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.

Input: Consider Input: Comment: The University, for whatever, reason decided to terminate Mr. Walls' contract.  It was an amazingly "one-sided" document..ostensibly written for four years....but, with a "without cause" clause which allowed the University to terminate it with only one month's notice.  The administration exercised that legal right and terminated Mr. Walls with no stated "cause".....that was perfectly legal...however "unfair" it might seem.  On the other hand, perhaps they did have "cause" but chose to "take the easy way out" and not go through the hassle of proving any justification for his termination.  They experienced considerable "blowback" because of their actions and, it seems, decided to "buy off" Mr. Walls for $90K...."here that this damn money and go away!"  The whole fiasco reflects very badly on the administration...these guys make too much money to be so horribly incompetent...Gary Crum

Output: Obscene


Input: Consider Input: Comment: Without going through the legal channels to change how the pay out is done, this is flat out illegal. 

So instead of local businesses and citizens infusing and stimulating OUR economy, he wants to pour 700M into a bucket with holess in it.

Blatant thievery. Gov. Walker.

You shame the office of Govenor and Alaska. You are guilty of HURTING the innocent and poor and taking that which does not belong to you to take.

Output: Non-obscene


Input: Consider Input: Comment: Ridiculous! private profits for public money? No this is a boondoggle, no P3 project is good for tax-payers, they all cost more.


Output: Non-obscene