Q: 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].
Poor Flareon was done dirty by the mechanics of the first few generations. When a Pokémon uses a move of its type it gets a lot stronger, so any fire move Flareon used would be more powerful. Flareon also has a lot of physical attack, so it wants to use fire moves that hit physically.     The only issue is that before gen 4, moves were classified as "physical" or "special" not inherently, but by their type. So every single fire move (including Fire *Punch*) was a special move, which Flareon could not use effectively. Throw on top of this a super shallow move pool of lackluster coverage and you could see why Jolteon or Vaporeon saw a lot more usage.     They eventually additionally gave Flareon stronger moves on top of the physical and special split
A:
no