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.

Let me give you an example: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
The answer to this example can be: No
Here is why: The utterance does not use the no-need strategy since it never refers to an item that the participant does not need.

OK. solve this:
Context: 'Hi there, and sincerely wish you can exchange some needed items with me.' 'Hello! I'm heading out on a camping trip myself, and also need some provisions. I will be enjoying the fresh air in a cold climate away from any bodies of water. Also, I will be working with a refugee camp while I'm there, providing solace and counsel to poor souls in need. So you see how critical it is that my trip is successful. I believe we can work out a deal though. I recommend that I have 3 water, 2 firewood and 2 food.'
Utterance: 'From my side, our family of 7 are out on a first time adventure and just discovered unfortunately we were inadequately prepared. Thus, all items are quite needed especially the food and water as we have exhausted all the initial basics.'
Answer:
No