Datasets:

Lots-of-LoRAs

/

task108_contextualabusedetection_classification

like 0

Follow

Lots of LoRAs 38

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Slow down, mama. Everly and Everleigh are the originals. I stated "everlee" Like Ashlee, Garagelee Output:

task108-d5c726b2ac564902b91b79cb2fc91945

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Better in what ways? Output:

task108-b61dfd2db8844020a3239ca3042dccfd

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: You can't delete a subreddit. Output:

task108-41c07814a54f4e6b91d44a629378145b

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: >Last year around August, [one Teen Vogue writer advocated making up gender-neutral words for family members to "avoid erasing women and non-binary people"]([Link] because apparently words like "mother," "sister," "wife," "aunt" and so on erase women. Mm. Love the logic behind that. "In order to stop a problem that isn't happening, we have to make that problem happen to both sides." 10/10 Output:

task108-fb949b50ca674270af132caefccd5ed9

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Yeah but they groveled and licked admin boots so they were allowed to stay. Bunch of pussies. Output:

task108-dab834cd2ddd4f91b4b36f40223dcb13

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: We also get a check every month for all the money that we get for being men, this is why feminists say "check your privilege", they're telling us that we haven't gotten our monthly check yet and are politely reminding us. Output:

task108-eb908b0eb02a431aa666794c5b0a9d99

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: As a third(?) Chinese guy, #WE SURE FLUFFIN' DO Output:

task108-7ab04c7096214bfa937bbde35e937376

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I posted this on another subreddit and no one got it Output:

task108-1e1ac1b377f54cb693a2057631fd52e5

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Shoddy, now that's a name I haven't heard in a long time. It honestly might have been the most balanced OU meta ever. Gen 5 caused me to quit, i just couldn't keep up. Output:

task108-b63659dba5de4739bcd3b4fef8cdef36

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Based and bowchikawowwowpilled Output:

task108-4b1469e3ceef4603bb687b0f2665c877

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I lurk on freejinger. But the treaddrifts can be so tiresome. I honestly do not care about everyones opinon on duvets or peanutbutter. Every tread ends with people stating their personal experience with some random thing. As if anyone cares. The good thing is that there will always be someone who takes it way to serious and will flip out one someone with a different opinion. It is a source of great drama. Output:

task108-1dd130c9ef4f4bbdadc768457f97baf2

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: actually my weekend has ben utter shit but thanks for your well wishes i just realised this is a bot, bouta kms Output:

task108-a35e53d6a13a4e3fbbca3da56163e9d6

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: In fairness most (all?) undergraduate degrees do not provide employable skills. Service industry jobs are where most of these people end up nowadays Output:

task108-e4f8a994c28a40b78303477038cd1fe0

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Mama mia, here we go again.. Output:

task108-58aa05d4ce1b4fc7b4992b372c15214e

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: ^ Output:

task108-7e7577ffbc14471996c0eb2634770902

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: It was a cluster fuck in terms of funding, I guess. But the plane performs fine and is absolutely superior to anything else out there. A pretty good lecture on this from an f-18/f-22/f-35 pilot. He considers the f-35 the "internet" of fighters, as in it has the ability to be upgraded. He considers it a revolution in warfare. Output:

task108-c31893e8b0db4b01b31c61dfdb3bf2b2

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I really appreciated your clarification post and the (temporary) balance it brought. Thanks for doing that! It's a shame the other mods didn't feel that way. But to be fair, the founder of the sub isn't exactly a neutral person, non-critical person. I will be happy there will be less, "OMG so and so is wearing pants" type posts because, as another user said, it subtly and slowly normalizes their ass-backwards views. Output:

task108-96f0b830b1084684abff2eaff08f7c8d

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: And now we return to our favourite show "Anything that is not #000000 is whitewashing" Output:

task108-3ff8bf12c321436dac79f75bf923fb0e

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I stood my ground against that person because they are awful. I am not one to creep post history's, but they are a really toxic troll. Look for yourself. Output:

task108-ba8e28b3b36043f398aa7303f0e1e348

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: /u/rcrem I have an amazing business idea, want to invest? I let you in on the ground floor. Here's the pitch: emerging markets. Vertical integration. Paperless. Synergy. Silicon Valley. Solar panels. Just 3 mil and we can crank this shit out in no time! One thing, I only accept bitcoin and make frequent trips to Brazil. I'll send you over a headshot of me in a suit if you're interested. Output:

task108-85345a89aa3048858938217b16be28dd

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Attention whore. Just stick the damn thing in your eyes socket and shut up about it. Output:

task108-79c33c7b8a1b43b1981202a6a7650534

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: the poster doesn't realize the US has the world's best doctors. One could argue that without universal healthcare, it's a bigger financial burden, but arguing that the level of care is lower because it's not free is ridiculous. Output:

task108-fdbb2e5d2359446c92a9194ebc9ccd66

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Gypsies of peace strike again. Output:

task108-046aa5ffd5544c209c22a110bd4c4297

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Yeah I hate it too. But its such a common thing to talk about now. As a young virgin myself, I feel like I'm not normal. Anytime I see posts about it or people talking about it i just get upset thinking how amazing everyone is finding it, or how good their relationships are going. I don't think ill be around too long anyway. I can see the other side to this whole thing as well though. If you enjoy sex then you will love to tall about it a lot. Its similar to talking about any hobbies or intersts you have. Output:

task108-c91233e755dc45f492987e242e2e1e85

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: The richest and most powerful people in the world have always known that the best way for them to keep their power over you is to tell you "It's all THEIR fault. You could be as rich as I am right now, if it wasn't for the nasty people of [opposite group from you] holding you back and keeping you down. Hell, they're probably all as rich as I am right now and they're just keeping it from you because they like seeing you in misery. Make no mistake, if they got the chance, they would love to see you and everyone you care about dead. They're the real enemy. We're just trying to help you, and we're doing all we can, but they're just so strong I don't know if we can keep holding them back from getting the chance to destroy you. You have to strike back against them." Then, the people with real power watch as the lower classes' in-fighting makes sure they'll never realize who the real enemy is, because they truly believe the real enemy is their friend. Output:

task108-06dec45d19a34dc98f18df29ec099823

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I mean, fuck Peta and all, but this isn't really an r/tumblrinaction Output:

task108-6613b18efe7c400794329a9e201b05c4

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Any time vegans are brought up on any post, you can just assume it's going to be drama filled and very entertaining Output:

task108-a63d88d4ec8e4d518026fe8d87207df3

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: This has to be a troll. > Fuck your racism. Fuck your inability to flex on fucking anything. Because lol the projection here. Output:

task108-b79f9dcdf26f493d91f623d4b59d4557

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: So it's a crime for a woman to call HERSELF female now? Makes sense. Output:

task108-a13ea00a1fcc41c6860e8ade3de38700

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Haven't replied to me yet. Output:

task108-db14aa7d827542e8b981b59ba189ab0b

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Nice. I'm glad I got a [post]in while it lasted. Surprisingly well- received; I guess maybe "bootlicker" threw them off? Output:

task108-327e569d32814216bf990096b0250487

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Reddit died already and the sub has no purpose Output:

task108-981aec0ef11e4652bc8510738817b0db

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: >laughing at magacels makes you suicidal and spineless >"let's see who's crying when drama gets banned " lmao nigga unlike your Huggies-wearin ass who cries "CENSORSHIP" because a yellow banner is slapped on a subreddit i actually could not care less if the entire site goes up in flames. in fact i applaud it, just like i now applaud your conspiracy-addled brain's utter meltdown of "HURRDURR BOOTLICKER" what kind of commie cunt says shit like that anyways? gtfo lmao this totally-not-mad lil bitch is definitely insta-downvoting anyone who calls him a crybaby. Output:

task108-9d8a38da33d146fbb14c43e45d057fe5

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: You're welcome. Honestly, the other mods WERE fine with the post and said so via written language. It didn't get taken down until an older mod, who'd frankly never said much at all to me before that day, perceived some of the old guard getting upset and feeling that I was out of line for suggesting that, as adults, we should be grown up enough to block those we don't want to read and stop nitpicking on EACH OTHER. The forum was for Duggar snark...not to rate the level of snark that is permissible from others. That message was received, by some, as pot stirring. I still wish everyone well. Output:

task108-8ac54aadaead4f87befc4431ef44d767

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: God, just look at that little profile picture. If that's what the idealized version of it looks like, I dread to think what this creature looks like in real life. Output:

task108-843d26c594214174b91ab87713d98d33

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Honk Output:

task108-1843bd0bc07a4214a08322567c988c84

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Get better games retard Output:

task108-dd9e1c2881f5443292e0a1ff26baa0b7

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: So I decided to check out r/AgeplayPenPals after the rightoids sperged about it, and YIKES Output:

task108-897dace80dfc4a8a90a4403cdae9b10c

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: What? Output:

task108-dc99219192274233a033bbae9021fe18

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I mean, the donald sub is responsible for some pretty great memes. The left doesn't have an equivalent. Output:

task108-85787e58e5364efabbca077cb4b2f955

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: The baby thing killed me, like we're apparently not supposed to eat meat because a toddler will go after an apple before a bunny? Horse colts can walk almost immediately after birth but if you put a baby on its legs after birth it just falls down. Guess we're not meant to walk. Now, where did I leave my wheel chair... Output:

task108-272e3e8bc0ad431bbd7aff903b0067a3

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: that one was deleted, but another is still around. > We need pacifist voices. We also need violent voices to earn the pacifist voices a seat at the table. > >No progress has ever been without the explicit threat of violence. it's like some folks don't grasp how civilized, 1st world people are supposed to behave. what sort of cretins raise such misguided, maladjusted losers? Output:

task108-b2bf07d3093b4f689440211671163f10

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: >everyone *inhales* BOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Output:

task108-f48ea5a3f5c4470a89db877eb56e4d45

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: > So idk what's happening but I think if you chunk a baby at the ground then it doesn't matter how many good things you do, you suck. Controversial stance, but I'll allow it. Output:

task108-cf44bde5d7024f44bfe4a0c86fc61ea2

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: How do you fire warning shots inside your home with your family sleeping upstairs? Where do you aim them? The guy sniffed too much asbestos from the walls. Output:

task108-49239bfef0a641ccb663fe6d433af9f6

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I prefer lungi Output:

task108-0240260babf14f67b6a5fc74d51793b4

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: What? Since when did you ever need a social movement to feel comfortable with being straight in public. Output:

task108-5fc911697f994fb2a38153071f9d080d

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Seems like you learn something new every day! Output:

task108-c0995dd4da16468e8f149fd60893cf4f

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I just wanted a roll on square sausage (missed that I'd specified) but apparently roll on square sausage is not self explanatory in Scumdee. Output:

task108-f49b51dd32eb41da90439b246d81db37

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: No one needs to recruit anyone, these freaks are chasing away people themselves Output:

task108-ffe7943e358a4a519113e958c6e2ed96

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: At this point, the only people still on the left are either paid shills or literally insane people. Everyone with an ounce of sanity has stepped away from that dumpster fire. They might still be progressive, they might still supporters of social justice, but they're not going to look at that balls-to-the-wall insane rhetoric and think it's okay. Output:

task108-ef4271d37e2742578391439940af7ee7

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Not just Porkistan, Bangladesh and India too. Output:

task108-68060aed38304931bc7c548a82d16a9a

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Dude dinosaurs lmao Output:

task108-b790db2b5a25420c95ea09603ce1d52e

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I want to blow the fuckhole of a dolphin. Output:

task108-014f1d3fa9bb439ea99b1c95b5376461

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: /r/Drama is private again due to admin interference Output:

task108-7564b7ee53a54e1394e10d44a4317497

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: you shouldn't trust "legitimate" stuff either Output:

task108-eb824f1f1529457c8d41a72debb9e818

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Not all Syrians are muslim retard. Output:

task108-1f8b7365bafa48ac83878ea0580acff3

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: *facebook in this instance Output:

task108-a7f3a956bacf41e6bba0bdbc9894a26e

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: But...that's what marketing is. You guys completely missed the point of the post because of one stupid sentence at the end. Output:

task108-9e2ea585ab80409ab50c1c2a9977d898

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Amen. Output:

task108-9ae74515ba564a5e88867096e8d324fd

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Doesn't realize school now has an armed officer. Tries to plant incriminating evidence, bullets, maybe a fake clockbomb Gets shot. Is now forever known as a "school shooter". Have to teach biology in prison now. Mfw Output:

task108-77004ed327b143d6a8692ab0c3d81c4b

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Something given has no value; work for what you have and you would actually understand the value of the things you own as a result. Output:

task108-6fb803c2a6a5409d9dbdf3cccb2d5201

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: >Exactly. The time for remaining silent and out of the public eye is over. Investigation is done, and we still have no questions answered. They are answered. You just don't like the answers. Output:

task108-be66d8e416ac4a399632127f5ca69a76

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Don't follow the people you know on Facebook. You will be disappointed :( Output:

task108-3fa29fd035f649de81613b2a1f60dbf5

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Anon is unlucky Output:

task108-582155bf128f4307a1c86c1a34e032ae

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I feel you. Is there a chance of you embracing your voice?? One of my favorite streamers has a peculiar voice, he did took a little bashing at first but as soon as he "accepted" his voice, his stream did well and he was hired to a bunch of live events. Ironically (for the haters), as a commentator and a hell of a good one. I hope this little story helps you in any way Output:

task108-b5c84595e8a44a53abf23123e45b556a

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: India Today wale to **literally** nach rh th Output:

task108-7f08ae5dca9e44d496f9114fc5be434f

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: True, but his story is a lot more interesting than the story of Saint Barbara (the patron saint of artillery, military engineers, architects, and prisoners and thus kind of the closest thing Christianity has to a deity of war). Output:

task108-397af45a936c49969c746eaeeb95b3e9

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Punishing people for what you believe they're going to do is basically tyranny right? Output:

task108-9ef57d6a66ba47798dd4781d862acd86

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Probably about the same time as Trump is in peach mints.... Output:

task108-8e9f09ac6c0443f8b7f2136fb192df3e

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I wish they would do another Mad Max film with electric cars +42 Output:

task108-49f4f40140234a349595f8bd31d2b9df

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: u/Prem_Naam_Hai_Mera Output:

task108-e1bfcff3e9d24580985e5d4f5ca95d36

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: capitalism doesn't have a symbol Output:

task108-e78f7ad839e843bf8ff710373be2384c

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Russia has more Muslims and mosques than any European country you idiot. They have separate constitutions and parliaments for some of their Muslim minorities. You actually fell for Putin's pandering? :D Output:

task108-c3ab30c52a2d4d359bc88a4a142207c3

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: His last words, according to the camera man that pulled him out of the water and tried to keep him alive were "I'm dying". Output:

task108-0ea7a4ae6a8744588572d6b672050f3f

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: jheez even legaladvice? Wow... people have gone to new lows Output:

task108-ec411a1a361b4192b3ece74e2b9d9297

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I mean, this is an actual good point. Nationalists simultaneously believe Americans are somehow inherently exceptional or superior, but also we need insane protectionist policies to protect us from being outcompeted by dirty, untalented Chinese people. Output:

task108-c3fde5c86b734fc4bc1c6cbb0b4fa810

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Small things like asking them about their day and listening to what they have to say without judgement build trust and a healthy relationship. Output:

task108-7331104499dc4365beccdf519667933a

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Incels are actual misogynists. They're not good people for the most part. Now, the logic behind calling every bad person a "nazi" is something I can't get behind. Output:

task108-ed215e0df4974221bfc9975c2cf2a180

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: **Intersex** Intersex people are individuals born with any of several variations in sex characteristics including chromosomes, gonads, sex hormones, or genitals that, according to the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, "do not fit the typical definitions for male or female bodies". Such variations may involve genital ambiguity, and combinations of chromosomal genotype and sexual phenotype other than XY-male and XX-female.Intersex people were previously referred to as hermaphrodites or "congenital eunuchs". In 19th and 20th century medical literature, intersex was referred as true hermaphroditism, female pseudohermaphroditism, and male pseudohermaphroditism reflecting the first taxonomic efforts to classify intersex conditions. These terms are no longer used: terms including the word "hermaphrodite" are considered to be misleading, stigmatizing, and scientifically specious. *** Output:

task108-ab9f667f506c4f6eaeab20f1802d7769

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: From looking at the calcs, flamethrower didn't look "way worse" but just not as good. The biggest reason to run flamethrower is the accuracy, which the guy mentioned. I don't play competitive much but I do find it annoying with massive damage-dealing moves hit with bad accuracy. Fire Blast is at least 85 but whenever a Stone Edge or Focus Blast hit, I always shake my head. I understand the guy's logic here. Basically, it's a toss-up over whether you go for pure damage and some risk over guaranteed solid damage and no risk. There is no right or wrong answer to this. Just how willing are you to play the odds on 85% accuracy is all. Output:

task108-dcfdca75d94d4bf8b61163be094bab63

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Are the Tau Marxists? What even is Marxism? /r/Grimdank discusses. Output:

task108-4ae8310835b94c12abed772ea0b8d247

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: And that Zoroastrians have very narrow family trees because Xwedodah. Output:

task108-dcec787c059a4f8b91538a982160bdbe

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: sure love reporting those commies to admins Output:

task108-974c716198e948e8a2a4ebf23e1046b1

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Continue the species is logical, as every life form does this in some form. Output:

task108-f4a5079a02344fc4a1b17d0dd794b972

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL NYE THE MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DEGREE GUY (Hydraulic resonance suppressors produced by Boeing rule!) Just doesn't have the same ring to it somehow. Also, for a guy concerned about the environment.. I don't see why he owns multiple homes. Output:

task108-3ccdafb92cec4fe9baa825076fec6f83

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Link bhi? Output:

task108-293c726a5d274239b08d4a6433615b42

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: They too issue legal religious warnings for Pakistan on twitter and Nike censors in the name of the chinese communist party against the Hong Kong protest. Hail corporate siding with every despot no matter how big or petty. Output:

task108-948cff4f01f341e79ab110db07efe221

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: I missed and murdered them all... Not just the indigenous men but the indigenous women and indigenous children too Output:

task108-8221e82d520b4c50acf16d059016937e

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: It's literally the same thing with The Witcher, where the whole series is very clearly is political, yet people treat it like it's their shining example of a game without politics in it. Output:

task108-6a8439c3ab894748ad4ebaf4618bebd9

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: lol trevor noah is a cartoon version of an sjw even other liberals are sick of his shit Output:

task108-cfefea7e560e4e31aa787009ffc7de2b

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: A report says that this person is 17- is that true? Removed this post just in case Output:

task108-297bdb4074074e1ea33e527187f8bfa4

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Yeah I definitely learnt that lesson lol Output:

task108-aa895dbe08c64a9a8c2bf8debff39515

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: You're only allowed to discuss the things you care about if you also discuss the things I care about even if they're totally unrelated! >:T Output:

task108-817e8a1d77364d80a450da7b08d88089

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: This is pretty fucking weak man Output:

task108-8945a8cf7d794b6eae2c66ab46af8f22

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: [I got you fam] Output:

task108-7b43fd00dda94e0dbb7efd6324270f90

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Truly based god Sanders. Inshallah. Output:

task108-1a6ac3c978744836a8b6204634f7d58b

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Most of then catfish for karma as well. Also lots if insecure dudes angry when a women prefers tall guys or the like. Output:

task108-823777bb79f549adbf5954e29b8649f8

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Yep. Output:

task108-735a6c3fcb324bc688442ab4023dd4d5

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: There's still slavery in Libya lmao Output:

task108-9d71949ff8274e08a95d1c55e0845050