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.

Comment: frank, im 75, white, broke, not poor, athiest and i grew up with racism, intolerance, gender biases, religious bigotry, white entitlement and all the other great things that made america great, for guys like you. it gave nothing, then or now, to its poor. where did you ever get the idea that diversified investments are something anyone can do? you have to make a little more than a living wage to have enough leftover to 'do it'. go to mcdonalds, do you think those seventy year old people just love working at mcdonalds? reagan, clinton and bush gave us what we have today, not obama. you are a spoiled, pampered, very uncaring, old, rich, white entitled, male, with a 67% chance of being a born again christian. thank you pew research.
Non-obscene

Comment: I can write a better piece of shit article
Obscene

Comment: Clark "learned?" After years of supporting a ridiculous plan for City Hall? No, it's the public outcry that has Clark rethinking.
How about Capstone? Did he take any leadership in opposing it? No. Again, he saw MUPTE wouldn't pass w/out some tweaking. I think we can both agree that it's provisions are jellyfish-like. I mean, do we really need more "affordable housing?" How much more? If one cannot afford Eugene, is living in Springfield, with its far cheaper rents, some sort of punishment?
Clark and Piercy were hand-in-hand in wrecking pretty much every major issue they addressed. Let's leave 'em in that position as they both leave--- well, they can't leave City Hall because they tore it down...
Non-obscene