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: I'd ask what pedo sub, but knowing the people who post here, you probably are going to say something like r/anime . Output:

task108-d99b8bf7f17142a9a096834b6d849eac

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 argument used to be 'what happens in the bedroom is none of your business' regarding marriage, now it's 'what happens in the bedroom you better fucking pay for'. Output:

task108-2c5d62e82a8d453694c00576bf96aaa6

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's the thing, you know. YOU DO THE MATH. You can't, because you've been brainwashed, and it's obvious. And it's mostly because you never heard it before, and so Like when the truth is exposed- you just think "NO" — once again, brainwashed. Please understand that's why Charizard was actually the most racist Pokémon and you can't argue cause you're fucking wrong. Output:

task108-02dd763261fd4910b0d5dc6a1693d639

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: Op is a Republican. Output:

task108-277689c7fb024507ab72e4f5a90a99a2

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, one of the reasons I'm in the process of selling my house and moving. Shits crazy. Output:

task108-d4a287dbaf0a43d890c51531a5eb9c0e

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: Liberal would be fine as liberty and tolerance are good things. It's the totalitarian leftist bias that is a mess. Output:

task108-14b98e972b8d44e59d3ac758c3da5bea

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: Oldest trick in the book Output:

task108-2b0b070c495f4dd18ae28524b9b71822

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're being killed at roughly 3x the rate, maybe a bit lower. See chart 9 Output:

task108-f086cbf58a8b46f28788a723e5e2d0c8

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 resisted getting diagnosed for years, because my experience of ASC was usually someone trying to excuse AHOTI syndrome. Output:

task108-b669bc3d8a5449ff93ddbdef1c135fd0

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: Ahh, dont you hate that secret mission? Siu Bao Gate. Good luck finding it though. Output:

task108-bd6bf6b2838d4b238865ee21e3ef06db

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 spawn children for Q. Output:

task108-27ce55fd1354449f8dc9142f224d6789

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 never met someone who conflated the Iliad with actual history? It's not that different, and sadly, more common than you might think. Output:

task108-f81cb88ae76642d09edaaef7a4b16272

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, of course not. But pointing out that 91% of nurses are women as an encouragement about how women have a position in STEM fields doesn't serve much in the way of swaying an argument in an encouraging direction. Not only that, but the fact most nurses don't consider themselves to be in a STEM position also comes into play. What I'm saying, essentially, is that if you want to say, "Sure, women have plenty of STEM careers! 91% of nurses are women!" I'm not really going to feel much better about the lack of women in STEM fields. Output:

task108-380d93cd04244a27a2cd0510a0c03934

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 it was always only a matter of time until someone will copycat the nz shooter and post their stream to td Output:

task108-4d33aab387e449fdb60c3e44c9f92618

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 poster ended up being an abusive troll, for the record. Output:

task108-bfc6da2299124d57a065ff80dbc291d6

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: meh there is one of those for video streaming. Playon is a streaming aggregate I use. Wonder if there will be a gaming one. Output:

task108-d86587f82a3a44ad826467eed006efc2

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: Sex sells. 100% agree. We've lost the art of connecting and friendship. Is it any wonder why most people are lonely traumatized anxious and depressed Output:

task108-a86da736a4284c698ca34c11642cbeae

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 only autistic thing there is unraveling of the truth through comments. > It's absolutely disgusting how heavily fetishized Asian women are, yet there are some Asian women out there that claim that non-Asian men are more respectful than Asian men. The irony being that these people used to [force women to bind their feet]([Link] Output:

task108-407ce61846444722ac605258440f686f

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: fucking crop the image you fucktard Output:

task108-ff1cdfff10fa4ac7a39bafe030fff9bd

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: Buy jojoba oil Ejac into hand Mix in a pea sized drop of jojoba Apply mix to area in a circular motion for 2-3 minutes Output:

task108-7120bbd039294db29e1bd7caf8d3df66

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: >because he doesn't produce milk for young? He could but he'll go to jail Output:

task108-90520acda5dd44d7a89dfc6fc490c8ae

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: Long as you're not going overboard and just trying to harm them it's fine. Output:

task108-55ed4cb7e7ce4cbeae495bc5fb74e8ed

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 I seen art where the bunch line is literally two people being gay. Output:

task108-9c3f24e68058454a8e7489ad0b644bba

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: NotallpeoplefromAlambamaarewhite :D Output:

task108-8c7b057455914144a8fcf081c7808260

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: Wasn't the issue that TD didn't moderate enough of its shit? I'm seeing more and more posts linked here that are mod removed Output:

task108-9b91dc2d61014c7a98eafacea95474f8

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 are arguments that state [Valerie Solanas]([Link] is a foundational thinker for radical feminism, but I don't suggest that feminists try and murder people. TERFs are transphobes who are also feminists, and while Greere's early work is well admired her stance on trans people is not. I like Father Ted, and admire Graham Linehan's comedy. I do not admire his transphobic stance. Output:

task108-12b190a33ceb42eb993b6ee05c947e3f

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's exactly what they're saying dumbass Output:

task108-715ccd6728bf4c779c459c5276def43f

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 are plenty of those, they just don't grow very quickly. Output:

task108-14351f2ab2ba4b4290b69e7003a701f8

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: Thought it might be the case. That's good to hear. Output:

task108-57fc7836edce4cf7af74cf55a8edcd7b

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: Also tags "kill all men". Output:

task108-c43f80a4230746d384ce390633016b31

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 very weird watching all of this play out, since Randy Pitchford isn't my idea of the angelic developer either. People decrying the "sales practices" or EGS, just to run into the arms of Gearbox/Pitchford is... strange. Output:

task108-7f678d25055f4fb39bdf2a391496ca80

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 multiple layers to it but in the context of the culture war, people are still sour over Ghostbusters and more so The Last Jedi and how Disney seems to be handling their franchises. They see Captain Marvel (CM) as being shoehorned into the MCU, and recent leaks, if they are to be believed, suggest that the Russo Brothers have clashed with Disney over CM's role in End Game. The Marvel comics are also recovering from some "forced diveristy" issues that has [completely tanked their sales](e.g., female Thor). In short, people are tired of mega corporations pandering to diversity progressiveness at the detriment of quality products. More specifically, Brie Larson has made several comments about white movie critics and how she is going out of her way to give people of colour press access. In the grand scheme of things, maybe this isn't so bad, but her comments have caused a ruckus mostly because she comes off as [snooty and posh]. Even feminists have accused her of being a limousine liberal and acting like a white saviour which [she has been accused of before]. Gotta pay those bills though, I guess. The trailers drop for CM and people are unimpressed. This causes media outlets to pump out their preemptive "incels are back to ruin CM" narrative. This attracts negative attention and people go to Rotten Tomatoes to say they aren't interested in the movie. This intensified the tension and more articles were written which attracted trolls and genuine pissed off comic and movie patrons alike. The shit snowball keeps rolling and keeps getting bigger. The movie comes out and reviews are mixed, even from people one might consider "woke". Rotten Tomatoes deletes reviews which intensifies tensions further. People fed up with the "SJWing" of preexisting intellectual properties smell blood in the water and keep clashing with people whining about Trump's America being plagued by white nationalist, sexist, GamerGater incels. The fact that the film has moments that would even make the recent Gillette commercial blush isn't helping lol Output:

task108-9de7ebb165d34931b2f2778c02fcadd9

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 first I was upset but then I saw it was that commie YouTube group. Output:

task108-9645e380fcb742528add7f8d85f80cab

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: Haha, if you can't recognize nuance or weigh different factors to come to a conclusion you are literally incapable of reason or logic. If you are alive, you can enjoy a delicious slice of pizza. Therefore by your logic, I have found one reason to exist, ergo the only possible conclusion is that you should have children. In reality, the challenges or bad parts of life do not outweigh the good. Either way, you have provided no valid or reasonable arguments addressing that. Output:

task108-b3a1c0cdb40148518c8a2aa12f1a5cb7

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: Paging /wowthanksimcured Output:

task108-4a951158eb584d6aa03a2a576a85697f

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: Very true! Output:

task108-d5ac2a672b1e49338b270ca87c875627

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: Here's a sneak peek of /r/Anarchism using the [top posts]([Link] of the year! \#1: [That moment when police tries to pepper spray Yellow Vest protesters, but protesters just pepper spray them back]([Link] | [419 comments]([Link] \#2: [Someone didn't read Homage to Catalonia]([Link] | [138 comments]([Link] \#3: [Praxis: My school refused to buy the textbooks my class needs, so I made free copies for every student using the school printer]([Link] | [121 comments]([Link] ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| Output:

task108-e3223e3e294b4d6b87c97c50a15bb56e

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 day after it came out the CEO was anti gay they had a sale at all locations. There were lines at every location in the country. So much for boycotting. Mind you they have since expanded. Output:

task108-a4438dc293724f4189ce53561c5ae3a9

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: Lmao. I've seen a bunch of toxic tumblr posts from the toxicity that the Gorillaz fandom is in my fair share of being in the fandom. After Humanz hit, it just seemed to go downhill from there with that swarm of fans. Output:

task108-48070b4f020845d6ac35219a435894cd

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 no good with numbers How many tastys you chompin Output:

task108-22d5562237104b22bb1a467a3a1be2d9

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: OEM. LOL Output:

task108-d074ff2a3408488d9bd4cc437cdea28c

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: Fuckin pussy. Output:

task108-245381c1b40e4f209f854638aabd03c9

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 is an unusually hot picture of her tbh Output:

task108-10e0a31b33964733963f8b0e09781b27

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 dumbest hill to die on tbf. Output:

task108-2830ee4f29314ae58394ca13f686fa36

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: He's basically Chinese Tywin Lannister Output:

task108-2d5c039eb4e343b4a9902272aec8f959

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: Wow, it must be nice to take a back seat and talk shit to anyone you want, generalize entire groups of people, then have zero evidence and tell everyone else to do the research... also, why are white women still pretending that they're not white? I can't fathom for the life of my why the average human doesn't respect this type of person........ Output:

task108-63a963f7aa7f482ba80df41c02a5f780

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: For Latinas I can wear Bikini. They are hot af. Output:

task108-6d91a62ff4e840349fe8424e8a22fc89

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 need everyone to know how much technical mastery I have of this game, I watched like one elobandit video and now I'm better than literally everyone ever Output:

task108-4374fade81b9433dbea5b4482f43fdaf

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 think you misunderstood my post. I am saying that a lot of non-black people would not want to put themselves in situations where they could be mistaken or accused of racism and instead decide to just not interact and build relationships with black people. Output:

task108-425badf7fbd34795a85c1bd664f049dc

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 laugh every time some idiot tries to discredit McCabe. He's one of the most respected people in the entire intelligence world and in the public eye Output:

task108-732d56784e2141cfabaf80d76cd9e4c9

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 actually saw some porki Abduls claiming vedas and Sanskrit as their own holy shit! Output:

task108-b124c55040794e02b78c0a42aeee85cd

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: He forgot the clapping emojis too Output:

task108-af6b471aad20475cb7e89c3c9ae39686

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: Umm No , He is anirudh thapa . Output:

task108-aec8e72b0d7c4803bfacc724ea57c8d6

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: Hannibal 2 electric bugaloo Output:

task108-3809e6e2a96f4539950015aa65376244

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 internet is horrible, but at least it can be used for cool things like bullying weak people. Output:

task108-c4d568fcd8ae4161bce29e3402a636d9

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 believe a solid half of what we comment on here is in that category Output:

task108-d3d8c38ced164322a6e43a0e6e87e635

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's the difference between a shavette and a straight razor? Output:

task108-b71a00b59f8e431c9d6eb11990118c50

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 are white people in detroit? Output:

task108-eec9a5054a94494c99e5995b17ef30a1

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: ewww! looks like a ladyboy. Output:

task108-ef38ba597f8c4588becbbcaa83831861

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: Southampton fire Output:

task108-728b156d276f410b8fa36b1520773d94

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: Yes. There are legitimate issues that men face that could be much more easily discussed if not for the raving band of lunatics that try to represent them. Output:

task108-633c20c70c63494f8b3e2ae7739956fd

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 charges were dropped because his defence team and the prosecutor's office came to a private agreement. There exists damn near irrefutable evidence he misled the police and thus it's entirely possible for him to be held liable for the costs incurred from that. Output:

task108-5ef7ea00f117494b8ce3c42f1f0eb0bd

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: Monarchism the only true answer to these trying times. Can we all stop shendaposting for one minute to come together and elect a king? Output:

task108-16791d11dac14a698729c28c12eb6ac8

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: He gets that the internet is not supposed to be taken seriously and none of this matters Output:

task108-6b47f38d745245df962147d58288965d

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: Asking the real questions. Output:

task108-1397d19be37f46adbc77ae60a5d64f1d

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: Because it's one of the best offensive types in the game. Output:

task108-4450a77ba6ed4cdc97dd0fbb06ae9e04

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: >harassing So interacting with any wildlife at all is harassing. Ok lmao Output:

task108-9ba454a4315143e79d1ff30d461e87d0

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: Non-racially inspired oppression, is oppression. Repeat this to yourself, until you can breathe without swallowing your tongue. Output:

task108-dc0c9a9eeea5426fb60ff5cf4a5ef91a

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 you trying to tell me to read wholesome content to cure myself if this disease? Cause that's pretty nice if you. Output:

task108-5c9efa69d415473f8dc660cc393d5138

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 matter what 3 arrows shouldn't be banned right now. Unless you want to be ideological inconsistent, he didn't advocate violence and so he should still have his platform. We all need voices from both sides for a health discussion. Output:

task108-744658fae72949938e66fca26f318180

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's the difference? It's still nigger tho. Output:

task108-2054b23027a2443094d5ed047b46923d

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: Yes. Because existence is generally preferable to non-existence. Output:

task108-edf692917ca147ffac57c8754c10547c

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: Trump is an anti-Christ Output:

task108-1d6bd62d189b40dd9bd3ec9d7a42a76d

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 love reminding the salty far right trolls here that their Midwestern hometowns are literal shitholes. This attitude is so fucking exhausting. I know 'coastal liberal elitism' is a bit of a meme but this pattern of boasting about the abstracted 'economic value' of exclusive cities while dismissing the network of agriculture, manufacturing, and distribution that allows them to thrive is pretty close to colonial. Output:

task108-d7015992ee564308a1fd77dfa28d32cd

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: Go outside for better graphics. Output:

task108-950732c0499f425a992c73195d4ec7b8

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: Prepare for the best hitman you'll ever see, we got a self-doxxer over here! >!/s!< Output:

task108-a48b0a3a024a4bdc993a9aa54772c10d

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 don't know. Can you style deleted/removed comments with a subreddit's style sheet to hide them? If I went to an askscience thread or something and saw only the 'approved' answers instead of pages of deleted posts, I'd probably actually read it. Instead I see an intriguing question and after 30 seconds of scrolling and seeing a bunch of out of context posts and deleted comments I give up. If I really care I'll google the answer. This way if you cared, you could turn off the subreddit's CSS and see all the deleted posts, or you can keep it on and be blissfully ignorant and just look at the actual responses. Output:

task108-17bf18fa558c4beea60f99da8078f81e

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: > Using "toxic masculinity" unironically. Are you retarded Output:

task108-ac196fe340bb4fb3987221e16c14e39e

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: GoT show is literally fantasy capeshit. Output:

task108-41a0388f879f471396f712333d748f34

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 think that Reddit will go eventually. They pretty much just catalyzed their own doom over the past few years. There's nothing wrong with wanting to change your business model to be more profitable but they shunned their original users. They built their platform based off "Stop internet censorship!" (I still have the stickers they gave out years ago). Now the content is really, really shallow. Anything that goes against the grain is [removed]. I came to see a high amount of censorship on the site in almost every subreddit; especially the default ones. Every time they would say the person broke some generic rule that can be interpreted in any way a mod wants. For me I started noticing the cancer when they changed the default subreddits. Output:

task108-f3107863708a4a38a5ac13ea1d32d1a4

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 I like how this was your big opinion that set people off, it seems pretty tame tbh Output:

task108-e79508558b604f1d880b3f9f143e17e3

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 can we arrest black people for shootings without evidence, then? Output:

task108-3d034a33d7874dbda40abd39389b5c15

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: >Be 50 Cent >Be 6 foot tall black dude who has been involved in gangs and drugs >Rap about how many bitches you've fucked >Get cucked by a load of mayo soyboys at a music festival OH NO NO NO Output:

task108-6f2f64a5a1224bf1922656f7c8525843

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's fantasy Output:

task108-ad81f1d649884e9b8dc0a8b2105c352c

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: Model kits are a fun way to start. They're also relatively inexpensive I'd link a couple good starter gundam kits if you guys are interested Output:

task108-474aa89542a6465a99df4a88fda5f293

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 screenshot of an Instagram post of a Facebook screenshot posted onto a tumblr subreddit... hm. Output:

task108-9823cfa7ee6e468e9842cfafa7c3cfe4

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: Reversed conversion therapy when? Output:

task108-349a590023f6425bbdb653d8006abe3e

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 responder is a hero. Output:

task108-052ff180f3e2464d9e7ab20e2b4f3886

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: Impossible. Think of the shareholders! Output:

task108-603288f8f29943d79f6712f616b282d0

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 only closed BPT as an April fools joke and to see the racist reactions to our new policy What a fucking joke those mods are, but hopefully it produced some comedy gold in a bunch of self loathing pathetic cucks apologizing for being white. Output:

task108-9297de7f80464b4db31480b13a6448f6

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 read about this a few years ago. It's not just China, but Japan, too. Japan really likes chewy food, for example. I also saw a video of a Japanese inventor experimenting with a small electric charge in the fork. So when you ate, you felt the electricity. Output:

task108-6a8e853615134edc8ba24af581ef031c

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 a men's club with quarterly meetings in which we discuss how best to suppress women. Output:

task108-8e4cef2f31b14382a7e7d3bc72d350e2

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: Nah, this can't be real. Seriously? Output:

task108-e3c29b463abf46cd93b0d5d037e9255d

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 solution is built in, child assassins. Output:

task108-9da6f994c965492b8fa35fa083fde89e

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 know, I dont see whay about this is TumblrInAction Output:

task108-1b67a7ef72ef4aefb3e05d38aaef6535

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 don't know how much you read of one piece if any, but there's various examples Not at all, unfortunately. I've tried to get into it a few times, but every time I stop after a few chapters when I realize just what a big *commitment* its size makes it. Output:

task108-c1a11ada6b8a4ce281c49d28ca345569

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: First of all, I don't know if the girl even wants me as a friend. Sometimes she takes one, two days to answer my messages. But she always answers, so I guess she is at least a tiny bit interested in talking to me. Otherwise she'd already have ghosted me. However, I do recognise that I might have driven her away a bit by avoiding to see her back then. I went to a therapist back when I was 17 to talk about this and some other, darker, things. She ended up saying that she didn't treat troubles as bad as mine, gave me another place's number & charged me anyway. I'll never go to a therapist again, since she was not the first one I went to during my life. I went to one when I was 5, another one when I was 12 and another one when I was 14. Neither one of them were able to help me at all with the issue I faced at the time (I don't quite remember why I went when I was 5 but the other two times were because of anger management issues). Last year I thought of fixing my anxiety myself with meds since it got really bad (I got to the point of stuttering once when talking to two girls and one guy), but I couldn't find any pharmacy willing to sell them to me without a prescription so I couldn't do anything about it. I don't know if I like anything about myself. I'm a good friend, I guess? Back when I had friends I always stood by their side and always listened to them when they had some sort of problem. But I don't know... I was always the one initiating conversations & when I decided to let them start one I never heard from them again. And about my life... I don't know. The only things I can come up with are material things such as not having to work like most people my age and having two cars for myself (whereas most people my age have to use public transport) but I guess these don't count. I don't have much going on. Output:

task108-ffcc8f01962247498866123de0cd0a09

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: My expectations... such subversion!! Output:

task108-2f889fe0dbfe4f18a3ca9afbab67caa8

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: Hey don't forget his bug bite fetish Output:

task108-0f7f0fe7669940e98bc7de2b246c06bb

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: Hopefully this post is tame enough for the reddit gods to ignore... Output:

task108-f836071628c64b728b98a4ef56ec21b4