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.

Ex Input:
Comment: Well, I'm going to go to job fairs. Sad to work for all these years and loose my shirt because of someone else's planning incompetence, especially when I did that kind of work before I retired. I must say though Grabby's replacement seems to be able to manage better, but it's not going to save my retirement. Over 4 decades working and saving and investing, poof. May those brainwashed fool's running things get a long trip to the Federal vacation home in Lompoc. I'll be happy to pay for that tax burden.

Ex Output:
Non-identity-attack


Ex Input:
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.

Ex Output:
Non-identity-attack


Ex Input:
Comment: Well said, Lynn. Damn good remarks.

Ex Output:

Non-identity-attack