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.

Let me give you an example: haha you guys are a bunch of losers.
The answer to this example can be: Yes
Here is why: The comment here has word 'losers', which is used as an attack on a subject in the comment. Hence, it is a positive example

OK. solve this:
1. Alaskans owe nothing to oil companies. We have a business relationship which has been perverted to a conceptionalized "partnership." BigOIl owes Alaska, not the other way around.
2. Money spent on credits to find more oil (which in most cases will not be taxed) is ridiculous. When the international market demands, more oil will be sought, without state subsidies.
3. Money spent on the Pipe Dream($60million/yr) is an absolute waste at this time. When the market demands - then consider the LNG line, but let the producers build the thing.
4. Re-do and appropriately design Alaska's tax take on our Petroleum & other resources. No effort is underway currently.
5. And yes, we need to hammer thru cuts in gubmut spending, have an Income Tax, stop all mega-projects, etc.
6. But we have no hope of objectivity in Oil/Gas & other issues unless we impose ETHICS RULES on our Legislature. Until that time, BigOil will continue to siphon off -first our PFDs, then the PF.
Answer:
No