Categorize the comment on the basis of threat. If the comment is threatening output Yes, otherwise output No.
One example is below.
Q: Baloney. You are going to see real action against Herr Trump and his white supremacist agenda.
A: Yes
Rationale: The comment suggests threat against Trump and his agendas and classified as threatening. Hence, it is a positive example
Q: The parroted false and inaccurate mantra that hunters pay for conservation is propaganda steering the imbalance of wildlife management in Alaska and the U.S.
Here is the revenue breakdown to illuminate truth:
In Alaska, non hunters contribute the lions share of 65% of the Wildlife Conservation funding. Hunters contribute a minority 35% of this budget. General funds, federal funds and Pittman Robertson funds are not derived by hunters alone. No, they are the minority of all these funding sources. Wildlife conservation is paid by all citizens equally...the majority of citizens do not hunt but they are Alaskan and US citizens paying the majority of the funding to the Wildlife Conservation Division budget.
A:
Yes