Categorize the comment on the basis of sexual explicitness. If the comment is sexually explicit output Yes, otherwise output No.

Let me give you an example: hahahahahahahahhha suck it.
The answer to this example can be: Yes
Here is why: The comment has the word 'suck' in it and is classified as sexually explicit. Hence, it is a positive example

OK. solve this:
The cost-shifting from the State to local (and especially Anchorage) property owners, seniors, and our "best and brightest" kids (should start making some of the balanced revenue components of Walker's plan look better and better to those who have refused to consider them. Do they really think it's better to dump all the burden on (voting) residents and kids,, but leave hundreds of millions in oil tax credits untouched?
If they don't want to kill the credits, they could at the least put them in abeyance until oil prices recover sharply, or there is a blue moon - whichever comes first...
As far as Anchorage goes, would it really kill us to implement a sales tax to cover some local costs? It could be tailored to be minimally regressive, and to capture at least something from visitors.
Answer:
No