[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] Зустрівся з головою фракції Соціал-демократичної партії Німеччині в Бундестазі ФРН Рольфом Мютценіхом та лідером СДПН Ларсом Клінгбайлем. Наголосив на необхідності посилення підтримки України - озброєнням, навчанням наших військових, фінансовою допомогою.


[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]
Хтось продовжує дерусифікувати Полтаву підпільно.
Намалювали
 патріотичний символ на пам‘ятнику. Також зафарбували радянську зірку.
У центрі Полтави досі лишається пам’ятник братам Литвиновим, які були чекістами та брали участь у знищенні армії УНР.
ТРУХА
⚡
Полтава
Надіслати новину
📸


[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]
Хрен им, а не наши дети!
https://peremogi.livejournal.com/66802648.html
#аберрация сознания

#перемога опасносте!

#ублюдки и выродки просто сдохнут


[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]
Завдяки небайдужим громадянам перші «ударні роти БпЛА» отримали сучасні автівки
В рамках проєкту “
Армія дронів
” продовжується формування перших «ударних рот БпЛА».
Допомогти у їх доукомплектуванні зголосився Андрій Веселий - український підприємець, засновник БФ «Родини Веселого». Завдяки відповідальній роботі волонтерів та партнерів Фонду вчора було передано на потреби однієї з таких рот два нових пікапи Mitsubishi L200.
З 2014 фонд допомагає ветеранам Майдану та АТО (ООС), сім'ям загиблих захисників та тим, хто зараз протистоїть окупантам.
Долучитися до укомплектування «ударних рот БпЛА» може кожен.
Переможемо разом!
@AFUStratCom
 - найактуальніші і найсвіжіші новини


[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] Фейковые аккаунты Сирського были созданы враждебными спецслужбами и использовались для распространения лжи о ситуации на фронте. Эту информацию раскрыли специалисты Центра протидействия дезинформации и кибердепартамента СБУ, которые обнаружили мережу фейковых аккаунтов в социальных сетях.


[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]
Ну те, що Жернаков хворий на голову, ми з вами без усіляких ВЛК й довідок знали.
Але ж плоскостопість? У законопроекті по посиленню мобілізації, що Кабмін відкликав на доопрацювання взагалі пропонувалась призивати інвалідів другої та третьої групи.
Насправді ситуація навколо не доброчесності Жернакова це чергова історія, яка наочно демонструє брехню і цинізм наших так званих «реформаторів» та «експертів».
https://t.me/zib_news/9198


[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]
⚡
Охочі потрапити до кадрового резерву для роботи на деокупованих територіях матимуть змогу перекваліфікуватися
Про це Віцепрем’єр-міністр Ірина Верещук заявила під час ефіру на телеканалі ICTV. За її словами, наразі процес підготовки кадрів набуває конкретних обрисів.
▪
Зокрема, нещодавно з керівництвом Луганщини та Донеччини було проведено нараду, де обговорювалися першочергові кроки зі стабілізації та реінтеграції цих областей після їх деокупації.

▪
Крім того, Рада національної безпеки і оборони працює над оновленням стратегії реінтеграції Криму. У III – IV кварталі цього року РНБО має винести цей документ на обговорення і подальше голосування.
💬

«Роблю на цьому акцент, бо ви розумієте, що у нас є території, які вже понад 9 років перебувають у тимчасовій окупації. І той кадровий резерв, який поїде туди працювати, має бути відповідно підготовлений»,
 – зазначила посадовиця.
▪
Вона додала, що вже зараз Нацагентство з питань державної служби приймає заявки від всіх охочих: можна зареєструватися на сайті та створити електронний кабінет. Так, разом формуватимемо кадровий резерв для роботи на деокупованих територіях.
💬

«Власне, у разі потреби можна також перекваліфікуватися. Наші виші вже презентували унікальні магістерські програми для підготовки кадрового резерву з питань реінтеграції. 10 липня одна з них стартуватиме в Київському національному університеті імені Тараса Шевченка. Є також інші програми в інших вишах. Вони теж допоможуть перекваліфікуватися і зайняти ту нішу, яку кандидати вважають найнеобхіднішою»,
 – резюмувала Віцепрем’єрка.
📲
Мінреінтеграції


[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]
Єдина проблема для ручного раба з державного телебачення, яке представляє армію - це що робити з блогерами, які критикують протиправні дії ТЦК. Тих ТЦК, які також знущаються і з військових, списуючи їх лише за гроші.
Зеленський звичайно, з радістю відповів на це питання.
Проблем в мобілізації він не бачить, а всі критики - працюють на Росію.
Шкода, що Армію ТБ не хвилює наприклад, чому досі військові збирають зі своїх зарплат гроші на автівки та дрони. Чому досі мобілізованому треба десь взяти 2000-3000 доларів, щоб зібрати все необхідне, бо держава цього не надає, але викидає зараз 17 млрд грн на дороги.
@novynypravdy


[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]
💥
 Зимнее наступление рф в Украине
не привело к воплощению в жизнь целей, поставленных Кремлем
, - захвату к 31 марта всей территории Донецкой и Луганской областей.
Из-за провального наступления в россии
скоро возможны кадровые изменения
 в высшем военном руководстве, сообщили в американском Институте изучения войны (ISW).
Остаться с нами в Телеграм
 |
Восхититься нашим YouTube


[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]
Захар Соколенко, Андрей Лаврук, Максим Кузнецов, Алексей Погодин - это имена героев, погибших, освобождая и защищая нашу Родину в ходе СВО. Символично, что именно сегодня, в День Победы 9 мая, были открыты мемориальные плиты героям-защитникам в школах №12 и №15, в которых они обучались.
Спасибо Виталию Кишкинову, откликнувшемуся на инициативу школ. Благодаря его поддержке память о героях теперь высечена в камне. Вечная память и вечная слава тем, кто погиб за нашу свободу.


[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]
❗
Після отримання від Норвегії літаків F-16 Україна може перейти в наступ протягом найближчих місяців,
 — німецьке видання
Welt.
Від українського плацдарму на лівому березі Кринок до Криму лише близько 60 кілометрів.
Видання зазначає, що Крим залишається однією з найпроблемніших зон Росії, так як ЗСУ активно знищують там ППО та радіолокаційні станції.


[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]
А що думали, що F-16 та Абрамси по Новій Пошті - це жарт??
Нєєє, тому русня вчора в Селідово накрила такий стратегічно важливий об’єкт)))
Дурні, шо сказати(
Офіцер ✙ | Підписатись


[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]
А тепер трохи прояснемо для читачів в чому унікальність
цієї новини
.
Справа в тому, що до цього часу
у ФБР не було жодної фотографії Віктора Нетикшо
, який очолював в/ч 26165, російські хакери в погонах якої втручались у вибори США 2016 року. І от завдяки українським хакерам "Кібер Спротив" ця біла пляма зараз розкрита. Також отримані додаткові документи, які допоможуть ФБР наблизитись до арешту цієї персони. Фактично зараз, продовжуючи тему
зламу Моргачова
, українські хакери демонструють вищий пілотаж, коли ламають і російських хакерів, і їх найближче оточення.
@informnapalm


[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]
🇹🇼
🇨🇳
Над Тайванем кількість китайських літаків зросла до 71 бортів
⚠
45
 з них при цьому перетнули північну, центральну та південну серединні лінії
Тайванської протоки
 і увійшли до зони
ППО Тайваню.
 Також понад
9
 військових кораблів знаходяться безпосередньо біля острова у виключній (морській) економічній зоні
Тайваню.
👤
Нагадуємо, що
 Китай
 почав масштабні військові навчання навколо Тайваню під назвою "
Єдиний гострий меч
"— в них задіяні мали бути більше
40-ка літаків
 та з
десяток військових кораблів.
 Це найбільші навчання з серпня
2022 року,
 коли на
Тайвань
 приїжджала
Ненсі Пелосі.
Зараз вони стали відповіддю на поїздку президента
Тайваню до США.
Мапа
🛑
Блог
🛑
Написати нам
🛑
Звіти

🛑
ЗСУHelp
🛑
Магазин


[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]
Президент Румынии
Клаус Йоханнис
 считает что НАТО должна
помочь
Майе Санду укрепить устойчивость и улучшить ситуацию.
Если пример Украины, где НАТО "укрепило устойчивость и улучшило ситуацию" так, что экономика и безопасность просто вышли из чата,
ничему
 не учит, то ЛГБТ-флаг в руки.


[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]
Уважаемые земляки! Поздравляю вас с Днем флага Донецкой Народной Республики!
Все годы борьбы и существования Республики значимые события проходили под нашим флагом: продвижение на фронте, восстановление, развитие. Он символ нашего выбора и свободы. Символ того, что мы добились своей цели: стали частью большой семьи российских регионов.
С флагом ДНР ребята-ополченцы становились настоящими русскими героями, с ним мы освобождали законные территории; его с гордостью поднимали спортсмены, добиваясь рекрордов. С нашим флагом мы прошли долгий, но богатый бесценным опытом путь от создания Республики до торжества исторической справедливости – возвращения домой, в Россию.
Теперь флаг Донецкой Народной Республики рядом с российским триколором развевается над нашим регионом, символизируя единство и неразрывные связи с Большой Страной.
В цветах флага ДНР хранится наша история и живет современность, в нем наша решимость идти до полной и окончательной Победы.


[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]
Украина подбила в Черном море российский большой десантный корабль «Цезарь Куников».
Россия ночью нанесла удар по больнице и жилому дому в Селидово. Нелюди убили гражданских, в том числе ребенка. Сейчас спасатели еще разбирают завалы.
Так и воюют.
@kazansky2017


[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]
⚡
Испания выделит 55 млн евро на школы и поддержку малого и среднего бизнеса в Украине
Премьер-министр Испании Педро Санчес во время выступления в Верховной Раде анонсировал выделение Украине пакета помощи на 55 млн евро, основные средства будут выделены через Всемирный банк.
"Сегодня моя страна, Испания, решила выделить дополнительные 55 млн евро, в том числе 51 млн евро через Всемирный банк для финансирования малого и среднего бизнеса в Украине", – сказал Санчес.
ПОДПИСАТЬСЯ

✅

ОБСУДИТЬ


[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 дім - Україна
🇺🇦
Наша авіація захищає наше небо та українську землю.
Земля, по якій ми зробили свої перші кроки.
Земля наших батьків, дідів та прадідів…
Кожен на свому місці здобуває перемогу для держави
🇺🇦
Вистоїмо! Переможемо!
831 бригада тактичної авіації/"831s tactical aviation brigade"
Командування Повітряних Сил ЗСУ / Air Force Command of UA Armed Forces
Міністерство оборони 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]
Пресс-конференция Зеленского. Главные выводы

Вчерашняя большая пресс-конференция Зеленского сильно отличалась от тех, что он проводил ранее, после начала вторжения. Гораздо меньше «победного» настроения, ответы краткие и, зачастую, неконкретные. Видно, что президент нервничает, срывается на перепалку с журналистами.

Изменения эти произошли на фоне известных событий - отсутствие успехов на фронте, неудача наступления, на которое возлагались большие надежды, проблем с западной помощью, а также нарастающее внутриполитическое и социальное напряжением (в том числе и из-за мобилизации). В этой связи у журналистов было много вопросов по конфликту с Залужным и о планах по увольнению главкома ВСУ. На них президент прямо не отвечал, но и не опровергал, подчеркивая наличие вопросов, на которые должно дать ответ военное командование с намеком, что именно оно несет ответственность за самые «неудобные» темы – ситуацию на фронте и с мобилизацией. То есть, Зеленский, по сути, подтвердил, как минимум, отсутствие полного взаимопонимания с Залужным, которого он назвал «Валерой», сравнив его с Безуглой – мол оба любят писать в соцсетях, делать селфи и собирать лайки.
Но самым важным моментом, безусловно, была тема по мобилизации. С нее пресс-конференция началась и к ней президент возвращался неоднократно.

Зеленский заявил, что командование предлагает призвать в армию до полумиллиона человека, но он эту цифру не утвердил по двум причинам.

Первая - отсутствие предложений по ротации и демобилизации тех, кто давно в окопах. Вторая - мобилизация в предложенном военными формате будет стоить бюджету дополнительно 500 миллиардов гривен и нет пока понимания откуда их взять.

Само по себе то, что президент предал огласке свою дискуссию с военными о планах по мобилизации – беспрецедентно. Обычно такие цифры (и, тем более планы) – это военная тайна.

Поэтому у некоторых наблюдателей сразу возникли сомнения в том, что Зеленский озвучил реальную ситуацию, а не решил сыграть в «доброго полицейского» на фоне недовольства в обществе жесткими методами мобилизации: мол, «военные и Залужный хотят забирать всех поголовно, но я им не даю» (в это же вписывается и отказ Зеленского поддержать мобилизацию женщин). Также есть сомнения в том, что военкомы вообще в принципе способным набрать столько людей в армию в условиях тотальной коррупции и массового уклонения от службы.

Но если допустить, что Зеленский сказал все как есть на самом деле, то из этого следуют важные выводы.

Прежде всего, стоит сказать, что чисто военная логика в предложении призвать до полумиллиона человек есть - в нынешней войне основная ударная сила в наступлении это пехота. И, чем больше пехоты, тем больше шансов на продвижение.
При этом подобная тактика - это очень большие потери личного состава и очень большие деньги на содержание армии.
И если Зеленский считает, что Украина не готова к таким жертвам и издержкам, то встает вопрос о том, как дальше продолжать войну.
Тогда нужно снимать задачу идти в наступление «до границ 1991 года» и уходить в глухую оборону имеющимися силами (что, по факту, сейчас уже и происходит). Или начинать переговоры с Россией об окончании войны. Но эти переговоры, как заявил сам президент на пресс-конференции, он считает неактуальными.
При этом вариант ухода в оборону также порождает вопросы – какие цели в таком случае? Тянуть время в надежде на то, что когда-нибудь в России закончатся солдаты или наступит внутренняя смута и развал армии? Или расчет на то, что западные союзники колоссально нарастят производство неких качественно новых видов вооружений, которые позволят ВСУ одержать победу малыми силами? Или что НАТО напрямую вступит в войну на стороне Украины? И есть ли уверенность, что время в такой войне «на истощение» работает на Украину и что условия окончания войны через, например, год будут выгоднее, чем могли бы быть сейчас? Или они окажутся гораздо хуже?

Зеленский по этому поводу ничего не говорил. Хотя, возможно, он уже знает ответы на эти вопросы. Только пока не готов их озвучить.


[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]
Вице-премьер Марат Хуснуллин доложил Президенту о реализации работы по финансированию новых регионов
В рамках госпрограмм на территориях новых субъектов работает 16 федеральных органов исполнительной власти.
📊
По словам Марата Хуснуллина, 73% средств по госпрограммам от запланированных уже переданы, а еще 27% финансов находятся в процессе реализации.
✅
100% средств уже направлено Минстроем, Минспортом, Минтрансом, Минкультом, Минпромторгом, Росреестром и Минфином. В ближайшее время все средства будут доведены до регионов.
🔍
Работа координируется совместно с регионами.
❗
Президент поручил Председателю Правительства Михаилу Мишустину провести анализ работы и представить отчет по финансированию отраслевых программ по новым регионам к 30 июня.


[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]
До речі, з цікавого, Орбан на офіційній сторінці виклав відео перед початком зустрічі, що буде стояти на своєму і що в нього чітка позиція.
🤡
🤡
🤡


[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]
#сплетни

Банковая
запустила антикриз по аграрному
 скандалу.
Миша Подоляк получил по шапке за медийные провалы и выступил с заявлением, что не стоит обращать внимание на риторику польских властей, так как там выборы.
"
Любая страна может защищать свои национальные экономические пространства, и это вопрос диалогов, включая юридические конфликты. Это нормально. Спокойно нужно относиться к тому, что сегодня в Польше достаточно активный избирательный процесс, они имеют право говорить со своим населением, как желают, и в то же время могут критически относиться к любым предложениям других стран, включая Украину
", - сказал Миша Подоляк.
То есть дают заднюю по полной. Ох и дилетанты…
Вопрос, зачем было понты гонять?