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.

Input: Consider Input: Comment: I knew it. I knew that whatever Dingman used as a title to his column, whatever his opening paragraphs were, I knew Dingman would end up in the same place he always ends up. I knew he'd end up promoting the same nonsensical garbage that the laziest of lazy journalists always promote; that being the false equivalency and both siderist trash that people like Dingman, Ron Fournier and David Brooks always promote.

No matter the specific issue or situation, Dingman is just like a parrot that keeps squawking "brawk brawk, both sides, both sides, brawk brawk.

Dingman says both conventions were equally marred by "disunity". But even the master of the false equivalency, the Ayatollah of both siderism, David Brooks, even he wasn't brushing the conventions with his usual both siderist paint.

Early in his column, Dingman refers to the "political cluelessness" of others. But if he wants to see a living, breathing example of political cluelessness, all he needs is a mirror.

Output: Non-identity-attack

Input: Consider Input: Comment: Oh, "BIGOTRY!"
Homosexual acts are sinful, and, according to Sacred Scripture, one of the four sins "crying to heaven for vengeance." A gay marriage is (un)naturally going to involve said acts. Are you capable of comprehending this? The baker doesn't want to participate in a wedding that promotes this sin. Now, a bigot is "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; [you certainly fit that description to a tee] especially :one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance."
The question boils down to obstinacy and intolerance. Well, when bases his opinion or belief of something as crystal clear as"homosexual behavior is sinful", is it obstinacy or principled dissent? And why do you think we should be tolerant of sin? That certainly isn't Christ-like, being as that Christ admonished everyone to "sin no more." You are the obstinate bigot here, clearly.

Output: Identity-attack

Input: Consider Input: Comment: It is you showing the ignorance, who cares what happened in BC this is about exports and the damage these taxes do making us less competitive bud,
Output: Non-identity-attack