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.

Q: Comment: I don't appreciate either the writing (such as it is) or the sentiment.  The writing style is incoherent because these selfish individuals don't have any arguments to rationalize their presumed "privilege" to place wildlife and other human users of our rapidly fragmenting wilderness at risk.

Typical of the entitlement mentality crowd, it's all about THEM. Fact is once a bear has been aggravated into attacking a person, it's almost always destroyed because of the entirely rational concern the bear will subsequently be less afraid of humans after attacking one and coming away unscathed (which is usually the case). And this nose-ringed nitwit's solution? She'll wear a "don't kill the bear" tattoo! Yay.  THAT oughtta help.

"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity."--R. A. Heinlein

A: Non-obscene
****
Q: Comment: Actually there was a great tweet last night on this topic - "There was a major flaw in the design and construction of the Saddledome. All the seats look toward the ice surface and people are forced to watch this crap."

A: Obscene
****
Q: Comment: FM:  Just pointing out the hypocrisy of your comment.

A:
Non-obscene
****