With no explanation, label text_A→text_B with either "DON'T KNOW", "NO" or "YES".
text_A: In England, the Royal Society of London also played a significant role in the public sphere and the spread of Enlightenment ideas. It was founded by a group of independent scientists and given a royal charter in 1662. The Society played a large role in spreading Robert Boyle's experimental philosophy around Europe and acted as a clearinghouse for intellectual correspondence and exchange. Boyle was "a founder of the experimental world in which scientists now live and operate" and his method based knowledge on experimentation, which had to be witnessed to provide proper empirical legitimacy. This is where the Royal Society came into play: witnessing had to be a "collective act" and the Royal Society's assembly rooms were ideal locations for relatively public demonstrations. However, not just any witness was considered to be credible: "Oxford professors were not accounted reliable witnesses, but Oxfordshire peasants were". No factors were taken into account: neither a witness's knowledge in the area nor a witness's "moral constitution". In other words, not only civil society were considered for Boyle's public.
text_B: Would a random person who witnessed a demonstration feel it worth voicing an opinion that countered an Oxford professor's?
YES.