In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: toxic and non-toxic. Toxicity is defiend as anything that is rude, disrespectful, or unreasonable that would make someone want to leave a converation.

Comment: If you want to blame a mayor for this ride in crime, wouldn't it make more sense to blame the mayor who failed to fill police positions, who shrank the PD by what 25% and cut special teams that delt with gangs? Sullivan, in the name of tax cuts, ironically my property taxes went up during his administration, had more to do with the crime we have today, because of the cuts he claimed to make.
Non-toxic

Comment: They're living it over in Santa Clara, making converts, and making intentional disciples out of nominal cradle-Catholics.  Right now, today, not in some bygone era.  

And the situation was similar across the bay from there at St. Edward's in Newark before a real clericalist character (who hates the rail...) was made pastor in 2015.  (Is 2015 a bygone era?)  The building was a Protestant-style prayer barn but with a sanctuary rail and some improvements, the community was active, people were getting on fire for the faith, and nobody in his right mind thought of that rail being about the personal elevation of the priest over the laity.

OLOP isn't my parish (and by choice, since it's closer than where I go) but I can't say they're not doing some things right.

Of course one could always mention Cantius as another example.  And for all practical purposes that parish community dates to the Bernardin era in Chicago.
Non-toxic

Comment: You are the one who thinks humans are consubstantial with the Holy Ghost.

Non-toxic