text stringlengths 1 296 | output stringlengths 228 3.52k |
|---|---|
NES is a? | <text>NES is a?</text><reasoning>The NES Test Station's front features a Game Pak slot and connectors for testing various components (AC adapter, RF switch, Audio/Video cable, NES Control Deck, accessories and games), with a centrally-located selector knob to chose which component to test. The unit itself weighs approximately 11.7 pounds without a TV. It connects to a television via a combined A/V and RF Switch cable. By actuating the green button, a user can toggle between an A/V Cable or RF Switch connection. The television it is connected to (typically 11" to 14") is meant to be placed atop it.</reasoning><output>Game</output> |
The television should be above the? | <text>The television should be above the?</text><reasoning>The NES Test Station's front features a Game Pak slot and connectors for testing various components (AC adapter, RF switch, Audio/Video cable, NES Control Deck, accessories and games), with a centrally-located selector knob to chose which component to test. The unit itself weighs approximately 11.7 pounds without a TV. It connects to a television via a combined A/V and RF Switch cable. By actuating the green button, a user can toggle between an A/V Cable or RF Switch connection. The television it is connected to (typically 11" to 14") is meant to be placed atop it.</reasoning><output>NES Test Station</output> |
Accessories and games comes with? | <text>Accessories and games comes with?</text><reasoning>The NES Test Station's front features a Game Pak slot and connectors for testing various components (AC adapter, RF switch, Audio/Video cable, NES Control Deck, accessories and games), with a centrally-located selector knob to chose which component to test. The unit itself weighs approximately 11.7 pounds without a TV. It connects to a television via a combined A/V and RF Switch cable. By actuating the green button, a user can toggle between an A/V Cable or RF Switch connection. The television it is connected to (typically 11" to 14") is meant to be placed atop it.</reasoning><output>The NES Test Station's front features</output> |
What is below generally? | <text>What is below generally?</text><reasoning>The NES Test Station's front features a Game Pak slot and connectors for testing various components (AC adapter, RF switch, Audio/Video cable, NES Control Deck, accessories and games), with a centrally-located selector knob to chose which component to test. The unit itself weighs approximately 11.7 pounds without a TV. It connects to a television via a combined A/V and RF Switch cable. By actuating the green button, a user can toggle between an A/V Cable or RF Switch connection. The television it is connected to (typically 11" to 14") is meant to be placed atop it.</reasoning><output>NES Test Station</output> |
what is been disussed in the passage? | <text>what is been disussed in the passage?</text><reasoning>The NES Test Station's front features a Game Pak slot and connectors for testing various components (AC adapter, RF switch, Audio/Video cable, NES Control Deck, accessories and games), with a centrally-located selector knob to chose which component to test. The unit itself weighs approximately 11.7 pounds without a TV. It connects to a television via a combined A/V and RF Switch cable. By actuating the green button, a user can toggle between an A/V Cable or RF Switch connection. The television it is connected to (typically 11" to 14") is meant to be placed atop it.</reasoning><output>The NES Test Station</output> |
What can be any size? | <text>What can be any size?</text><reasoning>The NES Test Station's front features a Game Pak slot and connectors for testing various components (AC adapter, RF switch, Audio/Video cable, NES Control Deck, accessories and games), with a centrally-located selector knob to chose which component to test. The unit itself weighs approximately 11.7 pounds without a TV. It connects to a television via a combined A/V and RF Switch cable. By actuating the green button, a user can toggle between an A/V Cable or RF Switch connection. The television it is connected to (typically 11" to 14") is meant to be placed atop it.</reasoning><output>television</output> |
The Test Station should be used with a? | <text>The Test Station should be used with a?</text><reasoning>The NES Test Station's front features a Game Pak slot and connectors for testing various components (AC adapter, RF switch, Audio/Video cable, NES Control Deck, accessories and games), with a centrally-located selector knob to chose which component to test. The unit itself weighs approximately 11.7 pounds without a TV. It connects to a television via a combined A/V and RF Switch cable. By actuating the green button, a user can toggle between an A/V Cable or RF Switch connection. The television it is connected to (typically 11" to 14") is meant to be placed atop it.</reasoning><output>television</output> |
toggle is meant to be practically done by a?? | <text>toggle is meant to be practically done by a??</text><reasoning>The NES Test Station's front features a Game Pak slot and connectors for testing various components (AC adapter, RF switch, Audio/Video cable, NES Control Deck, accessories and games), with a centrally-located selector knob to chose which component to test. The unit itself weighs approximately 11.7 pounds without a TV. It connects to a television via a combined A/V and RF Switch cable. By actuating the green button, a user can toggle between an A/V Cable or RF Switch connection. The television it is connected to (typically 11" to 14") is meant to be placed atop it.</reasoning><output>user</output> |
Who benefits from the NPOs? | <text>Who benefits from the NPOs?</text><reasoning>Although NPOs are permitted to generate surplus revenues, they must be retained by the organization for its self-preservation, expansion, or plans. NPOs have controlling members or a board of directors. Many have paid staff including management, whereas others employ unpaid volunteers and even executives who work with or without compensation (occasionally nominal). In some countries, where there is a token fee, in general it is used to meet legal requirements for establishing a contract between the executive and the organization.</reasoning><output>the organization</output> |
Can any NPO workers receive money? | <text>Can any NPO workers receive money?</text><reasoning>Although NPOs are permitted to generate surplus revenues, they must be retained by the organization for its self-preservation, expansion, or plans. NPOs have controlling members or a board of directors. Many have paid staff including management, whereas others employ unpaid volunteers and even executives who work with or without compensation (occasionally nominal). In some countries, where there is a token fee, in general it is used to meet legal requirements for establishing a contract between the executive and the organization.</reasoning><output>Many have paid staff</output> |
What is nominal? | <text>What is nominal?</text><reasoning>Although NPOs are permitted to generate surplus revenues, they must be retained by the organization for its self-preservation, expansion, or plans. NPOs have controlling members or a board of directors. Many have paid staff including management, whereas others employ unpaid volunteers and even executives who work with or without compensation (occasionally nominal). In some countries, where there is a token fee, in general it is used to meet legal requirements for establishing a contract between the executive and the organization.</reasoning><output>compensation</output> |
What helps work within the law? | <text>What helps work within the law?</text><reasoning>Although NPOs are permitted to generate surplus revenues, they must be retained by the organization for its self-preservation, expansion, or plans. NPOs have controlling members or a board of directors. Many have paid staff including management, whereas others employ unpaid volunteers and even executives who work with or without compensation (occasionally nominal). In some countries, where there is a token fee, in general it is used to meet legal requirements for establishing a contract between the executive and the organization.</reasoning><output>a contract between the executive and the organization</output> |
Is staff paid, unpaid, or both? | <text>Is staff paid, unpaid, or both?</text><reasoning>Although NPOs are permitted to generate surplus revenues, they must be retained by the organization for its self-preservation, expansion, or plans. NPOs have controlling members or a board of directors. Many have paid staff including management, whereas others employ unpaid volunteers and even executives who work with or without compensation (occasionally nominal). In some countries, where there is a token fee, in general it is used to meet legal requirements for establishing a contract between the executive and the organization.</reasoning><output>Many have paid staff including management, whereas others employ unpaid volunteers and even executives who work with or without compensation (occasionally nominal)</output> |
It is not enough to merely have an NPO, what has to be done with it? | <text>It is not enough to merely have an NPO, what has to be done with it?</text><reasoning>Although NPOs are permitted to generate surplus revenues, they must be retained by the organization for its self-preservation, expansion, or plans. NPOs have controlling members or a board of directors. Many have paid staff including management, whereas others employ unpaid volunteers and even executives who work with or without compensation (occasionally nominal). In some countries, where there is a token fee, in general it is used to meet legal requirements for establishing a contract between the executive and the organization.</reasoning><output>must be retained</output> |
Who else is responsible for an non-profit organization other than the board? | <text>Who else is responsible for an non-profit organization other than the board?</text><reasoning>Although NPOs are permitted to generate surplus revenues, they must be retained by the organization for its self-preservation, expansion, or plans. NPOs have controlling members or a board of directors. Many have paid staff including management, whereas others employ unpaid volunteers and even executives who work with or without compensation (occasionally nominal). In some countries, where there is a token fee, in general it is used to meet legal requirements for establishing a contract between the executive and the organization.</reasoning><output>Many have paid staff including management, whereas others employ unpaid volunteers and even executives</output> |
How do some members show dedication to the cause? | <text>How do some members show dedication to the cause?</text><reasoning>Although NPOs are permitted to generate surplus revenues, they must be retained by the organization for its self-preservation, expansion, or plans. NPOs have controlling members or a board of directors. Many have paid staff including management, whereas others employ unpaid volunteers and even executives who work with or without compensation (occasionally nominal). In some countries, where there is a token fee, in general it is used to meet legal requirements for establishing a contract between the executive and the organization.</reasoning><output>work with or without compensation</output> |
People leave nonprofits because of? | <text>People leave nonprofits because of?</text><reasoning>Competition for employees with the public and private sector is another problem that Nonprofit organizations will inevitably face, particularly for management positions. There are reports of major talent shortages in the nonprofit sector today regarding newly graduated workers, and NPOs have for too long relegated hiring to a secondary priority, which could be why they find themselves in the position many do. While many established NPO's are well-funded and comparative to their public sector competetitors, many more are independent and must be creative with which incentives they use to attract and maintain vibrant personalities. The initial interest for many is the wage and benefits package, though many who have been questioned after leaving an NPO have reported that it was stressful work environments and implacable work that drove them away.</reasoning><output>stressful work environments and implacable work</output> |
What is an advantage that NPOs have? | <text>What is an advantage that NPOs have?</text><reasoning>Competition for employees with the public and private sector is another problem that Nonprofit organizations will inevitably face, particularly for management positions. There are reports of major talent shortages in the nonprofit sector today regarding newly graduated workers, and NPOs have for too long relegated hiring to a secondary priority, which could be why they find themselves in the position many do. While many established NPO's are well-funded and comparative to their public sector competetitors, many more are independent and must be creative with which incentives they use to attract and maintain vibrant personalities. The initial interest for many is the wage and benefits package, though many who have been questioned after leaving an NPO have reported that it was stressful work environments and implacable work that drove them away.</reasoning><output>many established NPO's are well-funded and comparative to their public sector competetitors</output> |
What part of businesses does the problem with NPO's lie in? | <text>What part of businesses does the problem with NPO's lie in?</text><reasoning>Competition for employees with the public and private sector is another problem that Nonprofit organizations will inevitably face, particularly for management positions. There are reports of major talent shortages in the nonprofit sector today regarding newly graduated workers, and NPOs have for too long relegated hiring to a secondary priority, which could be why they find themselves in the position many do. While many established NPO's are well-funded and comparative to their public sector competetitors, many more are independent and must be creative with which incentives they use to attract and maintain vibrant personalities. The initial interest for many is the wage and benefits package, though many who have been questioned after leaving an NPO have reported that it was stressful work environments and implacable work that drove them away.</reasoning><output>public and private sector</output> |
What character trait is a high priority for nonprofits? | <text>What character trait is a high priority for nonprofits?</text><reasoning>Competition for employees with the public and private sector is another problem that Nonprofit organizations will inevitably face, particularly for management positions. There are reports of major talent shortages in the nonprofit sector today regarding newly graduated workers, and NPOs have for too long relegated hiring to a secondary priority, which could be why they find themselves in the position many do. While many established NPO's are well-funded and comparative to their public sector competetitors, many more are independent and must be creative with which incentives they use to attract and maintain vibrant personalities. The initial interest for many is the wage and benefits package, though many who have been questioned after leaving an NPO have reported that it was stressful work environments and implacable work that drove them away.</reasoning><output>vibrant personalities</output> |
In what position do nonprofits find themselves? | <text>In what position do nonprofits find themselves?</text><reasoning>Competition for employees with the public and private sector is another problem that Nonprofit organizations will inevitably face, particularly for management positions. There are reports of major talent shortages in the nonprofit sector today regarding newly graduated workers, and NPOs have for too long relegated hiring to a secondary priority, which could be why they find themselves in the position many do. While many established NPO's are well-funded and comparative to their public sector competetitors, many more are independent and must be creative with which incentives they use to attract and maintain vibrant personalities. The initial interest for many is the wage and benefits package, though many who have been questioned after leaving an NPO have reported that it was stressful work environments and implacable work that drove them away.</reasoning><output>Competition for employees</output> |
From a monetary standpoint how does long standing non profits rank in relation to the government sector? | <text>From a monetary standpoint how does long standing non profits rank in relation to the government sector?</text><reasoning>Competition for employees with the public and private sector is another problem that Nonprofit organizations will inevitably face, particularly for management positions. There are reports of major talent shortages in the nonprofit sector today regarding newly graduated workers, and NPOs have for too long relegated hiring to a secondary priority, which could be why they find themselves in the position many do. While many established NPO's are well-funded and comparative to their public sector competetitors, many more are independent and must be creative with which incentives they use to attract and maintain vibrant personalities. The initial interest for many is the wage and benefits package, though many who have been questioned after leaving an NPO have reported that it was stressful work environments and implacable work that drove them away.</reasoning><output>comparative</output> |
What is the stated problem with NPO's? | <text>What is the stated problem with NPO's?</text><reasoning>Competition for employees with the public and private sector is another problem that Nonprofit organizations will inevitably face, particularly for management positions. There are reports of major talent shortages in the nonprofit sector today regarding newly graduated workers, and NPOs have for too long relegated hiring to a secondary priority, which could be why they find themselves in the position many do. While many established NPO's are well-funded and comparative to their public sector competetitors, many more are independent and must be creative with which incentives they use to attract and maintain vibrant personalities. The initial interest for many is the wage and benefits package, though many who have been questioned after leaving an NPO have reported that it was stressful work environments and implacable work that drove them away.</reasoning><output>Competition</output> |
Who is initially interested in wage and benefit packages? | <text>Who is initially interested in wage and benefit packages?</text><reasoning>Competition for employees with the public and private sector is another problem that Nonprofit organizations will inevitably face, particularly for management positions. There are reports of major talent shortages in the nonprofit sector today regarding newly graduated workers, and NPOs have for too long relegated hiring to a secondary priority, which could be why they find themselves in the position many do. While many established NPO's are well-funded and comparative to their public sector competetitors, many more are independent and must be creative with which incentives they use to attract and maintain vibrant personalities. The initial interest for many is the wage and benefits package, though many who have been questioned after leaving an NPO have reported that it was stressful work environments and implacable work that drove them away.</reasoning><output>newly graduated workers</output> |
Nonprofits have issues finding the best what for management jobs? | <text>Nonprofits have issues finding the best what for management jobs?</text><reasoning>Competition for employees with the public and private sector is another problem that Nonprofit organizations will inevitably face, particularly for management positions. There are reports of major talent shortages in the nonprofit sector today regarding newly graduated workers, and NPOs have for too long relegated hiring to a secondary priority, which could be why they find themselves in the position many do. While many established NPO's are well-funded and comparative to their public sector competetitors, many more are independent and must be creative with which incentives they use to attract and maintain vibrant personalities. The initial interest for many is the wage and benefits package, though many who have been questioned after leaving an NPO have reported that it was stressful work environments and implacable work that drove them away.</reasoning><output>employees</output> |
What resource must nonprofit organizations fight for? | <text>What resource must nonprofit organizations fight for?</text><reasoning>Competition for employees with the public and private sector is another problem that Nonprofit organizations will inevitably face, particularly for management positions. There are reports of major talent shortages in the nonprofit sector today regarding newly graduated workers, and NPOs have for too long relegated hiring to a secondary priority, which could be why they find themselves in the position many do. While many established NPO's are well-funded and comparative to their public sector competetitors, many more are independent and must be creative with which incentives they use to attract and maintain vibrant personalities. The initial interest for many is the wage and benefits package, though many who have been questioned after leaving an NPO have reported that it was stressful work environments and implacable work that drove them away.</reasoning><output>employees</output> |
What is something that pleases only the lower-tiered members of NPOs? | <text>What is something that pleases only the lower-tiered members of NPOs?</text><reasoning>Resource mismanagement is a particular problem with NPOs because the employees are not accountable to anybody with a direct stake in the organization. For example, an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors. Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud. But even indirect liabilities negatively affect the financial sustainability of the NPO, and the NPO will have financial problems unless strict controls are instated. Some commentators have also argued that receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations can ultimately alter the NPO's functions.</reasoning><output>an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors</output> |
How can someone working at an NPO earn additional bonuses by bringing in new people? | <text>How can someone working at an NPO earn additional bonuses by bringing in new people?</text><reasoning>Resource mismanagement is a particular problem with NPOs because the employees are not accountable to anybody with a direct stake in the organization. For example, an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors. Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud. But even indirect liabilities negatively affect the financial sustainability of the NPO, and the NPO will have financial problems unless strict controls are instated. Some commentators have also argued that receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations can ultimately alter the NPO's functions.</reasoning><output>attracting</output> |
Regarding what pleases the lower-tiered members in NPOs, how is this bad for the NPOs? | <text>Regarding what pleases the lower-tiered members in NPOs, how is this bad for the NPOs?</text><reasoning>Resource mismanagement is a particular problem with NPOs because the employees are not accountable to anybody with a direct stake in the organization. For example, an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors. Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud. But even indirect liabilities negatively affect the financial sustainability of the NPO, and the NPO will have financial problems unless strict controls are instated. Some commentators have also argued that receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations can ultimately alter the NPO's functions.</reasoning><output>Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud</output> |
What is the legal opposite of non profit organizations in this paragraph | <text>What is the legal opposite of non profit organizations in this paragraph</text><reasoning>Resource mismanagement is a particular problem with NPOs because the employees are not accountable to anybody with a direct stake in the organization. For example, an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors. Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud. But even indirect liabilities negatively affect the financial sustainability of the NPO, and the NPO will have financial problems unless strict controls are instated. Some commentators have also argued that receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations can ultimately alter the NPO's functions.</reasoning><output>for-profit corporations</output> |
What is the one, specific issue for NPOs, as stated in the excerpt? | <text>What is the one, specific issue for NPOs, as stated in the excerpt?</text><reasoning>Resource mismanagement is a particular problem with NPOs because the employees are not accountable to anybody with a direct stake in the organization. For example, an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors. Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud. But even indirect liabilities negatively affect the financial sustainability of the NPO, and the NPO will have financial problems unless strict controls are instated. Some commentators have also argued that receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations can ultimately alter the NPO's functions.</reasoning><output>liabilities</output> |
What is the condensed letters for non-profit organizations | <text>What is the condensed letters for non-profit organizations</text><reasoning>Resource mismanagement is a particular problem with NPOs because the employees are not accountable to anybody with a direct stake in the organization. For example, an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors. Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud. But even indirect liabilities negatively affect the financial sustainability of the NPO, and the NPO will have financial problems unless strict controls are instated. Some commentators have also argued that receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations can ultimately alter the NPO's functions.</reasoning><output>NPO</output> |
What do the NPOs need to work on in order to correct these fallacies? | <text>What do the NPOs need to work on in order to correct these fallacies?</text><reasoning>Resource mismanagement is a particular problem with NPOs because the employees are not accountable to anybody with a direct stake in the organization. For example, an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors. Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud. But even indirect liabilities negatively affect the financial sustainability of the NPO, and the NPO will have financial problems unless strict controls are instated. Some commentators have also argued that receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations can ultimately alter the NPO's functions.</reasoning><output>strict controls</output> |
What is hurt if strict controls are not put in place for an NPO? | <text>What is hurt if strict controls are not put in place for an NPO?</text><reasoning>Resource mismanagement is a particular problem with NPOs because the employees are not accountable to anybody with a direct stake in the organization. For example, an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors. Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud. But even indirect liabilities negatively affect the financial sustainability of the NPO, and the NPO will have financial problems unless strict controls are instated. Some commentators have also argued that receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations can ultimately alter the NPO's functions.</reasoning><output>sustainability</output> |
How do they address monetary sustainability in an NPO? | <text>How do they address monetary sustainability in an NPO?</text><reasoning>Resource mismanagement is a particular problem with NPOs because the employees are not accountable to anybody with a direct stake in the organization. For example, an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors. Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud. But even indirect liabilities negatively affect the financial sustainability of the NPO, and the NPO will have financial problems unless strict controls are instated. Some commentators have also argued that receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations can ultimately alter the NPO's functions.</reasoning><output>controls are instated</output> |
What is the opposite of an NPO in the text | <text>What is the opposite of an NPO in the text</text><reasoning>Resource mismanagement is a particular problem with NPOs because the employees are not accountable to anybody with a direct stake in the organization. For example, an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors. Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud. But even indirect liabilities negatively affect the financial sustainability of the NPO, and the NPO will have financial problems unless strict controls are instated. Some commentators have also argued that receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations can ultimately alter the NPO's functions.</reasoning><output>for-profit corporations</output> |
Regarding finances, what is a flaw in the way that NPOs operate? | <text>Regarding finances, what is a flaw in the way that NPOs operate?</text><reasoning>Resource mismanagement is a particular problem with NPOs because the employees are not accountable to anybody with a direct stake in the organization. For example, an employee may start a new program without disclosing its complete liabilities. The employee may be rewarded for improving the NPO's reputation, making other employees happy, and attracting new donors. Liabilities promised on the full faith and credit of the organization but not recorded anywhere constitute accounting fraud. But even indirect liabilities negatively affect the financial sustainability of the NPO, and the NPO will have financial problems unless strict controls are instated. Some commentators have also argued that receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations can ultimately alter the NPO's functions.</reasoning><output>receiving significant funding from large for-profit corporations</output> |
What has different requirements than a charity | <text>What has different requirements than a charity</text><reasoning>A charity is a nonprofit organisation that meets stricter criteria regarding its purpose and the method in which it makes decisions and reports its finances. For example, a charity is generally not allowed to pay its Trustees. In England and Wales, charities may be registered with the Charity Commission. In Scotland, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator serves the same function. Other organizations which are classified as nonprofit organizations elsewhere, such as trade unions, are subject to separate regulations, and are not regarded as "charities" in the technical sense.</reasoning><output>trade unions</output> |
A charity has a special way it has to divulge what? | <text>A charity has a special way it has to divulge what?</text><reasoning>A charity is a nonprofit organisation that meets stricter criteria regarding its purpose and the method in which it makes decisions and reports its finances. For example, a charity is generally not allowed to pay its Trustees. In England and Wales, charities may be registered with the Charity Commission. In Scotland, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator serves the same function. Other organizations which are classified as nonprofit organizations elsewhere, such as trade unions, are subject to separate regulations, and are not regarded as "charities" in the technical sense.</reasoning><output>finances</output> |
What isn't a charity | <text>What isn't a charity</text><reasoning>A charity is a nonprofit organisation that meets stricter criteria regarding its purpose and the method in which it makes decisions and reports its finances. For example, a charity is generally not allowed to pay its Trustees. In England and Wales, charities may be registered with the Charity Commission. In Scotland, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator serves the same function. Other organizations which are classified as nonprofit organizations elsewhere, such as trade unions, are subject to separate regulations, and are not regarded as "charities" in the technical sense.</reasoning><output>nonprofit organizations</output> |
What can trustees not get? | <text>What can trustees not get?</text><reasoning>A charity is a nonprofit organisation that meets stricter criteria regarding its purpose and the method in which it makes decisions and reports its finances. For example, a charity is generally not allowed to pay its Trustees. In England and Wales, charities may be registered with the Charity Commission. In Scotland, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator serves the same function. Other organizations which are classified as nonprofit organizations elsewhere, such as trade unions, are subject to separate regulations, and are not regarded as "charities" in the technical sense.</reasoning><output>pay</output> |
What is the purpose of the Charity Commission | <text>What is the purpose of the Charity Commission</text><reasoning>A charity is a nonprofit organisation that meets stricter criteria regarding its purpose and the method in which it makes decisions and reports its finances. For example, a charity is generally not allowed to pay its Trustees. In England and Wales, charities may be registered with the Charity Commission. In Scotland, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator serves the same function. Other organizations which are classified as nonprofit organizations elsewhere, such as trade unions, are subject to separate regulations, and are not regarded as "charities" in the technical sense.</reasoning><output>Regulator</output> |
What form of nonprofit has extra standards? | <text>What form of nonprofit has extra standards?</text><reasoning>A charity is a nonprofit organisation that meets stricter criteria regarding its purpose and the method in which it makes decisions and reports its finances. For example, a charity is generally not allowed to pay its Trustees. In England and Wales, charities may be registered with the Charity Commission. In Scotland, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator serves the same function. Other organizations which are classified as nonprofit organizations elsewhere, such as trade unions, are subject to separate regulations, and are not regarded as "charities" in the technical sense.</reasoning><output>charity</output> |
What is the Nationality name of the people listed in the text | <text>What is the Nationality name of the people listed in the text</text><reasoning>A charity is a nonprofit organisation that meets stricter criteria regarding its purpose and the method in which it makes decisions and reports its finances. For example, a charity is generally not allowed to pay its Trustees. In England and Wales, charities may be registered with the Charity Commission. In Scotland, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator serves the same function. Other organizations which are classified as nonprofit organizations elsewhere, such as trade unions, are subject to separate regulations, and are not regarded as "charities" in the technical sense.</reasoning><output>Scottish</output> |
What is another name for a 501 3 c besides charity. | <text>What is another name for a 501 3 c besides charity.</text><reasoning>A charity is a nonprofit organisation that meets stricter criteria regarding its purpose and the method in which it makes decisions and reports its finances. For example, a charity is generally not allowed to pay its Trustees. In England and Wales, charities may be registered with the Charity Commission. In Scotland, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator serves the same function. Other organizations which are classified as nonprofit organizations elsewhere, such as trade unions, are subject to separate regulations, and are not regarded as "charities" in the technical sense.</reasoning><output>nonprofit organisation</output> |
When was the Holocaust? | <text>When was the Holocaust?</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>prior to and during World War II</output> |
What was the Holocaust? | <text>What was the Holocaust?</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>genocides</output> |
What did Lemkin campaign for? | <text>What did Lemkin campaign for?</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>forbidding genocides</output> |
What was the short version of the adopted convention in 1948? | <text>What was the short version of the adopted convention in 1948?</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>CPPCG</output> |
What action did the General Assembly take in the wake of claiming genocide to be a crime? | <text>What action did the General Assembly take in the wake of claiming genocide to be a crime?</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide</output> |
When did the General Assembly state the criminal nature of genocide without defining it? | <text>When did the General Assembly state the criminal nature of genocide without defining it?</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>1946</output> |
When did the United Nations General Assembly adopt the resolution? | <text>When did the United Nations General Assembly adopt the resolution?</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>After the Holocaust</output> |
When did Hitler's men initiate and carry out mass genocide, which was later forbidden by the General Assembly?? | <text>When did Hitler's men initiate and carry out mass genocide, which was later forbidden by the General Assembly??</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>World War II</output> |
What was genocide considered? | <text>What was genocide considered?</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>a crime</output> |
When did the General Assembly confirm exactly what could be called genocide? | <text>When did the General Assembly confirm exactly what could be called genocide?</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>1948</output> |
Who encouraged genocide to be illegal? | <text>Who encouraged genocide to be illegal?</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>Lemkin</output> |
Defining genocide internationally would be useless if what other element didn't come with it? | <text>Defining genocide internationally would be useless if what other element didn't come with it?</text><reasoning>After the Holocaust, which had been perpetrated by the Nazi Germany and its allies prior to and during World War II, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocides. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law, but did not provide a legal definition of the crime. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) which defined the crime of genocide for the first time.</reasoning><output>forbidding genocides</output> |
Even though convicted in German court, how many disagreed? | <text>Even though convicted in German court, how many disagreed?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>one</output> |
Who assisted Beara in some genocide cases? | <text>Who assisted Beara in some genocide cases?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić</output> |
What outside entity found some suspect of genocide to be guilty? | <text>What outside entity found some suspect of genocide to be guilty?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>European Court of Human Rights</output> |
What is the largest group that has been found guilty? | <text>What is the largest group that has been found guilty?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>eight men</output> |
Which of the following people was not found guilty of committing genocide: Vujadin Popovic, Nikola Jorgic, or Ljubisa Beara? | <text>Which of the following people was not found guilty of committing genocide: Vujadin Popovic, Nikola Jorgic, or Ljubisa Beara?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>Nikola Jorgić</output> |
What governmental department were unnamed peope found guilty? | <text>What governmental department were unnamed peope found guilty?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>Bosnian Serb security forces</output> |
Who was not able to get a case overturned? | <text>Who was not able to get a case overturned?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>Jorgić</output> |
Which of the following people was not found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide: Radislav Krstic, Ljubisa Beara or Drago Nikolic? | <text>Which of the following people was not found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide: Radislav Krstic, Ljubisa Beara or Drago Nikolic?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>Ljubiša Beara</output> |
Who accomplised Popovic in some cases? | <text>Who accomplised Popovic in some cases?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić</output> |
Even though they did not commit genocide, these 2 aided those who did? | <text>Even though they did not commit genocide, these 2 aided those who did?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić</output> |
Many appealed the convictions, which were guilty and aided in the conspiracy? | <text>Many appealed the convictions, which were guilty and aided in the conspiracy?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>Zdravko Tolimir</output> |
Were fewer people found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, or by German courts? | <text>Were fewer people found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, or by German courts?</text><reasoning>About 30 people have been indicted for participating in genocide or complicity in genocide during the early 1990s in Bosnia. To date, after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal two men, Vujadin Popović and Ljubiša Beara, have been found guilty of committing genocide, Zdravko Tolimir has been found guilty of committing genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide, and two others, Radislav Krstić and Drago Nikolić, have been found guilty of aiding and abetting genocide. Three others have been found guilty of participating in genocides in Bosnia by German courts, one of whom Nikola Jorgić lost an appeal against his conviction in the European Court of Human Rights. A further eight men, former members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (See List of Bosnian genocide prosecutions).</reasoning><output>German courts</output> |
What might have been used to pull the wool over everyone's eyes? | <text>What might have been used to pull the wool over everyone's eyes?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>Soviet machination</output> |
Who made it his life's work to study genocide? | <text>Who made it his life's work to study genocide?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>William Schabas</output> |
What legal status does genocide hold? | <text>What legal status does genocide hold?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>crime</output> |
How does one attempt to influence a security council measure? | <text>How does one attempt to influence a security council measure?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>objections</output> |
What did the USSR object to? | <text>What did the USSR object to?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>political killings</output> |
Who objected to having political killings? | <text>Who objected to having political killings?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>some countries, including the USSR</output> |
The USSR is this kind of organization which the World Jewish Congress is not. What is it? | <text>The USSR is this kind of organization which the World Jewish Congress is not. What is it?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>governmental</output> |
What was a major point of contention for finalizing the convention? | <text>What was a major point of contention for finalizing the convention?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>political killings</output> |
What was the name of the NGO opposed to including political killings in the Convention? | <text>What was the name of the NGO opposed to including political killings in the Convention?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>the World Jewish Congress</output> |
What are the countries aside from the USSR that did not want to include political killings in the Convention? | <text>What are the countries aside from the USSR that did not want to include political killings in the Convention?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay</output> |
Who debunked the leading theory on the exclusion of political killings in the Convention? | <text>Who debunked the leading theory on the exclusion of political killings in the Convention?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>William Schabas</output> |
Why did the USSR object to political killings? | <text>Why did the USSR object to political killings?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term</output> |
Who first suggested that political groups not be included in the Convention? | <text>Who first suggested that political groups not be included in the Convention?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>the World Jewish Congress</output> |
What did the USSR have in common with the first draft? | <text>What did the USSR have in common with the first draft?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>its own Great Purge</output> |
What was argued against unwanted global attentions? | <text>What was argued against unwanted global attentions?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination</output> |
The person who stated "Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression" specialized in? | <text>The person who stated "Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression" specialized in?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>genocide</output> |
How do countries handle international disputes? | <text>How do countries handle international disputes?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>diplomatic compromise</output> |
What did Schabas examine? | <text>What did Schabas examine?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>the travaux</output> |
Why did other countries agree with the soviet sentiments? | <text>Why did other countries agree with the soviet sentiments?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator</output> |
What made the revisions necessary? | <text>What made the revisions necessary?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>political killings</output> |
What is the legality of genocide? | <text>What is the legality of genocide?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>crime</output> |
Lebanon, Sweden and the USSR are members of what community? | <text>Lebanon, Sweden and the USSR are members of what community?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>international</output> |
What doesn't make a lot of sense in how it was grouped? | <text>What doesn't make a lot of sense in how it was grouped?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay</output> |
Why did some nations agree with the Soviets? | <text>Why did some nations agree with the Soviets?</text><reasoning>The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSR, a permanent security council member. The USSR argued that the Convention's definition should follow the etymology of the term, and may have feared greater international scrutiny of its own Great Purge. Other nations feared that including political groups in the definition would invite international intervention in domestic politics. However leading genocide scholar William Schabas states: “Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was in fact originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin’s vision of the nature of the crime of genocide.”</reasoning><output>Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator</output> |
The state carries out? | <text>The state carries out?</text><reasoning>Barbara Harff and Ted Gurr defined genocide as "the promotion and execution of policies by a state or its agents which result in the deaths of a substantial portion of a group ...[when] the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality." Harff and Gurr also differentiate between genocides and politicides by the characteristics by which members of a group are identified by the state. In genocides, the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality. In politicides the victim groups are defined primarily in terms of their hierarchical position or political opposition to the regime and dominant groups. Daniel D. Polsby and Don B. Kates, Jr. state that "... we follow Harff's distinction between genocides and 'pogroms,' which she describes as 'short-lived outbursts by mobs, which, although often condoned by authorities, rarely persist.' If the violence persists for long enough, however, Harff argues, the distinction between condonation and complicity collapses."</reasoning><output>genocides and politicides</output> |
Who defines the characteristics of genocide | <text>Who defines the characteristics of genocide</text><reasoning>Barbara Harff and Ted Gurr defined genocide as "the promotion and execution of policies by a state or its agents which result in the deaths of a substantial portion of a group ...[when] the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality." Harff and Gurr also differentiate between genocides and politicides by the characteristics by which members of a group are identified by the state. In genocides, the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality. In politicides the victim groups are defined primarily in terms of their hierarchical position or political opposition to the regime and dominant groups. Daniel D. Polsby and Don B. Kates, Jr. state that "... we follow Harff's distinction between genocides and 'pogroms,' which she describes as 'short-lived outbursts by mobs, which, although often condoned by authorities, rarely persist.' If the violence persists for long enough, however, Harff argues, the distinction between condonation and complicity collapses."</reasoning><output>identified by the state</output> |
Someone killed is a? | <text>Someone killed is a?</text><reasoning>Barbara Harff and Ted Gurr defined genocide as "the promotion and execution of policies by a state or its agents which result in the deaths of a substantial portion of a group ...[when] the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality." Harff and Gurr also differentiate between genocides and politicides by the characteristics by which members of a group are identified by the state. In genocides, the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality. In politicides the victim groups are defined primarily in terms of their hierarchical position or political opposition to the regime and dominant groups. Daniel D. Polsby and Don B. Kates, Jr. state that "... we follow Harff's distinction between genocides and 'pogroms,' which she describes as 'short-lived outbursts by mobs, which, although often condoned by authorities, rarely persist.' If the violence persists for long enough, however, Harff argues, the distinction between condonation and complicity collapses."</reasoning><output>victim</output> |
Which, between genocides and politicides, are defined in terms of political opposition? | <text>Which, between genocides and politicides, are defined in terms of political opposition?</text><reasoning>Barbara Harff and Ted Gurr defined genocide as "the promotion and execution of policies by a state or its agents which result in the deaths of a substantial portion of a group ...[when] the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality." Harff and Gurr also differentiate between genocides and politicides by the characteristics by which members of a group are identified by the state. In genocides, the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality. In politicides the victim groups are defined primarily in terms of their hierarchical position or political opposition to the regime and dominant groups. Daniel D. Polsby and Don B. Kates, Jr. state that "... we follow Harff's distinction between genocides and 'pogroms,' which she describes as 'short-lived outbursts by mobs, which, although often condoned by authorities, rarely persist.' If the violence persists for long enough, however, Harff argues, the distinction between condonation and complicity collapses."</reasoning><output>politicides</output> |
Which, between genocides and politicides, are defined in terms of communal traits? | <text>Which, between genocides and politicides, are defined in terms of communal traits?</text><reasoning>Barbara Harff and Ted Gurr defined genocide as "the promotion and execution of policies by a state or its agents which result in the deaths of a substantial portion of a group ...[when] the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality." Harff and Gurr also differentiate between genocides and politicides by the characteristics by which members of a group are identified by the state. In genocides, the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality. In politicides the victim groups are defined primarily in terms of their hierarchical position or political opposition to the regime and dominant groups. Daniel D. Polsby and Don B. Kates, Jr. state that "... we follow Harff's distinction between genocides and 'pogroms,' which she describes as 'short-lived outbursts by mobs, which, although often condoned by authorities, rarely persist.' If the violence persists for long enough, however, Harff argues, the distinction between condonation and complicity collapses."</reasoning><output>genocides</output> |
Genocides are characterized by activities of? | <text>Genocides are characterized by activities of?</text><reasoning>Barbara Harff and Ted Gurr defined genocide as "the promotion and execution of policies by a state or its agents which result in the deaths of a substantial portion of a group ...[when] the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality." Harff and Gurr also differentiate between genocides and politicides by the characteristics by which members of a group are identified by the state. In genocides, the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality. In politicides the victim groups are defined primarily in terms of their hierarchical position or political opposition to the regime and dominant groups. Daniel D. Polsby and Don B. Kates, Jr. state that "... we follow Harff's distinction between genocides and 'pogroms,' which she describes as 'short-lived outbursts by mobs, which, although often condoned by authorities, rarely persist.' If the violence persists for long enough, however, Harff argues, the distinction between condonation and complicity collapses."</reasoning><output>violence</output> |
Which, between genocides and politicides, have anything to do with ethnicity? | <text>Which, between genocides and politicides, have anything to do with ethnicity?</text><reasoning>Barbara Harff and Ted Gurr defined genocide as "the promotion and execution of policies by a state or its agents which result in the deaths of a substantial portion of a group ...[when] the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality." Harff and Gurr also differentiate between genocides and politicides by the characteristics by which members of a group are identified by the state. In genocides, the victimized groups are defined primarily in terms of their communal characteristics, i.e., ethnicity, religion or nationality. In politicides the victim groups are defined primarily in terms of their hierarchical position or political opposition to the regime and dominant groups. Daniel D. Polsby and Don B. Kates, Jr. state that "... we follow Harff's distinction between genocides and 'pogroms,' which she describes as 'short-lived outbursts by mobs, which, although often condoned by authorities, rarely persist.' If the violence persists for long enough, however, Harff argues, the distinction between condonation and complicity collapses."</reasoning><output>genocides</output> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.