The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Example input: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
Example output: No
Example explanation: The utterance does not use the no-need strategy since it never refers to an item that the participant does not need.
Q: Context: 'I need a lot of food, because of how many people are coming now (like 3 times as many). Also, there's only one stream in the area and it's really far from our campsite, so it would be super inconvenient to have to hike there everyday to refill our canteens. We are in a forest though, so we should be good for wood. Since you can easily fish, what if I take 3 food and 2 water? You can keep all the firewood. 🙂' 'Well I have to have some food and I don't need all of that water.  How about I take 2 water, 1 firewood, and 1 food.  I do need the firewood to cook the fish but I dont need it to keep warm at night because I have hefty sleeping bags that work excellent in the cold.' 'That could work, but I'm still a little worried I won't have enough food for 6 people. How long are you guys going to be camping for?'
Utterance: 'I will be camping for 3 day so I gotta have some food.  Although, I do understand your situation.'
A:
No