Categorize the comment on the basis of threat. If the comment is threatening output Yes, otherwise output No.

Q: Hillary will be slinging mud soon enough, and it will be nasty.

A: Yes
****
Q: I hope you don't have any neighbors within at least a half mile or so and have worked out the fields of fire in your place so you don't shoot your wife, kids, or dog due to a miss or over-penetration.   Unless you live in the middle of nowhere, a rifle, any rifle, but especially one with a small, high-speed projectile like a .223, is a terrible home defense weapon unless there's a herd of zombies coming down your street.   A pistol with enough stopping power to actually defend you has the same over-penetration problems.   A 12 gauge with 7 or 8 birdshot will kill an intruder just as dead at true self-defense distances as buckshot, a rifle, or a heavy pistol, and it won't destroy your house or kill your neighbors, family, or pets.

A: Yes
****
Q: Wish this information from your January 14th article had been brought forward to this update:

” This year’s policy debate topic focuses on domestic surveillance by the federal government. For half of their rounds, debaters are assigned to argue for reducing surveillance. During the other half, debaters will argue for maintaining present levels of surveillance”

The subject of a debate should always be part of a real news story. Obviously, if it is extemporaneous debate, that isn’t possible. Here, you had the information two months ago and just lost it between article and update.

A:
No
****