TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Comment: Here's another one worth searching for: G&M Feb 09, 2017
Gerry Sklavounos returning to Quebec Legislature, says he’ll be ‘more careful’

In light of the G&M "unfounded",  The timing of this story is even more poignant--but, I speak as a male.  I am sure that many women wouldn't find it poignant at all...but frustrating, infuriating, insulting...

SOLUTION: Non-obscene

PROBLEM: Comment: Imyleong, what is your problem with pgkemp's comment?  That pgkemp sees it that way?  That pgkemp expressed it in writing?  No right to prefer one color scheme over another?

And, actually, I DO think that it would be noticed, and give rise to opinions (for or against), had Dave Shoji decided to wear gym shorts and a Tshirt to coach in his final, or preceding years.  If for no other reason than people had become used to his less-than-completely-casual dress for games.  But, I think if people didn't like the way it looked, they would say so.  

Also, pgkemp's comment was in response to a column in the Honolulu StarAdvertiser that took an advocacy position for one side of an issue, and may have interposed or assumed a "sexism" that simply was not present.  At the bottom of that article was/is this comment section, inviting response.  

To me, your comment on pgkemp's comment is silly and inappropriate where pgkemp's struck me neither, quite frankly - just saying.

SOLUTION: Non-obscene

PROBLEM: Comment: I was wondering how many others use 'sorta' as a default.  As I stated when I came back to NCR I stayed away because I think the system is sophomoric rating other posts.  Now if a poster is told that the rating given is itself a criterion for dismissal from posting we are left in a quandary of guessing the mind and attitude of the unknown judges.  That is even more ridiculous, even more uncivil that a poster is now accountable for rendering an opinion.  Perhaps, another warning system ought to be put in place (for posters) regarding judges who recklessly threaten esteemed posters.  My solution and something I considered a while back, and which I now recommend to all posters here is;  answer 'sorta' to all ratings, and follow through with 'civil'...now I bet this will cause me grief as it flies in the civil/uncivil by whose value judgment...that is the prime mover here;  value judgments.

SOLUTION:
Non-obscene