In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: threat and non-threat. Threat is a statement that someone will be hurt or harmed, especially if the person does not do something in particular.

Ex Input:
Comment: Remember when Assange was a traitor and Republicans hated him? Remember when Republicans hated Comey? Yeah, we ALL do--except you.

Ex Output:
Non-threat


Ex Input:
Comment: If we're 1-3 you can bet dollars to donuts that Siemian is the problem.  Unless we are 1-3 and averaging 25 pts per game, which we know won't be true with our defense.  I'm not saying he'll be entirely to blame, I'm saying people don't give him enough blame.  There were alot of reasons we lost that Titans game last year, but at 10-13 if Trevor makes one play, we win the game or send it to overtime.  He couldn't do it.

Ex Output:
Non-threat


Ex Input:
Comment: No you actually contradict yourself. You say, "

“If the vote is very close, my leaning would be to side with the scientists,” French said." So "if it is close" you will ignore the will of the people because YOU think the science is settled. Your arrogant attitude is alarming and untrustworthy. You cannot treat voters like they are all as dumb as you hope they are.. Like you said, "I think that only smart people should be allowed to run for office". So are you saying that your opponents are dumb? Are you saying that the voters are dumb? Only YOU are smart?? Curious.... I heard these words right from your own mouth...

Ex Output:

Non-threat