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: No one knows how to gauge te outcome based on the ranked ballot.  But isn't the challenge greater than that?   
Each EDA counts as 100 points and the first candidate to get 16901 points, or more, is the winner.  This means that EDA's with a small number of members carry a lot of weight.  If one candidate has 28% support concentrated in many EDA's with few members, that candidate ha a much better chance than another candidate with 35% support concentrated in a few ridings in the GTA.
This is the same approach the Liberals used to choose Justin Trudeau.  Apparently, he had broad support getting over 80% of the points on the first round.  This time around, it seems like a real crap shoot.

Output: Obscene


Input: Consider Input: Comment: Essentially he was a no show, if compared to how other presidents had participated. And I believe that at one of the prayer breakfasts he insulted Christians, did he not?  Can you do better than that example?  Something in the Denver Post, for example.

Output: Non-obscene


Input: Consider Input: Comment: Holy shit Batman.  The bombers flew in accordance with international law and posed no threat.  Man let's bang those war drums and get our panties twisted.


Output: Obscene