Categorize the comment on the basis of insult. If the comment is insulting output Yes, otherwise output No.

Ex Input:
"They ignore the plain evidence of dozens of campuses in several states with combined decades of experience of legal carry on campus not producing -any- of the “fears and concerns” they state."

So why are negligent discharges up on campuses who've allowed concealed carry? Were you the "responsible gun owner" who left his shooting iron in the crapper last year at UAF? Or maybe 1/3 who've left unsecured firearms around in the past 3 months, also at UAF?

Ex Output:
No


Ex Input:
Rachael, you're the one who may actually be off a bit and appear to be confusing the PF  (Permanent Fund)  and the PFD (Permanent Fund Dividend. The difference is clear. The Fund itself was/is indeed truly meant to be a rainy-day fund to help support the State when the oil is inevitably gone. A moment of wondrous political clarity and foresight often not seen in our system.  The Dividend (PFD) was intended, at least in part, as a means to keep the pubic involved and monitoring the fund so that later politicians wouldn't figure out a way to get to the principle with no one to say otherwise. In retrospect it has worked just like that though maybe a little better than is healthy. With skin in the game Alaskans decry any attempt to raid the fund as it will have direct impact on them. This is the intended effect. On the downside it has created a bit of an unhealthy entitlement mentality but in general it's worked well. We still have an obligation to future generations.

Ex Output:
No


Ex Input:
Bet ya she can pronounce "Tanzania" and knows where it is and can even spell it.  Trump is still looking on the map for Africa!

Ex Output:

No