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 know there are a couple of sects of Christianity that don't allow icons or pictures in the church, but the images of Jesus and various saints are technically idol worship Output:

task108-2c40772add3241e1b453ccfd3c07d186

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: Torrents Zindabad Output:

task108-f7af2e62874e417885bd023706637108

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 not their fault. You can't expect black people to possess the mental capacity to understand when they're being insulted, much less offended. This is for your own good, Darnell. Now please go upstairs and fuck my wife as a form of reparations and as a sign that I do not plan to spread my imperialistic white genes. Output:

task108-f34746f9d19943c3ab6f94e5f8b66223

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: Any citations for this the explanation of Mitsuhide's betrayal? As far as I knew, no one knows the reason and whether it was the treaty, Oda simply calling him names, or fear he was being supplanted as an important general (or other factors). The massacre at Mt. Hiei was brutal, but Nobunaga was trying to break the militancy of the Buddhist monks (Sansom has a good thorough line about this in his three volume history). Buddhist monks through much of Japanese history were a large, well-armed faction that caused problems for both the court in Kyoto and for daimyo. Without crushing them to the roots, its likely they would have continued causing problems for those groups. Output:

task108-db59c3f4227947d3902a63cfb1f4c631

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: Just snitched on him for suspension evasion my man Output:

task108-02594e6111314efbb67e8520badf43c3

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 Siri... define dichotomous thinking.... Output:

task108-694c1dd14b1f48c6974da9b6358e04a4

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 social media based cult. Weve come full circle. Output:

task108-7ad01cf703994f4896a4a51378c38651

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

task108-8932ce93686e4e89b3896a7bdacedb93

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: Ms. [REDACTED], what you just typed is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your unpunctuated run-on ocular torture were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this subreddit is now dumber for having read this. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul. Output:

task108-6c06f7664f2845e997f593ceea8afdf7

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've seen so many "friendly reminders" to never joke about pregnancy because of this. I get that it can be a painful topic for women who can't conceive, but how is joking about it so much more traumatizing than people actually being pregnant? Output:

task108-b241b21b88094ef6af873d9dc60717b2

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 anything someone says is true now? I heard all extreme leftists are serial rapists. Output:

task108-e9de13aa1aa249e2afd8074210b85b5a

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: Do you have a source for the availability of shipping? Also Churchill directly appealed for aid in India to the US Output:

task108-fc2984c855d340bab8b4852d9abf71df

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: Maybe we were the Detroit Become Human all along Output:

task108-aa033c0e00fc423684a0a2eccd5dfc37

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

task108-313a23307c8b4fddaf3e090f78851764

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

task108-821602c692d143f7bcb4f26486a0dfa8

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: Care to explain why? Or would you rather just stand on your soapbox? Output:

task108-aea068a301754943bf4f5ddbf4c4f162

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: Momotawave! Output:

task108-b8d555b33adc4185929d4885519dfa4a

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 do you mean self sustaining? You can always just go to another country or go off the grid. Stop using roads and public services. Output:

task108-708be96c89684f149e417e052c7f60a0

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: Love it when that happens with the christchurch video Output:

task108-7fbb7a037ea14adcaf4e0e80cea5da0d

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 if a trans person killed themselves in the fire after escaping Syria Output:

task108-98f198722a534c45b63ba14edf794759

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 same thing happened 2 me just 4 mins ago...i loved that sub... Output:

task108-18f5187347b34535a66b26886e60a106

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: Like they say 'Stupid is as stupid does'. Output:

task108-650bcd8fe0af4664bbd6ca09cc40e199

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: ? Context Output:

task108-40c8cf2784874ba5828909b019938bf9

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: /r/Tinder in a nutshell: Woman: height? Man: weight? Woman: Commenters: epic comeback bro fuck these shallow whores haha u can change weight but not height!!! or some dumbass/niche joke that only a fellow mouth breathing Redditor would get: Man: hey wanna be the thanos to my ant-man and let me cum in ur ass? Woman: um what? Commenters: she's not worth ur time anyway king or the rarest, a normal person: Man: hey thought you looked pretty. Woman: same [normal, slightly flirty convo] Man: so do u wanna meet up sometime? Woman: yes Commenters: what's ur secret bro i bet ur really attractive huh? rules 1 and 2 i guess Output:

task108-7ec9290dafb94f939a426ca264d22ccc

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: tryhard Output:

task108-90b5d0335a7f4fb8a51ff83db84bafb4

Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link]. Positive Example 1 - Input: Was Michelangelo straight though? I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know. Output: yes Positive Example 2 - Input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump. Output: yes Negative Example 1 - Input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras. Output: yes Negative Example 2 - Input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives? Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves? Output: no Now complete the following example - Input: > NO ONE IS FOR THAT EXCEPT THE MEMBERS OF THOSE GROUPS. You said "I don't see any Nazis" which is what I was addressing. But since you brought it up, [about 9% of the American population does support it — about 22 million people.] > Antifa is even attacking registered democrats, ripping a flag out of their hand and people applaud. So is this the example you're going with? How do you think that compares to the assassination of Lubcke? > There is a big fucking difference. Between what exactly again? > Calling this out doesn't make me alt-right. Never said it did. > Even the media coverage of this stuff it does look like the media is stifling the coverage of it. Though I did see it on r/news this morning. it has only been a day though, I wouldnt be surprised if the bigger news outlets do come out wirh something on this after gathering sources and more information. > a ton of self inflicted "attacks" that are trying to frame the right any more examples besides Smollett? Output:

task108-0deae44207f64667867fe11c397ee8e0

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: Fancy is closer to $300 for the meal. That's what I spent last time I splurged on a dinner for a woman. I've since learned better. Burger King from now on, and if you put cheese on that Whopper you're giving up the buttsex later. Output:

task108-c13b31e853f54407ab81c417945eba95

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

task108-be55f7445465499f9ecfc6a525ad6c48

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 do you do for the primaries? Output:

task108-257c1023ff054b03a247fd35e52a4733

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: Try putting u/ in front of it. Output:

task108-d030d4cc440d46ada30dc26b7f1775c2

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: Thats the thing you pay attention to? Output:

task108-a6f06ebbaaa2438388e1e4beab14453e

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 do realize that back in 2012 when it looked like the electoral college winner might loose the popular vote by a slim margin, [Trump said we needed to abolish the electoral college], that it was a joke, a travesty, and that we shouldn't respect the results and should instead march on DC and have a revolution rather than let the inauguration go through. Are you calling Trump a moron? Output:

task108-8a6110dbb52f488f98d4e5ff72b870ad

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: > Tumblr hates ~~white~~ people Output:

task108-e2c5d201341f40608a881fb39d275911

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: One thing the commenter hasn't fully "appropriated" yet - the English concept of when you should use an adjective instead of an adverb. Output:

task108-ff7d84d22e924e1397d129d37e3e10a4

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: China ftw Output:

task108-abc598f70cf24e0ab9a8af8d6743087e

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: Only if you let it. Output:

task108-93e7b51c0c6c4a10a5fc20dc7742aa34

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 over-under on Baron being on the spectrum? Output:

task108-1f8fb0bf2a27443bb3063131ad739b73

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

task108-2ffa065b7c6e4e2097fcffe662b0218f

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: Did you read the sticky from two hours ago, sweaty? The thread is blowing up again. Output:

task108-2042a39b85464cfa906d33c109a0624b

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: Can we get a link Output:

task108-ddd05d12f5af4c37b2236003eb5a55a2

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

task108-c02733b010c249f1ba5c922cd58baa79

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 should the age of consent be in your opinion? Output:

task108-a2743d2ac43a41a6bc0568389ff5f2ad

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

task108-6ce0a1b36f094aae8a1c56c906cda6fd

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: If you live life afraid of offending the easily offended then youre a fool. Try not to offend normal people and you're set. Output:

task108-5c99a10afb9c471c92f281c4a16aa515

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 an odd stance, but how many billions of dollars can you earn us a year though? Output:

task108-58adaa7b4dce43af825c98eacd3038cc

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

task108-81edeb84cf8b4e25a6f2d7699830582f

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: Sounds like you are projecting your insecurities on the subject itself? Who cares if you do or don't have sex? Just enjoy yourself, I assume you have hobbies and interests. Output:

task108-6715d13606e3457485cc2c5561c85b75

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: Who the fuck uses that font Output:

task108-ebc588591cc74c388d638cb20122818e

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 live in the South, Georgia to be exact. Other than usual political bullshit, and the overblown accusations of voter suppression in the last election, everyone lives pretty civilly with each other and it is much more racially integrated here than any where I lived in California. These people have no idea what is going on in the South. Output:

task108-cfb58ecea45e40afb273dbcdae7f1223

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: These arguments between mods of /r/menslib and users of /r/mensrights have been going on for literally three days. It's a mishmash of fights about social sciences, Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, and censorship. Output:

task108-19155a2e55bf4cacacaa3e7942ae7e3c

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 post I replied to was doing more than just saying there have been logical reasons for having kids. Output:

task108-c96b522d233243feb7af876e18835167

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: Doing the work we already have a bot to do Output:

task108-b678994a0ef948a399de27c24f3ec458

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

task108-017be31aec1f4c39bf5182892dbd70b1

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 elite don't care about reddit neets bitching about trannies or CEOs. There are like 2 fascists and 5 antifa in all of the US. Also if you're job gets taken by "cheap labour" you're a poor and deserve it tbh. Output:

task108-14ee4f302140465897280c69fca03b9d

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: >Literally attempted suicide Code for, "I threw a temper tantrum until my parents gave me my phone back" >and other suicides have been successful under the same conditions. Which should tell you that kids having 24/7 access to cell phones and social media is part of the problem, not the solution. I was a teenager in the time before cell phones (my parents had a car phone) and the internet (I could use my 2400 bps modem to call into local BBS systems) and I hate to sound cliche but kids were a hell of a lot better adjusted. If we wanted to talk to someone we actually had to talk to them and there was no drive to impress (or bully) our peers on social media. A kid under the age of 16 doesn't need a cell phone, nor do they need unrestricted access to social media. Sorry, they just don't. At 16 you're much closer to being an adult than a kid and you gain the ability to drive so a cell phone isn't a terrible idea. Sorry, but I think we're raising a generation of kids who will be damaged by the internet, OP is just one example of that and so is the related post talking about the kid who thinks they are trans. Output:

task108-8048249282f647e59dc5661971d0b456

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: Times like this I wish we had pinging. What a lad Output:

task108-7d2d19b1e66c4425ac0a007fadd3fedf

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: Why does gay shit like this always have a million points on this shit site. Output:

task108-6350a1009ade41a19c78934e3c195a19

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: Considering this is coming from 4chan, with a heavy heart, I have no choice but to call this fake and gay. Output:

task108-7b856055d9104105b12991a4447560ef

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 depends on the anchor. Shep Smith and Meghan Kelly were anti-Trump, Hannity and Tucker Carlson were pro-Trump, from what I can remember. Output:

task108-86bda2d5f5384533b055a64116638d8a

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 Dany is certainly a bit mad. There are flashes of it, in both the books and the show. My guess in the books is that she'll have become more brutal when she returns from her little dragon side-quest (seems to have embraced 'fire and blood'). In the show, it certainly tries to portray her burning of the Tarlys as being somewhat unhinged. She's not nearly as mad as her brother and father, but there's still something there. Output:

task108-f93b14923d2b46fd85e5ce76813a19c5

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

task108-4e205c4ca4254817b07bd8c8ded408e3

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: >Disclaimer: TLJ is the best Star Wars movie according to me. Half of it is at least. :) Output:

task108-f36d3c285f4c4832ae01408bde5fcd18

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: Who gives a fuck Ferrothorn is steel/grass, basically all fire moves are gonna whoop ass. Output:

task108-290311e005234310a3031e2dcf3208fd

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: Reactionary garbage Output:

task108-47d42daac5244c85afdcdeafe0ac5955

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: Imagine buying into radical centrism lmao, how fucking weak must you be? I hate both AND pretentious rAdIcAL cEnTrIstS like you. Output:

task108-e0dfb7bd36cc4d4883fe55165d264be4

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 and a good amount of them are offended that their art isn't listed and is inadvertently called gay. Output:

task108-0fe9af1ee92f4fd687ffe977520859d5

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 don't call themselves sinners for shipping same sex ships. They call themselves sinners for writing kinky smut about it. I've seen people do it with straight ships too. Also the seme/uke thing is outdated in western fandom these days. Output:

task108-0ca2682f0f614bd3b2a5d9271a92d2b1

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: Wait hol' up. I thought questioning the integrity of God Emperor Mueller was "un-American"? Output:

task108-455c8244f09c4846b94085c1aaf4c513

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: Alright, you ugly bitch. But wait, I'm sure that's a 'racist comment'. Maybe I'll just ignore you completely. Oh wait, that's 'racism' too. Essentially, not doing whatever a non-white person wants, at any point, ever, is racist. Output:

task108-6467f9d6a5ad4df78a624ea8d7381273

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: Swish dude Output:

task108-246569b3438246e28e8f1704e08d157b

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 my favorite observation about star wars from RLM went something like "they took a great trilogy of summer blockbusters form the 80s and turned them into a massive expanded universe. It's like if someone had taken the back to the future trilogy and tried to create an expanded universe out of it, and other people had devoted their life to the back to the future expanded universe." Output:

task108-e92791aeb35444bfa0fe16d43f5fb01a

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: See the sticky, no need for a dozen submissions regarding the breaking news. Also: > Try to summarize the background of the hoax as best you can in the headline without editorializing. Try to be as clinical as possible this means refraining from vitriol and sarcasm. Output:

task108-1751f9377d2742e9a854bb5230a5026f

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

task108-575b7f2d34e948e8b4b81fbcf832a244

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've got this annoying mental block which pretends me doing anything which would render me unavailable to some other people, particularly family Output:

task108-e58ad44c601040b292a65c424e0925e8

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: IF YOU'RE IN A DRIVE THROUGH YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE IF YOU ORDER FOOD FOR 10 FUCKING PEOPLE Output:

task108-1ed92e4d19e4453bae850409d9ea590d

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: if the draft ever gets reinstated I'm getting the fuck out of this country and if that likely doesn't work, I'm breaking my arm so they can't get me to throw my life away Output:

task108-b16553abb79f424dbcf7ff4379a893ed

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, can you start being gay and stop being a homophobe. Output:

task108-6fbb84ddfe414f30aaa02711b154bdd5

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: Fair point Output:

task108-c38e878c9c974f48b5fb511d0114e6f1

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 mean "School Report Topics"? Output:

task108-7564893dd93c4e9584926752126fec03

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 had to do the followings to manage it (still not sure if it's 100% bed bug but i got itchy at night and had rashes next morning) 1. Sparingly sprinkle Diatomaceous Earth around the floor and crevices surrounding the bed 2. Use mattress cover so the inside of mattress won't be infected 3. use handheld steam cleaner on the beddings and sometimes other clothes and furnitures regularly 4. Wash & dry beddings at high temp at a laundromat weekly 5. put lice spray around my scalp and body that get itchy before i go to sleep Output:

task108-2641b66f65794589801148ccc9709719

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: If this person tweets about all that shit but doesn't mention police violence, they want police to kill people. And because that sentence didn't mention slavery, I'm pro-slavery. And it goes on. Output:

task108-d112bc5a5e7d44e8b090fb03980c47e8

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

task108-064716c4e7414f36a11bc85f6eb1bd0e

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 thought last night's ep should have been a twist where everyone dies and jon somehow usurps the night king because he's already half dead or some shit and the rest of the season is him leading the army of the dead to kill cersi and all the other living. It would have really pissed everyone off even more and nobody would have seen it coming. Then everyone could argue about whether or not the whole thing was a metaphor for replacement migration. Instead they went with hackneyed and predictable. Cowards. Output:

task108-92e8594900cd4a5caa98333ddd87d74c

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 heard it was some racists in white face! Magagagawd! Output:

task108-d22032c72b8945b282588b79c2bd593f

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

task108-523ab30a9e6d40b2b64ffa4b35430768

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: Cool, go tell them that on posts that you find hateful. Output:

task108-41495d7e57074e20b77831e69f3c0582

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'm holding my nut for a big realization that you have to work to be working class, and the COPE that will follow as they try to justify their own NEETdom, welfare mooching and trust funds to each other. Output:

task108-56b5048afb8b465987ee123954b56807

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: Now that I think about it, you're right. I hate this shit though, we used to live in a nicer part of town and it was fucking rampant, but recently moved into a more inner city area and I fucking love how chill and relaxed the parents are. It's so much less uptight, and so much easier to socialize without any fear of judgment. Output:

task108-7b9365fe3b024db591c18bb706fbaea4

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: Still doesn't explain what it has to do with my comment. Unless you're one of the people who go by the saying "You're either with us, or you're against us." Output:

task108-9d2fd07798b043199cc09ccaa16c35dc

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 humor is off-limits, as far as I'm concerned. I might not like a joke, but that doesn't give me the right to insist you not tell it. Output:

task108-37f823b740f240afb0d7ca28fa7cc183

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 never even began for Coughlincels Output:

task108-446dfb14d335431195fea16a159bfe68

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 probably is that America is not a democracy. Elections are a horse and pony show put on by the bourgeoisie elite and have no real meaning. Democracy can only truly be realized through a vanguard party formed by class conscious workers to execute their will in a dictatorship of the proletariat. Output:

task108-0be808bbd4034e39b89f62f533739ec0

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: Cringe Output:

task108-599483cf767e41a796b39a7be4b01aad

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: Every subreddit is an echo chamber, comment something against the quo and prepare for d e a t h Output:

task108-51c56ee7c8374931829f7ee63eb82e51

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: Interesting as fuck is more for rare gemstones or mechanical pencils, or specific facts about obscure things which are interesting. As I said, I disagree with the netting. Despite this, I feel that his ability to push this to the top is disconcerting. He has the power to spread more than just this. Output:

task108-52e89bcbf26e4781869b61704192a5b2

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: > According to the FBI, "A hate crime is a traditional offense like murder, arson, or vandalism with an added element of bias." The underlying problem with this definition is it elevates non-criminal activity to the level of a crime. Spray painting a phallus on the side of a building is vandalism. Spray painting a swastika on the side of a building is a hate crime. > > The first major problem we run into, then, is that the vast majority of recorded hate crimes fall into a number of activities that normally fall under misdemeanor or even civil categories. These actions include vandalism, simple assault and a vague category the FBI uses called "Crimes Against Society." Vandalism alone makes up a third of all events. It is troubling that the State elevates non-criminal matters into a criminal one based nothing on perpetrator motivation. The aforementioned swastika spray paint is no more difficult to clean off than a person scrawling their name. > > Digging further, the increase in reported hate crimes is driven primarily by these non-criminal acts. > > The disparity between real crime where people are harmed or property is irreparably lost and simple misdemeanor activity is staggering. > > An indicator hate crime isn't a problem is the rise of the hate crime hoax. According to researcher Wilfred Reilly, a Kentucky State professor of political science, there has been a [notable rise in hate crime hoaxes] > > In today's United States, there is immense value in becoming a victim of a hate crime. There is an outpouring of social support, TV circuit interviews and other social benefits. Being seen as authentic is so strong that people become [distraught when they find out they're not the ethnicity they think they are]; these individuals are motivated to become a victim of such an event to solidify their social standing. > > Through the fact that there are *any* hoax events indicates that the problem of hate is, by and large, solved. > > [The overwhelming support such people obtain as the immediate snap decision ]has indicated that our society doesn't tolerate such behavior and, since society doesn't tolerate the behavior, finding individuals is equally rare. One doesn't need to raise awareness when the events are so few that cable news outlets can justify days of debate over each event; we're already pretty much aware the moment they happen. But one does need to raise awareness if they wish to have their 15 minutes of fame. > > [As I previously noted] the number of people who buy into hate ideology, regardless of motivation, is so trivial that they couldn't even fill a minor league baseball stadium. There are more people than this who think the Earth is flat, yet no one considers that a growing trend. It would be impossible to casually talk about Nazis being evil if they had any semblance of power or authority as people would tread more carefully. Being anti-Nazi is a safe and easy way to win social points since there is almost zero risk of reprisal. Just ask Wilfred Reilly, who is on actual enemies lists, just how dangerous they are (they aren't). However, politicians, certain groups and many individuals have strong incentives to manufacture hate crimes where none exist as such events generate votes, revenue and social attention. Condensed version. Output:

task108-d215fc7f9fb24e6daec7a9bcf660ea12

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 wouldn't know, I saw something about 'nba' and I assume that's soccer. I only watch interesting high art. It's just stuff with balls. Not for me, but you might get a dopamine kick (primitive) from it. Not my thing (I want to be challenged by ART) This level of trolling is ART Output:

task108-cd1f2f9afeb142a9829cfe38c363d261

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 right! He's a POC, and POCs never make bigoted comments because of intersectionality, only straight white men. Output:

task108-9e5951b27f7f4176a12975952aaeb20c

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

task108-859db4ebb49d45ca8b9441ab48e36449

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: T_ders water... Smgdh Output:

task108-f3d833ba978b4b1f9c5bf7506c482472