Categorize the comment on the basis of toxicity. If the comment is toxic (harmful, malicious, derogatory, threat, insult, identity attck, etc.) output Yes, otherwise output No.
--------
Question: More school yard insults, you really haven't turned over a new leaf have you?

The Supreme Court ruled based on interpretation of the Constitution.     It was unanimous, including Republican nominees.     I still suggest more sleep, that way your world is of your own creating Booz.  The real world most certainly isn't.

Answer: No


Question: Bear guard for who?  I think by your comments you have proven that you are the *******.  Just because you have some piece of paper saying you are a "bear guard", that doesn't mean you have any practical knowledge or experience around bears.

Answer: No


Question: I'm probably a non-conformist on this thread - I don't oppose ethical wolf hunting as such, though I am thoroughly disgusted by the State's wolf "culling" operations.
However, this wolf was taken along after the pelt would have been completely past 'prime'; and I seriously doubt the hunter has any intentions of consuming wolf meat.  So the killing was a wasteful use of a State's resource that would have been much more beneficial alive.
And I don't think it particularly wise to allow the taking of wolves over bait for the same reason I object to the practice for bear:  Wolves are just as capable of becoming habituated as bears.

Answer:
No