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].

Example Input: Of course it was. Disarming the population is the first step to oppressing them. Take away their guns, and then when they can't defend themselves, you can take away any rights you want: free speech, trials, etc. There's a reason the founding fathers put the right to bear arms in the Constitution.
Example Output: no

Example Input: Game sales do not go directly to the developers the developers have already been paid for by developing the game and the money made from selling the games goes to the publisher and shareholders developers only get a cut as a bonus that can vary unless the developers is independent then a significant portion of sales do go to them and a sum to their shareholders now on the note of epics claim that they are helping developers is a flat out lie I don't think terrorizing consumers by holding their products hostage behind an exclusivity deal, cutting their audience right down the middle by removing the freedom to choose, staining their name by associating them with terrorist  and destroying their credibility is a good thing for developers if you do you are fucking retarded.         EDIT: Forgot to add that the first part of the above was something I just read about and if I am wrong please inform me so I may correct myself and two the second part is still valid.
Example Output: yes

Example Input: That's true for a surprising number of comments linked here, actually.
Example Output:
no

