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.

Q: Comment: Imyleong, what is your problem with pgkemp's comment?  That pgkemp sees it that way?  That pgkemp expressed it in writing?  No right to prefer one color scheme over another?

And, actually, I DO think that it would be noticed, and give rise to opinions (for or against), had Dave Shoji decided to wear gym shorts and a Tshirt to coach in his final, or preceding years.  If for no other reason than people had become used to his less-than-completely-casual dress for games.  But, I think if people didn't like the way it looked, they would say so.  

Also, pgkemp's comment was in response to a column in the Honolulu StarAdvertiser that took an advocacy position for one side of an issue, and may have interposed or assumed a "sexism" that simply was not present.  At the bottom of that article was/is this comment section, inviting response.  

To me, your comment on pgkemp's comment is silly and inappropriate where pgkemp's struck me neither, quite frankly - just saying.

A: Non-obscene
****
Q: Comment: Yes, your analysis is crap. Your first statement is apples and oranges. The Canadian soldiers don't have to sue to get their benefits (although Harper was headed that way). You haven't read the case so you have no clue what it was actually about. Finally, the "lefties" applaud getting the damn thing over with at a lower cost. Your problem was with the 3 previous governments, this part of things was inevitable. Harper (he did love losing at the Supeme Court)would likely have been stupid enough to fight it and triple the cost.

A: Obscene
****
Q: Comment: A piano? A whole freakin' piano?

A:
Obscene
****