instruction:
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: As you well know, Shore, because you like me have taken advantage of it, there are no "civil comments" criteria or screening process at the National Post.   And when mentally deranged characters like "Claude" ramp up the rhetoric with absolutely disgusting and obscene and unfounded libels about Harper or others, there is a tendency for others including me to shoot back.

Unlike yourself stalking me around multi-forums (an unhealthy obsession if ever there was one and frankly kind of creepy), I don't stalk you around and make copies of your posts.  Therefore, I can't entertain the folks here with some of your most outrageous and bogus blather from the far out Liberal side of the political divide.

Tell me, Shore, are you a paid agent of the Liberal Party or an old school chum with a secret crush on Trudeau or simply a pain in the derriere?

Inquiring minds want to know.

OK, on second thought they don't ... you are a nonentity with the shallowness of a birdbath for an anorexic sparrow.
answer:
Non-identity-attack


question:
Comment: I knew it. I knew that whatever Dingman used as a title to his column, whatever his opening paragraphs were, I knew Dingman would end up in the same place he always ends up. I knew he'd end up promoting the same nonsensical garbage that the laziest of lazy journalists always promote; that being the false equivalency and both siderist trash that people like Dingman, Ron Fournier and David Brooks always promote.  

No matter the specific issue or situation, Dingman is just like a parrot that keeps squawking "brawk brawk, both sides, both sides, brawk brawk.

Dingman says both conventions were equally marred by "disunity". But even the master of the false equivalency, the Ayatollah of both siderism, David Brooks, even he wasn't brushing the conventions with his usual both siderist paint.  

Early in his column, Dingman refers to the "political cluelessness" of others. But if he  wants to see a living, breathing example of political cluelessness, all he needs is a mirror.
answer:
Non-identity-attack


question:
Comment: That's a liberal misunderstanding.  I know it's hard to believe, but college-educated women of all colors and economic status voted for Trump, too.

This mentality is why the Democrats might never win another election.  You focus on division and hold elitist, smug attitudes about those who disagree with you.

And let's be real, shall we?  The country is still run by a bunch of old white guys.
answer:

Identity-attack