In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: disagree or agree. Classify the comment as disagree if it is likely to raise a certain level of public disagreement, whether healthy or unhealthy. The disagreement can be due to toxic content (for example, disrespect, identity attack, insult, and threat), controversial content, misunderstandings, or conflicting opinions. Classify the comment as agree otherwise.

Input: Consider Input: Comment: The precise words Doucet used were certainly indelicate and ill-advised, but the sentiment is totally understandable: Snowden's leaks were extremely damaging to Canada and the US' security and have only aided criminals, terrorists and hostile nations in evading detection so that they can do more bad things with a freer hand. 

Most Canadians support having their government carry out robust surveillance against hostile actors. How do I know? Voters had the option of elevating the NDP, which is the anti-security, anti-surveillance, and anti-counterterrorism choice, to power in October 2015, but instead gave it resoundingly to one of Canada's two centrist parties, which despite their ideological differences basically do agree that the country needs to be at the cutting edge when it comes to national security.

Output: Disagree


Input: Consider Input: Comment: You wish to continue to indulge in your hatred caused by irrational fears of Muslims without ever being called out for it.  Well, you still have every freedom to spew Islamaphobia (and that's exactly what you're defending here) but others have every right to continue to call it for what it is.  You and others continue to whine that you're not Islamaphobic and yet you never seem to be able to raise any non-bigoted, intelligent arguments about Islam.  In fact, you almost certainly haven't read the Qoran either so please, tell us, what fact-based, reason-based arguments do you have then????????  M103 is a motion.  Your hysterical response to it just highlights your irrationality even more.

Output: Disagree


Input: Consider Input: Comment: Dear Margaret,

As long as Justin wins elections, he doesn't need advice from you. Just like Trump didn't. You made wrong electoral predictions about both of them.

How about advising Trump not to act like a 5 year old with a Twitter account?

Who knows, he might actually grow up?


Output: Disagree