[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]
Синод УПЦ (МП) вивів зі складу двох "дискредитованих" священиків — залишив намісника Києво-Печерської  лаври митрополита Павла.
🔹
Митрополита Сімферопольського і Кримського Лазаря — у зв’язку з "неможливістю брати участь в засіданнях". Саме Лазар перевів усі кримські парафії під омофор РПЦ після окупації півострова росією;
🔹
Єпископа Макарівського Гедеона — за "станом здоров’я". Він є настоятелем "храму-МАФу" біля Десятинної церкви у Києві.
🚀
Підписатися на ZN.UA


[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]
Подекуди в області ожеледиця. На дорогах, де це необхідно, працює техніка.
☝
Втім, є прохання і до автомобілістів. За можливості утримайтеся від поїздок. А якщо виїхали – не перевищуйте швидкість. Уважними слід бути й пішоходам.


[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]
Франція вимагає підтвердити, що ЄС не зможе надати Україні 1 млн снарядів до березня, —
Politico
В ЄС зростає занепокоєння, що блок не зможе виконати обіцянку виробити для України мільйон артилерійських боєприпасів до березня 2024 року. Через це деякі політики почали просувати ідею закупівлі снарядів за межами ЄС.
🇺🇦
Підписатись

|
Запропонувати 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]
Дев'ять років тому завдяки мужності та незламності українських воїнів Слов'янськ і Краматорськ звільнили від терористів, які прагнули пошматувати нашу Батьківщину та позбавити незалежності
Сьогодні над цими містами майорить український стяг, який незабаром буде піднято по всій нашій території. Пологи, Токмак, Комиш-Зоря, Енергодар, Мелітополь, Розівка, Бердянськ, Якимівка - чекайте!
Контрнаступ триває, ворогу нас не спинити. Разом крокуємо до перемоги!
🇺🇦

Сайт ЗОВА

🇺🇦
 |
Facebook ЗОВА

🇺🇦
 |
YouTube ЗОВА


[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]
📍
Авдеевское направление:
На данный момент, после вчерашнего мощного контрбатарейного противодействия украинской артиллерии со стороны 152-мм гаубиц "Гиацинт-Б", "Мста-Б" и Д-20 артиллерии 114-й мотострелковой и 1-й Славянской бригад СВ России, командование бригад прорабатывает новую конфигурацию лазеек продвижения для охвата Авдеевского укрепрайона ВСУ в тактически "котёл".
По фортификации ВСУ на территории АКХЗ продолжают активно работать Су-34/М ВКС России с применением фугасных авиабомб ФАБ-500М-62 в планирующей управлямой модификации.
😍

АВДЕЕВКА.РУ
🇷🇺


[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]
👀
Депортувати всіх чоловіків-українців запропонував генерал Польщі, —
Onet
Wiadomości
За його словами, уряди у Варшаві, Парижі, Празі мають сприяти депортації та допомогти українській стороні.
У МЗС Польщі вважають, що це питання слід врегулювати на рівні всіх країн ЄС, але МВС країни не працює у цьому напрямку.
Київ — пряма трансляція

👈
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]
Обсудим кадровые изменения, которые якобы готовит ОП до конца апреля.

Конечно, они не связаны с майскими событиями, о которых нельзя говорить вслух, просто так совпало.

Совпало, что ОП нуждается в резком усилении силового блока, под который и заточены все изменения.

Например, Костина, который является 100% человеком Ермака, меняют на Кипера, который, помимо того, что 100% человек Ермака, еще и его кум – человек не переборчив.

Если Костин позволяет себе обсуждать задачи руководства, прежде всего, по депутатам, которых он знает т.к. сам был Слугой – то Кипер подпишет все и по всем.

Также в ОП до сих пор не отказались от замены министра МВД Клименко на Малюка, хотя скандал с Шило этим планам серьезно подгадил.

Однако, эта замена нужна под закон о мобилизации, когда полиция получит задачу по жесткой отработке уклонистов в составе группы ТЦК – Клименко, как классический мент-кадровик, эту жесткость обеспечить не может. Малюк – готов на все.

Все остальные перестановки – для ОП вообще не принципиальны, и носят исключительно отвлекающий характер, чтобы размывать в новостной ленте информацию про российский паспорт жены Кипера или про коррупцию Шило в СБУ.


[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]
⚡
Взрывчатку под «Северные потоки» в июне 2022 заложили американские водолазы под прикрытием учений НАТО, активировали ее норвежцы, утверждает лауреат Пулитцеровской премии журналист
Сеймур Херш со
 ссылкой на источник, который принимал непосредственное участие в планировании этой операции.
Диверсии предшествовали более 9 месяцев секретных обсуждений Байдена с командой по нацбезопасности, в подготовке операции участвовал советник президента США по нацбезопасности Джейк Салливан.
Херш впервые получил признание в 1969 году за разоблачение резни в Май Лай и ее сокрытия во время войны во Вьетнаме, за что он получил Пулитцеровскую премию 1970 за международную журналистику. В 1970-е годы Херш освещал Уотергейтский скандал для The New York Times и раскрыл тайные бомбардировки Камбоджи. В 2004 году он первым сообщил о жестоком обращение с заключенными иракцами в тюрьме Абу-Грейб. В 2004 году он получил Премию Джорджа Оруэлла. Херш обвинял администрацию Обамы во лжи о событиях, связанных с смертью Усамы бен Ладена, и оспаривал утверждение о том, что режим Асада применил химическое оружие против мирных жителей во время гражданской войны в Сирии.


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

### Guidelines for Classification:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

### Example Application:

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

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

### Conclusion:

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

[User]
"На війні ворога можна і треба вбивати на його території. Партнери бояться передавати зброю — ми використаємо свою", — Залужний для  Washington Post
«Щоб врятувати свій народ, чому я маю питати в когось дозволу, що робити на ворожій території? Чомусь я маю думати, що мені там нічого не можна робити. Чому? Тому що Путін… застосує ядерну зброю? Дітям, які помирають, однаково. Це наша проблема, і нам вирішувати, як убивати цього ворога. На війні на його території можна і треба вбивати. Якщо наші партнери бояться використовувати їхню зброю, ми будемо вбивати своєю. Але рівно стільки, скільки необхідно», — наголосив він.
База.
P.S. Наймудріша, найрозумніша людина, послана Богом в тяжкий час, нам з Вами, щоб врятувати Україну.
Дякую що Ви є, пане Головнокомандувач!


[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]
✅
Депутаты Совета муниципального округа муниципальное образование Лутугинский муниципальный округ Луганской Народной Республики первого созыва присоединились к просмотру пресс-конференции и прямой линии с Президентом Российской Федерации Владимиром Владимировичем Путиным 14 декабря 2023 года.
Очень важно подводить итоги уходящего года, знать о той колоссальной работе, которая уже проделана нашим руководством по всем направлениям, услышать каждого желающего задать вопросу Путину В.В. и наметить планы на ближайшее будущее для их дальнейшего исполнения.
❗
Весь депутатский корпус Совета муниципального округа муниципальное образование Лутугинский муниципальный округ Луганской Народной Республики поддерживает Президента Российской Федерации и готов делать все возможное для людей нашего муниципального округа.


[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]
Крізь вогонь, воду та перешкоди!
Січеславські десантники долають психологічну смугу перешкод!
Сильні, швидкі, вмотивовані! Січеславці - жах для окупанта, гордість для українців!
Наші воїни регулярно гартують тіло та волю, адже важко в навчанні - легко в бою.
Слава Україні та її героям!
Разом до Перемоги! ДШВ - Завжди Перші! Слава Україні!
Служба звʼязків з громадськістю 25 окремої повітрянодесантної Січеславської бригади
#stoprussia

#ДШВ

#3СУ

#Завжди_Перші
#UkrainianAirAssaultForces
#AirAssaultForces

#WarInUkraine

#RussianAggression
#BattleOfUkrainianAirAssaultForces

#25_бригада


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

### Guidelines for Classification:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

### Example Application:

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

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

### Conclusion:

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

[User]
#США

#Трамп
⚡
🇺🇸
⚡
Трамп ОСУДИЛ нападения ХАМАС на Израиль и сообщил, что администрация Байдена финансировала эти нападения
❗
«Эти нападения ХАМАС — позор, и Израиль имеет полное право защищать себя подавляющими силами», — написал Трамп в субботу в Truth Social.
«К сожалению, доллары американских налогоплательщиков помогли финансировать эти нападения, которые, как говорят во многих сообщениях, исходили от администрации Байдена. Мы [имеет ввиду себя] принесли так много мира на Ближний Восток посредством Авраамовых соглашений только для того, чтобы увидеть, как Байден свел их на нет гораздо более быстрыми темпами, чем любой думал, что это возможно. Вот и снова».
Конечно, для Трампа ситуация абсолютно выигрышная
❗

Напоминаем, что Байден передал 6 миллиардов долларов замороженных средств Ирану, чтобы обеспечить сделку по обмену пленными, в рамках которой пять иранских заложников были переданы в обмен на пять американских граждан.


[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]
Військо! Повномасштабне вторгнення рф до України триває вже 316 днів. Проте залишаються компанії, які продовжують вести бізнес в росії та фінансувати вбивства українців. Наприклад, OMV — найбільша в центральній Європі австрійська нафтова компанія. Сьогодні звертаємося до її керівництва та вимагаємо припинити фінансувати російську агресію. Поїхали!
✊🏻
🇺🇦
⚡
Що робимо?
⚡
✅
 Готуємо текст, в якому засуджуємо дії компаній й просимо вийти з ринку рф.
✅
 Підготовлений текст залишаємо в коментарях під дописами на сторінках компанії та керівництва в усіх соцмережах.
✅
 В Твіттері також робимо власну публікацію з підготовленого тексту.
✅
 До коментарів та дописів додаємо зображення з посту ІВУ.
Підготували для вас орієнтовні тексти
👇🏻
 Можете використовувати їх або написати власний. За потреби користуйтеся гугл-перекладачем.
🔹
🔹
🔹
Every ruble that ends up in russian taxes turns into tears and deaths for Ukrainian children. Stop funding the war in Ukraine. #StopWar #Stoprussia
🔹
🔹
🔹
Stop cooperating with the aggressor! As long as you cooperate with russia and pay taxes, their soldiers are getting new weapons. #Banrussia
🔹
🔹
🔹
Hundreds of companies have already left russia. Why do you continue to work with the aggressor and sponsor their army? #Stoprussia
❓
Де шукати адресатів?
Підготували для вас добірку з посиланнями на соцмережі компаній:
https://cutt.ly/q2xrkfE
До бою! Ви — неймовірні і здатні на будь-які дива, ми це точно знаємо
😌
💙
💛


[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]
Що саме запитують та шукають рашисти, коли обходять квартири в Енергодарі:
1.
 До будинку під'їжджає вантажний автомобіль з 15-20 рашистами. Вони заходять у під'їзд та стукають у кожну квартиру зі словами "ОТКРЫВАЙТЕ!";
2.
 Вони чекають не більше однієї хвилини, після чого наклеюють листок із датою та ведуть облік. Вони повернуться через кілька днів, щоб перевірити, чи приходив хтось;
3.
 Якщо двері відкрили, перш за все окупанти попросять показати російський паспорт чи телефон. Якщо цей "документ" є, то у більшості випадків вони просто йдуть геть. Якщо немає, то заходять у квартиру й оглядають наявність
української
 символіки, літератури та іншого;
4.
 Якщо вони розуміють, що у мешканця немає російського паспорта, то стають грубішими й вимагають показати телефон. Шукають будь-які додатки, пов'язані з Україною. Наприклад, "Дія", "ПриватБанк", "monobank", "Нова Пошта" та інші. Якщо знаходять українську SIM-карту в телефоні, то починаються проблеми;
5.
 Якщо після перевірки вони не знайшли, за що схопитися, то можуть запитати, де проживають родичі, з ким спілкуєтесь з територій підконтрольних Україні. Також вони хочуть отримати відповіді на такі питання: хто обстрілює Запорізьку АЕС? Зараз "СВО" чи війна?
Енергодар буде вільним.


[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]
❗
Популярная американская газета
Wall Street
 предупреждает украинское правительство, что уже с ноября США могут приостановить выплаты украинским госслужащим из-за проблем с бюджетом в Америке.
 У нас уже многие подзабыли, что наша власть на зарплате у США. Это что, Украина суверенная страна? И мы можем делать что-либо не так, как они скажут?


[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]
#раскладка

Война России и НАТО
возможна только в том случае,
 если оттуда выйдет США. В противном случае, эти статьи и публикации заказ военного лобби, которое пугает свою общественность, чтобы выбить больше себе заказов.
Если США выходят из НАТО, тогда, это полностью ложится в стратегию американцев по самоуничтожению обеих «сторон», которые потратят все ресурсы на войну друг с другом, а Вашингтон, как и после II мировой раздаст всем кредиты в своих «напечатанных бумажках» и продолжит финансовую гегемонию в мире.
Ну как видим в ЕС правят идиоты, как и у нас в Киеве, которые понимают прекрасно куда ведут свои страны, но продолжают их туда втягивать.


[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]
🔥
💥
11 ВСУшников побило «Градом» под Авдеевкой
11 ВСУшников приехали на ротацию. Они начали выгружаться за 2 км до позиций
Результат на видео, ротация у боевиков ВСУ не состоялась.


[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]
НАБУ и САП разоблачили «на горячем», сразу после получения $50

000 взятки, мэра Рени и депутата местного совета
Чиновники потребовали $100 тысяч за «содействие» в решении вопроса о выделении земельного участка в аренду под складские помещения.
При получении первого транша их разоблачили. Детали позже.
Прислать новость
👉

@our_odessabot
👉

ПОДПИСАТЬСЯ


[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]
Посол України у Великобританії Вадим Пристайко дав гучне інтерв'ю для видання
Daily Express
. Самі журналісти відзначають недипломатичність мови посла, який використовував у зверненні до путіна й росії нецензурні вислови чи натяки на них (у стилі послання руцкому воєнному кораблю). Переказувати не стану, можете прочитати переказ інтерв'ю у відкритій версії видання, там удосталь цитат (якщо є складності з англійською, скористайтеся гугл-перекладачем):
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1755820/vadym-prystaiko-ambassador-ukraine-putin-war-russia
Загалом, вислови справді недипломатичні й жорсткі щодо ерефії й пуйла та цілком прийнятні й коректні щодо Британії. Але Пристайко не надто публічна особа. А жорсткий атакуючий стиль інтерв'ю і зовсім не в його стилі. Тому тут той випадок, коли він явно виконав наказ керівництва. А це вже цікаво: який наказ і якого керівництва? Це не пусте питання. Ми всі знаємо, що країною в значній мірі, а міністерствами оборони й закордонних справ персонально керує не Зеленський, як написано в Конституції (той лише написані тексти не вдумуючись спроможний зачитувати), а Єрмак. І яку б провокацію чи акт бездіяльності не звершив якийсь із наших дипломатів, яке б мародерство не покривав Рєзніков із своїми заступниками, ми розуміємо - це не він, це головний завгосп мутить.
Але Пристайко - окрема історія. Його міністром призначав персонально Зеленський (тоді Єрмак ще не був усесильним). І саме через пізнішу відмову Пристайка переприсягнути на вірність Єрмаку його усунули з уряду й відправили в почесне заслання до Лондона. Але Пристайко зберігає пенрсональну вірність виключно Зеленському - Єрмака він не визнає, а Кулебу глибоко зневажає, в чому його не можна не підтримати. Накази, звісно, віддає не сам Зеленський, але, припускаю, що хтось із його близьких осіб, наприклад,
"перша Маша країни"
 - Марія Левченко - секретарка Кварталу-95, що сидить у президентському кабінеті й конкурує за впливи з
"першим завгоспом країни"
.
То цей Пристайко, коли Зеленський руками й ногами відбивався від інтеграції в НАТО, дозволив собі зрадницьку заяву, що треба поступитися москві й погодитися на позаблоковий статус та не виконувати прямої вимоги Конституції. Мовляв, тоді путін не нападе.  Ми тоді вимагали термінового звільнення Пристайка та його відповідальності за антиконституційні заклики й угодовство перед путіним. А тут раптом нове інтерв'ю і така радикальна зміна. Ні, чогось мудрого він і цього разу не сказав, просто набір лайливих, пустопорожніх, але загалом правильних фраз. І серед них, що ніяких переговорів з путіним ні про що бути не може. Це колись після перемоги для майбутніх поколінь, а нині воювати до останнього їхнього, а ні, то до останнього нашого.
Питання: чому він це говорив? Це схоже на войнушку між
башнями кремля
 поверхами Банкової. Єрмак розпочав якусь інтрижку, зміст якої не до кінця ясний - наказав своєму заму Сибізі (відомий кадровий дипломат) зробити заяву в інтерв'ю для
Financial Times
 про можливі переговори щодо Криму. Почалися шум і бродіння, питання виникли, звісно, до Зеленського. Чи Єрмак його підставляв, чи підіграв комусь із москви, чи мав ще якесь замовлення на таку заяву - не знаю. Але в безпосередньому оточенні Зеленського вирішили відреагувати негайно й дзеркально - сказали Пристайку напроситися на інтерв'ю й дати протилежну відповідь, а ще прямо спростувати прийнятність того, що через Сибігу озвучив Єрмак.
Колись у дитинстві, пригадую, була така забавка: "Зіпсований телефон". То ці  [ла-ла-ла] під час війни через іноземні газети один одному меседжі передають? Куууурва!
Єдине, що поза контекстом цієї конспірології щодо появи незвичного інтерв'ю Пристайка, все ж процитую - це болісна фраза щодо наших втрат. На пряме питання, він відповів, що поки наша політика - їх не озвучувати, але:
"Коли війна закінчиться, ми це визнаємо. Я думаю, що це буде жахлива цифра".
Це сказав не я і не мої знайомі військові, які у вузькому колі говорять про дуже драматичні речі, це сказав особисто довірений посол Зеленського Пристайко...


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

### Guidelines for Classification:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

### Example Application:

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

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

### Conclusion:

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

[User] Не будет захвата Харькова.  Во-первых, BILD - это желтая пресса Германии. Во-вторых, автор статьи Рёпке часто ошибался в прогнозах и аналитике.  Ну а в-третьих, самое важное, мы не будем щелкать еб@лом как с 2015 до 2022 гг, когда никто не верил в полномасштабное…


[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]
Хто хоче поспілкуватися з російським підором?
Мешкає в Донецьку, вірить у те, що зможе дожити до кінця війни
🥹
«Александр родился в Мариуполе, воюет 9 лет
+79496179564»
🇺🇦
Підписатися

|
Надіслати новину
Інстаграм Данило
Інстаграм Кирило
Закритий чат
🔞


[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]
"Human Rights Watch" сообщили, что собрали доказательства гибели жителей
Изюма
 в результате обстрелов
ВСУ
 кассетными боеприпасами в 2022 году.
Только Изюма? ВСУ совершили столько
военных
 преступлений, что "Human Rights Watch" должны работать без выходных.


[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]
⚡
Инстаграм заблокировал страницу боксера Василия Ломаченко для просмотра из Украины.
Страница украинской звезды бокса Василия Ломаченко в Instagram оказалась недоступна на территории Украины. При нажатии на ссылку аккаунта боксера появляется надпись: "К сожалению, эта страница недоступна" тогда как при использовании VPN она доступна.
На своей странице в Instagram Ломаченко опубликовал, в частности, сообщения в поддержку Украинской православной церкви после того, как против ряда ее иерархов были введены санкции СНБО.