Teacher: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.
Teacher: Now, understand the problem? Solve this instance: Comment: In a day and age when everyone is screaming about equality, the author, the "Denver Post Editorial Board" seems to condone discrimination against police officers. Does anyone else loose their jobs for paying a prostitute for sex? Do truck drivers, or plumbers, or news paper editors? I doubt it. And plea deals ? Criminals get plea deals all the time. But hey, the police are different, like not even human, right? I fully understand the "public trust" thing, but on the other hand one must consider the human thing too. We all make mistakes, poor choices, commit sins. Maybe we should think more about counseling or rehab, just like we do for criminals. As far as the disparity between the cases mentioned, there may be other factors or personal history aspects involved that are not public knowledge, and probably shouldn't be. Maybe we should consider that.
Student:
Non-obscene