Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.

Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: Because this is the most natural and comfortable way of reading a vertical list of credits. While the major credited actors/film crew can enjoy fancy transforms on their listings, it would become exhausting to see the names of rest of the bazillion film crew members to be similarly displayed. Horizontal scrolling won't really work because someone's name/role will invariably scroll off one side before you have a chance to read it (especially when there's a full screen-full of names). Generally, producers want you to see the full list as quickly as reasonably possible (especially as all of these people worked hard for you to enjoy that movie).  <sep>  Q: Why do movie credits scroll from the bottom to the top of the screen? A: Because this is the most natural and comfortable way of reading a vertical list of credits  Q: Couldn't they be scrolled from left to right? A: Horizontal scrolling won't really work because someone's name/role will invariably scroll off one side before you have a chance to read it (especially when there's a full screen-full of names  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Do you think before computers the screen was done manually or by machine?

Output: No


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: As shown throughout the film, the Predator has only killed armed opponents. At this point in the film Arnold has put up a great fight against the Predator and is currently unarmed. The Predator looks him over much like a hunter might take time looking at a prize kill before firing a shot. The Predator disarms himself and then fights Arnold hand-to-hand, a "fair" fight instead of just killing defenseless prey. (It's been a long time since I've seen the film, so can't remember exactly when/how the Predator stops using weapons).  <sep>  Q: Why did the Predator not kill Arnold immediately as it killed everybody else? A: As shown throughout the film, the Predator has only killed armed opponents. At this point in the film Arnold has put up a great fight against the Predator and is currently unarmed  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What happened to the Predator after checking arnold's head?

Output: Yes


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: The money belonged to Barr so it had his fingerprints on it. The gun was also Barr's as was the van. The whole point of Charlie's actions were to frame Barr for the killing. He had befriended Barr to get close to him and was close enough to be able to drug him and take the various pieces of property away from Barr's house and to return them with incriminating evidence without Barr realising he'd been set up. If I remember correctly the movie shows a jar filled with coins on Barr's desk. Presumably Charlie just took one of these to leave that final piece of incriminating evidence in the multi-story car park.  <sep>  Q: How did Charlie get Barr Finger prints? A: Charlie just took one of these to leave that final piece of incriminating evidence  Q: What did Charlie take one of? A: If I remember correctly the movie shows a jar filled with coins on Barr's desk. Presumably Charlie just took one of these  Q: Why did Charlie kill four people? A: The whole point of Charlie's actions were to frame Barr for the killing  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is the movie titled?


Output: No


