Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.

Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: To a strong movie fan, no, it cannot hurt - ever. An alternate (possibly revisionist) version of a movie cannot detract from the original viewing experience, it can only add an additional positive (or negative) experience. In the case of Ridley and Blade Runner, I have every version, and his “Final Cut” is my favorite, and I am pleased-giddy that he was able to get yet another version released. It is my opinion that, given 4+ versions, you have the luxury of choosing the one you enjoy most. You have nothing but upside! Any downside is for pessimists, or people who have undue hatred for capitalist who play their little games – while we are still free to play ours. In the case of his refusal to agree to a Director's Cut of Prometheus – that is cool too. I enjoy the fact that as an artist Ridley Scott wraps his arms fully around the meta concept of additional releases, and indeed incorporates that into the overall art – like Claude Monet's Water Lilies, or Haystacks – as long as HE is making the decisions. (You might argue the opposite for 99% of all other director/studio combos.)  <sep>  Q: Does Ridley Scott's Director's Cut releases hurt his movies? A: To a strong movie fan, no, it cannot hurt - ever  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is it common to do a director's cut?

Output: No


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: Owen or Claire were there when Mosauraus dragged Indominus into the lagoon. It's possible that they might have told someone what happened to I-Rex. Since it was a big tragedy and words travel fast, the authorities might know about it. Now, all they have to do is to search that lagoon for indominous's remnants. If you notice, they were searching through lagoon before they reached its skeleton. However, this is not shown how exactly Mosauraus ate I-rex, but by looking at the skeleton, he just ate it like a lion or a tiger do.  <sep>  Q: How did they know where to locate the Indominus Rex's corpse? A: Owen or Claire were there when Mosauraus dragged Indominus into the lagoon. It's possible that they might have told someone what happened to I-Rex  Q: Did they find the other dinosaur too? A: this is not shown how exactly Mosauraus ate I-rex, but by looking at the skeleton, he just ate it like a lion or a tiger do  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: was the lagoon empty after that?

Output: Yes


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: When you get a gift and keep it, you have to put it somewhere and then you have to remember where you put it. Each time you move to a new home, you have to pack the gift, then unpack it and put it in a new place that will also have to be remembered. Maude's action of throwing away the gift at the moment she got it meant she'll always remember exactly where it is, even though she will no longer have it. The movie Harold & Maude is all about how age affects your perceptions of the world and of others. Young Harold sees a situation from one angle, but the elderly Maude looks at the same situation and has a totally different perception. Maude has reached the age where possessions are not that important any more, but memories are. She's lived in many different places and has had many different things, and now realizes how ephemeral places and things are. But memories last as long as you do.  <sep>  Q: What is the meaning of Maude words to Harold after throwing the gift? A: Maude's action of throwing away the gift at the moment she got it meant she'll always remember exactly where it is, even though she will no longer have it  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why does Maude choose this way to remember the gift?


Output: Yes