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.

Ex Input:
Comment: Telling people to shut the f*ck up and calling them ignorant is the lefty version of civility here I guess. Lots of us have read Gramsci, and the writings of the Frankfort School, and, yes, Saul Alinsky; we understand the communist march through the institutions. Into the 50s progressive was a synonym for communist, and a "progressive person" was a trusted fellow traveler but in a position where s/he couldn't be an open, card-carrying member of the Party. Liberal became the substitute for use in polite company during the Cold War years until failed liberal policies made liberal a pejorative as well. The government schools had done a good enough job of revising and air-brushing history that by the 90s it was felt safe to go back to the term progressive. Some of us do know history and know that you've exposed yourself as either ignorant or a liar, but I'm confident you just think of yourself as "educated."

Ex Output:
Obscene

Ex Input:
Comment: Denying that a Creator actually created the universe is akin to denying that anyone 'created' a housing development or a piece of art. If I said the housing development just appeared out of nowhere you'd say I was crazy and you would be right. Yet the belief that the entire universe had no designer, no builder and no intelligence behind it and it just appeared is accepted, with a straight face, as a fact. Just because we don't know how God did something doesn't mean He didn't do it. That kind of reasoning is absurd and not at all 'scientific'.

Ex Output:
Non-obscene

Ex Input:
Comment: Ambler- maybe. I could see a route from tanana being beneficial because of the amount of people coming/going. But...who's going to drive that? (After fueling stations deem it fiesable). That's a seriously long drive, and airfare beats those costs 10 fold.

Knik arm. No. Not only would it save a small amount of time. It is chalk full of unconsolidated soils that would be subject to extreme damages from settling and an inevitable DISASTER when an earthquake strikes. The glenn is not that bad. They just need to make that sucker 3 lanes deep the entire way.

In the end, it is Fairbanks that will boom due to the incoming F-35 squadrons. Probably another 5k troops to benefit to the economy there.

We can see benefits in almost anything, sh*t=fertilizer. If you have a million dollars and you buy a million dollar house, it may be cool for awhile.

Up until the property taxes come due. I'm a firm believer that building on crap will become crap itself. Fixing what we have is #1 priority.

Ex Output:
Obscene