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: We go into their living rooms, and then kill them when they disapprove.  Amazing.

Ex Output:
Threat


Ex Input:
Comment: Really, just stuff and nonsense.  Unsupported opinion allegedly supported by all the other unsupported opinion posts.  Don't get me wrong, I find your postings hilarious, but others might find them a bit tedious after a while.

Ex Output:
Non-threat


Ex Input:
Comment: Not the same thing at all.  You are dealing here with commercial entities trying to protect what they view as intellectual property they created.  Disney is not taking a stand to defend from appropriation all of western culture, just that darned black rat.  The French government or its commercial agents do not stop you from using the "method champagnoise" to make bubbly wine.  (or the shape of the bottles or the colour of the labels).  As a commercial and sourcing matter they ask you not call it champagne.  (The folks who own and run the "Olympic movement" are vile and corrupt - feel free to have at them).  You would do better here to compare the collective  defense of a particular set of views about shared symbols (the Bible, the cross, etc...) to the Catholic church's (far more violent of course) reaction to the Reformation.  Remember that the Catholic church lost.  (And yes that is not a perfect case for comparison, but no worse than yours).

Ex Output:

Non-threat