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 Q]: Comment: Such an absurd comment.  Actually, this will directly benefit affordable projects, because they will pass the savings onto residents, just as occurs with lower utility bills due to conservation.  As for discouragement of larger projects: silly.  The cost increment is so modest per square foot, and the cost benefit so clear, that it will not impede the decision to appropriately scale.

Suggesting this is racist is silliest of all.  Environmental benefit benefits all.  Environmental Equity's a thing, focusing on the obligation of all to provide healthy conditions for all, particularly those most disenfranchised.

But mostly: look at the economics.  This is an unambiguous step forward.
[EX A]: Non-identity-attack

[EX Q]: Comment: So you are censoring speech.

Whether or not anyone should or would want to listen to him is not the issue.  

And is the answer to that question violence, destruction and wanton thuggery?
[EX A]: Non-identity-attack

[EX Q]: Comment: Tittle of article: "Muslims have the most to lose from Barcelona"

Reality: The ones who have the most to lose, are the dead, murdered by Islamic terrorists on the streets of Barcelona.
[EX A]:
Identity-attack