instruction:
Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". 
We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].
question:
Honestly wasn't salt the main concern? It seemed pretty obvious it was going to end up better for low tax states, but be kind of shitty for CA and NY specifically.  It seemed like it was very much trying to target democrats and make them pay more.     The big thing too is that in those states though, there are people making low 6 figs that barely make rent because of absurd urban cost of living and that's just where their job is.    there was quite a bit of really nice stuff in there though like letting elderly be counted as dependents.
answer:
no


question:
or your just standing up against a powerful entitie like the government that have no shred of honor and will use every unfair dirty trick know to mankind. so the only realistic way to fight them back is to use guerilla warfare and stick to the shadows i.e. concealing ur identity.    Is just your latest comment. And rule1 doesn't mean that they're saying you're being uncivil, it means you're trying to start a debate, which the sub isn't for. "Rule 1. This subreddit is for civil discussion not heated debate." and you have a couple of different subs that are for debating. Different subs for different purposes.    As for your argument. You're addressing why there might be a legitimate reason for fear, but in the end, that's still you being a coward and a legitimate reason to fear doesn't change that.
answer:
yes


question:
>MDE was dope as hell before world peace which is when all the jew-posting that happened after all the /pol/ fags that flooded in cuz sam linked the sub from his twitter when he started race-posting     >nobody remembers the glory days. sad.    Imagine pretending MDE was ever good.
answer:

yes


