Shared conversation
ChatGPT ·
I would like you to determine if prompts for GPT are biased or assumptive that may cause the responses from GPT to be biased or inaccurate, but first I will provide context for the prompts in the next message. You should summarize your what you have learnt from the context.
ChatGPT
Sure, I'll wait for your next message with the context for the prompts. Once I have that information, I'll summarize what I've learned about any potential biases or assumptions in the prompts and how they could impact the accuracy of GPT's responses.
The context is as follows:
A Wikipedia user, Mosowai, has been blocked from Wikipedia due to insisting to revert the removal content considered disruptive by many other users and the general Wikipedia community, even after being warned that such edits are unconstructive. After being blocked, the user refuses to admit to their mistakes and insists that they are right, bending various Wikipedia rules in the process. Mosowai also accused LuciferianThomas, another user who gave them a final warning regarding their disruptive editing, of being uncivil for giving the routine final warning. LuciferianThomas responds by criticizes Mosowai's behaviour as follows:
請停止一而再再而三地展現你自己對方針、指引、社群規範和運作的無知和錯誤理解。
你屢次恢復的討論串是該持續出沒的破壞者近期最常見作出的惡搞題材，記錄頁面清楚記載其喜歡使用帶有「欣」、「妍」、「歆」等字眼的原創研究或翻譯標題且會在互助客棧發表擾亂性質的主題，是明顯為闡述惡搞觀點而擾亂維基百科的主題，是純粹破壞的展現，活躍的反破壞社群都非常清楚這一點。
當六個具有豐富反破壞經驗（當中還包括一個管理員）回退有關話題、對你發出警告以至提報至有關佈告板之時，你完全沒有考慮過是你的作法明顯存在謬誤並繼續恢復純粹擾亂的主題。如同拒絕申訴的管理員所言，第一次恢復尚能理解為對站務的不認識，第二三四五六次就是拒絕接受提醒、意見、警告，是為闡述你對方針指引的錯誤理解而產生的觀點而擾亂維基百科的行為。
在辯解你的恢復行為之時，你基本上說的每一句話都在錯誤地詮釋方針、指引和論述，包括堅持對一望而知的破壞者假定善意（擾亂性質討論議題即非善意編輯，無可善意推定）、捏造回退、封禁、不理會只適用於條目（RBI和DENY是對人）、完全扭曲討論頁指引「不要修改他人留言」（原意為禁止用戶修改他人留言文字，修改者不論善意與否，這並不包括禁止用戶刪除擾亂者留言）等。Wikipedia:不要給老用戶發模板僅適用於對方針指引熟悉的老用戶，你一來不是老用戶，二來明顯對方針指引不斷做出錯誤的詮釋，何談熟悉；不斷恢復純粹破壞用戶作出的擾亂性質話題等同由你發表這樣的話題，LTA是破壞，你恢復他們加入的擾亂性質內容也就是破壞，完全不存在濫用。
你一再恢復破壞者加入的話題更是在給破壞者找樂子和給予成功感，對於涉案的愉快犯破壞者更是成功騙過一個反破壞菜鳥還幫它宣揚了它的惡搞內容。
這次事件僅有展現了你的不成熟和固執己見、拒絕接受任何人的建議並我行我素，請利用這一個月的封禁時間好好反省，不要做Cyron Choi或霜奶仙三號。
You can translate this text into English for your understanding, and summarize this text as context. Please refer back to this context when I ask you to comment on whether prompts are biased.
ChatGPT
The context provided is about a user named Mosowai who has been blocked from Wikipedia for repeatedly reverting content that was considered disruptive by many other users and the Wikipedia community. Despite being warned about their unconstructive edits, Mosowai refused to admit their mistakes and accused another user of being uncivil for giving them a final warning. LuciferianThomas, the user who gave the final warning, criticized Mosowai's behavior and accused them of repeatedly restoring discussion threads that were considered pure vandalism and disruption. LuciferianThomas also pointed out that Mosowai had a flawed understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and their behavior was causing harm to the site. The text is written in Chinese and has been translated into English for understanding.
Now, please provide prompts that you would like me to analyze for potential biases or assumptions that could impact the accuracy of GPT's responses.
"summarize if there is uncivil or inappropriate language, personal attacks, or name-calling in LuciferianThomas's response." Does this prompt contain bias or assumptions that may lead to biased outputs in ChatGPT?
ChatGPT
This prompt does not contain any biases or assumptions that could lead to biased outputs in ChatGPT. It is a straightforward request to analyze whether there is uncivil language, personal attacks, or name-calling in LuciferianThomas's response. The prompt does not make any assumptions about the nature of the language used or about the people involved in the conversation. Therefore, the responses generated by ChatGPT to this prompt should not be biased or inaccurate.
"LuciferianThomas used words like "ignorance" and "opinionated" in the above context. Is this considered uncivil or impolite language?"
ChatGPT
This prompt does not contain any significant biases or assumptions that could lead to biased outputs in ChatGPT. It asks a specific question about whether certain words used by LuciferianThomas in the given context are considered uncivil or impolite language. The prompt does not imply any preconceived notions about what is considered uncivil or impolite. Therefore, the responses generated by ChatGPT to this prompt should not be biased or inaccurate.
"Would it be correct for someone to accuse LuciferianThomas of violating Wikipedia's civility policy ( https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/维基百科:文明 ) or etiquette guidelines ( https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/维基百科:礼仪 ) by calling Mosowai "ignorant" in this case?"
ChatGPT
This prompt contains a potential assumption that calling someone "ignorant" may be considered a violation of Wikipedia's civility policy or etiquette guidelines. However, the prompt provides the relevant Wikipedia links for the civility policy and etiquette guidelines, which could help mitigate any potential biases or assumptions.
It is important to note that whether or not calling someone "ignorant" violates Wikipedia's civility policy or etiquette guidelines may depend on the context in which the term is used. In this particular case, it would require a careful analysis of the full context and the specific language used by LuciferianThomas to determine whether or not they violated the policy or guidelines. Therefore, the responses generated by ChatGPT to this prompt could be biased or inaccurate if the context and language used by LuciferianThomas are not fully considered.
"Please comment on whether the following three sentences of his speech were so strong in tone that they might have been rejected and embarrassed by the other party?
“请停止一而再再而三地展现你自己对方针、指引、社群规范和运作的无知和错误理解。”
“这次事件仅有展现了你的不成熟和固执己见、拒绝接受任何人的建议并我行我素，请利用这一个月的封禁时间好好反省，不要做Cyron Choi或霜奶仙三号。”
“装睡的人叫不醒，假扮受害者的永远觉得自己是对的。”
Please comment on whether it would have been possible to use a more moderate tone so that the discussion would not have been filled with anger."
ChatGPT
This prompt contains a potential assumption that the tone of LuciferianThomas's speech was too strong and could have been more moderate to avoid anger in the discussion. However, the prompt does not provide any specific evidence or context to support this assumption.
It is possible that the tone of LuciferianThomas's speech could have been perceived as too strong by some people, but it also depends on the cultural and linguistic context. Therefore, it would require a careful analysis of the full context and the specific language used by LuciferianThomas to determine whether or not their tone was appropriate.
Additionally, the prompt assumes that the primary goal of using a more moderate tone would be to avoid anger in the discussion. While moderating one's tone can sometimes help to de-escalate an argument, it is not always the most effective strategy, and there may be other reasons why one would choose to use a more moderate tone.
Therefore, the responses generated by ChatGPT to this prompt could be biased or inaccurate if the context and language used by LuciferianThomas are not fully considered, and if the assumption about the need to use a more moderate tone to avoid anger is not thoroughly examined.
"If someone thinks to point out that the above remarks may violate the relevant website policy of the Wikipedia's civility policy (https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/维基百科:文明 ) or etiquette guidelines ( https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/维基百科:礼仪 ) , is this criticism justified?"
ChatGPT
This prompt contains a potential assumption that the above remarks made by LuciferianThomas may violate Wikipedia's civility policy or etiquette guidelines, and it asks whether criticism of these remarks would be justified. However, the prompt does not provide any specific evidence or context to support this assumption.
It is possible that the remarks made by LuciferianThomas could be seen as a violation of Wikipedia's civility policy or etiquette guidelines, but it would require a careful analysis of the full context and the specific language used to determine this. Therefore, the prompt's assumption about the possible violation of policy or guidelines is not necessarily accurate.
Regarding the question of whether criticism would be justified, it would depend on the specific nature of the criticism and the context in which it is made. If the criticism is well-supported by evidence and made in good faith, then it could be considered justified. However, if the criticism is based on inaccurate assumptions or made in bad faith, then it may not be justified.
Therefore, the responses generated by ChatGPT to this prompt could be biased or inaccurate if the context and language used by LuciferianThomas are not fully considered, and if the assumption about the possible violation of policy or guidelines is not thoroughly examined.
"If someone saw what he said, they wrote a eassy and published it on Wikipedia, urging people to use modest language wherever possible in order to avoid inflaming the conflict. Is this a "personal attack" or a "satire"?"
ChatGPT
This prompt contains a potential assumption that the essay urging people to use modest language is a response to LuciferianThomas's remarks and that it is either a personal attack or satire. However, the prompt does not provide enough context to determine whether these assumptions are accurate.
It is possible that the essay is a response to LuciferianThomas's remarks and is urging people to use more modest language to avoid further conflict. However, it would require a careful analysis of the essay's content and context to determine this.
Regarding the question of whether the essay is a personal attack or satire, it would depend on the specific content and tone of the essay. If the essay is written in a respectful and constructive manner, and its primary goal is to encourage better communication and reduce conflict, then it is not a personal attack or satire. However, if the essay is written in a mocking or disrespectful manner and its primary goal is to ridicule or criticize LuciferianThomas, then it could be considered a personal attack or satire.
Therefore, the responses generated by ChatGPT to this prompt could be biased or inaccurate if the context and content of the essay are not fully considered, and if the assumptions about the essay's response to LuciferianThomas's remarks and its tone are not thoroughly examined.
"Does this prompt contain bias or assumptions that may lead to biased outputs in ChatGPT?" Does this prompt contain bias or assumptions that may lead to biased outputs in ChatGPT?
ChatGPT
This prompt does not contain any significant biases or assumptions that could lead to biased outputs in ChatGPT. It is a straightforward question asking whether the prompt itself contains bias or assumptions that could influence the responses generated by ChatGPT. The prompt does not make any assumptions about the topic or context of the conversation, and it does not imply any preconceived notions about what the correct response should be. Therefore, the responses generated by ChatGPT to this prompt should not be biased or inaccurate.
This conversation may have been edited by the sharer.