BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Consequentialism is wrong

I appreciate my opponent's clarification. Thank you for the debate, it has been fun. #1. Moral realism requires intrinsic values. Happiness is quantifiable and measurable (see link below), so if we were to use that form of consequentialism, this point would be rendered false and therefore irrelevant to the matter at hand. #2. This is false. Stating that a situation in which good things happen is better than situations where bad things happen has nothing to do with the ability to attain such a situation. Consequentialism states that when ignorance leads to horrendous outcomes it is bad, and when malice leads to utopia, it is good. Ability and knowledge concerning either would be a matter of applied ethics rather than normative. #3. No, but there are consequences to things and they have value. The point of consequentialism is that bad intentions are good if they lead to good things. In summary: #1. What you are describing is consequentialism. #2. Ignorance and malice are irrelevant if they make things better. $3. Consequences do occur however, and their value is grossly important. I urge you to vote con. http://sonjalyubomirsky.com...
Consequentialism is wrong

My opponent is struggling to decode my arguments so I shall lay them out in a sentence-by-sentence manner that shall hopefully shed some more clarity upon this. Extensive list manner: #1 Consequences are non-quantifiable and immeasurable. There is no way to determine whether one set of consequences is more or less desirable than another outside of flawed subjective interpretation that, itself, is non-consequential in basis as it is applying intrinsic valuing to judge the consequences. #2 Relying on the consequence of an act to determine its moral value presumes that he one doing the act is capable of knowing the consequences. It ignores limitations of perception and confuses ignorance for malice. #3 There is no such thing as a consequence of an action alone. Everything requires extraneous variables to alter the future. For example, if one punches someone and their migraine suddenly becomes easier to cope with due to the numbing effect, this person is now labelled as a consequential savior even though the 'goodness' of their action was never part of the intended malice. Shorter version of the list (the numbers correspond to their caption): #1 To judge consequences requires intrinsic values being assigned to the consequences. #2 The ignorance of an individual trying to do good resulting in harm would have them labelled as a consequential villain when it is more true to say that they are kind-hearted. #3 Extraneous variables mean that that actions of an individual never are the sole cause for the consequences that seemingly result from the action. Often unforeseeable events occur that alter the consequences to become offset from their intended path Shortest version (numbers still correspond): #1 The only way to judge consequences is by their intrinsic, non-consequential, value. #2 Ignorance is not malice. #3 Consequences are never the direct result of one action or event alone.
PC gaming is better than console gaming

My opponents first claim "PC gaming is better because it has more power and better efficiency than console" can be refuted by a simple observation. That being that the average PC is produced for web browsing and nothing more. As a result on average consoles will be better at playing video games because they are made for it. My opponents second claim "also a controller has limited buttons while a keyboard has many different options" is also an interesting one. He states that since a controller has less buttons it is inferior yet, for fighting games its universally agreed that controllers are a stronger choice. In addition nearly every single game does not need all the buttons a keyboard has. The only genre that does not work on console is MMO's and they hardly make up a large portion of gamers. My opponents third claim "A PC is internally upgrade while a console has limited upgrade-ability". I would like to first note the grammatical error that he makes in saying "A PC is internally upgrade" instead of a PC is internally upgrade-able. The next point I would like to make is that while PC's are more easily upgrade-able most people are not tech savy enough to perform these upgrades. And these upgrades are expensive. Consoles serve as a good introduction to gaming and being that the industry can only survive if more people join it consoles are helpful to the industry and by extension gaming as a whole. My opponents fourth claim " As well as a PC has many more different uses but a console is pretty much only for gaming." I would again point out the grammatical error. And being that this debate is over gaming the other uses a computer has is irrelevant given that the topic of discussion is not if PCs are better than consoles but rather which serves as a better source of gaming. I would now like to put fourth the following points- 1. Console gaming serves as a good introduction to video games. Most gamers start on a console. As a result consoles poor a huge amount of money into the gaming industry and by extension improve the quality of gaming everywhere. 2.Consoles are more affordable. To have a PC that outperforms a console you will need to spend more money. 3.Consoles promote innovation. Having to work within the constraint of a console lead to developers improving their problem solving skills and bettering their ability to package things into smaller amounts of data and cut out unnecessary features that would only bog down a system in needless complexity.
Rap Battle: The Joker (Pro) vs Guido Fawkes (Con)

And now for something that isn't a round of rap, because as per the rules, absconding absconding blahdy blahdy blah. So don't p*ss your pants, Greenie. Lord knows it's unlikely I'll sway any votes with a third round of stank rhymes. For those of you that don't already, check out Epic Rap Battles of History (ERB) on Youtube. Beethoven Vs Justin Bieber? Einstein Vs. Stephen Hawking? Blackbeard Vs. Al Capone? Aw sh*t son! Dese raps be fresh like market-ready cucumbers, yo!...is...is that how the kids say it? F*ck it, enjoy the voting.
Rap Battle: The Joker (Pro) vs Guido Fawkes (Con)

You wanna be tough, Stanley Ipkiss? Well here... we... go! You speak a lot of words, you like to put on a show. You're acting out of your time, talking like some hipster. Making me suspect you've had too much liquor. I don't spit "Deadshots"-- I kill hotshots. Like this Snowden wannabe tryin' to twist my stomach into knots. I'm gonna stab my knife where your sun won't shine, I'll make you see spots! Hopefully they'll find you before your corpse rots. I'm a boss! I'm putting Dents in your career faster than the Baron did. You're out of your league, and York's a-callin' your name, kid. Who care if this is funny? I'm all about the punchline. Your reign of intimidation is over, b*tch! The time is mine! I'm stylin' the color of royalty, and I'm the king. Life would be so boring if my popularity wasn't on an upswing. I'll keep coming back, and back, and back! You can't hold me down. I'm the toughest sh*t you'll ever face, I ain't some sad-*ss clown. I can't be killed, I've got a criminal empire to build. I can't be jailed, cause Arkham failed. I can't be beat, my flows are too sweet. I can't be influenced, so quit trying to do it to us! Gotham needed a hero and I came to its rescue. I'll use some of your powder, French-Fry your sorry *ss on the barbecue. Governments don't fear the people, they fear the Joker! So Fawke you, Mr. Vive La Revolution, you punk-*ss poser! I'll slay the Batman, make you wear HIS mask. No point in reformation if you can't do it with class. I've got the balls to rip off my own face. Every plot I make is pulled off with cackling grace. It's not about anarchy, it's about sending a message. If you can't do that, you don't have courage. You couldn't act alone, you needed a whole team. My men are collateral, replaceable to all degrees. Tell your Caesar Conspirators they work for ME now, cause this is MY city. It's a shame I'll have to put you down this early, what a pity. Why don't I cut you up into pieces and feed you to your sleeper-agent followers? Or even better yet, show you how I got these scars? Let's put a true smile on that fake grin of yours. And toss you in a vat of acid, even out the score. You need to realize the fact you've lost, and now it's time to pay. J'ai- Gagne- Cette- Guerre!
Rap Battle: The Joker (Pro) vs Guido Fawkes (Con)

Come on now, really? You're gonna b*tch about masks? Is all that lead paint on your face makin' you gasp? You ought to know better than to trust imitations So don't act like I've a teenager's limitations My lyrical wit has pierced thicker shells and I've sent more than one politico straight down to hell because death and destruction only go so far You need to win hearts and minds to raise the bar. So you make fun of my methods, yawn, so predictable It'd be funny except you're as slow as a dirigible I'm the Bane of your existence make no mistake I out Two-Faced politicos and I watch them break If my rhymes are too Strange for you you'd better beware I'm just sat here spitting Deadshots with my Macbook Air So when you pick yourself up and dust the Clay from your Face You could take a job as a Scarecrow with that face You move like Poison Ivy's in your pants and Zsaaz too So Riddler me this, what really DO you do? People been layin' bombs and shooting dudes for a number of years Don't need a eunuch clown to teach the meaning of fear but if you're the best we got then I'll endure your weak flow Though I'd rather rap with White Rabbit and see how deep her hole goes. School's in session boy you're gonna get an education a million lines on theboard "I will pick a less ridiculous vocation" I'll just be over here with my legions of fans The pen is mightier than the exploding van. People don't fear your wrath, just your bullets They have this thing called kevlar now, look into it. They ought to fear your jokes though, they're truly deadly If dyin' of boredom's a regular medicinal medly Your chaos is weak, you make sh*t up like a crazy bum You're worse than youtube comments "lol so randumb" There are boards on 4chan scarier than you and that's f*cking funny, you know it's true. So I suppose you want some grandiose "so long!" Since I think its your bedtime, before the Bat's song I'd read you a story but you'd probably miss the point So instead I'll just lock you up in the joint and even if you're out in a week, that puts me at ease Gotham could use seven days of peace If Governments fear their people then so should you You get regularly smacked by a gimp in a black tutu Sticks and stones can break my bones but you could never touch me. Not with weak-@ss raps like those, they're worse than Imma Be! So I'll leave a nightlight on for you, don't be scared The bat can't get you in prison, only Bubba Jared So get in touch with your feminine side or spend your life on the run, always havin' to hide From the Bat, from Me, and from life itself. But Knight always falls, and I'm concerned for your 'ealth So go back to doing children's parties and bar mitzfahs I'm done talking to such a weak Chutzpah
Rap Battle: The Joker (Pro) vs Guido Fawkes (Con)

Tell me chienne Guido, why so serious? Why wear that mask, and try to be mysterious? Why are you afraid to show your face to the Joker? Is it because your whole existence is so mediocre? I have given a name to my pain, I see, and it's you. You're a pretty sad excuse for a rebel, it's true. No one knows who I truly am, no one knows my life story. I'll do whatever I want to show off my full glory. I'll take two ships of hostages, burn all the town's money. Smoking black powder, man? That just ain't funny. You try to be anonymous, boy, are you kidding me? Posting your threats on the internet for the WORLD to see? You'll be dancing with the devil in the moonlight after we're through. I'd give you a second chance, but you'd blow that up too. I'll keep making lyrical art until someone dies. Under my scars a true mercenary shall arise. You call me an Agent of Chaos? That's a fitting name. I did more in one movie than you did in your whole French charade. I know you want to hit me so take a shot, vous la chatte! I'll put your head on my knife and serve it as an entr"e. Try to attack the government and the world loses its mind. You need to give up your acts, and toss it all behind. If you want to be a good criminal let me give you a tip. Come out of the closet and grow a pair, you wimp! No one remembers you today, you're just a mask! People idolize your failure, cause you didn't do a simple task. I'll call you V for my Victim, but don't worry, man. You still have your Downs Syndrome online clan.
Rap Battle: The Joker (Pro) vs Guido Fawkes (Con)

Welcome to the (three) Lion's den Lets hurry up and get it started, then. I don't know what you thought you were doin' Makeup and guns, man, who are you foolin'? You're an Agent of Chaos and all I do is type But I got nothing to fear From Bats in the night You got to modernise, playa Your style's lookin' vintage You might be scary in the 30's but you only make me cringe. You're comin' out as scary as my VLC player. I'd ask what your great plan is, but you ain't got one! No lawman's gonna get caught out by you son I bring information out and expose the secrets within As for you? You're headin' to my recycle bin. Now excuse me while I put a real suit on Why ain't you take that smelly thing to your mom? Sh*t I could sit here all day spittin' batarang rhymes but unlike you I got places to be, and on time. So sit in the corner and play with your toys 'cuz Harley's always lookin' at me and my boys and if you gotta beat a woman to feel like a boss then sorry baby, today, you're guaranteed a loss.
Raise Walmart's lowest paid associates pay $1-2 per hour in the USA.

Sorry, my mistake for not understanding the resolution. But you still have made one crucial mistake. You have nothing for me to argue. You have posted no argument. Just sources and quotes. You do understand in a debate posting quotes is totally pointless because you give no reasoning behind them? If you explained and showed how the quotes supported your arguments then that would be good. But yet you have failed to do so. So heres why Walmart SHOULD NOT raise its price to $1-2. 1. You don't have to work at Walmart. - Walmart is a business. That is it. It isn't the government. We have the right in the U.S.A (which I suppose is where you are talking about.) Business's can create whatever payment for their employees if they wish. If they don't like it, then they can get another job or quit. 2. Raising prices wouldn't change anything. - Common economic knowledge. If one place raises the minimum wage, then others will, therefore increasing the price of items all around the country/state. So doing this won't make much of a difference. 3. Walmart is entry level work and it isn't a true skill to be deserved of a higher raise. - Anybody can work at Walmart. It takes no true skill to have a living wage. If someone had a skill such as an enjineer, artist, etc. Then those are living wage jobs because you demonstrate potential and not just putting items on a shelf or bagging someones groceries. Voter keep this in mind, I have shown arguments and sources to back up my arguments. What my opponent has failed to do is present an argument for his case. Simply putting quotes without any explanation is a big no-no when it comes to debate. Thank you! Source(s): http://usconservatives.about.com... http://www.usnews.com...
Raise Walmart's lowest paid associates pay $1-2 per hour in the USA.

Sorry I have been late to post. What kind of argument is this? You have not posted an argument just a bunch of quotes. See here voter, Pro has failed to explain his reasoning, he has just posted links and quotes without giving an explanation, reasoning, etc. I don't understand your argument because you haven't explained anything and you have left me and the voter with nothing to go off of but quotes taken out of articles. The problem is you are not fighting for your resolution: "Raise Walmart's lowest paid associates pay $1-2 per hour in the USA." My opponent has promised me a debate where he will provide me Walmart's lowest paid associates are paid $1-2 per hour. The problem is he hasn't provided any sources. In fact he has gone against his own resolution by saying... "The lowest paid associate is a cashier being paid $7.58 an hour. [4] "The Average Associate Annual Salary is $18,000." [5]" http://www.forbes.com...... http://www.payscale.com...... ... He has even proven evidence against himself. Voter, if my opponent proves himself wrong then you have no choice but to vote for Con because I have the evidence that the lowest paid associate is $7.58 when he has proven nothing for the $1-2 minimum wage. Even thou he wishes to raise the minimum wage, he has deceived the you, the voter and me into thinking that the lowest paid employee is paid $1-2 per hour. So in conclusion of Round 2 I ask you to take in consideration that: 1. Pro has failed to give us an argument 2. Pro has gone against his own case. Thank you.
Raise Walmart's lowest paid associates pay $1-2 per hour in the USA.

"How Walmart's Bosses Get Rich off Welfare Abuse"Carl Gibson[1] "Employee wages are so low that during the last holiday season, one Walmart in Ohio held a food drive for its own employees so they could have a decent Thanksgiving dinner. This video of Walmart workers sharing their own stories in time for last year"s Black Friday protests included footage of one worker talking about how other workers often had to loan each other money so they could pay their bills on time." Carl Gibson[1] Same story huffington post [2] "Walmart"s low-wage workers cost U.S. taxpayers an estimated $6.2 billion in public assistance including food stamps, Medicaid and subsidized housing, according to a report published to coincide with Tax Day, April 15." Clare O'Connor [3] The lowest paid associate is a cashier being paid $7.58 an hour. [4] "The Average Associate Annual Salary is $18,000." [5] http://readersupportednews.org... http://www.huffingtonpost.com... http://www.forbes.com... http://www.payscale.com... http://www.careerleak.com...
Students going barefoot to school as a school rule would a good idea.

This debate is about should schools in the United States (grades K-12) have their students go barefoot and not allowing having any students to have any footwear on school campus would be a helpful tactic for student's education (not including swimming classes or sports activities). For an example, students can't wear any footwear like shoes, socks, and sandals on campus for any reason so a student must go barefoot at the start of the school hours until the end of school hours, even if it rains or snows. I am against this rule for a couple of reasons… First reason is weather conditions. Students can get sick if they go barefoot in an inappropriate weather for a certain length period of time. Schools are usually 6-8 hours a day, a bad weather conditions for going barefoot would make a student sick, most likely with the flu. In the northern part of the United States, they get snowy weather. Students can get frostbite if the students go barefoot in snowy weather. In the Midwest, they can get unexpected tornados while students are in school. If there were an unexpected tornado, then kids would have to walk barefoot on hazardous debris. Earthquake can go for that same reason too, students would have to walk barefoot on hazardous debris, especially walking home. Second Reason, students would have a high risk stepping there bare feet onto something hazardous. One of those risks is a sharp object where the student can cut their feet and students can get hookworms on a wound on the feet (http://www.cdc.gov...). Plus kids can step on gum with their bare feet. Third reason is many of the PE activities. Other than swimming, there are may things can go wrong while going barefoot in PE activities. First off that school often have baseball or softball as one of the PE activities. Running on the dirt a little too much would cause kids to have cuts on their feet. Barefoot during PE on the blacktop would also cause barefoot scrapes and injuries on the foot, http://www.flickr.com.... Sometime students take the public city bus to school or to home. These buses have that "No shirt, no shoes and no service" policy. If transportation is out of the question, then the kids would walk barefoot to school or home, and they would have to walk more than a mile towards school or home. Along the way, who knows they will be stepping on with their bare feet. One time, I almost step on a snake. I hope Kleptin accepts my challenge, as I like to take on the best debater with this debate. This is my only second debate so I am beginner debater taking on the master debater with a easy debate.
I believe some people on this website are incompetent in making propositions.

Not having specified what point your opponent must argue on, I chose my own, which does, in fact, logically fit. Because of this failure on your part, you must work with the side I choose regardless of the way you may have intended for me to argue. During your whole rebuttal, you failed to show specific examples of members who lack the ability to make good proposals, throwing into question your point of view as a whole. Its seems you are among those to whom you scorn. A debater does not need to disprove the words "I believe" unless it is necessary for the betterment of the debate, e.i. "reality vs. perception topics". If one did try to disprove every members personal views, the debate would quickly fall into a battle of personal attack (ad hominem). Rather, the words "I believe" are only a formality of the argument, in order to show their personal stance, and is synonymous with "The topic I will be arguing for is" or something else to that effect. It is much like judging a person based on the way they greet you, such as whether they say "hi" or "shalom", it means the same thing, so why make a junk about it. The main point of civilised debating is to prove a main idea wrong, not a persons feelings. Any worthwhile debater would know that. I have shown that some people are competent at making propositions. The only someone you have shown to be unable to make good propositions, unfortunately, is yourself regardless of whether you meant it to be an example or not. This validates my point that a majority are competent, and a minority are not. If someone does not do a good job with their proposition, they are only hurting themselves, allowing their opponent to meld the argument anyway within reason that they want. It then falls to the instigator to work with the mess they made for themselves. Thus, it seems as though the problem falls not on the opponent but the instigator. If they do not fix the problem themselves, that just means more free wins for everyone else. Darth_Grievous_42 out.
I believe some people on this website are incompetent in making propositions.

Well, I might as well counter your argument and push my own main point as well. My argument was that I believe that some people on this website are incompotent in making propositions. While some might be competent, that does not null those 'some' that are incompetent at making propositions, those some still exist. Furthermore, my premise is "I believe...", therefore, you must prove that I do not, in fact, believe that some people are incompetent at making propositions. People who make propositions, such as mine "I believe" (I did this for a reason, not because I fail at propositions) usually argue pro, and do not bring up the fact that they believe it, and that con must disprove that they believe that..... but that's exactly what it is, the proposition "I believe some people on this website are incompetent in making propositions." forces the con to disprove whether or not somebody believes it! Since some people are so incompetent at making propositions, to put "I believe" or propose a question (EG: Do dogs bark?) they make debates confusing and difficult.