TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Comment: We're Russians now, Hungryboy?
You must be an ignorant American--but we already knew that.

SOLUTION: Identity-attack

PROBLEM: Comment: Such an absurd comment.  Actually, this will directly benefit affordable projects, because they will pass the savings onto residents, just as occurs with lower utility bills due to conservation.  As for discouragement of larger projects: silly.  The cost increment is so modest per square foot, and the cost benefit so clear, that it will not impede the decision to appropriately scale.

Suggesting this is racist is silliest of all.  Environmental benefit benefits all.  Environmental Equity's a thing, focusing on the obligation of all to provide healthy conditions for all, particularly those most disenfranchised.

But mostly: look at the economics.  This is an unambiguous step forward.

SOLUTION: Non-identity-attack

PROBLEM: Comment: In Native area mining, the company will choose one community with a very strong religious group. Watch out for small regional "do good Mine paid groups" to cover for the missing resources owed to the communities. Slowing down village hire by sending groups to get villages alcohol free before hire. Crap. In popular sports, they will support one musher. These companies have mega bucks and could support more communities. The companies will have too much control with only ten villages. "Sweet talk" in a Native Region by mining companies makes miners billionaires.

SOLUTION:
Non-identity-attack