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

Ex Input:
The state is paying a huge sum for Furie to drill down deep into formations thought to hold large pockets of gas and oil that the previous drillers never bothered to drill to because they had access to smaller pockets already producing. The "renaissance" was to get them to drill to that "deep" zone. It wasn't classified or secret if it's the same deal I'm thinking about. You'll notice the companies never discuss the depths they are referring to?... there's a reason for that. When they hit the pocket it then becomes confidential information between the DNR and the drilling company. But we do know what the "intended" depth was that the state contracted with Furie to go to, before it reported the find. I would think the depth is confidential from the public unless I'm mistaken. Large credits and subsidies should end now that Conoco/Agrium have enough gas, demonstrating there is no longer a need for Alaska to suffer fiscally as there is no shortage of gas anymore.

Ex Output:
No

Ex Input:
Alaskan government is behaving like a heroin addict. Taking taxes from the fossil fuel industry that kills our lifestyle and culture. Is this really the future you are looking for? Stop #ClimateChange http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/04/07/big-oil-spent-115m-obstructing-climate-laws-in-2015-ngo-says/

Ex Output:
Yes

Ex Input:
You REALLY need to spend some time doing some research, instead of spitting the kind of vitriol such as you have dispensed here. If you were being raped by a man who was overpowering you, would you prefer the cops use a taser or a gun?

Ex Output:
Yes