<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_05_28_1236240</id>
	<title>Google Considers Taking Beta Tag Off Gmail</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1243517100000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.pcpro.co.uk/" rel="nofollow">Barence</a> writes <i>"Google is considering <a href="http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/253690/is-google-finally-ready-to-take-beta-tag-off-gmail.html">removing the beta tag from Gmail</a> &mdash; and other online services &mdash; a mere five years after it was first launched. Google has become somewhat synonymous with seemingly endless beta cycles. Many of the company's most famous services, including Gmail, Docs, and Calendar all still carry the beta tag. Google now admits the eternal beta cycles could be damaging consumer and business confidence in its online apps. 'It's a minor annoyance and something you'll see addressed in the not-too-distant future.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Barence writes " Google is considering removing the beta tag from Gmail    and other online services    a mere five years after it was first launched .
Google has become somewhat synonymous with seemingly endless beta cycles .
Many of the company 's most famous services , including Gmail , Docs , and Calendar all still carry the beta tag .
Google now admits the eternal beta cycles could be damaging consumer and business confidence in its online apps .
'It 's a minor annoyance and something you 'll see addressed in the not-too-distant future .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Barence writes "Google is considering removing the beta tag from Gmail — and other online services — a mere five years after it was first launched.
Google has become somewhat synonymous with seemingly endless beta cycles.
Many of the company's most famous services, including Gmail, Docs, and Calendar all still carry the beta tag.
Google now admits the eternal beta cycles could be damaging consumer and business confidence in its online apps.
'It's a minor annoyance and something you'll see addressed in the not-too-distant future.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125175</id>
	<title>Re:Please tag this.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243531860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The freezing of Hell will commence after a brief beta testing period...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The freezing of Hell will commence after a brief beta testing period.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The freezing of Hell will commence after a brief beta testing period...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122705</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124403</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243528620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey "Bill,"</p><p>I use Google Hosted for my domain, and have put many clients on it. They happily run their businesses on this free "beta."</p><p>Their biggest problems came from running ME or Vista; production "alphas" that cost them money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey " Bill , " I use Google Hosted for my domain , and have put many clients on it .
They happily run their businesses on this free " beta .
" Their biggest problems came from running ME or Vista ; production " alphas " that cost them money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey "Bill,"I use Google Hosted for my domain, and have put many clients on it.
They happily run their businesses on this free "beta.
"Their biggest problems came from running ME or Vista; production "alphas" that cost them money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28133749</id>
	<title>Re:Whew!</title>
	<author>lewko</author>
	<datestamp>1243524060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>people should know not to use Beta software for production usage.</i></p><p>But we paid for the service!</p><p>Oh. Wait....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>people should know not to use Beta software for production usage.But we paid for the service ! Oh .
Wait... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>people should know not to use Beta software for production usage.But we paid for the service!Oh.
Wait....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28130631</id>
	<title>Business Listings</title>
	<author>tomsomething</author>
	<datestamp>1243506900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As long as they'll have an extra "beta" tag lying around ready for use, why don't they slap it onto their local business listing robots. If you represent an organization and need to change your listing(s)(s)(s)(s), it can be a disaster.

Gmail FTW.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as they 'll have an extra " beta " tag lying around ready for use , why do n't they slap it onto their local business listing robots .
If you represent an organization and need to change your listing ( s ) ( s ) ( s ) ( s ) , it can be a disaster .
Gmail FTW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as they'll have an extra "beta" tag lying around ready for use, why don't they slap it onto their local business listing robots.
If you represent an organization and need to change your listing(s)(s)(s)(s), it can be a disaster.
Gmail FTW.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123089</id>
	<title>Re:Coming soon...</title>
	<author>CambodiaSam</author>
	<datestamp>1243522860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>i was thinking Release Candidate 0</htmltext>
<tokenext>i was thinking Release Candidate 0</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i was thinking Release Candidate 0</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122707</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123107</id>
	<title>not a good idea</title>
	<author>perryizgr8</author>
	<datestamp>1243522860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>i know gmail works quite well. but sometimes in firefox, when you click forward the thing gets stuck at 'loading rich text'. this happens at random and also on new ubuntu, opensuse installs. also, google calendar gets stuck sometimes on some firefox installs. seems to me the 'beta' tag is there for a reason.</htmltext>
<tokenext>i know gmail works quite well .
but sometimes in firefox , when you click forward the thing gets stuck at 'loading rich text' .
this happens at random and also on new ubuntu , opensuse installs .
also , google calendar gets stuck sometimes on some firefox installs .
seems to me the 'beta ' tag is there for a reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i know gmail works quite well.
but sometimes in firefox, when you click forward the thing gets stuck at 'loading rich text'.
this happens at random and also on new ubuntu, opensuse installs.
also, google calendar gets stuck sometimes on some firefox installs.
seems to me the 'beta' tag is there for a reason.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123065</id>
	<title>Give us folders.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243522740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take the beta tag off once they give us folders for email.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take the beta tag off once they give us folders for email .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take the beta tag off once they give us folders for email.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122705</id>
	<title>Please tag this.</title>
	<author>MyLongNickName</author>
	<datestamp>1243521000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hellmightfreezeover.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hellmightfreezeover .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hellmightfreezeover.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28127949</id>
	<title>The gmail interface is still slow as hell...</title>
	<author>pongo000</author>
	<datestamp>1243541040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...which is why the first thing I do when I connect is click the "HTML for slow connections" link.</p><p>Which is silly, because I don't consider my cable or business connections very slow.  In fact, most websites load just fine.  Gmail simply...well, let's put it this way:  By the time I get the gmail interface up, I will have already checked my personal e-mail on another machine using mutt.</p><p>Why does Google believe we want all the "enhanced" interface that really does nothing to enhance the interface?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...which is why the first thing I do when I connect is click the " HTML for slow connections " link.Which is silly , because I do n't consider my cable or business connections very slow .
In fact , most websites load just fine .
Gmail simply...well , let 's put it this way : By the time I get the gmail interface up , I will have already checked my personal e-mail on another machine using mutt.Why does Google believe we want all the " enhanced " interface that really does nothing to enhance the interface ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...which is why the first thing I do when I connect is click the "HTML for slow connections" link.Which is silly, because I don't consider my cable or business connections very slow.
In fact, most websites load just fine.
Gmail simply...well, let's put it this way:  By the time I get the gmail interface up, I will have already checked my personal e-mail on another machine using mutt.Why does Google believe we want all the "enhanced" interface that really does nothing to enhance the interface?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125425</id>
	<title>Re:Google Beta</title>
	<author>dk90406</author>
	<datestamp>1243532940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Besides this new "Wolfram" search thing is still in Alpha!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides this new " Wolfram " search thing is still in Alpha !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides this new "Wolfram" search thing is still in Alpha!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125611</id>
	<title>Comment spam</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243533720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I fight comment spam on a weenie little user forum that has a few real posts per week and hundreds of attempts by spambots to post comment spam. Users are required to have a valid (verified) email account to join. No problem. Most of them get a gmail account and dump it immediately so they won't get banned through a honeypot database. I think heavy spammers get hundreds of gmail accounts/month. THIS IS A PROBLEM. Even the Ukrainian, Russian and Chinese spammers now prefer gmail. Presently, we have about 30 real users and 1700 spammer accts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I fight comment spam on a weenie little user forum that has a few real posts per week and hundreds of attempts by spambots to post comment spam .
Users are required to have a valid ( verified ) email account to join .
No problem .
Most of them get a gmail account and dump it immediately so they wo n't get banned through a honeypot database .
I think heavy spammers get hundreds of gmail accounts/month .
THIS IS A PROBLEM .
Even the Ukrainian , Russian and Chinese spammers now prefer gmail .
Presently , we have about 30 real users and 1700 spammer accts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fight comment spam on a weenie little user forum that has a few real posts per week and hundreds of attempts by spambots to post comment spam.
Users are required to have a valid (verified) email account to join.
No problem.
Most of them get a gmail account and dump it immediately so they won't get banned through a honeypot database.
I think heavy spammers get hundreds of gmail accounts/month.
THIS IS A PROBLEM.
Even the Ukrainian, Russian and Chinese spammers now prefer gmail.
Presently, we have about 30 real users and 1700 spammer accts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123003</id>
	<title>Re:Google Beta</title>
	<author>genghisjahn</author>
	<datestamp>1243522440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The article is talking about gmail.  Google search hasn't been in beta for quite awhile.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article is talking about gmail .
Google search has n't been in beta for quite awhile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article is talking about gmail.
Google search hasn't been in beta for quite awhile.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124097</id>
	<title>Bug Google Redefined Online Beta a Year ago.</title>
	<author>IgnitusBoyone</author>
	<datestamp>1243527480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't understand this article.  I might of missed it, but from my reading the article clearly has not done is background checking.  The article clearly mentions that chrome is out of beta, but gmail which is five years old is not, but I did not see it point out that one is a local application but gmail, and docs are online applications.  A year ago slashdot posted an article on Google's view of online beta's.  The basic view was that since online applications change at a higher rate to traditional applications they are never out of the beta phase and always capable of testing new content.  I admit the company may need to come up with a new word to describe such a view like transitional, but I do not believe its entirely wrong.

<a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/25/1235216&amp;from=rss" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/25/1235216&amp;from=rss</a> [slashdot.org]
<a href="http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33131" title="networkworld.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33131</a> [networkworld.com]

Given this view its only natural that Chrome go through traditional version why gmail and other services do not. These articles also always fail to mention labs.google.com which is really where the company keeps its Alpha and Beta releases before they want them to go entirely public along with the very extended invitational phase that gmail went through.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand this article .
I might of missed it , but from my reading the article clearly has not done is background checking .
The article clearly mentions that chrome is out of beta , but gmail which is five years old is not , but I did not see it point out that one is a local application but gmail , and docs are online applications .
A year ago slashdot posted an article on Google 's view of online beta 's .
The basic view was that since online applications change at a higher rate to traditional applications they are never out of the beta phase and always capable of testing new content .
I admit the company may need to come up with a new word to describe such a view like transitional , but I do not believe its entirely wrong .
http : //tech.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 08/09/25/1235216&amp;from = rss [ slashdot.org ] http : //www.networkworld.com/community/node/33131 [ networkworld.com ] Given this view its only natural that Chrome go through traditional version why gmail and other services do not .
These articles also always fail to mention labs.google.com which is really where the company keeps its Alpha and Beta releases before they want them to go entirely public along with the very extended invitational phase that gmail went through .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand this article.
I might of missed it, but from my reading the article clearly has not done is background checking.
The article clearly mentions that chrome is out of beta, but gmail which is five years old is not, but I did not see it point out that one is a local application but gmail, and docs are online applications.
A year ago slashdot posted an article on Google's view of online beta's.
The basic view was that since online applications change at a higher rate to traditional applications they are never out of the beta phase and always capable of testing new content.
I admit the company may need to come up with a new word to describe such a view like transitional, but I do not believe its entirely wrong.
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/25/1235216&amp;from=rss [slashdot.org]
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33131 [networkworld.com]

Given this view its only natural that Chrome go through traditional version why gmail and other services do not.
These articles also always fail to mention labs.google.com which is really where the company keeps its Alpha and Beta releases before they want them to go entirely public along with the very extended invitational phase that gmail went through.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123213</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>rob1980</author>
	<datestamp>1243523340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The only difference between a "beta" product like Gmail and any other software product requiring monthly patches is the fact that Google is honest enough to still call their product a work in progress.  Like you said it's sufficiently stable for most folks, but I'd argue that they aren't any more non-committal to their SLA than other companies are to getting their product right on the first try.  And anybody in charge of purchasing software for their organization - assuming they're doing their job properly and getting sufficient information before making decisions - will be aware of that fact.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only difference between a " beta " product like Gmail and any other software product requiring monthly patches is the fact that Google is honest enough to still call their product a work in progress .
Like you said it 's sufficiently stable for most folks , but I 'd argue that they are n't any more non-committal to their SLA than other companies are to getting their product right on the first try .
And anybody in charge of purchasing software for their organization - assuming they 're doing their job properly and getting sufficient information before making decisions - will be aware of that fact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only difference between a "beta" product like Gmail and any other software product requiring monthly patches is the fact that Google is honest enough to still call their product a work in progress.
Like you said it's sufficiently stable for most folks, but I'd argue that they aren't any more non-committal to their SLA than other companies are to getting their product right on the first try.
And anybody in charge of purchasing software for their organization - assuming they're doing their job properly and getting sufficient information before making decisions - will be aware of that fact.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123413</id>
	<title>Re:In the not too distant future</title>
	<author>LMacG</author>
	<datestamp>1243524300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; 3000 A.D. Sha la la</p><p>Errr, that would be "Next Sunday, AD", actually.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; 3000 A.D. Sha la laErrr , that would be " Next Sunday , AD " , actually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; 3000 A.D. Sha la laErrr, that would be "Next Sunday, AD", actually.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122835</id>
	<title>Release Candidate</title>
	<author>fatp</author>
	<datestamp>1243521660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So the next will be release candidate?<br>
Wondering how many RC will they make...</htmltext>
<tokenext>So the next will be release candidate ?
Wondering how many RC will they make.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the next will be release candidate?
Wondering how many RC will they make...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123349</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>Dudibob</author>
	<datestamp>1243524000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps because Google still doesn't believe it's 'ready' yet?  Google are forever changing stuff on all their products</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps because Google still does n't believe it 's 'ready ' yet ?
Google are forever changing stuff on all their products</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps because Google still doesn't believe it's 'ready' yet?
Google are forever changing stuff on all their products</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761</id>
	<title>Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243521300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot<br>(in case you can't read the comment titles)</p><p>Jesus. Why does Slashdot always look totally broken?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot ( in case you ca n't read the comment titles ) Jesus .
Why does Slashdot always look totally broken ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot(in case you can't read the comment titles)Jesus.
Why does Slashdot always look totally broken?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123049</id>
	<title>What GMail really needs...</title>
	<author>castironpigeon</author>
	<datestamp>1243522680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>...is one of those early 90s construction signs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...is one of those early 90s construction signs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...is one of those early 90s construction signs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122957</id>
	<title>What comes after beta?</title>
	<author>chinton</author>
	<datestamp>1243522200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>GMail -- RC1</htmltext>
<tokenext>GMail -- RC1</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GMail -- RC1</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123679</id>
	<title>Release candidate 1</title>
	<author>gravis777</author>
	<datestamp>1243525500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yay! Finally we are in the release candidate stage! Another 5 years we may see ver 0.1 build 3!</p><p>Btw, iPhone support on slashdot sucks! My 5th time trying to post this comment</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yay !
Finally we are in the release candidate stage !
Another 5 years we may see ver 0.1 build 3 ! Btw , iPhone support on slashdot sucks !
My 5th time trying to post this comment</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yay!
Finally we are in the release candidate stage!
Another 5 years we may see ver 0.1 build 3!Btw, iPhone support on slashdot sucks!
My 5th time trying to post this comment</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122723</id>
	<title>Hahaha</title>
	<author>EmagGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1243521060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's no way GMail is ready for "release."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no way GMail is ready for " release .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no way GMail is ready for "release.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123129</id>
	<title>Re:Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243522980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So its not just me?
Does anyone have a solution to this?
-Chubbz</htmltext>
<tokenext>So its not just me ?
Does anyone have a solution to this ?
-Chubbz</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So its not just me?
Does anyone have a solution to this?
-Chubbz</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123269</id>
	<title>Some background and Google's previous explanation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243523580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At last count (last fall) almost half of Google apps were labeled beta, so it's not just a few they're talking about. At that time, Google offered a convoluted explanation for the practice that included: "We believe beta has a different meaning when applied to applications on the Web, where people expect continual improvements in a product." More here:</p><p><a href="http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33131" title="networkworld.com">http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33131</a> [networkworld.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At last count ( last fall ) almost half of Google apps were labeled beta , so it 's not just a few they 're talking about .
At that time , Google offered a convoluted explanation for the practice that included : " We believe beta has a different meaning when applied to applications on the Web , where people expect continual improvements in a product .
" More here : http : //www.networkworld.com/community/node/33131 [ networkworld.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At last count (last fall) almost half of Google apps were labeled beta, so it's not just a few they're talking about.
At that time, Google offered a convoluted explanation for the practice that included: "We believe beta has a different meaning when applied to applications on the Web, where people expect continual improvements in a product.
" More here:http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/33131 [networkworld.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125261</id>
	<title>Re:GASP!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243532220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://sanguinalis.tripod.com/bigtrucklove/id4.html</p><p>glad to help rule 34</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //sanguinalis.tripod.com/bigtrucklove/id4.htmlglad to help rule 34</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://sanguinalis.tripod.com/bigtrucklove/id4.htmlglad to help rule 34</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877</id>
	<title>Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>spyrochaete</author>
	<datestamp>1243521900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How can Google be taken seriously in an enterprise environment if their most stable and successful offshoot project takes 5 years to come out of beta?  They should have done this 3 years ago or more.  Gmail has been sufficiently stable all this time, yet this self-deprecating beta designation has constantly served as an admission of being non-committal to SLA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How can Google be taken seriously in an enterprise environment if their most stable and successful offshoot project takes 5 years to come out of beta ?
They should have done this 3 years ago or more .
Gmail has been sufficiently stable all this time , yet this self-deprecating beta designation has constantly served as an admission of being non-committal to SLA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can Google be taken seriously in an enterprise environment if their most stable and successful offshoot project takes 5 years to come out of beta?
They should have done this 3 years ago or more.
Gmail has been sufficiently stable all this time, yet this self-deprecating beta designation has constantly served as an admission of being non-committal to SLA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122985</id>
	<title>In other news...</title>
	<author>JCWDenton</author>
	<datestamp>1243522320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google introduces 'charlie' status for online services. More at 11.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google introduces 'charlie ' status for online services .
More at 11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google introduces 'charlie' status for online services.
More at 11.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703</id>
	<title>Google  Beta</title>
	<author>dspkable</author>
	<datestamp>1243521000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe more people probably know what Google means then they know what Beta means.  Google has become the biggest of the BIG companies (without imploding or needing government bailout).  8 to 1 searchers use Google over Microsoft Search Engine, so what Google's 'beta' is, is really what the industry standard has become.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe more people probably know what Google means then they know what Beta means .
Google has become the biggest of the BIG companies ( without imploding or needing government bailout ) .
8 to 1 searchers use Google over Microsoft Search Engine , so what Google 's 'beta ' is , is really what the industry standard has become .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe more people probably know what Google means then they know what Beta means.
Google has become the biggest of the BIG companies (without imploding or needing government bailout).
8 to 1 searchers use Google over Microsoft Search Engine, so what Google's 'beta' is, is really what the industry standard has become.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124653</id>
	<title>Re:Obama Auto Task Force - Chicago Ganster Politic</title>
	<author>magnusrex1280</author>
	<datestamp>1243529520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oops. Entirely unrelated to the original post.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oops .
Entirely unrelated to the original post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oops.
Entirely unrelated to the original post.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122907</id>
	<title>Not ready for release</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1243522020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're just moving it to Gamma.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're just moving it to Gamma .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're just moving it to Gamma.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125469</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243533120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And I blame the people like YOU.</p></div><p>
How about you blame Google for not having an timely testing process? The beta tag is just a cheap way of avoiding responsibility--the responsibility to do adequate testing and be responsible for the quality of service.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And I blame the people like YOU .
How about you blame Google for not having an timely testing process ?
The beta tag is just a cheap way of avoiding responsibility--the responsibility to do adequate testing and be responsible for the quality of service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I blame the people like YOU.
How about you blame Google for not having an timely testing process?
The beta tag is just a cheap way of avoiding responsibility--the responsibility to do adequate testing and be responsible for the quality of service.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123059</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124553</id>
	<title>Re:Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot</title>
	<author>michrech</author>
	<datestamp>1243529160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess I'm failing to see what is broken.  Everything looks good to me.  I can even see the subject lines on each post...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess I 'm failing to see what is broken .
Everything looks good to me .
I can even see the subject lines on each post.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess I'm failing to see what is broken.
Everything looks good to me.
I can even see the subject lines on each post...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123493</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>spyrochaete</author>
	<datestamp>1243524600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does it take a company with 10,000 engineers 5 years to make a 20 year old communications protocol stable?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does it take a company with 10,000 engineers 5 years to make a 20 year old communications protocol stable ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does it take a company with 10,000 engineers 5 years to make a 20 year old communications protocol stable?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123219</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124729</id>
	<title>Re:Hahaha</title>
	<author>pcolaman</author>
	<datestamp>1243529940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How does $1.99 an invite sound?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does $ 1.99 an invite sound ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does $1.99 an invite sound?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123013</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122685</id>
	<title>In the not too distant future</title>
	<author>RemoWilliams84</author>
	<datestamp>1243520940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's a minor annoyance and something you'll see addressed in the not-too-distant future.</p></div><p>3000 A.D. Sha la la</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a minor annoyance and something you 'll see addressed in the not-too-distant future.3000 A.D. Sha la la</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a minor annoyance and something you'll see addressed in the not-too-distant future.3000 A.D. Sha la la
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124981</id>
	<title>Re:GASP!</title>
	<author>SlowMovingTarget</author>
	<datestamp>1243531020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dude, there are only so many Steve-Ballmer-in-Clown-Suit anime fan service sites.  I'm guessing Google already found them all for you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , there are only so many Steve-Ballmer-in-Clown-Suit anime fan service sites .
I 'm guessing Google already found them all for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, there are only so many Steve-Ballmer-in-Clown-Suit anime fan service sites.
I'm guessing Google already found them all for you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28131151</id>
	<title>Re:Whew!</title>
	<author>kqc7011</author>
	<datestamp>1243509300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not until Google can get Gmail and it's other app's to work with my Starband satellite connection.
Cannot even log in.
Can log in with  Wild Blue, Hughes Net and Tachyon but not Starband.
As near as we can figure it has something to do with the latency.
Even though the other satellite providers also have some latency.
We have been ignored by both Googles and Starbands so called tech support.
Many many non responses from both companies, both email and phone attempts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not until Google can get Gmail and it 's other app 's to work with my Starband satellite connection .
Can not even log in .
Can log in with Wild Blue , Hughes Net and Tachyon but not Starband .
As near as we can figure it has something to do with the latency .
Even though the other satellite providers also have some latency .
We have been ignored by both Googles and Starbands so called tech support .
Many many non responses from both companies , both email and phone attempts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not until Google can get Gmail and it's other app's to work with my Starband satellite connection.
Cannot even log in.
Can log in with  Wild Blue, Hughes Net and Tachyon but not Starband.
As near as we can figure it has something to do with the latency.
Even though the other satellite providers also have some latency.
We have been ignored by both Googles and Starbands so called tech support.
Many many non responses from both companies, both email and phone attempts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123137</id>
	<title>Re:Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot</title>
	<author>WebmasterNeal</author>
	<datestamp>1243522980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The sad thing is, Slashdot looks broken in browser WITH proper standards support like Firefox, Opera &amp; Safari. God only knows how bad it looks in IE.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The sad thing is , Slashdot looks broken in browser WITH proper standards support like Firefox , Opera &amp; Safari .
God only knows how bad it looks in IE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sad thing is, Slashdot looks broken in browser WITH proper standards support like Firefox, Opera &amp; Safari.
God only knows how bad it looks in IE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125493</id>
	<title>Also...</title>
	<author>sam0vi</author>
	<datestamp>1243533240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the first of the three signs that will announce His coming. Duke Nukem (not) Forever!!!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the first of the three signs that will announce His coming .
Duke Nukem ( not ) Forever ! ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the first of the three signs that will announce His coming.
Duke Nukem (not) Forever!!!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122705</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28160457</id>
	<title>Oliver</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243802340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the end, all it means is someone uses an eraser on the logo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the end , all it means is someone uses an eraser on the logo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the end, all it means is someone uses an eraser on the logo.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28137491</id>
	<title>Beta late than never</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1243605480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All Beta jokes aside, Google is warping (eroding) the definition of beta.  GMail left beta when invitations were no longer needed to get an account. Even then, they were stretching the meaning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All Beta jokes aside , Google is warping ( eroding ) the definition of beta .
GMail left beta when invitations were no longer needed to get an account .
Even then , they were stretching the meaning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All Beta jokes aside, Google is warping (eroding) the definition of beta.
GMail left beta when invitations were no longer needed to get an account.
Even then, they were stretching the meaning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124061</id>
	<title>Re:Google Beta</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243527300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please explain how Google is the "biggest of the BIG companies" when it doesn't even rank in the top 50?</p><p><a href="http://media.ft.com/cms/889d77f0-4142-11dd-9661-0000779fd2ac.pdf" title="ft.com" rel="nofollow">Financial Times Global 500</a> [ft.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please explain how Google is the " biggest of the BIG companies " when it does n't even rank in the top 50 ? Financial Times Global 500 [ ft.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please explain how Google is the "biggest of the BIG companies" when it doesn't even rank in the top 50?Financial Times Global 500 [ft.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123579</id>
	<title>the bugs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243525020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you read an e-mail with a pdf sometimes it takes a while to scan for viruses and when the scan ends it does not  show the message that the scan was complete.</p><p>BR,<br>FR</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you read an e-mail with a pdf sometimes it takes a while to scan for viruses and when the scan ends it does not show the message that the scan was complete.BR,FR</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you read an e-mail with a pdf sometimes it takes a while to scan for viruses and when the scan ends it does not  show the message that the scan was complete.BR,FR</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124187</id>
	<title>Re:Whew!</title>
	<author>squeeze69</author>
	<datestamp>1243527840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't know if things will be better, but I believe they will put a "gamma" tag.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't know if things will be better , but I believe they will put a " gamma " tag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't know if things will be better, but I believe they will put a "gamma" tag.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28139811</id>
	<title>Re:Some background and Google's previous explanati</title>
	<author>Cro Magnon</author>
	<datestamp>1243617000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I expect continual improvements in any product that isn't dead.  Web-based or otherwise.  Beta just means it's not quite ready for serious use yet.  Though Google and some OSS software has had very good "betas" for years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I expect continual improvements in any product that is n't dead .
Web-based or otherwise .
Beta just means it 's not quite ready for serious use yet .
Though Google and some OSS software has had very good " betas " for years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I expect continual improvements in any product that isn't dead.
Web-based or otherwise.
Beta just means it's not quite ready for serious use yet.
Though Google and some OSS software has had very good "betas" for years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123269</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125467</id>
	<title>Re:Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243533120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because open standards are only good if they're not web standards. If it's web standards, then it's l33t to mock them like you are Microsoft.</p><p>Validation results aside, another<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. gem from the last few days is the ReadMore links fail in Opera.<br>title link works: <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/28/1236240" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/28/1236240</a> [slashdot.org]<br>ReadMore link fails: <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/05/28/1236240/Google-Considers-Taking-Beta-Tag-Off-Gmail" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/05/28/1236240/Google-Considers-Taking-Beta-Tag-Off-Gmail</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>I can't figure what their server is returning for the second. Opera shows a blank page, which is highly unusual. There should be a real page or an error message. Hitting view-source doesn't even respond.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because open standards are only good if they 're not web standards .
If it 's web standards , then it 's l33t to mock them like you are Microsoft.Validation results aside , another / .
gem from the last few days is the ReadMore links fail in Opera.title link works : http : //tech.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 09/05/28/1236240 [ slashdot.org ] ReadMore link fails : http : //tech.slashdot.org/story/09/05/28/1236240/Google-Considers-Taking-Beta-Tag-Off-Gmail [ slashdot.org ] I ca n't figure what their server is returning for the second .
Opera shows a blank page , which is highly unusual .
There should be a real page or an error message .
Hitting view-source does n't even respond .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because open standards are only good if they're not web standards.
If it's web standards, then it's l33t to mock them like you are Microsoft.Validation results aside, another /.
gem from the last few days is the ReadMore links fail in Opera.title link works: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/28/1236240 [slashdot.org]ReadMore link fails: http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/05/28/1236240/Google-Considers-Taking-Beta-Tag-Off-Gmail [slashdot.org]I can't figure what their server is returning for the second.
Opera shows a blank page, which is highly unusual.
There should be a real page or an error message.
Hitting view-source doesn't even respond.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124705</id>
	<title>Re:In the not too distant future</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1243529820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If that's supposed to be a MST3K reference, the correct lyric is "Next Sunday, A.D." The gag, of course, is that Sunday afternoons is when most TV stations fill programming gaps with godawful movies, the type that MST3K mocks. (Also: that you wouldn't normally qualify "next Sunday" with A.D.)</p><p>The Satellite of Love never ends up in 3000 A.D., but it does spend a few episodes in the year 2525, but unfortunately you can't pick your son, pick your daughter too, from the bottom of a big glass tube. I'm pretty sure the "3000" in the title is just there to make it sound cooler.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If that 's supposed to be a MST3K reference , the correct lyric is " Next Sunday , A.D. " The gag , of course , is that Sunday afternoons is when most TV stations fill programming gaps with godawful movies , the type that MST3K mocks .
( Also : that you would n't normally qualify " next Sunday " with A.D. ) The Satellite of Love never ends up in 3000 A.D. , but it does spend a few episodes in the year 2525 , but unfortunately you ca n't pick your son , pick your daughter too , from the bottom of a big glass tube .
I 'm pretty sure the " 3000 " in the title is just there to make it sound cooler .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If that's supposed to be a MST3K reference, the correct lyric is "Next Sunday, A.D." The gag, of course, is that Sunday afternoons is when most TV stations fill programming gaps with godawful movies, the type that MST3K mocks.
(Also: that you wouldn't normally qualify "next Sunday" with A.D.)The Satellite of Love never ends up in 3000 A.D., but it does spend a few episodes in the year 2525, but unfortunately you can't pick your son, pick your daughter too, from the bottom of a big glass tube.
I'm pretty sure the "3000" in the title is just there to make it sound cooler.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124013</id>
	<title>The beta tag does detour businesses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243527120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At my work (a public school) we have a strict policy on beta software: we don&#226;(TM)t use beta software. When it came time to choose between Microsoft and Google, we had to go with M$ since Google was still using the Beta tag, albeit we preferred Google, the policy was put there to protect (and punish) the end users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At my work ( a public school ) we have a strict policy on beta software : we don   ( TM ) t use beta software .
When it came time to choose between Microsoft and Google , we had to go with M $ since Google was still using the Beta tag , albeit we preferred Google , the policy was put there to protect ( and punish ) the end users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At my work (a public school) we have a strict policy on beta software: we donâ(TM)t use beta software.
When it came time to choose between Microsoft and Google, we had to go with M$ since Google was still using the Beta tag, albeit we preferred Google, the policy was put there to protect (and punish) the end users.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28134777</id>
	<title>Re:Marketing Ploy</title>
	<author>defireman</author>
	<datestamp>1243532460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ho hum.. just Google's way of staying as the leader of the web 2.0 app pack.

Wonder if this will cause a ton of "production" products to appear.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ho hum.. just Google 's way of staying as the leader of the web 2.0 app pack .
Wonder if this will cause a ton of " production " products to appear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ho hum.. just Google's way of staying as the leader of the web 2.0 app pack.
Wonder if this will cause a ton of "production" products to appear.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124317</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122865</id>
	<title>Re:Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243521840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Why does Slashdot always look totally broken?</i>
<br> <br>
The dark halo of the userbase spills over it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does Slashdot always look totally broken ?
The dark halo of the userbase spills over it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does Slashdot always look totally broken?
The dark halo of the userbase spills over it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123627</id>
	<title>Obama Auto Task Force - Chicago Ganster Politics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243525260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...at it's finest.  Turns out that all of the Chrysler dealerships that are being closed down by the gov't - I repeat: being closed down by the gov't - contributed to Republican campaigns with the exception of a SINGLE dealership.  Now what do you suppose the odds of that being a coincidence are?  Is this the job creation that Obama promised us - taking revenge against private citizens and their employees?  So much for a new era of responsibility, hope, change, etc.  All Obama's talk of post-partisanship was campaign bullshit.  Turns out he's the most vindictive son of a bitch since Andrew Jackson!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...at it 's finest .
Turns out that all of the Chrysler dealerships that are being closed down by the gov't - I repeat : being closed down by the gov't - contributed to Republican campaigns with the exception of a SINGLE dealership .
Now what do you suppose the odds of that being a coincidence are ?
Is this the job creation that Obama promised us - taking revenge against private citizens and their employees ?
So much for a new era of responsibility , hope , change , etc .
All Obama 's talk of post-partisanship was campaign bullshit .
Turns out he 's the most vindictive son of a bitch since Andrew Jackson !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...at it's finest.
Turns out that all of the Chrysler dealerships that are being closed down by the gov't - I repeat: being closed down by the gov't - contributed to Republican campaigns with the exception of a SINGLE dealership.
Now what do you suppose the odds of that being a coincidence are?
Is this the job creation that Obama promised us - taking revenge against private citizens and their employees?
So much for a new era of responsibility, hope, change, etc.
All Obama's talk of post-partisanship was campaign bullshit.
Turns out he's the most vindictive son of a bitch since Andrew Jackson!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123355</id>
	<title>gmail is pretty damn solid -- docs has problems</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1243524000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Docs has been having problems recently with syncing. The biggest caveat of the whole cloud concept is "What do you do if you lose your connection to the cloud?" (Ok, one of the big caveats. The other is not having access to your data. If Microsoft went under tomorrow, your SQL Server won't disappear. Office will still run on the desktop. If a cloud company goes under, you may have a backup of the data from the app but who will be hosting it? They had code escrow back in the day, the company that wrote your app goes under, the source code is held in escrow and will be released to you at that time. You can hire people to perform maintenance.) Really, big business has seen this problem for decades. When offices are connected to centralized servers over frame relay and there's nothing at the remote locations but dumb terminals, losing the connection leaves you just as dead in the water as losing your internet today. Google's answer was the local cache. It works great for gmail, I can see them saying it's no longer beta.</p><p>The problem I've encountered with docs is that "docs list" window as they call it is having trouble syncing. You create a document on one computer, it should be visible on the other within a few minutes. You can see it if you do a page refresh. The problem is the local copy doesn't sync automatically anymore. You can make that happen by syncing manually or by opening the file up while connected to the net -- it will display the old version and then flash over to the new one as it downloads.</p><p>The problem arises when you think you're synced up and open an older document and start working on it. You last worked on it on Computer A yesterday. Computer B's copy is from four days ago. If you're away from a net connection when you open it on Computer B, you won't get a refresh and the automatic refresh you thought already happened didn't. So when you get back home you fire up Computer B so you can make sure it syncs back to the cloud, it will now try to reconcile two different versions. If you were working in separate parts of the document, you might get lucky. if any of your changes were made to the same paragraph, last edit wins.</p><p>These sorts of problems will be esoteric to the typical end user. I can see what's going on because I'm geeky. The end user is just going to get upset because something that "just works" no longer does.</p><p>You can't really complain about getting this kind of functionality for free but people will really start bitching if they have to pay for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Docs has been having problems recently with syncing .
The biggest caveat of the whole cloud concept is " What do you do if you lose your connection to the cloud ?
" ( Ok , one of the big caveats .
The other is not having access to your data .
If Microsoft went under tomorrow , your SQL Server wo n't disappear .
Office will still run on the desktop .
If a cloud company goes under , you may have a backup of the data from the app but who will be hosting it ?
They had code escrow back in the day , the company that wrote your app goes under , the source code is held in escrow and will be released to you at that time .
You can hire people to perform maintenance .
) Really , big business has seen this problem for decades .
When offices are connected to centralized servers over frame relay and there 's nothing at the remote locations but dumb terminals , losing the connection leaves you just as dead in the water as losing your internet today .
Google 's answer was the local cache .
It works great for gmail , I can see them saying it 's no longer beta.The problem I 've encountered with docs is that " docs list " window as they call it is having trouble syncing .
You create a document on one computer , it should be visible on the other within a few minutes .
You can see it if you do a page refresh .
The problem is the local copy does n't sync automatically anymore .
You can make that happen by syncing manually or by opening the file up while connected to the net -- it will display the old version and then flash over to the new one as it downloads.The problem arises when you think you 're synced up and open an older document and start working on it .
You last worked on it on Computer A yesterday .
Computer B 's copy is from four days ago .
If you 're away from a net connection when you open it on Computer B , you wo n't get a refresh and the automatic refresh you thought already happened did n't .
So when you get back home you fire up Computer B so you can make sure it syncs back to the cloud , it will now try to reconcile two different versions .
If you were working in separate parts of the document , you might get lucky .
if any of your changes were made to the same paragraph , last edit wins.These sorts of problems will be esoteric to the typical end user .
I can see what 's going on because I 'm geeky .
The end user is just going to get upset because something that " just works " no longer does.You ca n't really complain about getting this kind of functionality for free but people will really start bitching if they have to pay for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Docs has been having problems recently with syncing.
The biggest caveat of the whole cloud concept is "What do you do if you lose your connection to the cloud?
" (Ok, one of the big caveats.
The other is not having access to your data.
If Microsoft went under tomorrow, your SQL Server won't disappear.
Office will still run on the desktop.
If a cloud company goes under, you may have a backup of the data from the app but who will be hosting it?
They had code escrow back in the day, the company that wrote your app goes under, the source code is held in escrow and will be released to you at that time.
You can hire people to perform maintenance.
) Really, big business has seen this problem for decades.
When offices are connected to centralized servers over frame relay and there's nothing at the remote locations but dumb terminals, losing the connection leaves you just as dead in the water as losing your internet today.
Google's answer was the local cache.
It works great for gmail, I can see them saying it's no longer beta.The problem I've encountered with docs is that "docs list" window as they call it is having trouble syncing.
You create a document on one computer, it should be visible on the other within a few minutes.
You can see it if you do a page refresh.
The problem is the local copy doesn't sync automatically anymore.
You can make that happen by syncing manually or by opening the file up while connected to the net -- it will display the old version and then flash over to the new one as it downloads.The problem arises when you think you're synced up and open an older document and start working on it.
You last worked on it on Computer A yesterday.
Computer B's copy is from four days ago.
If you're away from a net connection when you open it on Computer B, you won't get a refresh and the automatic refresh you thought already happened didn't.
So when you get back home you fire up Computer B so you can make sure it syncs back to the cloud, it will now try to reconcile two different versions.
If you were working in separate parts of the document, you might get lucky.
if any of your changes were made to the same paragraph, last edit wins.These sorts of problems will be esoteric to the typical end user.
I can see what's going on because I'm geeky.
The end user is just going to get upset because something that "just works" no longer does.You can't really complain about getting this kind of functionality for free but people will really start bitching if they have to pay for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123603</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>ubersoldat2k7</author>
	<datestamp>1243525140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know, maybe they just forgot about it.
<br>
Today @ Google's Offices:<br>
CEO: Wait! Are you telling me gmail is still on beta?<br>
SOG: ehm... yes, we totally forgot about it with all this android, docs, SoC and stuff all around us.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , maybe they just forgot about it .
Today @ Google 's Offices : CEO : Wait !
Are you telling me gmail is still on beta ?
SOG : ehm... yes , we totally forgot about it with all this android , docs , SoC and stuff all around us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, maybe they just forgot about it.
Today @ Google's Offices:
CEO: Wait!
Are you telling me gmail is still on beta?
SOG: ehm... yes, we totally forgot about it with all this android, docs, SoC and stuff all around us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124167</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>fishbowl</author>
	<datestamp>1243527780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"How can Google be taken seriously in an enterprise environment if their most stable and successful offshoot project takes 5 years to come out of beta?"</p><p>Plenty of companies and institutions have switched from running their own mail infrastructure over to the commercial version of GMail.  I can't tell you what a relief it was to get to shut down our mail server, to lock down the inbound ports, to stop having to be an admin for a mail server, and to stop having to deal with SPAM or with the gigantic imap folders that accumulate.</p><p>Our GMail interface is branded with our company name, and doesn't say anything about it being beta.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" How can Google be taken seriously in an enterprise environment if their most stable and successful offshoot project takes 5 years to come out of beta ?
" Plenty of companies and institutions have switched from running their own mail infrastructure over to the commercial version of GMail .
I ca n't tell you what a relief it was to get to shut down our mail server , to lock down the inbound ports , to stop having to be an admin for a mail server , and to stop having to deal with SPAM or with the gigantic imap folders that accumulate.Our GMail interface is branded with our company name , and does n't say anything about it being beta .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"How can Google be taken seriously in an enterprise environment if their most stable and successful offshoot project takes 5 years to come out of beta?
"Plenty of companies and institutions have switched from running their own mail infrastructure over to the commercial version of GMail.
I can't tell you what a relief it was to get to shut down our mail server, to lock down the inbound ports, to stop having to be an admin for a mail server, and to stop having to deal with SPAM or with the gigantic imap folders that accumulate.Our GMail interface is branded with our company name, and doesn't say anything about it being beta.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123617</id>
	<title>Re:Whew!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243525260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That'll make things better!</p></div><p>Not as long at it only runs on QT and Linsux.  Where's the support for good, highly secure operating systems like Windows Vista?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 'll make things better ! Not as long at it only runs on QT and Linsux .
Where 's the support for good , highly secure operating systems like Windows Vista ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That'll make things better!Not as long at it only runs on QT and Linsux.
Where's the support for good, highly secure operating systems like Windows Vista?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671</id>
	<title>Whew!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243520880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>That'll make things better!</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 'll make things better !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That'll make things better!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125773</id>
	<title>Re:Google Beta</title>
	<author>Cedric Tsui</author>
	<datestamp>1243534200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Government bailouts???</p><p>Ok. The successes of the big three in the US FAR OUTWEIGH those of Google. In their development, they defined America and the world.<br>You can't say that Google is great because it didn't implode over a little recession.</p><p>The big three didn't need bailouts during the great depression.<br>Yes they're floundering now. But that's partly due to their past successes which lead to a bloated company, high pensions, large salaries, and many many different models.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Government bailouts ? ? ? Ok .
The successes of the big three in the US FAR OUTWEIGH those of Google .
In their development , they defined America and the world.You ca n't say that Google is great because it did n't implode over a little recession.The big three did n't need bailouts during the great depression.Yes they 're floundering now .
But that 's partly due to their past successes which lead to a bloated company , high pensions , large salaries , and many many different models .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Government bailouts???Ok.
The successes of the big three in the US FAR OUTWEIGH those of Google.
In their development, they defined America and the world.You can't say that Google is great because it didn't implode over a little recession.The big three didn't need bailouts during the great depression.Yes they're floundering now.
But that's partly due to their past successes which lead to a bloated company, high pensions, large salaries, and many many different models.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123059</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>Tei</author>
	<datestamp>1243522740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"How can Google be taken seriously in an enterprise environment if their most stable and successful offshoot project takes 5 years to come out of beta?"</p><p>The Beta tag let Google make changes that judge will make the service much better. These changes withouth the Beta tag are mostly "disallowed".  Removing the Beta tag is much like a pact "We will not make mayor changes to the service, that will break your work".  In my book great changes to make a service better is a good thing, the level of breaks of Gmail is high, but I can live with it. I will feel sad that the tag will be removed, because will mean maybe much less errors (or maybe not), but It will sure mean less and less enhancements of the service. And I blame the people like YOU.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" How can Google be taken seriously in an enterprise environment if their most stable and successful offshoot project takes 5 years to come out of beta ?
" The Beta tag let Google make changes that judge will make the service much better .
These changes withouth the Beta tag are mostly " disallowed " .
Removing the Beta tag is much like a pact " We will not make mayor changes to the service , that will break your work " .
In my book great changes to make a service better is a good thing , the level of breaks of Gmail is high , but I can live with it .
I will feel sad that the tag will be removed , because will mean maybe much less errors ( or maybe not ) , but It will sure mean less and less enhancements of the service .
And I blame the people like YOU .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"How can Google be taken seriously in an enterprise environment if their most stable and successful offshoot project takes 5 years to come out of beta?
"The Beta tag let Google make changes that judge will make the service much better.
These changes withouth the Beta tag are mostly "disallowed".
Removing the Beta tag is much like a pact "We will not make mayor changes to the service, that will break your work".
In my book great changes to make a service better is a good thing, the level of breaks of Gmail is high, but I can live with it.
I will feel sad that the tag will be removed, because will mean maybe much less errors (or maybe not), but It will sure mean less and less enhancements of the service.
And I blame the people like YOU.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125627</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>tikram</author>
	<datestamp>1243533780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We will not make mayor changes to the service</p></div><p>
I'm sure Rudy Guliani will be most pleased.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We will not make mayor changes to the service I 'm sure Rudy Guliani will be most pleased .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We will not make mayor changes to the service
I'm sure Rudy Guliani will be most pleased.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123059</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125105</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>RealGrouchy</author>
	<datestamp>1243531680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why does it take a company with 10,000 engineers 5 years to make a 20 year old communications protocol stable?</p></div><p>Because the company's name is derived from "googol"?</p><p>- RG&gt;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does it take a company with 10,000 engineers 5 years to make a 20 year old communications protocol stable ? Because the company 's name is derived from " googol " ? - RG &gt;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does it take a company with 10,000 engineers 5 years to make a 20 year old communications protocol stable?Because the company's name is derived from "googol"?- RG&gt;
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123125</id>
	<title>Re:Google Beta</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243522980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Google has become the biggest of the BIG companies. 8 to 1 searchers use Google over Microsoft Search Engine, so what Google's 'beta' is, is really what the industry standard has become.</i></p><p>What that's got to do with their [b]email[/b] system being labeled as unstable/beta is beyond my comprehension. And why that post is +5 Insightful as well. What a crap post.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google has become the biggest of the BIG companies .
8 to 1 searchers use Google over Microsoft Search Engine , so what Google 's 'beta ' is , is really what the industry standard has become.What that 's got to do with their [ b ] email [ /b ] system being labeled as unstable/beta is beyond my comprehension .
And why that post is + 5 Insightful as well .
What a crap post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google has become the biggest of the BIG companies.
8 to 1 searchers use Google over Microsoft Search Engine, so what Google's 'beta' is, is really what the industry standard has become.What that's got to do with their [b]email[/b] system being labeled as unstable/beta is beyond my comprehension.
And why that post is +5 Insightful as well.
What a crap post.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28130997</id>
	<title>Re:In the not too distant future</title>
	<author>guppysap13</author>
	<datestamp>1243508640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's still a little bit off, but anyone thinking 2012?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's still a little bit off , but anyone thinking 2012 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's still a little bit off, but anyone thinking 2012?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124395</id>
	<title>Re:Whew!</title>
	<author>TigerTime</author>
	<datestamp>1243528560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What would be kind of humorous, in a sadistic kind of way, is if they decided to just cancel the GMail project.</p><p>Since its in beta, I don't think they'd have any liabilities since people should know not to use Beta software for production usage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What would be kind of humorous , in a sadistic kind of way , is if they decided to just cancel the GMail project.Since its in beta , I do n't think they 'd have any liabilities since people should know not to use Beta software for production usage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would be kind of humorous, in a sadistic kind of way, is if they decided to just cancel the GMail project.Since its in beta, I don't think they'd have any liabilities since people should know not to use Beta software for production usage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28138791</id>
	<title>Re:Whew!</title>
	<author>noppy</author>
	<datestamp>1243611660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and they are now RC1</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and they are now RC1</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and they are now RC1</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28128951</id>
	<title>Not ready for prime-time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243543740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My gmail inbox currently says it is displaying messages 1-27 out of 23.</p><p>If they can't get a correct inbox count displayed after five years, I'd say it's still not ready to come out of beta.  Or maybe, take it out of beta, but send the gmail programmers back to remedial counting school?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My gmail inbox currently says it is displaying messages 1-27 out of 23.If they ca n't get a correct inbox count displayed after five years , I 'd say it 's still not ready to come out of beta .
Or maybe , take it out of beta , but send the gmail programmers back to remedial counting school ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My gmail inbox currently says it is displaying messages 1-27 out of 23.If they can't get a correct inbox count displayed after five years, I'd say it's still not ready to come out of beta.
Or maybe, take it out of beta, but send the gmail programmers back to remedial counting school?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123553</id>
	<title>Test data</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243524840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it's really a beta product, they should dump all the user data before they take it to production. After all, it is just test data. No one in their right mind would be using a beta product as their primary email provider, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it 's really a beta product , they should dump all the user data before they take it to production .
After all , it is just test data .
No one in their right mind would be using a beta product as their primary email provider , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it's really a beta product, they should dump all the user data before they take it to production.
After all, it is just test data.
No one in their right mind would be using a beta product as their primary email provider, right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123219</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243523340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So not officially releasing a product until it's properly tested, stable and has all required features... is a bad thing now?</p><p>Take your pointy hair and go away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So not officially releasing a product until it 's properly tested , stable and has all required features... is a bad thing now ? Take your pointy hair and go away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So not officially releasing a product until it's properly tested, stable and has all required features... is a bad thing now?Take your pointy hair and go away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124011</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1243527120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nah, Google now has the "Labs" tag in settings, so you can try out "beta" Gmail features (or stuff they just haven't yet figured out how to stuff into the interface.) In actuality, the only difference will be more clicks to turn on the new, untested stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nah , Google now has the " Labs " tag in settings , so you can try out " beta " Gmail features ( or stuff they just have n't yet figured out how to stuff into the interface .
) In actuality , the only difference will be more clicks to turn on the new , untested stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nah, Google now has the "Labs" tag in settings, so you can try out "beta" Gmail features (or stuff they just haven't yet figured out how to stuff into the interface.
) In actuality, the only difference will be more clicks to turn on the new, untested stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123059</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123331</id>
	<title>How to get Google off of beta</title>
	<author>Bruiser80</author>
	<datestamp>1243523940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Step 1: Stop answering bug reports<br>
Step 2: Use GIMP to remove "beta" from all header pics<br>
Step 3: ????<br>
Step 4: Profit!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Step 1 : Stop answering bug reports Step 2 : Use GIMP to remove " beta " from all header pics Step 3 : ? ? ? ?
Step 4 : Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Step 1: Stop answering bug reports
Step 2: Use GIMP to remove "beta" from all header pics
Step 3: ????
Step 4: Profit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122693</id>
	<title>GASP!</title>
	<author>Deus.1.01</author>
	<datestamp>1243520940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But...but...is it READY?!</p><p>Because i still find it annoying to search for porn with my specific fetish.<br>(you heard me)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But...but...is it READY ?
! Because i still find it annoying to search for porn with my specific fetish .
( you heard me )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But...but...is it READY?
!Because i still find it annoying to search for porn with my specific fetish.
(you heard me)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122807</id>
	<title>Coming soon...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243521540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GMail Release Candidate 1.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GMail Release Candidate 1 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GMail Release Candidate 1.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124879</id>
	<title>I could have sworn...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243530600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>...that this was from the Onion</htmltext>
<tokenext>...that this was from the Onion</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...that this was from the Onion</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125213</id>
	<title>Re:Please tag this.</title>
	<author>Eudial</author>
	<datestamp>1243532040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed. It's all Duke Nukem Forever's fault. Because that is no longer almost to be released, the entire structure of stuff that happens after hell freezes over is unraveling.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed .
It 's all Duke Nukem Forever 's fault .
Because that is no longer almost to be released , the entire structure of stuff that happens after hell freezes over is unraveling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed.
It's all Duke Nukem Forever's fault.
Because that is no longer almost to be released, the entire structure of stuff that happens after hell freezes over is unraveling.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122705</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123795</id>
	<title>The end all</title>
	<author>JustOK</author>
	<datestamp>1243526160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is just a ploy to prevent us from talking about Google Omega products. Do <i>no</i> evil, indeed. Perfect evil is indistinguishable from Perfect Good. We all know that their Omega products <tt>are perfectly ok and nothing to worry about</tt></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is just a ploy to prevent us from talking about Google Omega products .
Do no evil , indeed .
Perfect evil is indistinguishable from Perfect Good .
We all know that their Omega products are perfectly ok and nothing to worry about</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is just a ploy to prevent us from talking about Google Omega products.
Do no evil, indeed.
Perfect evil is indistinguishable from Perfect Good.
We all know that their Omega products are perfectly ok and nothing to worry about</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124131</id>
	<title>Re:Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot</title>
	<author>Phroggy</author>
	<datestamp>1243527660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I liked the new AJAX comment form, but then they broke it.  It's still functional, but the CSS is horked now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I liked the new AJAX comment form , but then they broke it .
It 's still functional , but the CSS is horked now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I liked the new AJAX comment form, but then they broke it.
It's still functional, but the CSS is horked now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123045</id>
	<title>Re:Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243522560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
because slashdot is totally broken.  If you look at slashcode (or the infrastructure behind slashdot) you'll soon realize what a horrible mess it is.  The surprise isn't that it sucks as much as it does, but that it doesn't suck more.
</p><p>
Slashdot should be rewritten in RoR but VA Linux (r whatever they call themselves this week) doesn't have the money or inclination to improve slashdot.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>because slashdot is totally broken .
If you look at slashcode ( or the infrastructure behind slashdot ) you 'll soon realize what a horrible mess it is .
The surprise is n't that it sucks as much as it does , but that it does n't suck more .
Slashdot should be rewritten in RoR but VA Linux ( r whatever they call themselves this week ) does n't have the money or inclination to improve slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
because slashdot is totally broken.
If you look at slashcode (or the infrastructure behind slashdot) you'll soon realize what a horrible mess it is.
The surprise isn't that it sucks as much as it does, but that it doesn't suck more.
Slashdot should be rewritten in RoR but VA Linux (r whatever they call themselves this week) doesn't have the money or inclination to improve slashdot.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123013</id>
	<title>Re:Hahaha</title>
	<author>CristalShandaLear</author>
	<datestamp>1243522440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can I get an invite? From someone? Please? I've been wanting to try out gmail for so long. You can contact me through my blog on Blogger...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I get an invite ?
From someone ?
Please ? I 've been wanting to try out gmail for so long .
You can contact me through my blog on Blogger.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I get an invite?
From someone?
Please? I've been wanting to try out gmail for so long.
You can contact me through my blog on Blogger...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123403</id>
	<title>...speaking of beta prodcts...</title>
	<author>DewDude</author>
	<datestamp>1243524240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>anyone remember how ridiculously long ICQ was in "beta"? I think it spanned the enture duration it was created till AOL bought out Mirablis.</htmltext>
<tokenext>anyone remember how ridiculously long ICQ was in " beta " ?
I think it spanned the enture duration it was created till AOL bought out Mirablis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>anyone remember how ridiculously long ICQ was in "beta"?
I think it spanned the enture duration it was created till AOL bought out Mirablis.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123185</id>
	<title>That means something?</title>
	<author>TheMightyFuzzball</author>
	<datestamp>1243523220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought that was just its name...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought that was just its name.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought that was just its name...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123647</id>
	<title>Re:Whew!</title>
	<author>Neoncow</author>
	<datestamp>1243525320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it doesn't get any beta than this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it does n't get any beta than this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it doesn't get any beta than this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122839</id>
	<title>Snake sez...</title>
	<author>DarrenBaker</author>
	<datestamp>1243521720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, no! Beta!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , no !
Beta !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, no!
Beta!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123669</id>
	<title>So when</title>
	<author>Exitar</author>
	<datestamp>1243525440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>all the companies that put "Beta" after the name of their services to look as cool as Google will remove it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>all the companies that put " Beta " after the name of their services to look as cool as Google will remove it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>all the companies that put "Beta" after the name of their services to look as cool as Google will remove it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122815</id>
	<title>About time!</title>
	<author>Kylock</author>
	<datestamp>1243521600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My university was transitioning their mail back end to google shortly after I left.  Good to know that they are considering it good enough to not be beta anymore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My university was transitioning their mail back end to google shortly after I left .
Good to know that they are considering it good enough to not be beta anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My university was transitioning their mail back end to google shortly after I left.
Good to know that they are considering it good enough to not be beta anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125707</id>
	<title>Re:Whew!</title>
	<author>jo42</author>
	<datestamp>1243534020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Beta late than never!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Beta late than never !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Beta late than never!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123647</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124317</id>
	<title>Marketing Ploy</title>
	<author>pz</author>
	<datestamp>1243528260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Leaving beta as a part of the name of a given service well beyond the normal limit was a marketing ploy.  It generated lots of press and ardent discussion.  The tact has run its course.  They're removing it as another marketing ploy.  That will generate another wave of press and ardent discussion.  Ho hum.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Leaving beta as a part of the name of a given service well beyond the normal limit was a marketing ploy .
It generated lots of press and ardent discussion .
The tact has run its course .
They 're removing it as another marketing ploy .
That will generate another wave of press and ardent discussion .
Ho hum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Leaving beta as a part of the name of a given service well beyond the normal limit was a marketing ploy.
It generated lots of press and ardent discussion.
The tact has run its course.
They're removing it as another marketing ploy.
That will generate another wave of press and ardent discussion.
Ho hum.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123067</id>
	<title>NBD</title>
	<author>NES HQ</author>
	<datestamp>1243522740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry, but this is not a real big deal outside of communities like<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.

Beta is just another one of 'those fancy tech terms' for most folks, so regardless of whether or not Gmail is beta or not in beta millions of people will still use it as their primary mail service.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , but this is not a real big deal outside of communities like / .
Beta is just another one of 'those fancy tech terms ' for most folks , so regardless of whether or not Gmail is beta or not in beta millions of people will still use it as their primary mail service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, but this is not a real big deal outside of communities like /.
Beta is just another one of 'those fancy tech terms' for most folks, so regardless of whether or not Gmail is beta or not in beta millions of people will still use it as their primary mail service.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123249</id>
	<title>Weird to use...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243523460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe I'm just dumb, but I can't really figure out how to use it. Just subscribed to the google android group and have now 150 android messages in my inbox. What I want is a filter that shows only the messages in the inbox that DON'T have anything to do with android. So I created a filter that applies an Android label to all of them, but what should I do from there on? I can't even archive them, because I did not read them yet.</p><p>- Where's the "show unlabeled messages" button?<br>- Why can't I create views? E.g. "show messages that have the label (Family or Important) and not Boring.</p><p>This idea with adding labels to messages sounded like such a great idea, but I still haven't figured out how to use them effectively. If it is actually possible... (Also, the help sucks. Or just explains the limited functionality perfectly...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe I 'm just dumb , but I ca n't really figure out how to use it .
Just subscribed to the google android group and have now 150 android messages in my inbox .
What I want is a filter that shows only the messages in the inbox that DO N'T have anything to do with android .
So I created a filter that applies an Android label to all of them , but what should I do from there on ?
I ca n't even archive them , because I did not read them yet.- Where 's the " show unlabeled messages " button ? - Why ca n't I create views ?
E.g. " show messages that have the label ( Family or Important ) and not Boring.This idea with adding labels to messages sounded like such a great idea , but I still have n't figured out how to use them effectively .
If it is actually possible... ( Also , the help sucks .
Or just explains the limited functionality perfectly... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe I'm just dumb, but I can't really figure out how to use it.
Just subscribed to the google android group and have now 150 android messages in my inbox.
What I want is a filter that shows only the messages in the inbox that DON'T have anything to do with android.
So I created a filter that applies an Android label to all of them, but what should I do from there on?
I can't even archive them, because I did not read them yet.- Where's the "show unlabeled messages" button?- Why can't I create views?
E.g. "show messages that have the label (Family or Important) and not Boring.This idea with adding labels to messages sounded like such a great idea, but I still haven't figured out how to use them effectively.
If it is actually possible... (Also, the help sucks.
Or just explains the limited functionality perfectly...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122707</id>
	<title>Coming soon...</title>
	<author>lewko</author>
	<datestamp>1243521000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gmail - Acceptance Testing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gmail - Acceptance Testing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gmail - Acceptance Testing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122857</id>
	<title>Re:Put a Beta Tag on Slashdot</title>
	<author>JustOK</author>
	<datestamp>1243521780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it's out of alpha already? oh dear.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's out of alpha already ?
oh dear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's out of alpha already?
oh dear.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125431</id>
	<title>I hope that ...</title>
	<author>esten</author>
	<datestamp>1243532940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They upgrade it to the Gamma release version.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They upgrade it to the Gamma release version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They upgrade it to the Gamma release version.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123225</id>
	<title>Re:Tarnished reputation</title>
	<author>ledow</author>
	<datestamp>1243523400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because they want to make SURE it works before they remove the label?  I don't get the modern obsession with releasing stuff on day one and then patching endlessly.  I'd much rather wait until a company says "Right, we're finally happy with it" before they start tagging things with version numbers.  If that were the case, "Windows XP" would actually mean what we now call "XP SP2/SP3", "Windows 95" would have meant "Windows 98SE" and "Windows 7" would have meant "Vista SP2 with knobs on" - which happen to have been my exact definitions for usable systems in those particular product lines.  And, to be honest, I'm not even happy deploying Vista/Windows 7 at the moment because there's just too many changes and problems to say that it's good, stable, reliable, etc. with most business software and network integrations.</p><p>A network admin does not just install software the second it is released.  It takes *years* of testing, literally, before something is able to be categorised as good/working or not in a corporate environment.  Just because there are a lot of cowboys who slap Automatic Updates on, along with every latest version they can find does not mean that's the best way to do things.  Pick a version that works, stick with it, TEST it, and analyse every update for the exact impact (which means more testing).  Otherwise, things are likely to just break "for no reason".  Most educational establishments I've worked for still run XP with Office 2003.  Why?  Because it works and they know every nook, cranny and problem.  When they get to that level of knowledge for Vista or (more likely) Windows 7, then they will think about deploying it.</p><p>If my company *relied* on Gmail, I'd want an SLA.  It's that simple.  If they won't provide one, then I wouldn't use them.  And if your company is relying on Gmail *today* without an SLA, you're an idiot, pure and simple, or your needs are very rudimentary.  As such, Gmail will not be taken seriously in an enterprise environment until that SLA exists and is to the satisfaction of both sides - it doesn't matter if they call it Beta, Alpha, or Zebedee.  But when it does become available with a suitable SLA, what would I rather use for any company I work for?  A webmail that's had five years of extremely public testing with millions or users, or something knocked off the back of Squirrelmail and stuck into an appliance hosted in some cheap "webmail" company's racks that gets a few customers a year?  There are other, much more insurmountable problems with using Gmail for business than the name - SLA's, contracts, privacy and legal issues.  All of those cost Gmail a million times more business customers than that magic word "Beta".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they want to make SURE it works before they remove the label ?
I do n't get the modern obsession with releasing stuff on day one and then patching endlessly .
I 'd much rather wait until a company says " Right , we 're finally happy with it " before they start tagging things with version numbers .
If that were the case , " Windows XP " would actually mean what we now call " XP SP2/SP3 " , " Windows 95 " would have meant " Windows 98SE " and " Windows 7 " would have meant " Vista SP2 with knobs on " - which happen to have been my exact definitions for usable systems in those particular product lines .
And , to be honest , I 'm not even happy deploying Vista/Windows 7 at the moment because there 's just too many changes and problems to say that it 's good , stable , reliable , etc .
with most business software and network integrations.A network admin does not just install software the second it is released .
It takes * years * of testing , literally , before something is able to be categorised as good/working or not in a corporate environment .
Just because there are a lot of cowboys who slap Automatic Updates on , along with every latest version they can find does not mean that 's the best way to do things .
Pick a version that works , stick with it , TEST it , and analyse every update for the exact impact ( which means more testing ) .
Otherwise , things are likely to just break " for no reason " .
Most educational establishments I 've worked for still run XP with Office 2003 .
Why ? Because it works and they know every nook , cranny and problem .
When they get to that level of knowledge for Vista or ( more likely ) Windows 7 , then they will think about deploying it.If my company * relied * on Gmail , I 'd want an SLA .
It 's that simple .
If they wo n't provide one , then I would n't use them .
And if your company is relying on Gmail * today * without an SLA , you 're an idiot , pure and simple , or your needs are very rudimentary .
As such , Gmail will not be taken seriously in an enterprise environment until that SLA exists and is to the satisfaction of both sides - it does n't matter if they call it Beta , Alpha , or Zebedee .
But when it does become available with a suitable SLA , what would I rather use for any company I work for ?
A webmail that 's had five years of extremely public testing with millions or users , or something knocked off the back of Squirrelmail and stuck into an appliance hosted in some cheap " webmail " company 's racks that gets a few customers a year ?
There are other , much more insurmountable problems with using Gmail for business than the name - SLA 's , contracts , privacy and legal issues .
All of those cost Gmail a million times more business customers than that magic word " Beta " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they want to make SURE it works before they remove the label?
I don't get the modern obsession with releasing stuff on day one and then patching endlessly.
I'd much rather wait until a company says "Right, we're finally happy with it" before they start tagging things with version numbers.
If that were the case, "Windows XP" would actually mean what we now call "XP SP2/SP3", "Windows 95" would have meant "Windows 98SE" and "Windows 7" would have meant "Vista SP2 with knobs on" - which happen to have been my exact definitions for usable systems in those particular product lines.
And, to be honest, I'm not even happy deploying Vista/Windows 7 at the moment because there's just too many changes and problems to say that it's good, stable, reliable, etc.
with most business software and network integrations.A network admin does not just install software the second it is released.
It takes *years* of testing, literally, before something is able to be categorised as good/working or not in a corporate environment.
Just because there are a lot of cowboys who slap Automatic Updates on, along with every latest version they can find does not mean that's the best way to do things.
Pick a version that works, stick with it, TEST it, and analyse every update for the exact impact (which means more testing).
Otherwise, things are likely to just break "for no reason".
Most educational establishments I've worked for still run XP with Office 2003.
Why?  Because it works and they know every nook, cranny and problem.
When they get to that level of knowledge for Vista or (more likely) Windows 7, then they will think about deploying it.If my company *relied* on Gmail, I'd want an SLA.
It's that simple.
If they won't provide one, then I wouldn't use them.
And if your company is relying on Gmail *today* without an SLA, you're an idiot, pure and simple, or your needs are very rudimentary.
As such, Gmail will not be taken seriously in an enterprise environment until that SLA exists and is to the satisfaction of both sides - it doesn't matter if they call it Beta, Alpha, or Zebedee.
But when it does become available with a suitable SLA, what would I rather use for any company I work for?
A webmail that's had five years of extremely public testing with millions or users, or something knocked off the back of Squirrelmail and stuck into an appliance hosted in some cheap "webmail" company's racks that gets a few customers a year?
There are other, much more insurmountable problems with using Gmail for business than the name - SLA's, contracts, privacy and legal issues.
All of those cost Gmail a million times more business customers than that magic word "Beta".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125661</id>
	<title>Re:Hahaha</title>
	<author>alsdomain</author>
	<datestamp>1243533840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can I get an invite? From someone? Please? I've been wanting to try out gmail for so long. You can contact me through my blog on Blogger...</p></div><p> <a href="http://mail.google.com/mail/a-b2ff32cc90-51090590f8-76a0a8d89b9b732a" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://mail.google.com/mail/a-b2ff32cc90-51090590f8-76a0a8d89b9b732a</a> [google.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I get an invite ?
From someone ?
Please ? I 've been wanting to try out gmail for so long .
You can contact me through my blog on Blogger... http : //mail.google.com/mail/a-b2ff32cc90-51090590f8-76a0a8d89b9b732a [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I get an invite?
From someone?
Please? I've been wanting to try out gmail for so long.
You can contact me through my blog on Blogger... http://mail.google.com/mail/a-b2ff32cc90-51090590f8-76a0a8d89b9b732a [google.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123013</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124099</id>
	<title>Re:Hahaha</title>
	<author>Inda</author>
	<datestamp>1243527480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have 49 invites left. They're all yours. Happy spamming!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have 49 invites left .
They 're all yours .
Happy spamming !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have 49 invites left.
They're all yours.
Happy spamming!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123013</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124623</id>
	<title>Re:Google Beta</title>
	<author>rgviza</author>
	<datestamp>1243529400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And it will be the first production software release ever, which is actually production quality.</p><p>Most software's actual beta cycle starts with the production release and what most call beta is actually a slightly cleaned up alpha.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And it will be the first production software release ever , which is actually production quality.Most software 's actual beta cycle starts with the production release and what most call beta is actually a slightly cleaned up alpha .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And it will be the first production software release ever, which is actually production quality.Most software's actual beta cycle starts with the production release and what most call beta is actually a slightly cleaned up alpha.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28134777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28139811
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123269
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122693
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124403
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122693
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123225
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28130997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124187
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122705
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28133749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124395
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28138791
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124653
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125707
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123647
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122705
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123349
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125105
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125773
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122705
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28131151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123003
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124729
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123617
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_28_1236240_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124705
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28130997
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122671
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123647
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124395
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28133749
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28131151
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123627
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124653
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28138791
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123617
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123089
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122761
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123045
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124131
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123129
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125467
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123553
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123355
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123013
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125661
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124099
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124729
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122807
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123049
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122703
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123125
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125773
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124061
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125425
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123003
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124317
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28134777
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122839
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122985
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122877
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123219
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123493
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125105
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123603
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124403
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123349
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124167
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123225
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123059
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125469
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124011
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125627
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28124981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125261
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123249
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123065
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123269
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28139811
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28122705
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28125175
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_28_1236240.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_28_1236240.28123331
</commentlist>
</conversation>
