TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: identity-attack and non-identity-attack. Identity attack refers to anything rude or disrespectful about someone's identity, including appearance, race, gender, and sexual orientation.
PROBLEM: Comment: Is there any specific reason you have to be so condescending? You seem to have a serious judgement problem to make a statement like I haven't read the article. If I didn't I wouldn't have known of your biased almost racist rant.  And you stated you "have seen people who have written.."  Really you saw them actually writing the comments?  Amazing or untrue.  You read what they wrote, you didn't see them writing. You seem confused.  Bad journalism.  As far a Sessions comment, you had your own explanation and I disagreed with you.  I guess no one can disagree with you because you are a journalist.  You write articles  and responses however you please, but if someone disagrees with your elitist condescending posts you get them ruled uncivil.  You have to hide behind CB I guess because of your feelings of inadequacy.  In your mind the posts are all wrong and you are right.  Most seem to agree with me.  Ever ask yourself why you feel you have to vehemently defend yourself all the time?

SOLUTION: Non-identity-attack

PROBLEM: Comment: Yet it is the Democrats fighting to make sure there are plenty of dead black babies in the abortion mills.

SOLUTION: Identity-attack

PROBLEM: Comment: "Quebec is an almost pathologically alienated and low-trust society, deficient in many of the most basic forms of social capital"; Muslims are terrorists; Jews are cheap; Women are stupid; blacks are criminals; Mexicans are druglords; frat boys are rapists;  "Quebec is an almost pathologically alienated and low-trust society, deficient in many of the most basic forms of social capital." I'm not as articulate in my bigotry as Potter, sorry.

SOLUTION:
Identity-attack