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.

Example Input: Comment: Darn, taking the ex on a one way trip to Tonga would have been cheaper.
Example Output: Obscene

Example Input: Comment: What the PC alt-left fails to grasp is the rubber band effect of pushing too hard on folks who don't slide too easy. Pushback can be a real bitch.
Example Output: Obscene

Example Input: Comment: This Chris Neil fantasy, please. The Sens did not win b/c he played 2+ mins in this game.

He did take a penalty, which negated an Ott PP. Hey, great. What better way to help your team than taking a stupid penalty, which not only cost your team said PP, it cost you 10 mins in the penalty box.

Yeah, Neil was great.

Of course all the Sens' players are going to all sing kumbaya, they won.

Now, any coach that dresses a player to play barely 2 mins of a game, that coach is handicapping his team, they're 1 player down to the other team, and that's not good.

Ott is only still alive due to the NHL's insistence on using some bizarre scheme for the playoffs, in which the 6th and 7th seeds play in the 1st round, the winner playing the 5th seed, while the top seeded teams go at it.

Ott is the only team that qualified for the playoffs that allowed more goals than it scored.

Good for them, they've taken advantage, but they are wholly undeserving and really lucky.
Example Output:
Non-obscene