In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: identity-attack and non-identity-attack. Identity attack refers to anything rude or disrespectful about someone's identity, including appearance, race, gender, and sexual orientation.
--------
Question: Comment: obamma wamma is acting like a gay gay spolied lttle muslim rat brat who's throwing a temper tantrum
FLUSH........................................ he's finished ............ all he's doing is digging himself a deeper hole

Answer: Identity-attack


Question: Comment: Mr. Trump repeatedly exposes himself as a crude, crass misogynistic lout.  To note that those are unattractive characteristics in a Presidential candidate doesn't constitute "character assassination."  If you're not bothered by his values, that's your choice.  If you actually share his misogynistic view of women, that's your choice.  

Your defense of Trump is pathetic....the old "hey, everybody does it" sounds like a plea to a Junior High School vice principal.  No, Dun., not everybody is as crude and crass as Donald Trump.  
I know hundreds of men and, over my 74 years I've never been around someone who has made comments like Mr. Trump's.  

He's surrounded by sycophants (that's PC for #@$#kissers) so those comments have been accepted and reinforced.  The man is pathetic....but, that hardly qualifies him to be president.  He's embarrassing enough as a candidate.  It's simply unthinkable that he could be president.

Answer: Non-identity-attack


Question: Comment: Thank you Kieran for a very succinct overview, of the report. Unfortunately the link to the RMIT university page (which did work) indicated that "the page could not be found". I will follow up on Google.
 Many key points triggered reactions with me. The "learning curve" being one. As you are probably well aware from the reports of the various Judicial Reviews here in Ireland; the repeated phrase of many bishops & superiors; was that they had no awareness; it was all new to them; they had no training; they were never prepared for such scandal; nobody told them etc. These were the men with PhDs in various disciplines. The best and the brightest, that got the tap on the shoulder. They were the "good shepherds", who would look after "their flocks". Good shepherds would not leave their flocks vulnerable to predators.
 "Lies; lies and damn lies" . 
Your synopsis is very revealing and opens up another path to understanding this critical failure by the institutional church. Thank you Kieran.

Answer:
Non-identity-attack