Categorize the comment on the basis of insult. If the comment is insulting output Yes, otherwise output No.
One example is below.
Q: This is what I read when it comes from an EWEB commish, 'Shut up and take it!'
A: Yes
Rationale: The comment has term 'commish' which is an insult, also the phrase 'shut up and take it' is insulting as well. The comment is classified to be insulting. Hence, it is a positive example
Q: My big interest here is - at best, thriving - and at worst, sustainable, regional game populations.
Since pre-oil, Alaska guides have - rightfully - had a strong voice on the BOG - and they only were able to become guides through expensive and time-consuming "internship" hours. They occupied a near-insignificant niche in total wildlife-taking.

But then the State had only about 200-250,000 people, & there wasn't as nearly as much time & money for locals to be away from tasks of building and providing, to "play" at non-meat big game hunting. Game was primarily for food.
Now we have less game & thanks to our bountiful State & oil economy, more wealthy Alaskan sport hunters. Frankly, guided hunting economics & interests have served pretty well as a check against over-hunting. I disagree with MANY BOG decisions- most clearly regarding wolf-culling and I'd like a far stronger non-hunter BOG presence. But guides have been a boon to conservation, to F&G managers and to BOG data.
A:
No