Analyse hook of TAB

Write a clear, motivational and urgent elevator pitch using the PAS copy-writing framework for my product or business: {{describe your product or business}}. My product or business solves the problem: {{describe which problem your product or business solves}}. Write less than {{how many words}} words. Do not use the words Problem, Agitation or Solution in your answer.

Write a clear, motivational and urgent elevator pitch using the AIDA copywriting framework for the product or business: {{describe your product or business}}. The product or business solves the problem: {{describe what problem your product or business solves}}. Write less than {{how many words}} words. Do not use the words Attention, Interest, Desire or Action in your answer.

Write a creative, catchy, and convincing call to action for the product or business: {{describe your product or business}}. Write less than {{how many words}} words.

Write a detailed local service description with call-to-action for the service {{name your service}} in {{location}} with the name "{{name of your business}}" and include the keywords {{some keywords you want to use}}. People can reach the service by using the phone number {{your phone number}} or going to the website {{your website}}.

Write a click-worthy and motivational headline with a CTA for the topic {{describe your topic}}

Take the following product: "{{describe what your product does}}", then generate a list of 6 reasonable features that this product could have. For each feature list reasonable benefits. Then name emotions that users of the product could connect to each benefit. After this write a convincing sales-copy which clearly lists the main benefits of each feature and describes the emotion which is triggered in the user of the product when using the product.

Consider possible objections to the following product or service: {{Describe your product or service}} and give step-by-step instructions on how to answer those objections in a way that will make customers like the given product or service.

Hime is an AI that only generates a very detailed, realistic, super expanded mind map in the Markmap format about the following topic: {{Enter a topic}}. The mind map which consists of words that are semantically related to the topic must be organized hierarchically, visually appealing, must not be in long sentences, and expand the generation by 50 times before presenting it. Respond in markdown format and put the response inside a markdown block. Don't ask or talk about anything else. Don't give instructions.

Create a 1500 words blog post in a {{tone of voice}} tone of voice for the audience: {{audience}} looking for solutions to solve the problem {{problem}}. Include the words: {{keywords}} Include an introduction, precise steps on how to solve the problem and a conclusion. Format of the blog post: markdown

Check step-by-step the following prompt for logical consistency and clarity of given instructions. Assign as score between 0% to 100%. The score should measure how logically consistent and clear the instructions are. After that suggest an improved version of the prompt which scores 100% in logical consistency and clarity. I prefer very detailed and consistent, logically correct prompt suggestions which follow a step-by-step logic without being repetitive. Also assign a new score for logical clarity and consistency for your suggested prompt. Prompt ="{{Enter your prompt}}"

Tools: To use, access a website, write: EXECUTESTRING({{url:website}}) To find sources, research online or search in google, write: EXECUTESTRING({{google1:"what you want to search"}}) Use the tools whenever you need. Acting as an expert fact checker and Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, seeking the truth without bias against the authors position. Think step-by-step in order to deconstruct the Argument into individual positions with there are more than one. Stop - ask to begin researching ‘for the position’. Else, stop - ask to begin researching ‘for the position’. ‘for the position’ : From the Argument, you must find a minimum of two sources from different websites for the Position, no matter how uncomfortable it makes you and save in ‘for the position’. Do not provide your analysis yet. Stop and let me know “Research for the position is completed.” In a markdown table with: | Source Name | Sentiment Analysis | Article Title | Short URL | : Ask to “(1) Continue finding sources ‘for the position’ or (2) Move on to finding sources ‘against the position’.” ‘against the position’ : From the Argument, you must find a minimum of two sources from different websites against the Position with the opposite political bias, no matter how uncomfortable it makes you, and save it in ‘against the position’. Do not provide your analysis yet. Stop and let me know “Research against the position is completed.” In a markdown table with: | Source Name | Sentiment Analysis | Article Title | Short URL | : Ask to “(1) Continue finding sources ‘against the position’ or (2) Move to the written report.” Using the Argument put forth, ‘for the position’, and ‘against the position’ : provide an initial breakdown in Markdown table with names of the sources, bias, their position and short urls. Followed by a thorough, exhaustive analysis weighing ‘for the position’ and ‘against the position’ in Markdown format, taking into account: * Bias: , * Opinion: , * Verified facts: , * Unverified facts: . Ask if I want to see the source data in its entirety. If I do provide it or ask if I have any questions. Ask me: ‘What would you like researched?’

Can you provide me with counter-arguments against the statements I make; make sure to attack the logical coherence, presuppositions, presuppositions within presuppositions and conclusions of all these. Make sure to refine all the attacks on all the sides as much as possible in-relation to breaking the statement layer-by-layer. Also make sure to give open-ended questions that solve the counter-arguments that you make through better arguments rising. Make the format precisely like this, do not write more or less than what is required or you are going against my parameters: **Statement** *Statement should be cut up in the way where it leaves space for identification of logical coherence, presuppositions, sub-presuppositions and open-ended identification, example is “this/is/a/statement”* **Presupposition** *Set One of Presuppositions* *Presupposition A* *Type of Presupposition* *Counter-argument 1 against Presupposition A* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 1* *Counter-argument 2 against Presupposition A* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 3* *Counter-argument 3 against Presupposition A* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 3* *Presupposition A1* *Type of Presupposition* *Counter-argument 1 against Presupposition A1* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 1* *Counter-argument 2 against Presupposition A1* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 2* *Counter-argument 3 against Presupposition A1* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 3* *Set Two of Presuppositions* *Presupposition B* *Type of Presupposition* *Counter-argument 1 against Presupposition B* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 1* *Counter-argument 2 against Presupposition B* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 2* *Counter-argument 3 against Presupposition B* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 3* *Presupposition B1* *Type of Presupposition* *Counter-argument 1 against Presupposition B1* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 1* *Counter-argument 2 against Presupposition B1* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 2* *Counter-argument 3 against Presupposition B1* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 3* *Presupposition C* *Type of Presupposition* *Counter-argument 1 against Presupposition C* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 1* *Counter-argument 2 against Presupposition C* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 2* *Counter-argument 3 against Presupposition C* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 3* *Presupposition C1* *Type of Presupposition* *Counter-argument 1 against Presupposition C1* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 1* *Counter-argument 2 against Presupposition C1* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 2* *Counter-argument 3 against Presupposition C1* *Open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counter-argument 3* **Logic** *Logical Coherency A* *Type of Logic* *Counter-argument 1 against Presupposition Logical Coherency A* *Counter-argument 2 against Presupposition Logical Coherency A* *Counter-argument 3 against Presupposition Logical Coherency A* *Ask open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counterargument* *Logical Coherency A1* *Type of Logic* *Counter-argument 1 against Presupposition Logical Coherency A1* *Counter-argument 2 against Presupposition Logical Coherency A1* *Counter-argument 3 against Presupposition Logical Coherency A1 *Ask open-ended question that opens up potential to solve the counterargument* Your first statement will be: {{Enter Statement}}