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 Q]: Comment: The only thing I'm worried about is if Malina goes home too early will tRump keep his hands to himself and not be grabbing under the table, or shoving his uncontrollable appetite into the women's bathroom. Hey, he might get ahold of a transgender.
[EX A]: Non-obscene

[EX Q]: Comment: Yes, your analysis is crap. Your first statement is apples and oranges. The Canadian soldiers don't have to sue to get their benefits (although Harper was headed that way). You haven't read the case so you have no clue what it was actually about. Finally, the "lefties" applaud getting the damn thing over with at a lower cost. Your problem was with the 3 previous governments, this part of things was inevitable. Harper (he did love losing at the Supeme Court)would likely have been stupid enough to fight it and triple the cost.
[EX A]: Obscene

[EX Q]: Comment: Because Canadian citizenship is too easy to acquire and comes with no responsibilities. A status which is easily obtained by the world's fraudsters, criminals and felons. Last year it was uncovered that a Richmond BC immigration broker Sunny Wang enabled 1200 offshore nationals to become Canadians through massive orchestrated document fraud, conspiracy and applicatants colluding and lying under oath to immigration judges . A citizenship so easy to acquire is not special or important and should as easily be revoked like a movie ticket.
[EX A]:
Non-obscene