In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: threat and non-threat. Threat is a statement that someone will be hurt or harmed, especially if the person does not do something in particular.

Example Input: Comment: How is she spending money like a drunken sailor?  What's DIA's debt to income ratio?

Why would there be numbers for a new concourse that won't be built for another 15 years?

You're presuming that they're presuming?  

Do you really think they haven't done a basic analysis of fuel costs?  If so, based on what?  Airlines buy their fuel years in advance.
Example Output: Non-threat

Example Input: Comment: Kill them!  Kill them all!  And be as inhumane as possible about it!  So-much mean spiritedness.  Meanness is winning.  So-much winning!
Example Output: Threat

Example Input: Comment: Not really fair for everybody to be piling on Getzlaf - he's hardly alone.

The entire sport, right down through minor hockey, has allowed players and coaches to heap abuse and profanity on officials for decades, without ever being penalized. Referees who do penalize disgusting behaviour are disciplined for being "officious", and not given good games because they "have a thin skin". Hockey players, of all ages, regularly get away with things that, in any other sport, would result in immediate ejections, suspensions, and fines. It, like many other unsavoury things, has just become an expected part of the sport's culture.

Bottom line:  don't be mad at Getzlaf for doing what he's been allowed to do his entire career - right back to his days playing midget and bantam.
Example Output:
Non-threat