azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Google is Ethical reading our Emails
Side: Unethical

Google reading our emails is an invasion of privacy. Regardless of how they use it, one is entitled to private conversations between the emails recipients and themselves.
Debate: Google is Ethical reading our Emails
Side: Unethical

In reading our emails, Google is creating a conflict of interest with the public.
Debate: Google is Ethical reading our Emails
Side: Unethical

Google even scans messages sent to an active Gmail user from a non-Gmail user who never agreed to their Terms & Services.http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/09/05/google-seeks-to-dismiss-gmail-privacy-lawsuit-says-it-has-right-to-scan/
Debate: Google is Ethical reading our Emails
Side: Ethical

Apparently there was a highly controversial Supreme Court ruling in 1979 of Smith vs. Maryland that said citizens "lose their right to privacy" whenever they hand personal documents over to third parties.http://www.dailytech.com/Google+Yes+we+Read+Your+Gmail/article33184.htm
Debate: Google is Ethical reading our Emails
Side: Unethical

An interesting read. This could be the early signs of a precedent being set for access to more and more personal information by large corporations.
Debate: Google is Ethical reading our Emails
Side: Unethical

I don't think the parsing of email in itself is unethical, I think the fact that there is no mention of this anywhere in the ToS, yet still happening, is unethical. If Google is going to have access to and use your information it should be disclosed in the ToS.
Debate: Google is Ethical reading our Emails
Side: Unethical

For something like parsing the content of email, something that the average user expects to be private, they need to get some form of explicit consent. Since it is never specifically mentioned, they do not have that consent from the users and as such should not be parsing this data.
Debate: Google is Ethical reading our Emails
Side: Ethical

Not necessarily requesting consent, but informing users that their information could be scanned and used for whatever reasons as well as informing users how to opt out at the same time.
Debate: Google is Ethical reading our Emails
Side: Unethical

Scanning our emails for any purpose is unethical as we have the right to have our mail be private. Whether it be for Google's own ads or any other purpose.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

Graffiti is vandalism because it is in a place in which it does not belong. If it was aplied to a canvas or wall, etc that was designated to be art then it would be art. What is art? That is what one has to decide once the canvas, wall, etc. dries.Vandalism is defined as "Willful or malicious destruction of public or private property"
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

If you woke up and found Graffiti on the front hood of your car and windshield, would you call it art or vandalism?What about if it was the Mona Lisa on the hood and windshield of your car?NOTE: Both will render the car undriveable.What if it was on one of the (interior or exterior) house walls?
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

If I catch one of those fucks I'd begin a most enjoyable torture schedule ever filmed in the history of mankind. It'll be streaming live on utube for as long as I decide to keep him! First I'd remove each fingernail with my teeth, then I'd sterilize them with salt of course, you don't want them to fester and go smelly... then I'd ask him which hand he used to tag my car and if he didn't want to tell me immediately, i'd break a finger at the farthest joint. Once he kindly tells me the hand he used, I'd strip that hand of all of the skin and then set my pet rat (which i'd been starving for the purpose) on it... hmmm.. after that I should probably let him go back to his mother... he'd probably not draw anything for the rest of his life... shame though cos taggers have such potentials to be great artists...
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

So I guess that it is safe to assume that you do not like taggers ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

No one, not even the most obnoxious kid would spraypaint a windshield. You're obviously not speaking from experience.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

I guess you are speaking from experience. OK, so lets say they spray paint the side door of your very expensive, very nice, brand spanking new (insert your favorite car model here) car. What then?
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

then, who cares? it's just a posession. Besides i cant have a car
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

It's ugly and obnoxious. Punks run around and add it all over the place. Nobody is safe.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Their just expressing themselves, are they hurting you? Look at banksy, how can you sit back and say that is ugly????
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Art is very subjective. There are plenty of people that do not like Banksy nor Picasso.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

If it is displayed on private or public property, it is clearly vandalism, and it is the destruction of that property. If they want art, then go draw like every other artist.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

To some graffiti is an art form worthy of display in galleries but for others it is merely vandalism. As graffiti can be done on any property, it is seldom considered an art form as it might be deemed to be destructing someone else's property. Furthermore, graffiti also contributes to certain illegal activities. One such example would be that graffiti is used as a gang signal to mark territory or serve as an indicator or "tag" for gang related activities. If graffiti is done on a specified platform with a positive purpose to it, it would be apppreciated as an art form. Till then, graffiti is still considered to be vandalism.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Both

ITS ART! BUT WHEN PEOPLE ABUSE IT AND PUT IT ON INAPROPIATE PLACES THEN ITS A PROBLEM.....
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

i think it is vandalism. I feel irate that people use graffiti as an excuse not to get a job
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

There are different perspectives on vandalism; some believe it is a form of art that is expressed on the streets, while others believe it is dark and detestable, ruining the city (or towns) neat look. Although vandalism is not a violent crime, it is a violation of the law, yet graffiti artists continue to tag different places such as schools, houses, trains/trams and more. “Vandalism” refers to illegally disfiguring private and public property with illegible handwriting or markings without the owner(s) consent. Removing such vandalism usually costs a substantial amount of money and is an irritation. At the same time, it costs train operators eleven million dollars a year. Vandalism on properties also decreases the value of whatever property was tagged. Some may say that graffiti artists tag properties because they want respect – but how do these “artists” get respect out of this if they have no respect for the possessions of others? It is destruction and the graffiti artist grasps nothing except more of an ego to do more illegal activities.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

graffiti can easily be considered as art, but as soon as you do it on a property that isn't your own, or you weren't allowed to paint on, it is vandalism. Vandalism is when you destroy something that isn't your own, and when you put paint on a wall that you don't own yourself, you are practically ruining it
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

I hear people all the time try to excuse graffiti as art. But the truth is that it's vandalism and destruction of other people's property. Someone may like graffiti and consider it an art form. And they try to use the definition of art to excuse it. But those people are missing a major point about what art is. Art is created by commission or on the property the owner wants the art made on. Most graffiti is done without the consent or permission of the owner of which the graffiti appears on. The graffiti "artists" go where ever they want and destroy other people's property. I wouldn't want someone to tag up may walls of my building, just because it's their "self-expression\"... If I asked them to do so, then it's a different story. Why doesn't the graffiti "artists" do their work on canvas? Why do they need to tag public property? Self-expression isn't about destruction, it's about creation. Graffiti destroys. Go create graffiti and display it in a museum or an art show.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

Graffitti itself is not an art. Graffiti itself from what I know are just vulgar, crude and trashy words. But graffiti art is an art form born from graffiti techniques.Of course sometimes there are meaningful phrases painted and sprayed in a beautiful way but more often than not its a joke.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

No i Think Graffiti Is Not Art , Why ? Because Its a Terrible Thing the thing people write on people Property , and they have to pay for it , its so wrong. Their Paying for People Believes WHat is stupid in my eyes. It Makes Places Look Like The Ghetto , Or a War Zone. People Might Be Scared to Live there.In my opinion I think that in most cases graffiti has no meaning and is pointless, it has no thought of consideration. To be honest I can only think of one graffiti 'artist' and that's Banksy this is mainly because he is the only one who adds a morale or political message. However, overall graffiti spoils a nice day out for lots of people... I would also like to add this survey is slightly unfair due to the fact the main people who disagree with graffiti are older and don't used the internet or if they do they don't use it for the use of completing surveysI hear people all the time try to excuse graffiti as art. But the truth is that it's vandalism and destruction of other people's property. Someone may like graffiti and consider it an art form. And they try to use the definition of art to excuse it. But those people are missing a major point about what art is. Art is created by commission or on the property the owner wants the art made on. Most graffiti is done without the consent or permission of the owner of which the graffiti appears on. The graffiti "artists" go where ever they want and destroy other people's property. I wouldn't want someone to tag up may walls of my building, just because it's their "self-expression\"... If I asked them to do so, then it's a different story. Why doesn't the graffiti "artists" do their work on canvas? Why do they need to tag public property? Self-expression isn't about destruction, it's about creation. Graffiti destroys. Go create graffiti and display it in a museum or an art show.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

Well, it's both. But I voted on the vandalism side because no matter how clever or beautiful your graffiti art happens to be you still put it on something someone else owns and wanted to be some other way than you made it. You could express art onto a canvas instead. There is no reason you have to put it on the side of your house.The exception is political speech in times of serious political disagreement.But I'll also add that I don't think it should be a major crime. Fines combined with paying for cleanup or cleaning it up themselves should be sufficient.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

....................................Vandalism.........................................
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

I believe in freedom, and I would just laugh if my car got graffitied (if I had a car).
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

What if they wrote (no offense) 'Arataii is a slut' all over your house? Would you laugh?
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Actually I probably would laugh, I have a weird sense of humor... then I would go and graffiti their house. I believe in revenge.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

freedom... what freedom are you speaking of? The freedom to damage other people's property? I don't remember it being one of the articles in the UDHR... must have missed it...
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Graffiti is art! It is only illegal if it is done on people property but is it really a problem?
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Are you saying that you only graffiti up your own personal property? ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

If the maker of the graffiti work considers herself an artist, it is art. If you consider art as that product was is deliberately made with the intention to affect senses and emotions, then graffiti that is intended as art should be considered as art.The starting point is the artist and the subjective experience of humans. Then, if someone considers graffiti vandalism (because they feel their wall is vandalized) it doesn't make it vandalism.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

I think you got it a little backwards, if someone considers their graffiti art (because they are on drugs or just plain stupid) then it doesn't make it art. ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

No i did not get in backwards. - First, being on drugs does not disproves someone being an artist. Many artists are on drugs. Picasso, Pollack, Dali, Warhol all used drugs. Would you deny they were artists?- Second, that's beside the point. Graffiti can be art and can be plain vandalism, depending on the purpose of the maker. If you want to define art by it's purpose and not by it's reception you must admit that graffiti is sometimes art. And i believe it is by it's purpose only we can define whether something is art.Two examples: 1. some decorative item X that is produced without any intention of being art, but is defined as art by the buyer is no art.2. some object Y that is made as an artwork by the maker (with the intention of causing effect in senses and mind) but is not (immediately) widely recognized as art is still art. Van Gogh for example was only recognized as an artist after he died. Was his work no art?
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

it is a fact that most graffiti is meant to be a message of some kind to the people. it may be some useful message or just crap. when people paste posters on walls, its their way of spreading awareness. graffiti is just another way of spreadign awareness that some people prefer and its left to the individual to either accept is as art or reject it.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

There's no message in graffiti and graffiti doesn't spread awareness, it just spreads crap. ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

If it's on my property and I did not commission it, it is vandalism and I will prosecute to the fullest extend of the law. I will then have the offending crap removed. ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

If, like you say, art is defined subjectively (by the person that perceives it), then a most beautiful & thought provoking piece of grafiti can be art to some and pure crap to others.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

No, art is defined by the fact that it was commissioned and placed where no one will bitch about it ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

i dont agree, plus, using words like stupid in a public debate makes you sound unintelligent. I've seen yourarguments in multiple debates, and you have some very... "old school" views
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

no...no...your defintly wrong if you something is art in your eyes itmay well be art in someone else. just because u dnt like something does make it any less of an art work
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

If it is illegal and charges are brought up, then it is not art.If it is not your property, and you deface it with graffiti, and charges are brought up in a court of law, then it is not art. If you do not believe me, go and draw something on someone's house or car and then tell the judge that it is art. You should also have a friend tell the judge that he too considers your work art. Then come back here and tell us how that worked out for you ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Both

It really depends, I have seen amazing graffiti done on walls and in subway stations. Gang signs and slanderous garbage I would call vandalism. However, just the other day I took a short cut down an alley and saw an amazing dreaded up lion, that was quite illegal and quite breath taking. I would call some art and some vandalism.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

What if they had painted that "amazing dreaded up lion" on the front of your house?
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

I think graffiti is an art if it is done in an appropriate place. Some peices are beautiful and some are not
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Graffiti as in gang sighs are vandalism, but those large sculpture looking things I see as Art. :O
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

How do you see art in pieces of twisted metal? You may see art work but i see scrap metal that will bring in a pretty penny in a junk yard.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

... Ever watch the show ``Junk raiders``? They make old storage places into fully functional apartments, and make everything out of trash/`junk`. They make awesome stuff with that.I also saw a piece just this week on daily planet where some scrap metal artists make, a mechanical bull, and even a DJ booth. The DJ boot had features on it such as a few water fountains with lazer lights going trough it, and pyrotechnics. It all went with the beat of the music.Made it all in one weekend. Was amazing.If you don`t see art in something like that, then.... Wow...
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

I don't like when people do it for gangs, but graffiti can be used for advertising. I consider it art because it's not always vandalism. Some people use it for bad ways, but many, also, use it to show off their products.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

By all means use the proper medium for the art. Don't tag on people's property without permission.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Some people use it as a form of advertisement, as I said in my post. It's not always done without permission.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Well, if you've got permission and you've done it properly, then it's not called vandalism, you can call it whatever the heck you want really!
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Both

I think it all depends on what and what they put on it.Some of the graffiti on trains are beautifull. Even if some are just words. The colours, design, everything about a few of them, is so pretty.Though if it were on something like a bathroom stall, desk, building, sign, ect... I guess that would be a bad thing, no matter how nice it is. Especially if it is something crude, profane, ect...But i think appropriate and tastefull graffiti is something that birghtens my day and probably puts a smile on peoples faces.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

Just because something is pretty does not make it art.What if that wolf was painted on your property, house, car, etc.?
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

well honestly many people like me like wolves in fact i wound not mind if someone did paint a wolf on my house, car or property it would make the object diffrent it's like getting art or free
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Tell me where you live. I'll go over there and draw a wolf..., for free ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Both

That`s why I put at the begining of my post that it all depended on where it was placed.If it was on someone`s house, a store, ect... Then it`s not alright.But maybe abandoned places, or buildings where it`s permitted by the owner to do so is alright.and if something was painted on my shed, I`d be fine with it. Maybe not my house... Because it`s a bit odd to picture something like graffiti on a house and have it look good. But yeah...D`: I mean pretty as in difficulty, great colour coordination, and technicality.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

Hmmm...., your user name is, "abused mule." Were you kicked in the head when you were young or something; or is that a reference to you being stubborn as a mule? Just wondering ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Graffiti is just expressing yourself. So technaquly it is art. In some places people pay for graffiti because of the art behind it. So in my opinion it is art.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

That's all well and good except that a cop would disagree with you and haul your ass to jail for putting up art on private property. ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

There are the people who say 'Vandalism! It looks shit!'. They are the type who could see a Van Gogh piece on canvas in a museum and think 'Wow! The brush strokes, this is amazing, so beautiful!', then see it on the wall outside and turn their stuck-up noses up at it.Then there are those who say 'Both, it is a piece of art which is inappropriately placed on someone else's property'. These people are smart, open-mined individuals who know what they're talking about. Some may say 'Yes, but what if its badly drawn', well as you probably know art is based on opinion. I for one think Picasso's drawings look like shit, and wouldn't pay £5 for one, but there are people who are prepared to pay millions.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

The problem with keeping an open mind is that if you keep it too open, your brains fall out ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Both

You cant really classify Graffiti as art or vandalism....... when you see tags on trains, bus stops and signs then you can see that as vandalism. You can see graffiti as art, when its down sides of buildings out of the way of everything, and its pictures of people, and has meaning to it.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

If it is not commissioned, and it is on private property, it's vandalism. I am also tempted to say that if it isn't commissioned, it's not art. It is only art when someone pays for it. Otherwise I can wipe my ass with toilet paper, save it, and call it art.... when in reality it's crap ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

graffiti is a type of art. it involves hellla skills and intelegence.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Vandalism

Skills like keeping an eye out for the cops. Intelligence to keep you from getting caught ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Maybe people who get arrested for graffiti should try and use your argument to see if they get set free ;)
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Its art, but art can be vandalism.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

Art doesn't even have to be drawn. Music is art. Those sound waves are everywhere. Statues are works of art. Graffiti is just paint. If you hate it so much then buy a huge canvas for them and go relax.
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

I think its Art ! why , simply because most people who do "vandalism" are people with serious talent at making a good work of art ... while others may think its vandalism because some people just do it for from & don't actually know how to do it
Debate: Graffiti - art or vandalism?
Side: Art

As long as it is pg and on public property. I think it should be legal. I mean come on, imagine a dragon (get it? you know, the pun?. uh, nevermind) Imagine a dragon on a train car. They look so cool. Also it doesn't hurt anyone if it isn't inappropriate and it's on public property.