[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
⏺
#ЦПД_виявляє
:
🔶

Маніпуляція

❌
 Словацьке видання Nove Slovo написало: «
Поки він (Зеленський, – ред.) лаявся в бік Сходу, Захід аплодував йому. Але останнім часом він почав зазіхати на Захід, що є дивним з двох причин: одна з них – постійна вимога надсилати гроші та зброю, інша – те, що Україна не може існувати без Заходу
».
🔶

Маніпуляція

❌
 Ірландський журналіст Чей Боуз прокоментував фото та відео з московського метрополітену: «
Це культова станція московського метро «Київська». Вона прославляє всю українську культуру та історію, немає ніякої культурної війни проти України чи українців у росії, це ще один фейковий наратив, який поширюють західні ЗМІ, щоб увічнити конфлікт, який вони так охоче допомогли розпочати
».
🔶

Фейк

❌
 Сирійське видання Al-Watan написало: «
Американська адміністрація пішла на відкриття нових фронтів проти росії, починаючи з її західного сусідства, з одного боку, та з південного Кавказу, з іншого боку
».
✅

Підпишись:
TG
 |
FB
 |
INST
 |
YT
 |
TW
 |
TT


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
російські олігархи практично не відчули наслідків санкцій на своїх статках: статки найбагатших збільшилися загалом на $38,575 млрд з початку року.
Лише 3 з 25 осіб, які увійшли до рейтингу «топ-500» — зменшили свої статки у 2023 році.
Bloomberg Billionaires Index
.


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
❗
Коломойського хочуть довше тримати під вартою.
Саме це рішення розпочав розглядати Шевченківський районний суд Києва. Мені здається, що це буде вічно
😅
Ми з Києва

👋

Надіслати новину


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
Зеленський – найбільш популярний політик в США,
 – опитування YouGov.
Рівень підтримки нашого президента серед опитуваних – 57%. У американських лідерів відсоток куди нижче: у Байдена – 27% популярності, а Трампа – 26%. А от у путіна – лише 10%.
🇺🇦

@ukraine_golovne


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
#Обличчя_Незалежності
🇺🇦
1991 рік.
Україна здобуває Незалежність. Україна входить у новий виток історії, як незалежна, молода, прогресивна держава. Мільйони людей вийшли на демонстрації в очікуванні найважливішого рішення в історії українського народу - ухвалення Акту проголошення незалежності України.
Напружені, знервовані, проте рішучі українці довели, що можуть і будуть боротися за вільну Україну.
🇺🇦
1991 рік.
На території України народилося понад 630 тисяч малюків, яких називають “діти незалежності”. Зараз їм 32 роки. Вони - перше покоління “незалежних”, котрі віднині про радянський союз знатимуть з підручників. Вони - перше покоління, яке зростатиме разом з Україною. Проте важкі часи породили сильних людей, які прямо зараз захищають цю Незалежність.
Це тисячі людей з різними долями, але які були у схожих обставинах і проживали разом спільну історію.
Їм не було і року, як країна обрала першого Президента. Через рік затвердили державну символіку: гімн, герб та прапор України. Коли їм було 3, Україна підписала Будапештський меморандум. Коли їм було 5, було прийнято першу в українській історії Конституцію незалежної держави та введено в обіг національну валюту - гривню. Коли їм було 9, вони бачили на екранах національного телебачення перші прояви становлення громадянського суспільства - відбувся всеукраїнський референдум за народною ініціативою. Коли їм було 13, в школі, на вулиці вони обговорювали першу революцію - Помаранчеву. Коли їм було 17, і вони розпочинали студентське життя, Україна зіткнулася з фінансовою кризою. У 21 рік вони вболівали на трибунах під час Євро-2012, а в 22 взяли участь у Революції Гідності. У 23 дізналися про “зелених чоловічків” в Криму та билися на Донбасі - перша війна. Далі були декомунізація, безвіз і Томос. Вже свої 30 вони святкували під час світової пандемії коронавірусу і думали, що то найгірше - святкування в карантині. А 31 святкувати довелося в бомбосховищах під звуки сирен, які нагадують, що Незалежність українці не беруть, а здобувають.
🇺🇦
2023 рік.
Надія, Святослав та Віктор - ровесники України. Вони бачили та переживали одне й те ж у різних куточках України, але зараз у них спільна справа. Їм 32 і вони працюють у Державній митній службі України. Вони мудрі та досвідчені, водночас креативні та прогресивні. Вони створюють, будують, реалізують, водночас відстоюють та захищають.
Покоління Незалежних - принципово інше. Їх сприйняття та мислення нове, не затьмарене хворобливими наративами ідейної пропаганди. І вони є тією рушійною силою змін, що не дозволить новим поколінням стати "втраченими", а відродженню української держави - "розстріляним".
Вони -
#Обличчя_Незалежності
.


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
Снайпери Центру спецоперацій «А» СБУ відмінусували чергову партію росіян на сході України
Вони завдали втрат окупантам на одному з найгарячіших напрямків.
Працюємо до повної Перемоги!


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
Збагачений Іран: Путін влаштовує примусову уранотерапію Ізраїлю.
Вуха бункерного «миротворця» вилізли в Ірані: МАГАТЕ виявило, що цей затятий недруг Ізраїлю володіє збагаченим ураном, придатним для використання в ядерній зброї. І більше нізвідки, окрім як з мордору, цей уран зʼявитися не міг. Москва не залишає жодних подальших шансів для Єрусалиму «мирно» відсидітися у російській війні проти України.
🫵
 Експерти  знайшли в Ірані сліди збагаченого до 84% урану. Це надзвичайно тривожна новина, оскільки для виробництва ядерної зброї потрібно досягти показник в 90%.
👉
 Іранські технології дозволять збагачувати ядерне паливо до 60%.
👉
 Це означає, що Іран отримав військове обладнання, технології або ядерні матеріали від Росії, - припускають міжнародні експерти. Саме тому ця держава така щедра на дрони та навіть нібито пообіцяла кремлеві ракети.
🫵
 Ізраїль - перша ймовірна мішень для іранської ядерної стратегії. Тому Єрусалим шукатиме офіційного  підтвердження цієї інформації, опублікованої Bloomberg. А потім  вимушений буде обдумати свій нейтралітет у розвʼязаній фюрером війні.
Підписуйтеся на «
Орестократію
».


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
❗
Запущено близько 75 шахедів.
71 – знищено.
40% знищених шахедів - робота мобільних вогневих груп.
Для розуміння, мопеди летіли з усіх боків.
Батальон «Монако»
💎

З питань реклами


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
⚡
Представники компанії Apple Inc. відзначили високу ефективність української митниці у боротьбі з контрафактом
Державною митною службою України за партнерства Проекту EU4PFM проведено вебінар з питань ідентифікації контрафактних товарів на тему «Основні ознаки оригінальних товарів компанії Apple Inc. та товарів, що підозрюються в порушенні прав інтелектуальної власності».
Ключовий міжнародний експерт EU4PFM з митних питань Вітяніс Алішаускас зазначив, що мета вебінару – поділитися досвідом країн ЄС у застосуванні заходів сприяння захисту прав інтелектуальної власності. Адже розвинені країни світу все більше уваги приділяють боротьбі з контрафактною продукцію.
Міжнародний експерт EU4PFM і представник митної служби Республіки Болгарія Георгій Георгієв ознайомив учасників з інформаційними ресурсами та програмним забезпеченням, наявним у працівників митних органів країн ЄС для реалізації заходів сприяння захисту прав інтелектуальної власності. Також він наголосив на важливості співпраці з компаніями – правовласниками.
☝
У свою чергу Херріет Сміт (Harriet Smith), головний менеджер з питань розслідувань, пов’язаних із захистом прав інтелектуальної власності компанії Apple Inc., подала основні ознаки оригінальних товарів компанії та контрафактної продукції, зупинилася на методах їх ідентифікації.
Пані Сміт наголосила на тому, що незважаючи на введення воєнного стану, кількість виявлених підроблених товарів компанії Apple Inc. в Україні є дуже високою.
💬
«Україна є найкращою країною в моїй зоні відповідальності, і я дякую вам за вашу неймовірну роботу», - заявила пані Сміт, звертаючись до українських митників.


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
📐
📚

Школьные наборы для самых читающих детей Ясиноватой
👍
 Передали участницы Женского движения Единой России Ясиноватая школьникам, которые записаны и регулярно посещают городскую библиотеку. По акции «Собери ребёнка в школу» детям вручили ученикам тетради, краски, фломастеры, картон, клей, карандаши.
❤
 Ребят поздравили с наступающим Днём знаний, пожелали им хороших оценок, прекрасного настроения и скорейшего наступления долгожданного мира!
#ЕРДНР

#ЕдинаяРоссия

#Собериребенкавшколу

#ЖенскоеДвижение


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
6⃣
5⃣
8⃣
доба широкомасштабної збройної агресії російської федерації проти нашої країни: ситуація станом на ранок 13 грудня
Протягом доби 12 грудня відбулось 95х бойових залучень
❗
Ворог завдав загалом 2х ракетних та 13х авіаційних ударів, 63х ударів МЛРС по позиціях українських військ та різних населених пунктах. На жаль, російські терористичні атаки вбивають та поранені мирних жителів. Зруйновано або пошкоджено приватні житлові будинки та інша цивільна інфраструктура.
Також, протягом 12 грудня, російська федерація знову атакувала Україну, використовуючи 10 ударних БПЛА Shahed-136/131. Сили та засоби протиповітряної оборони України знищили всі ударні БПЛА.
Також 12 грудня російські окупанти випустили по Києву чергову ракету, використовуючи 10х ракет (зенітні керовані ракети С-400, крилаті ракети Іскандер). Сили та засоби протиповітряної оборони України знищили всі ракети. Наслідки атаки уточнюються.
🔹
 Авіаудари вдарили по Новомихайлівці та Костянтинівці (Донецька область).
🔹
 Під артилерійський обстріл потрапили понад 130х населених пунктів Чернігівської, Сумської, Харківської, Луганської, Донецької, Запорізької, Дніпропетровської та Херсонської областей.
🔹
 Оперативно-стратегічне угруповання "Півнич", сокири Волинь та Полісся: без суттє
🔹
 Сокири Сіверщини та Слобожанщини: противник зберігає військову присутність у районах Росії, що межує з Україною. Ворожі війська ведуть активні підривні дії, щоб запобігти розгортанню українських військ під загрозою сокир. Противник збільшує щільність мінних полів уздовж державного кордону в Бєлгородській області (росія).
🔹
 Оперативно-стратегічне угруповання «Хортиця», вісь Куп’янська: українські захисники відбили 8 разів ворожих атак у районах Синьківки, Петропавлівки та Іванівки (Харківська область).
🔹
 Лиманська вісь: українські захисники відбили 2х ворожі атаки в районі Макіївки (Луганська область).
🔹
 Бахмутська вісь: українські воїни відбили 5х атак противника у околицях Богданівка, Іванівське, Кліщіївка та Андріївка (Донецька область). Сили оборони України продовжують завдавати ворогу втрат у живій силі та техніці, а також закріплюють свої нові позиції.
🔹
 Оперативно-стратегічне угруповання "Таврія", вісь Авдіївка: українські захисники продовжують стримувати ворога, який намагається оточити Авдіївку. Українські воїни відстоюють свою позицію, завдаючи ворогу великих втрат. Сили оборони України успішно відбили 51 атаку противника в районах на схід від Новокалинове, на схід від Новобахмутівки, Степове, Авдіївки, на південь від Сєверне, на південь від Тоненьке, Первомайське та Невельське (Донецька область).
🔹
 Вісь Мар'їнка: Сили оборони України продовжують стримувати ворога у околицях Новомихайлівки (Донецька область). Українські захисники відбили 13х атак у тій області.
🔹
 Запорізька вісь: Сили оборони України відбили 8х атак противника в районах на північ від Приютного, на захід від Вербове та на південь від Роботиного (Запорізька область). Водночас Сили оборони України продовжують активні дії на осі Мелітополя, щоб завдати окупаційним військам втрат у живій силі та техніці, виснажувати ворога по всій лінії фронту.
🔹
 Оперативно-стратегічне угруповання Одеса, вісь Херсон: Сили оборони України утримують позиції на лівому березі Дніпро, продовжують вести контрбатарейний вогонь, завдаючи ударів в тилу ворога.
✈
ВПС України протягом доби 12 грудня завдали 1х авіаудару по зосередженню військ, озброєння та військової техніки противника.
☄
Українські ракетні війська вдарили 2х командних постів, 3х концентрації особового складу, зброї та військової техніки та 2х склади боєприпасів російських загарбників.
🇺🇦
Підтримуємо Збройні Сили України! Об'єднавшись ми переможемо!
Слава Україні!


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
#Испания

#МыслиВСлух
⚡
🇪🇸
⚡
НОРМАЛЬНАЯ СЕНСАЦИЯ
❗

НАСЛЕДНИЦА испанского престола, 17-летняя принцесса Астурийская Леонор ( полное имя - Леонóр де Тóдос лос Сáнтос де Бурбóн и Орти́с) прибыла на обучение в Генеральную академию Сарагосы, где на протяжении трёх лет будет проходить военную подготовку.
Король Фелипе VI, королева Летиция и младшая сестра инфанта София проводили Леонор в учебное заведение.
В следующем месяце наследница поступит на военную службу: она пойдет по стопам отца Фелипе VI и деда Хуана Карлоса, которые проходили аналогичную подготовку. После общего обучения в академии она будет направлена в военно-морскую школу и завершит трёхлетний курс обучения в Главной академии ВВС. Как и король Фелипе VI Леонор будет иметь специальность пехотинца.
ЧТО ДУМАЕМ ПО ЭТОМУ ПОВОДУ:
 ⁃ хоть где-то в Европе СОБЛЮДАЮТ ТРАДИЦИИ, и даже принцесса-наследница получит военное образование, как отец и дед
❗
 ⁃ королевская семья Испании пока с успехом обошла все ЛГБТ-ловушки и растит НОРМАЛЬНЫХ детей
❗


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
🦉

Тільки на справжньому полюванні стає зрозуміло хто ти — хижак чи жертва

🫡
 Загін
@nobody_we_are
 у складі спецпідрозділу Тимура ГУР МО України успішно виконує бойові завдання завдяки багаторічному досвіду бійців та новітньому обладнанню, яке дозволяє їм працювати вдень і вночі за будь-яких погодних  умов.

🤝
 Дякуємо
Project SIRIN
 за активну громадянську позицію та регулярну допомогу спецпідрозділам найсучаснішими приладами  нічного бачення від компанії
ACTinBlack.

📽

Над відео працювали:
📌
 Режисер/оператор —
Олексій Стратієнко
📌
 Саунд продюсер —
Danskiy
ГУР в інших соціальних мережах:

🔹
Facebook

🔹
YouTube

🔹

Viber

🔹
Instagram

🔹
Twitter

🔹

Threads

🔹

TikTok

🔹

WhatsApp

🔹

Telegram Bot


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
❗
Бориспіль золоте руно чоловік 10 на зупинці
❗
Метро  Харьковская много
🤢
🤢
🤢
🤢
🤢
🤢
🤢
 и парочка
🥶
🥶
❗
Мост через ЖД Беличи в сторону Коцюбинского частично перекрыт пикапом с красным проблесковым и установлен знак стоп контроль!!!!!
Посилання на канал:

https://t.me/kyiv_povistka
Повідомити інформацію:

@kiev_povistka_bot
👉🏽

ПІДПИСАТИСЯ
⬇


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
Сдаётся мне что мы наблюдаем закат политической карьеры Кличко. Народ вдруг увидел, что на второй год войны, с убежищами в Киеве катастрофа и виноват в этом никто иной как мэр Киева.
Стеклянным мостом тут мозги не получится запудрить.
Но, как говорится, будем посмотреть.


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User] В свете происходящих событий ... суицидальных настроений нет ...   Игарь Иванович пишет сказки и рисует натюрморт  ...


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
👉
Друзья, нам часто пишут родители детей, которым 16-17 лет и рассказывают о том, что в школы приходят распоряжения о том, чтобы школьники вставали на учет.
Но многие волнуются, что в связи с абсолютно террористическими методами государства Украина их детей рано или поздно могут тоже загнать на фронт, даже не дожидаясь 18 лет.
- Во-первых, вы понимаете, что людей фронтах не хватает, а значит этой недовласти может прийти в голову бросить и совсем вчерашних(а то и сегодняшних) школьников. Вы же видите как развивается ситуация? Умеете анализировать?
- Во-вторых, жизни той что была прежде уже не будет ДОЛГИЕ годы. Если хотите убедиться в том что мы правы - ваше право. Подождите, посмотрите, потеряйте годы жизни.
Поэтому отвечая на вопрос "Надо ли увозить детей?". Отвечаем: НАДО. Даже не думайте над этим, мол, "а может обойдётся". Просто НАДО. Не обойдётся!
Не отдавайте своих детей в пасть этого чудовища под названием "зеленский". Увозите!


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
💬
 Ранок – селектор. Внутрішня ситуація. Ліквідація наслідків російських ударів. Зокрема, Херсон та Херсонщина, Запорізька область, інші регіони. Вдячний кожному рятувальнику, кожному лікарю, кожному поліцейському.

Доповіді МВС і СБУ: є хороші результати в захисті від колаборантів та навідників, у протидії злочинності.

Робота нашого експортного коридору в Чорному морі: уже понад 12 мільйонів тонн вантажів. Особливо вагомі результати за грудень, і це відчувається на рівні всієї нашої економіки.

Звичайно, були сьогодні й доповіді щодо фронту – Харківщина, Донеччина, Запоріжжя, лівий берег Херсона. Стійкість зараз, сила зараз, результати зараз визначають, як мине ця зима повномасштабної війни й чого будемо очікувати від наступного року.

Вдень – наради. Зокрема, з міністром оборони. Щодо розвитку наших Сил оборони. Конкретні речі, які треба зробити. І ми їх зробимо. Обов’язково. Щоб зберегти нашу міцність і мати необхідні аргументи в розмові з партнерами. Збільшення власних сил України та збереження консолідації світу – це наше завдання. Завдання всієї держави й кожного, хто працює заради неї.

Була сьогодні й підсумкова нарада за рік щодо перемовин про безпекові гарантії для України. Команда Офісу, уряду… Є базова декларація «Групи семи» – Вільнюська декларація. Її вже підтримали 30 держав. Почалася двостороння робота щодо гарантій, і наступного року продовжимо.

Щойно говорив із Його Святістю Папою Франциском. Подякував за привітання для України та українців із Різдвом, за побажання миру – справедливого миру для всіх нас. Обговорили нашу спільну роботу щодо Формули миру – понад 80 держав уже в процесі на рівні своїх представників. Буде більше. Я вдячний Ватикану за підтримку нашої роботи.

Окремо я хочу подякувати за новий оборонний пакет від Сполучених Штатів – уже 34-й за цей рік і 54-й за час нашого захисту від цієї російської агресії. В цьому пакеті – ракети для систем ППО і для «хаймарсів», артилерія – калібр 155 і 105, додаткова бронетехніка. Все те, що потрібно. Все, що відчутно допомагає. Я вдячний Президенту Байдену, Конгресу – обом партіям – та всім тим, хто підтримує нас у цілком конкретному завданні: російський терор повинен програти. Терор завжди повинен програвати. І ми всі разом у вільному світі це забезпечимо – зробимо все, щоб і наступного року зберегти належний рівень взаємодії заради нашої спільної сили, сили всіх, хто протистоїть терору.

✊
 Я дякую всім, хто зараз у бою, на бойових постах і на бойових завданнях заради України! Я дякую всім, хто допомагає й хто працює заради наших спільних інтересів!

🇺🇦
 Слава Україні!
📢

Звернення
 Володимира Зеленського до українців наприкінці 673-го дня повномасштабного вторгнення.


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
📌
За підтримки ЮНІСЕФ 1218 родин Кремінської громади забезпечені необхідними речами
Українські міста та громади, що приєдналися до ініціативи ЮНІСЕФ «Громада, дружня до дітей та молоді», отримали по 50 тисяч доларів США на реалізацію своєї місцевої програми допомоги родинам з дітьми.
У реалізації програми ЮНІСЕФ участь взяла і Кремінська територіальна громада.
Зусилля місцевої влади були спрямовані на вирішення гуманітарних і соціальних проблем кремінських родин.
Зокрема, за підтримки ЮНІСЕФ придбані канцелярські набори, куртки, ґаджети для дітей та теплі ковдри для соціально незахищених родин.
Загалом ЮНІСЕФ забезпечив необхідними речами 1218 родин Кремінської громади з числа ВПО.
Для вирішення соціальних та гуманітарних питань закуплено 500 ковдр, 650 курток, 46 планшетів, 1000 альбомів для малювання, 1000 наборів кольорових олівців, 7300 зошитів та 2722 ручки.
⬇


[System]
You are an expert in the straw_man manipulation technique. Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack. List phrases that provide evidence of straw_man in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the straw_man manipulation.
To improve the classification of Straw Man arguments related to language manipulation, especially concerning the provided false negatives and positive examples, it is essential to clarify specific guidelines. A Straw Man argument typically involves misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Here are some refined classification criteria that can help in distinguishing genuine cases from misclassifications for both false positives and false negatives.

### Classification Guidelines for Identifying Straw Man Arguments:

1. **Identify Exaggeration or Simplification**:
   - Look for instances where a complex argument is reduced to an oversimplified version. If the language suggests that the opponent's claims are being grossly exaggerated or oversimplified, it may indicate a Straw Man.

2. **Check for Contextual Misrepresentation**:
   - Analyze whether the language distorts the context of the opponent's argument. If an example misframes the opponent’s perspective in a misrepresentative light, it qualifies as a Straw Man.

3. **Evaluate Emotional Language**:
   - Assess the emotional tone used. Language that sounds overly aggressive, dismissive, or mocking could indicate a Straw Man approach aimed at ridiculing rather than genuinely engaging.

4. **Look for Absurd or Ridiculous Outcomes**:
   - Determine if the statement presents an exaggerated or ridiculous outcome that is not consistent with the original argument being countered. This boiling down of an opponent's nuanced argument into a ludicrous position is a classic Straw Man tactic.

5. **Watch for Non-Responses**:
   - If the argument does not directly engage with the substantive claims made by the opponent but instead focuses on a distorted or fabricated version of those claims, it may represent a Straw Man approach.

6. **Check for Implicit Assertions**:
   - Identify statements that imply a twofold assertion: suggesting that the opponent holds an extreme or flawed belief while simultaneously attacking that mischaracterization without addressing the real argument.

7. **Focus on Comparisons**:
   - If the argument involved comparisons that simplify, distort, or overly generalize the opponent's claims to make them seem unreasonable (e.g., comparing a political stance to a widely condemned action), treat it as a potential Straw Man.

### Specific Considerations for False Positives:
- Language implying extreme positions or ridicule should still be considered carefully. Not all derogatory terms imply a Straw Man; sometimes, they reflect the genuine sentiment of opposition without necessarily misrepresenting the argument.
- Context is crucial: Ensure that the context in which terms are used supports a Straw Man classification (e.g., direct contrast to the original argument) or not.

### Addressing False Negatives:
- Clear definitions should be applied to nuanced contexts. Many seemingly neutral statements that describe opponents or their positions could mask underlying Straw Man tactics if they do not faithfully represent the opponent's original arguments.
- Implement a wider lens: Instead of solely relying on direct evidence of misrepresentation, look into the overall argument structure and the intentions behind the claim.

### Conclusion:
The objective of these guidelines is to provide a more structured approach to distinguishing Straw Man arguments effectively. By focusing on the manner in which arguments are constructed, the emotional undertones invoked, and the fidelity to the original context and complexity of the arguments presented, classifiers can better discern true misrepresentations of an opponent's views.

[User]
Дружину Кирила Буданова отруїли важкими металами через їжу
"
Швидше за все, отруїли через їжу. Їй

уже краще, перший етап лікування пройшла. Оскільки дружина Буданова мініатюрна і з маленькою вагою, виявилося у неї швидше. А так

отруєння підтвердилося ще у кількох співробітників

розвідки
. Вони просто великі, нічого за собою не помічали, зараз теж лікуються
", — повідомили джерела.
Маріанна Буданова вже завершує курс лікування і буде під наглядом. Розслідується спроба

вбивства.
"
Ці речовини

жодним чином не використовуються в

побуті і воєнній справі.

Їхня наявність може вказувати на цілеспрямовану спробу отруєння конкретної людини
", — розповіли джерела у розвідці.