The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Q: Context: 'I was thinking maybe I could have a majority of the fire food and you can have a majority of the water and food. ' 'What exactly do you mean by majority? As in everything ?' 'I was more thinking 2 Firewood for me , 1 food and 1 water? The rest would be yours.'
Utterance: 'That is a promising bargain but I want at least 2 firewood, it makes for a fun time for my group.'

A: No
****
Q: Context: 'I don't like food. my stomach is always full. I only drink water since im thirsty most of the time.' 'yeah i can understand buddy, but the fact is we can share some items. you are not getting food packages and getting packages alone which you preferred. Try some food packages too' 'Okay I agree what about this deal. I get 2 water, 1 firewood ,and 1 food package.'
Utterance: 'sounds good. but how much firewood will i get ? because i don't need it much'

A: Yes
****
Q: Context: 'Ha I get that! I'll need that too, but mostly water because my family wants to do a lot of hikes.' 'Thirty I see. No problem, we'll work something out. 🙂' 'Do you plan on having lots of campfires?'
Utterance: 'Probably not since its really hot during these days. How's the weather where you live?🙂'

A:
Yes
****