[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
Если сопоставить заявления
ГУР МО
 и
Генштаба ВСУ,
 то можно сделать следующие выводы.
1.
 Российская сторона не поставила украинскую сторону в известность о необходимости обеспечения безопасности в районе Белгорода в определённый период времени. Хотя ГУР подчёркивает, что
это неоднократно делалось в прошлом.
 За безопасность украинских пленных до момента обмена несёт российская сторона.
(ГУР)
2.
 Украина не была проинформирована про транспортные средства, маршруты и формы доставки военнопленных.
Украина не знала и не могла знать,
 каким маршрутом будут доставлены пленные.
(ГУР)
3.
 Посадка транспортного самолёта в 30-километровой зоне ведения боевых действий
в любом случае небезопасна и должна быть согласована,
 иначе это подвергает опасности весь процесс обмена и может быть расценена как спланированные и намеренные действия.
(ГУР)
4.
 ВСУ постоянно контролируют воздушное пространство, отслеживают точку запусков ракет и их снабжение, а за последнюю неделю - особенно тщательно, ведь противник нанёс 19 ракетных ударов по одной лишь Харьковской области, и многие из них - из района Белгорода. Естественно,
воздушные цели, которые осуществляют доставку вооружений, будут поражаться.
 Если ГУР не знал о маршруте Ил-76 и нахождении пленных на борту, то не мог знать и Генштаб.
(Генштаб)
5.
 ГУР к этому моменту
не может подтвердить,
 находились ли украинские военнопленные на борту Ил-76.
Итак, Россия не предупредила Украину, что Ил-76, который ранее
перевозил
 С-300, которые ежедневно запускают по Харькову, будет перевозить пленных. Ил-76 могли целенаправленно подставить под украинский огонь, как минимум, чтобы остановить процесс обмена пленными, как максимум, чтобы избавиться от ненужных России 65 украинских пленных.
Над Белгородом недаром действует
запрет на полёты гражданской авиации
 "до конца "СВО". Любой полёт в районе Белгорода - угроза для российской военной авиации.
Судьба украинских военнопленных остаётся неизвестной. Тела не были показаны (на кадрах, показанных российскими СМИ, было два тела). Хочется надеяться, что Ил-76 был пустым, но не хочется спекулировать. Страна, которая совершила
Еленовку
 могла совершить и Еленовку-2. Это всё, что можно сказать к этому моменту.


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
❗
Журналист погиб в центре Донецка при обстреле со стороны ВСУ, еще один ранен — оперативные службы ДНР


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
☝
ПРЕТЕНЗІЇ НАРОДУ ДО ВЛАДИ…
…викладені у результатах національного соціологічного опитування.
🔺
Серед головних
 - корупція, недостатнє забезпечення ЗСУ та недоцільні витрати бюджету. За ними - проблеми, пов'язані з неналежною підготовкою до війни, приховування правди від громадян та слабкі кадрові рішення.
❗
Достатній набір для переобрання тих, хто прикриваючись війною продовжує грабувати країну і всупереч Конституції
подовжив
 собі термін перебування при владі.
🧰
 Матеріали по темі:
▪
Нелегітимні відсунули вибори
#соціологія
👉

Підписатися
 |
Поштова скринька


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
❗
Как назвать этих людей?
В столице Украины демонтировали памятник освободителю Киева генералу Ватутину


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
Наш фюрер уволил посла в Великобритании Вадима Пристайко, который называл «нездоровым сарказмом» его слова о британском министре обороны Уоллесе.
Забавно, а ведь Пристайко был матёрым бандеровцем и был отличным спецом по кулуарным связям.
Получается, что у нашего фюрера самолюбие выше понимания, что настоящие специалисты это штучный товар и по объявлению их не найдёшь.
Вот же ж дурень. Он со своим болезненным самомнением весь наш Четвёртый Рейх так угробит...
@OpenUkraine


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
Россия вернулась к погромам | Виталий Портников
@1inTVArmenia
@1inTVArmenia
https://youtu.be/YCDaJXjn0Gw


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
Два десятки керівників дипломатичних місій країн-членів
🇪🇺
 Європейського Союзу, народні депутати України, лідери та представники угорської національної спільноти, пʼять локацій у двох громадах Берегівського району.
Цими днями Закарпаття – в центрі уваги всієї європейської спільноти.
Це безпрецедентна подія для нашого краю, яка показує, що Україна готова бути повноправним членам ЄС. Ми живемо, дотримуючись усіх демократичних принципів і стандартів, прагнемо до кращого й готові разом працювати, щоб отримати те, на що заслуговуємо, і те, за що поливають кров наші захисники.
Дякуємо Президенту Володимиру Зеленському, керівникам дипломатичних місій країн-членів Європейського Союзу, народним депутатам України за підтримку та увагу до Закарпаття, а також громадам, лідерам та представникам національних спільнот краю за консолідацію зусиль.
Разом ми – сила, разом ми переможемо!


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
❗
Міноборони активізує роботи із гуманітарного розмінування – перший заступник Міністра оборони Павлюк

Міністерство покращує якість та швидкість розмінування, оскільки «тільки на очищені території повернуться люди, бізнес, робота і нормальне життя» - про це розповів перший заступник Міністра оборони України Олександр Павлюк у
колонці
 для видання «Укрінформ».
За його даними, наразі додатково сформовано десять батальйонів та три роти розмінування
. Також затверджено План гуманітарного розмінування деокупованих територій на 2024 рік, в якому визначені території і послідовність робіт.
Олександр Павлюк є координатором Національного органу з питань протимінної діяльності.
Завданням інституції є координація заходів з гуманітарного розмінування на національному рівні.
Перший заступник Міністра повідомив, що від початку повномасштабного вторгнення групами розмінування уповноважених підрозділів
вже очищено від вибухонебезпечних предметів:
• 2610 квадратних кілометрів територій
• понад 68 квадратних кілометрів акваторій
• 8463 кілометрів автомобільних доріг
• 8 694 кілометрів ліній електропередач
• 3087 кілометрів залізничних колій
• 650 кілометрів трубопроводів
До заходів розмінування залучені п’ять операторів протимінної діяльності, ще десять проводять нетехнічне обстеження території. Разом це 216 груп та понад 1300 фахівців.
Для подальших робіт вже визначили та ідентифікували майже 26 тисяч гектарів територій, потенційно забруднених вибухонебезпечними предметами.


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
⚡
Премʼєра! Четвертий випуск програми «Реальний фронт» на моєму каналі 1 квітня 2024 року о 19:00 за київським часом.
⏺
Теми випуску:
⏺
Теракт в «Крокус сіті хол»
⏺
Коли знищать Кримський міст
⏺
Що буде з Харковом?
⏺
Нова тактика окупантів
⏺
Хусити зрадили росіян
https://youtu.be/qse-HN2TkHY?si=sJUvvl3Qk1J4bL8M


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
Мі мі мі
❤
Лиса голова заявляє, що ЗС РФ нанесли удар по позиціям ПВК «Вагнер». Вони зайшли до Ростова.
Готови вбивати всіх російських військових
💛
💙


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
В Кривом Роге предприимчивые предприниматели резко повысили цену на питьевую воду, после того как жители ринулись закупаться в супермаркетах.
Наказывать за это никого не будут.
Шептун
 |
Instagram
 |
Facebook


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
КЦС ВС вказав на обов'язок суду перевіряти електронну пошту та реєструвати надіслані на неї документи, підписані ЕЦП
Апеляційний суд залишив без руху апеляційну скаргу, оскільки вона подана поза межами строку на апеляційне оскарження без клопотання про його поновлення, і надав десятиденний строк на усунення недоліків.
Копія відповідної ухвали була направлена на електронну адресу, зазначену в апеляційній скарзі. Факт отримання копії ухвали підтверджений довідкою апеляційного суду та не заперечувався заявником.
У визначений строк апеляційний суд не отримав клопотання про поновлення строку, тому відмовив у відкритті апеляційного провадження у справі.
Верховний Суд у складі Касаційного цивільного суду скасував ухвалу, передав справу на розгляд до апеляційної інстанції, зробивши такі правові висновки.
Адвокат позивачки стверджувала, що в межах встановленого апеляційним судом строку направила на його офіційну електронну адресу клопотання про поновлення строку на апеляційне оскарження, на підтвердження цього вона надала скріншоти листування з апеляційним судом.
Із наданих скріншотів випливає, що адвокат із власної електронної адреси, на яку суд надіслав ухвалу про залишення апеляційної скарги без руху, направила на офіційну електронну адресу апеляційного суду підписане електронним підписом (файл із розширенням asice) клопотання про усунення недоліків апеляційної скарги.
Порядок використання для обміну документами електронної пошти встановлено Законом України «Про електронні документи та електронний документообіг», в якому зазначено, що порядок електронного документообігу визначається державними органами, органами місцевого самоврядування, підприємствами, установами та організаціями всіх форм власності згідно із законодавством.
За загальним правилом, визначеним ч. 1 ст. 11 цього Закону, електронний документ вважається одержаним адресатом із часу надходження авторові повідомлення в електронній формі від адресата про одержання цього електронного документа автора.
Відповідно до Положення про порядок використання ресурсів локальної обчислювальної мережі в Державній судовій адміністрації України, територіальних управліннях Державної судової адміністрації України, місцевих та апеляційних судах загальної юрисдикції, затвердженого наказом ДСА України від 4 грудня 2013 року № 164, користувач зобов'язаний перевіряти електронну поштову скриньку не менше двох разів на день. Також положення визначає порядок дій користувача після отримання нових повідомлень електронною поштою.
Крім того, у п. 22 Тимчасового порядку обміну офіційними електронними документами, затвердженого наказом ДСА України від 15 листопада 2016 року № 231, також встановлено порядок дій працівника суду в разі отримання електронного листа. Зокрема, електронну пошту відповідальна особа повинна перевіряти не рідше одного разу на годину протягом робочого дня.
Наведене свідчить про обов’язок працівників апарату суду перевіряти електронну пошту на наявність повідомлень та передавати їх для реєстрації.
Врахувавши відсутність відомостей про перевірку обставин і причин ненадходження чи нереєстрації в апеляційному суді клопотання заявника апеляційної скарги, а також відсутність даних перевірки змісту та порядку підписання електронним підписом самого клопотання, КЦС ВС вказав, що висновки про відмову у відкритті апеляційного провадження у зв'язку з неподанням заявником клопотання про поновлення строку на апеляційне оскарження слід визнати передчасними.
Постанова Верховного Суду від 7 грудня 2022 року у справі № 522/7002/17 (провадження № 61-10558св22) –
https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/107803716
.
Із цією та іншими правовими позиціями ВС можна ознайомитися в Базі правових позицій ВС –
lpd.court.gov.ua/login
.
#Верховний_Суд

#КЦС_ВС

#судова_практика

#електронні_документи

#електронний_документообіг


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
🇺🇦
 Не только россияне давят видео каналы для FPV. В каждую игру можно играть двоем.
Наши украинские парни собирают аналогичные решения буквально в полях из того, что под рукой.


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
Білорусь веде переговори з Іраном про виробництво шахедів на своїй території, — «Інститут вивчення війни» ISW
Вчора білоруський міністр оборони Хренін прибув до Ірану на зустріч зі своїм іранським колегою, щоб підписати Меморандум про взаєморозуміння та план двостороннього військового співробітництва на 2023 рік.
Міністр оборони Ірану Аштіані, перш за все, відповідає за ведення переговорів про військові придбання та продаж, а раніше вже зʼявлялись повідомлення, що Іран намагався перетворити одне з підприємств у Гомельській області білорусі на завод з виробництва іранських безпілотних апаратів.
Агент України


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
Глава МИД Германии
посмела
 упрекнуть Украину в 30-летних кумовстве и коррупции.
Сразу после этого в украинских СМИ вспомнили, что в Европе и США тоже есть коррупция.
Ждем, когда на уровне МИД Украины заявят, что на Западе царят взяточничество и продажность.
Шептун
 |
Instagram
 |
Facebook


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
15 реанімобілів типу С поїхали рятувати життя у Черкаси, Львів, а також у  Волинській, Київській та Чернівецькій областях.
Дякуємо нашим амбасадорам — Барбрі Стрейзанд та Скотту Келлі, а також партнерам — Uber, Укрсиббанку та «Золотому Віку». Дякуємо всім, хто долучився своїми пожертвами!
❤
Продовжуйте
підтримувати
 українських медиків.


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
Блять, они даже деда мобилизовали, еле ходит. Рыженко Владимир Дмитриевич
25.08.1963
Сургут
Контент від підписника


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User] На польской угольной шахте "Богданка" в сорока километрах от украинской границы горнорабочие обнаружили захоронение с сотнями тел мужчин в военной форме, в том числе с шевронами украинских подразделений. Данный участок сейчас закрыт для работы. На объект приехали военные, проводят беседы с работниками шахты, многих для этого увезли в Люблин. Среди украинцев, работающих на объекте, возникло много вопросов к происходящему. Плодится много слухов. Кто-то говорит, что туда на протяжении нескольких месяцев складировали иностранных наемников, погибших на Украине, кто-то уверен, что в шахту могли свозить неопознанные тела украинских военных, которых вывозили в Польшу чуть ли не для трансплантации органов. Также некоторые рабочие уверены, что таких захоронений может быть несколько и периодически они засыпаются. После того, как информация стала распространятся среди работников шахты, могут появиться официальные объяснения от оператора шахты. Вероятно, данная информация заинтересует тех, кто не может найти своих без вести пропавших родственников-военнослужащих.


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
«Ми вас нє окупіровалі, ви билі нашей какой-то рєспублікой»
💁🏻♀
рашен-турісто
🇷🇺
 пояснюють грузинам за Осетію та Абхазію
🤯


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
#США

#ЭтоСерьёзно

⚡
🇺🇸
⚡
В США РАЗРАБОТАЛИ НАЦИОНАЛЬНУЮ ОБОРОННО-ПРОМЫШЛЕННУЮ СТРАТЕГИЮ
❗

В ответ на текущую мировую обстановку, где США сталкиваются с вызовами по всем фронтам, Пентагон
 впервые в своей истории
разработал Национальную оборонно-промышленную стратегию.
Стратегия призывает американский истеблишмент вразумиться и проделать громадную работу над ошибками, которые поставили Штаты в уязвимое положение.
 Болевые точки:
 ⁃ снижение промышленной базы;
 ⁃ отставание в разработке гиперзвукового оружия;
 ⁃ разрушение цепочек поставок;
 ⁃ готовность рабочей силы;
 ⁃ вашингтонская бюрократия и "залезший под кожу" вражеский китайский капитал.
В документе признается, что с оттоком оружия в Украину промышленная база США сокращается, поскольку компании, поставляющие Пентагону оружие, испытывают замедление в темпах производства.
 Прогнозируется, что восполнение запасов займет несколько лет.
Кроме того, стратегия подчеркивает необходимость сотрудничества с союзниками для увеличения объёмов производства оружия за рубежом, рассматривая это как императив. Это к вопросу о том, насколько "военная машина" Штатов оказалась реально готова к ограниченной войне.
Также стратегия акцентирует внимание на необходимости привлечения молодежи на производство, взывая их к патриотизму. Другое дело, что в изменившемся западном антропотипе, понятие патриотизма не подразумевает собой ничего, что связано с армией, оружием и войной. Это стигматизировано как крайне "токсичное" и маскулинное проявление. Патриотизм нынче – это когда ты "комфортно" борешься за права меньшинств на улицах и в кампусах университетов, попивая свой тыквенный латте из "Старбаксовского Стенли Капа".
Далее, относительно главного антагониста США – Китая, Пентагон бьет тревогу из-за сильных позиций КНР в переработке лития, а также недавно введенных Пекином экспортных ограничений на галлий и германий. Документ освещает критическую важность минералов и стратегических материалов, где Китай доминирует в глобальных цепочках поставок важнейших полезных ископаемых, на его долю приходится около 60% мирового производства и 85% перерабатывающих мощностей. Например, в последние годы для закупки сурьмы, важного минерала необходимого для производства боеприпасов, Штаты почти полностью зависели от Китая. Вашингтон фактически проспал становление Пекина монополистом.
Эта стратегия – wake up call или "красная отрезвляющая таблетка", которая
 разоблачает последствия продолжительного существования США в бутафорском Фукуямовском мире
"конца истории" без масштабных войн и с локальными "военно-полицейскими" операциями, где фронты войны переместили на страницы в социальных сетях, а флаги государств на аватарке стали главным оружием в руках современного воина с тем самым латте.
https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3643326/dod-releases-first-ever-national-defense-industrial-strategy/


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
Бывшего мэра Екатеринбурга Евгения Ройзмана задержали из-за репоста записи Навального во «ВКонтакте»
«Проблема в том, что Ройзман не зарегистрирован в ВК. Просто ни разу в жизни не заходил. Перепост был сделан в группе "Евгений Ройзман", к которой он отношения не имеет и знать не знает, кто это сделал. Таких групп в ВК порядка 20»
Не страна а сказка: свобода, демократия,  любовь.


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
Сьогодні вся Україна відзначає День українського добровольця

Усі ми пам'ятаємо перші дні повномасштабної війни. Багатьом було тоді страшно, багато хто виїхав із міста, ніхто справді не знав що буде далі. Разом з цим всі ми були свідками як два роки тому у військових комісаріатах Кривого Рогу утворилися величезні черги. Бажаючих вступити було так багато, що навіть не всім вистачало озброєння. Але була рішучість боротися.

В перші дні було здійснено величезну роботу. Ми пройшли шлях від створення першого батальйону до формування повноцінної, добре оснащеної бригади Територіальної оборони. Було побудовано фортифікаційні споруди, багато з яких розташовані за межами міста та утворюють кілька ліній захисту. Паралельно вирішували питання з бронежилетами, касками та іншою амуніцією. Відкривали виробництва у Кривому Розі, робота йшла цілодобово. Це стало можливим завдяки зусиллям тисяч людей.

Ми об’єдналися та відбили ворога від міста. І зараз криворіжці продовжують добровільно вступати в різні частини ЗСУ і б'ються на різних ділянках фронту щоб вигнати окупантів з рідної землі і щоб ворог ніколи більше не обстрілював наші мирні міста.

Ви - справжні Герої, які писали та пишуть історію не лише словами, а й ділом.
Разом переможемо!


[System]
You are an expert in the whataboutism manipulation technique. Whataboutism: Deflects criticism by pointing out alleged hypocrisy instead of addressing the issue. List phrases that provide evidence of whataboutism in the given sentence if they are present. Given the evidence, make a judgement whether the sentence contains the whataboutism manipulation.
To improve the classification of statements above as "Whataboutism" or not, it's crucial to streamline the defining characteristics you’ve identified while also refining your understanding through false positive and false negative examples. Here are specific classification guidelines that address the second person.

### Guidelines for Classification:

1. **Identify the Core Argument**:
   - Focus on understanding the central issue being discussed. If the statement shifts away from this issue to allegations of hypocrisy or unrelated subjects, it may indicate Whataboutism.

2. **Check for Direct Relevance**:
   - Assess whether the statement directly addresses the initial criticism or topic. If it invokes unrelated acts of wrongdoing by another party in an attempt to deflect attention, classify it as Whataboutism.

3. **Look for Relational Dynamics**:
   - Determine if the statement attempts to compare two entities (or events) in a way that does not aid the discussion but rather distracts from it. Contrast the original subject with an unrelated attack or comparison.

4. **Watch for Deflections**:
   - Identify phrases that explicitly seek to deflect attention away from the core criticism. Common phrases indicating Whataboutism might include:
     - "But what about..."
     - "You say this, but..."
     - "You're just as bad because..."

5. **Examine Emotional Intensity**:
   - Strong emotional language or aggressive assertions that aim to shift blame rather than contribute to constructive dialogue can be indicators of Whataboutism.

6. **False Positive Reduction**:
   - Statements can mention unrelated criticisms or events without being Whataboutism if they serve to illuminate a legitimate systemic problem or context. Ensure you analyze the intent and relevance of these comments rather than categorically denying any comparative observations.

7. **False Negative Prevention**:
   - Be cautious when statements appear to just highlight similar issues, as they can still be Whataboutism if they are meant to negate the initial criticism without engaging with it.

8. **Context Matters**:
   - Evaluate the context in which the statement is made. A statement that may seem like Whataboutism could be relevant if presented in a context that sheds light on a systematic failing or hypocrisy, especially if it enriches the argumentative space.

### Example Application:

- **False Positive Example**:
   - "Почему вы не говорите о других нарушениях?"
     - This could be a false positive if it is merely inquiring about broader issues but does not dismiss the initial point.

- **False Negative Example**:
   - "А как же ситуация в Буче?"
     - This should be marked as Whataboutism if it is invoked to deflect a point being made about unrelated issues.

### Conclusion:

Utilize the above guidelines to refine your classifier's accuracy. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in speech and the intention behind statements, as well as their relational context to the initial criticism, to ensure accurate classification of Whataboutism. Regular reviews and adjustments based on newly encountered data will also enhance the performance of your classifier.

[User]
Реорганізація КРАІЛ — перше читання
✅
Це правильне рішення й важливий антикорупційний законопроєкт. Він пропонує реорганізувати Комісію з регулювання азартних ігор та лотерей (КРАІЛ) і прибрати з процесу видачі ліцензій людський чинник — усе буде автоматично й за чіткими критеріями.
Дякую Комітету з питань фінансів, податкової та митної політики й депутатам за підтримку
🤘