TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Comment: Damn when will ADN stop the bleeding here? I know its hard to believe but now we must acknowledge that Sarah Palin will go down in history as one of the most important and significant political figures in Alaska History. Right next to Jay Hammond, Romana Barnes, and Clem Tillion.

SOLUTION: Obscene

PROBLEM: Comment: I'd like to share a comment written in response to the article "Clarity beyond clericalism: Bishop Long at the Royal Commission" published in the Australian on-line journal "Eureka Street." The article elicited this response from one reader, who referred to Catholic schools:

"If there were a significant risk of abuse, then enrolments would have fallen off dramatically. They haven't... so I conclude this is a witch-hunt...and not a realistic assessment of any widespread problem."

To describe Australia's Royal Commission into Institutional Child Sexual Abuse as an unrealistic "witch-hunt" addressing a manufactured problem sounds bizarre to me.  However, this commentator is not alone; there are others.

Those of us who believe Church reform is sine qua non need to be talking to these folks.  Conversation can be a slow process, but if there is no meeting of minds, no willingness to listen, we're dead in the water.

SOLUTION: Non-obscene

PROBLEM: Comment: Stones?  Heck Harper & Baird were too foolish to realize anything would be needed after the bombing. Probably 'cause those 2 geniuses had witnessed so much prosperity burst out after other mindless bombing missions.

Ghadhafi paid restitution for the 1988 (!) bombing of Pam Am flight 103 - despite there being little conclusive evidence it was his doing.  

That's more than geniuses Harper and Baird are ever going to pay for the murder, rape and seemingly endless violence the ISIS afflicted (thanks to the bombing) people of Libya are now experiencing.

(I'm just going to assume you're joking about the irresponsible Harper Government, or any western authority, being able to impose "responsible government" on anyone.  NATO never had the authority for regime change to begin with.)

SOLUTION:
Non-obscene