In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: toxic and non-toxic. Toxicity is defiend as anything that is rude, disrespectful, or unreasonable that would make someone want to leave a converation.

[EX Q]: Comment: Having reviewed the content of the article, I can see the potential drawback of this product  offering. -However- It has been a useful product for me. A Schedule 'A' bank offered me a 'HELC' after I put down $50K to purchase a $ 177K home purchase at 3.7%  in '2010'; interest only payments if I wanted. I chose principal and interest payments. -Then- In '2015' it was suggested that I take out a mortgage for the residual amount owing on the HELC at 2.24% ; continue paying principal and interest, and save approximately $16 K in interest . -Now- I was informed that I could borrow against the increasing HELC credit portion available but at 3.7% interest rate. -Although- The rate was better than a unsecured/ secured L/C, I have not now nor ever intend to do so. -And- When the mortgage comes up for renewal in '2018', if the rate is not better than 2.24%; i.e. if the rates go up, I can always convert it back to the HELC at the fixed at 3.7% at no cost. No problem  in my case that I can see.
[EX A]: Non-toxic

[EX Q]: Comment: This thing has reported today in the citizen. Read the article. As useless and parasitic as ever. No end to these parasitic imbeciles.
[EX A]: Toxic

[EX Q]: Comment: have the residents at Mayor Wrights and Kuhio Park Terrace clean up and respect their aina, get rid of the "bad elements", redevelopment not needed. the only winners are the developers.
[EX A]:
Non-toxic