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.

[Q]: Comment: And why would they?? Anybody can get some old magazines and glue and make their own. And I have a very hard time seeing how collaging helps anyone find gainful employment. It's just a waste of money.

NO MORE STATE FUNDED COLLAGES!
[A]: Agree


[Q]: Comment: If you're incapable of offering anything beyond pointless sarcasm, why bother posting?
[A]: Disagree


[Q]: Comment: Here is what reporter Nat. Herz did not report:

Jim Jansen, CEO of Lynden, has a significant business relationship with ExxonMobil in Australia.  The probable quid pro quo in this relationship is that Jansen arranges funding to groups that want to continue the massive theft of Alaska's oil wealth in exchange for continued funding from Exxon.  This is similar to how VECO operated.  Obtain lucrative, no bid contracts for oil field services "work".  Then the top people (such as felon Bill Allen) pay bribes to elected officials, and fund the campaigns of white trash that will betray Alaskans by giving away the oil wealth.

The goal is not about helping Alaska.  If their objectives are met, they will bankrupt Alaska. 

Every dirty, soulless SOB that gets support from this group must be rejected by voters.
[A]:
Agree