In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: disagree or agree. Classify the comment as disagree if it is likely to raise a certain level of public disagreement, whether healthy or unhealthy. The disagreement can be due to toxic content (for example, disrespect, identity attack, insult, and threat), controversial content, misunderstandings, or conflicting opinions. Classify the comment as agree otherwise.

Input: Consider Input: Comment: I don't smoke marijuana. Never have. Never wanted to. However I voted to legalize 2 years ago just like a majority of Alaskan voters. 
I'm constantly appalled at how slow the legislative machine has made this process. Part of the reason people like me voted for legalization was to stop the unnecessary prosecution of these petty crimes AND to reap the benefits of tax revenue. 
All I have seen in 2 years is more ridiculous charges against people and a lot of money spent to keep pot shops closed and make sure we don't see any of that tax revenue. 
Enough already.

Output: Agree


Input: Consider Input: Comment: "Life got easier," quipped Rep. Mark Neuman, R-Big Lake, who's been co-chair of the House Finance Committee for the last two years. "Whole lot less work involved."

Dude, it's not like you did any work in the first place.

Output: Agree


Input: Consider Input: Comment: I just hate the idea of a referendum. The cost would not be worth it. Getting even 30% turnout for an issue most Canadians don't understand and don't care about would be a minor miracle. Below a threshold of at least a 50%  turnout the results would be suspect. Voting would be split along party lines. Would this be fair to the people who are neutral or don't come out to vote? From one who campaigned for the "No" side in the Charlottetown Accord Referendum, please avoid a divisive referendum.


Output: Disagree


