or not the applicants signature that verifies all of the information in the application is true based on the integrity of the applicant - he can be denied the job for his error but it does not bar him from it - whether or not to give the applicant a job is at his discretion. The point of making this analogy is that Subutai (applicant) made a mistake in the referencing process but the voters (employer) decided to overlook it and accepted it. Therefore Subutai won on fair grounds.
I Should Have Won This Debate

My RefutationsPlagiarism isn't accepted on DDO, and is considered cheatingCon: "True, however, you must take into account that it was true plagiarism"I did actually take into account that it was a form of plagiarism according to plagiarism.org. Con also states the this form of plagiarism was unintended because he referenced the source he got it from. As true as this may be, this doesn't change the fact that it's still plagiarism. Numerous websites point out that you must quote and source words directly coming from the author, namely Harvard University.[1]My opponent: "Given, word-for-word copy and pasted chunks is not good even though he cited the source and should have been deducted conduct and argument points for it (which he was)."No, he was not deducted arguments and conduct points. Where's your proof? Out of the four votes, he was not deducted arguments or conduct points for plagiarism. [2] However, you're right that it wasn't good enough that he cited the source.Con: "It can be likened to making a mistake on a job application, where the signature of the applicant shows that he believes all of the information to be true, but made a mistake in references along the way. In this case, he is held responsible for his fault, but it cannot be shown that his intent was to plagiarize since he referenced the sources." I'm assuming Con is implying that job applier made a mistake quoting as this has no relevance to the debate. In the case, the employer would probably tell him it was plagiarism and deny him the job.Plagiarizers get dedected conduct and argument pointsNo, he was not deducted conduct, (assuming you mean conduct) and argument points as I've said before. Did you even look at the debate?My oppenent claims that since conduct and arguments are only a part of the debate and that it was unintentional plagiarism, Subutai should've won. However, this is still plagiarism which causes plagiarizer to lose conduct and arguments. That means that competent voters that knew Subutai (not subutai) was plagiarizing, would have awarded me conduct and arguments. Consequently, this would cause me to win the debate. I look forward to your next arguments. You should probably read the debate, please. Sources: http://isites.harvard.edu...;[1]http://www.debate.org...;[2]
I Should Have Won This Debate

Plagiarism isn't accepted on DDO, and is considered cheating. True, however, you must take into account that it was true plagiarism. This form of plagiarism was unintended because he referrenced the source he pulled from. Given, word-for-word copy and pasted chunks is not good even though he cited the source and should have been deducted conduct and argument points for it (which he was).It can be likened to making a mistake on a job application, where the signature of the applicant shows that he believes all of the information to be true, but made a mistake in references along the way. In this case, he is held responsible for his fault, but it cannot be shown that his intent was to plagiarize since he referenced the sources.Plagiarizers get deducted conduct and argument pointsHe was deducted condunct and argument points for this reason. This debate was won based on voting criteria, which conduct and argument points are only a part of, and given the nature of this form of unintentional plagiarism - subutai clearly won.
I Should Have Won This Debate

I hope we'll have a fun, meaningfull debate. For the convenience of the readers and I, I think we'll keep this debate short and sweet. I don't think that'll be a problem though. Anyways let's get to the debate shall we. My ArgumentsPlagiarism isn't accepted on DDO, and is considered cheatingBasically, my opponent plagiarized by copy and pasting whole paragraphs without putting quotes around them. Here is an example: Information he got on CSA site: If rice could be genetically engineered to contain additional vitamins and minerals, nutrient deficiencies could be alleviated. For example, blindness due to vitamin A deficiency is a common problem in third world countries. Researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Institute for Plant Sciences have created a strain of "golden" rice containing an unusually high content of beta-carotene (vitamin A)13. Subutai: If rice could be genetically engineered to contain additional vitamins and minerals, nutrient deficiencies could be alleviated. For example, blindness due to vitamin A deficiency is a common problem in third world countries. Researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Institute for PlantSciences have created a strain of "golden" rice containing an unusually high content of beta-carotene (vitamin A). .. [1][6][11] [2] (my source) According to plagiarism. org, not quoting direct quotations properly is considered a form of plagiarism[1]. Even though he sourced them, he failed to put quotations. Plagiarizers get deducted conduct and argument pointsDDO president, airmax1227, gives conduct and arguments to the person who wasn't plagiarizing in debates where this is the case. [3] Most competent voters deduct conduct and arguments to the plagiarizers. Therefore, I should have won. Sources: . http://plagiarism.org...;[1]http://www.debate.org...;[2]http://www.debate.org...;[3]
I Should Have Won This Debate

The resolution is taken from the debate: Non-GMO Food is more Beneficial to Society than GMO Food. Link here: . http://www.debate.org...; I should've won because my opponent, Subutai, plagiarised the majority of his arguments in this debate. Now, I have nothing against Subutai and I think it was a misunderstanding and he unintentionally plagiarised his arguments. Definitions: Plagiarism: According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, to plagiarize is to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own [1] According to plagiarism. org, plagiarism also includes "failing to put a quotation in quotation marks. "[1] which is what Subutai failed to do in most of his arguments. Subutai copy and pasted whole paragraphs without putting quotation marks in[2]. Yes, he sourced them, but failed to quote whole copy and pasted paragraphs which is still considered plagiarism. Burden of Proof: On me, Pro. Ultimately, I should have won since plagiarism is considered unacceptable on DDO. airmax1227, the President of DDO, awards conduct and usually arguments to the other person. [3] Since plagiarism is considered unacceptable on DDO and an act of fraud, I should've won. Sources: . http://plagiarism.org...[1]http://www.debate.org...;[2]http://www.debate.org...;[3] **Note**Whether or not Subutai decides to accept this himself, is completely up to him. However, if he doesn't accept this, he cannot vote during voting period as this would be extremely biased. If he does, however, it will result in an automatic vote-bomb and will be countered by the next voter. Remember, I'm not saying Subutai is a notorious plagiarizer, I'm just saying it was probably a misunderstanding.
Biblical Creationism is more probable than atheistic naturalism

This debate will be that the Biblical Creationism is more probable than atheistic naturalism. This is not a open debate. Requirements are that you must be serious about the debate. I am looking for a serious contender. Definitions: Probable- having more evidence for than against, or evidence that inclines the mind to belief but leaves some room for doubt. Biblical creationism is in its basic form is Young earth creationism, because the basis of this belief comes from within the Holy Bible. As a Christian I hold to the Bible as being the inherent Word of God with everything therein is true and historically accurate. Atheistic naturalism is a combination of atheism and naturalism. In the most basic form it is the rejection of any deities and holds that all properties related to the physical creation are reducible to just nature. Most importantly it rejects the supernatural explanations that are the major part of many religious and theistic beliefs and instead relates it toward nature. The burden of proof is upon both. Pro must provide evidence that suggest Biblical creationism is the most probable position. While Con must also provide evidence that his atheistic naturalism is the most probable choice. Both share the burden of discrediting their opponent's case. I do not think we need many rules here except being courteous to one another and no trolling. The round structure should be that the first round is for acceptance and last round is for conclusions. The middle rounds are for clashing our arguments. I look forward to having a very interesting debate with someone. Please post in comment section to give reasons why I should pick you to debate with. Thank you to all and look forward to it.