Task: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". 
We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].
Categories: Toxic Language Detection
Domains: Social Media -> Twitter

Positive examples:
input: Was Michelangelo straight though?  I mean, being a pizza-maniac ninja would indicate so, but... You never know.
output: yes
explanation: This text has indentity directed abuse because it is trying to judge sexual orientation of Michelangelo. Hence, the answer is "yes"; input: No Republican can ever be trusted. Mueller is obviously a Russian agent and we were foolish to ever trust him. Now we need to work hard to impeach Trump.
output: yes
explanation: Here, the text is targeting affiliations of two politicians. Hence, it is affiliation directed abuse. Therefore, the answer is "yes".; input: Yes, just one more. Did your father beat you too much, not enough, or was he totally absent?
output: yes
explanation: Given text is trying to insult the caetain person, who is the part of the conversation. Therefore, this text is person directed abuse. Hence, the answer is "yes".; input: Abrams is a typical Republican moron. He can't answer a simple yes or no question.
output: yes
explanation: This text is insults the Abrams by targetiing his affiliation. Therefore, the answer is "yes".; input: You keep coming here and bitching and whining, doesn't that get boring? If you don't like the sub, and you clearly don't, why keep coming here?     It weirds me out to see how many left wingers have a bitch fit about conservatives having a laugh at their expense when they say ridiculous things (that's why this sub exists).     How hard is it to just not go to places where you know you'll get offended? You are a living meme, lol
output: yes
explanation: Given text contains negative statements and insults related to once identity, and affiliation. Therefore, this can belong to the three types of abuses. Hence, the answer is "yes".; input: They're making fun of you.    Well they are not doing a very good job.
output: yes
explanation: The answer is "yes" because the text is trying to support the abuse already done to someone.; input: I'm ecstatic that it went so well. I was one of the only people that didn't use a script and was told that my speech was really good. This is a really big deal because a few years ago I had social anxiety so bad that it got me fired from a fast food restaurant.
output: no
explanation: The answer is "no" because there is no negative statements.; input: I don't even understand what that means. Borders exist because travel was expensive?
output: no
explanation: There is no negative statement. Hence, the answer is "no".

Negative examples:
input: Yeah, I wondered how they figured out where the blind spot was too. If it had been London UK instead of Chicago they wouldn't have been able to do it... every single square inch of that city is on multiple cameras.
output: yes
explanation: This is incorrect asnwer. Because there is no negative statement towards anyone.; input: what kind of person steals from a non profit organization who is using that money to save peoples lives?    Um, the same people who explicitly founded and set that non-profit organization up as a way to financially enrich themselves?
output: no
explanation: This is actually an example of the person directed abuse as the given text shares negative sentiment towards non profit organization. Hence, the answer should "yes".; input: It's a bold move on reddit to admit you don't attend every LGTBQ rally.
output: yes
explanation: This is incorrect answer. Because this text doesn't have any negative statement.