In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: obscene and non-obscene. A comment is obscene if it is considered offensive to the public sense of decency, for example because it too obviously relates to sex or contains language regarded as taboo in polite usage.

Input: Consider Input: Comment: They don't mind paying more for? How much more? $5/gal? $8/gal? $10/gal?
The second the price of gasoline rises above $3, the same people who demonize the oil and gas industry conclude the rise is due to greedy oil and gas folks. Markets be damned!

Output: Obscene


Input: Consider Input: Comment: Morneau is using the left wing buzzword "fair".  Thus whole exercise is about inflamming opinion in the hope that the " soak the rich" crowd votes liberal instead of ndp, which makes your position particularly hypocritical

Output: Non-obscene


Input: Consider Input: Comment: And how can you blame the tides (assuming they meant one (1) day) when the tides were never above the usual high tide of 4.6 metres most days.
An eclipse (casting a shadow, or obscuring of light) does not make the sun and moon gravitational effects any more stronger.
A simple Tide tool would show that.   WxTide32, for example.
Maybe it is the untidal (tides but greater effect of spring floods and summer releases) "Inland Toronto Globe and Mail"'s fault.

And the lack of scientifically alert questioning Copy-Editors at the Globe doesn't help.
Please send the reporters and remaining editor back to school over the next months for intense subject refreshers, away from the stale Globian air.

This cursed Washington State fish farm shows why all fish-farms should be land-based.


Output: Obscene