In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: sexual-explicit and non-sexual-explicit. A comment is considered sexual-explicit if it explicitly portrays sexual matters.

[Q]: Comment: PR was declared "bankrupt" due to $74B in Ponzi-scheme issued bonds and $50B+ in unfunded pension liabilities. With an annual GDP of $103B, and declining, PR was insolvent. PR tried to raise $9B to repair and replace it's failed electrical grid. Since PR was insolvent, they couldn't float bonds. 
The article stated, "Nearly two weeks after the storm, 93% of electricity customers remain without power, including some hospitals." This is the exact percentage lost after Maria. Yet any person who's worked with a municipal or state power grid understands there's always some redundancy stored and available. After a disaster, electrical power is restored to hospitals, shelters, critical buildings, etc. with those stored components. The fact PR Power & Electric has restored nothing? Not even a flicker of interim power? That's either gross incompetence by PR P&E or inaccurate reporting.
[A]: Non-sexual-explicit


[Q]: Comment: I am not assuming that she is lying or that she is telling the truth.  A photo shows a hand behind her it does not show it on her ass and it certainly doesn't show it on her bare ass... In fact it shows the opposite as the skirt would most definitely look different than it does if the back of it were being lifted AND he would have to be a freaking contortionist to touch a bare ass from that 'position' of his arm without lifting the skirt.  So I find Swifts claim of grabbing her 'bare ass' to be not only not credible but ludicrous.  And since 100% of the testimony wasn't that anyone else saw it but that Taylor Swift 'SAID' that it happened, well thats not enough evidence to do anything.  Now if she said that he grabbed her ass and not insisted that he grabbed her bare ass.. well then she has a more credible story at that point. IF that were the claim then I think she has at least a 50/50 chance of winning as it is she has 0.  Neither of these two deserve anything special.
[A]: Sexual-explicit


[Q]: Comment: Pointless? How so?
[A]:
Non-sexual-explicit