<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_08_1641237</id>
	<title>Swedish Anti-Piracy Lawyer Gets New Name 'Pirate'</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1244449680000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Swedish newspaper <a href="http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article5321758.ab">Aftonbladet</a> (in Swedish) reports that Henrik Pont&#233;n, a lawyer of Antipiratbyr&#229;n, a Swedish organization against file sharing, has received a notification from officials that an application for change of his name has been approved and <a href="http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-nemesis-has-name-changed-by-pranksters-090607/">a new first name 'Pirate' has been added to his name</a>. Authorities do not check the identity of persons applying for name changes. Pirate Pont&#233;n now has to apply for another change in order to revert the change."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet ( in Swedish ) reports that Henrik Pont   n , a lawyer of Antipiratbyr   n , a Swedish organization against file sharing , has received a notification from officials that an application for change of his name has been approved and a new first name 'Pirate ' has been added to his name .
Authorities do not check the identity of persons applying for name changes .
Pirate Pont   n now has to apply for another change in order to revert the change .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet (in Swedish) reports that Henrik Pontén, a lawyer of Antipiratbyrån, a Swedish organization against file sharing, has received a notification from officials that an application for change of his name has been approved and a new first name 'Pirate' has been added to his name.
Authorities do not check the identity of persons applying for name changes.
Pirate Pontén now has to apply for another change in order to revert the change.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260935</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244477520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, Occam's Razor is that the simplest solution is the easiest one to disprove.  It's not an answer all to itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , Occam 's Razor is that the simplest solution is the easiest one to disprove .
It 's not an answer all to itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, Occam's Razor is that the simplest solution is the easiest one to disprove.
It's not an answer all to itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28274111</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244558760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.wired.com/politics/law/magazine/17-04/ff\_diamonds" title="wired.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.wired.com/politics/law/magazine/17-04/ff\_diamonds</a> [wired.com] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Any system that can be abused so easily is broken and should be fixed.</p></div><p>Any system that involves humans can be easily abused. Any system that is designed by the humans and does not involve the extensive and long review can be exploited as well. And as someone who works in IT security, you sure know that typically the exploits are not within the main codepath, but rather one of the unexpected corner cases that noone thought of due to the complexity of the system or the human mistake. And that the system that fails outside its specs is not necessarily a bug.</p><p>So I would assert that because some asocial idiots decided to prove something does not mean the world should be rewritten from scratch (the power of legacy code is all those bugs that are already found).</p><p>But rather that the newly christened Pirate should find those responsible and hang them on the mast like by their balls, like real pirates would do! Now he has the right<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>As I've said before, I'm in IT security. And I've seen time and again that there are systems that contain very sensitive data with shoddy, if any, security in place. When pointed out, the responsible people usually point me at legal instead of IT.</p></div><p>For this, I'll confront you with a bit cruel, but simple question.</p><p>You've a choice to select one and only one of the to groups, the other one will have to suffer pain and misery:</p><p>a) yourself and your family<br>b) N individuals you never knew and never will</p><p>assuming there exists some value of N for which you consider those two groups of equal importance, what is the value of N for you ?</p><p>Try asking it next time to the responsible people after your "security question" and see if they point you to legal for the answer on it as well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.wired.com/politics/law/magazine/17-04/ff \ _diamonds [ wired.com ] Any system that can be abused so easily is broken and should be fixed.Any system that involves humans can be easily abused .
Any system that is designed by the humans and does not involve the extensive and long review can be exploited as well .
And as someone who works in IT security , you sure know that typically the exploits are not within the main codepath , but rather one of the unexpected corner cases that noone thought of due to the complexity of the system or the human mistake .
And that the system that fails outside its specs is not necessarily a bug.So I would assert that because some asocial idiots decided to prove something does not mean the world should be rewritten from scratch ( the power of legacy code is all those bugs that are already found ) .But rather that the newly christened Pirate should find those responsible and hang them on the mast like by their balls , like real pirates would do !
Now he has the right : ) As I 've said before , I 'm in IT security .
And I 've seen time and again that there are systems that contain very sensitive data with shoddy , if any , security in place .
When pointed out , the responsible people usually point me at legal instead of IT.For this , I 'll confront you with a bit cruel , but simple question.You 've a choice to select one and only one of the to groups , the other one will have to suffer pain and misery : a ) yourself and your familyb ) N individuals you never knew and never willassuming there exists some value of N for which you consider those two groups of equal importance , what is the value of N for you ? Try asking it next time to the responsible people after your " security question " and see if they point you to legal for the answer on it as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.wired.com/politics/law/magazine/17-04/ff\_diamonds [wired.com] Any system that can be abused so easily is broken and should be fixed.Any system that involves humans can be easily abused.
Any system that is designed by the humans and does not involve the extensive and long review can be exploited as well.
And as someone who works in IT security, you sure know that typically the exploits are not within the main codepath, but rather one of the unexpected corner cases that noone thought of due to the complexity of the system or the human mistake.
And that the system that fails outside its specs is not necessarily a bug.So I would assert that because some asocial idiots decided to prove something does not mean the world should be rewritten from scratch (the power of legacy code is all those bugs that are already found).But rather that the newly christened Pirate should find those responsible and hang them on the mast like by their balls, like real pirates would do!
Now he has the right :)As I've said before, I'm in IT security.
And I've seen time and again that there are systems that contain very sensitive data with shoddy, if any, security in place.
When pointed out, the responsible people usually point me at legal instead of IT.For this, I'll confront you with a bit cruel, but simple question.You've a choice to select one and only one of the to groups, the other one will have to suffer pain and misery:a) yourself and your familyb) N individuals you never knew and never willassuming there exists some value of N for which you consider those two groups of equal importance, what is the value of N for you ?Try asking it next time to the responsible people after your "security question" and see if they point you to legal for the answer on it as well.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28272725</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244548140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is possible that this could have been done intentionally to the advantage of copyright lobbyists. In their view Sweden lacks "proper laws" or has too lenient ones  ( to protect their copyright of course.). it is possible that this was done to highlight the shortcomings in swedish law and the administration system. They could then go ahead presenting the need for tighter laws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is possible that this could have been done intentionally to the advantage of copyright lobbyists .
In their view Sweden lacks " proper laws " or has too lenient ones ( to protect their copyright of course. ) .
it is possible that this was done to highlight the shortcomings in swedish law and the administration system .
They could then go ahead presenting the need for tighter laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is possible that this could have been done intentionally to the advantage of copyright lobbyists.
In their view Sweden lacks "proper laws" or has too lenient ones  ( to protect their copyright of course.).
it is possible that this was done to highlight the shortcomings in swedish law and the administration system.
They could then go ahead presenting the need for tighter laws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259663</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1244470560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any system that can be abused so easily is broken and should be fixed.</p><p>As I've said before, I'm in IT security. And I've seen time and again that there are systems that contain very sensitive data with shoddy, if any, security in place. When pointed out, the responsible people usually point me at legal instead of IT.</p><p>Legal isn't where security should be done. You don't protect your data with laws, you protect them by protecting them. Handing the security of a system (IT, bureaucratic, whatever) to legal is asking for trouble, as much as saying that you don't need fire extinguishers, you got a good insurance covering you when you burn down to the ground.</p><p>The same applies here. If it is possible to change someone's name at will, the system needs an overhaul. Sure, it is against the law, but this should be the last line of defense, to keep people who are really GOOD at breaking it from breaking it because they got other, more profitable, ways to achive something within the boundaries of the law. More and more often, laws and regulations are regarded as the first, and often only, line of defense you have against an attack.</p><p>That's not only enough, that's simply and plainly asking for trouble. Especially when dealing with people who act out of zeal and not out of personal profit and gain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any system that can be abused so easily is broken and should be fixed.As I 've said before , I 'm in IT security .
And I 've seen time and again that there are systems that contain very sensitive data with shoddy , if any , security in place .
When pointed out , the responsible people usually point me at legal instead of IT.Legal is n't where security should be done .
You do n't protect your data with laws , you protect them by protecting them .
Handing the security of a system ( IT , bureaucratic , whatever ) to legal is asking for trouble , as much as saying that you do n't need fire extinguishers , you got a good insurance covering you when you burn down to the ground.The same applies here .
If it is possible to change someone 's name at will , the system needs an overhaul .
Sure , it is against the law , but this should be the last line of defense , to keep people who are really GOOD at breaking it from breaking it because they got other , more profitable , ways to achive something within the boundaries of the law .
More and more often , laws and regulations are regarded as the first , and often only , line of defense you have against an attack.That 's not only enough , that 's simply and plainly asking for trouble .
Especially when dealing with people who act out of zeal and not out of personal profit and gain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any system that can be abused so easily is broken and should be fixed.As I've said before, I'm in IT security.
And I've seen time and again that there are systems that contain very sensitive data with shoddy, if any, security in place.
When pointed out, the responsible people usually point me at legal instead of IT.Legal isn't where security should be done.
You don't protect your data with laws, you protect them by protecting them.
Handing the security of a system (IT, bureaucratic, whatever) to legal is asking for trouble, as much as saying that you don't need fire extinguishers, you got a good insurance covering you when you burn down to the ground.The same applies here.
If it is possible to change someone's name at will, the system needs an overhaul.
Sure, it is against the law, but this should be the last line of defense, to keep people who are really GOOD at breaking it from breaking it because they got other, more profitable, ways to achive something within the boundaries of the law.
More and more often, laws and regulations are regarded as the first, and often only, line of defense you have against an attack.That's not only enough, that's simply and plainly asking for trouble.
Especially when dealing with people who act out of zeal and not out of personal profit and gain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28268305</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Husgaard</author>
	<datestamp>1244572200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's perfectly legitimate to suspect that this guy did this himself to make the pirate party look more childish and discredit them.  We've seen the anti-piracy fucks do weirder, stupider and more far fetched things in the past.</p></div><p>
We cannot know if he did it himself to discredit the pirates.
</p><p>
But he did break this story just days before the election where the Pirate Party according to the polls at that time was going to win two seats (they ended up with only one seat). And he used the media time he got because of this to blame the Pirate Party for a lot of alledged harrasment, including death threats. Some of the harrasment he blamed the Pirate Party for dates back to long before the Pirate Party was even founded.
</p><p>
He is currently head of the swedish anti-piracy outfit Antipiratbyr&#229;n, who has a history of doing wrong and attempting to blame others for it. One example is the Bahnhof case. This was a big raid against an ISP, initiated by Antipiratbyr&#229;n. Servers were confiscated, as a lot of illegal copies were found on them. Later it was revealed that Antipiratbyr&#229;n had hired a person to get an employment at this ISP, and that all the illegal copies found on the servers were placed there by this person.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's perfectly legitimate to suspect that this guy did this himself to make the pirate party look more childish and discredit them .
We 've seen the anti-piracy fucks do weirder , stupider and more far fetched things in the past .
We can not know if he did it himself to discredit the pirates .
But he did break this story just days before the election where the Pirate Party according to the polls at that time was going to win two seats ( they ended up with only one seat ) .
And he used the media time he got because of this to blame the Pirate Party for a lot of alledged harrasment , including death threats .
Some of the harrasment he blamed the Pirate Party for dates back to long before the Pirate Party was even founded .
He is currently head of the swedish anti-piracy outfit Antipiratbyr   n , who has a history of doing wrong and attempting to blame others for it .
One example is the Bahnhof case .
This was a big raid against an ISP , initiated by Antipiratbyr   n .
Servers were confiscated , as a lot of illegal copies were found on them .
Later it was revealed that Antipiratbyr   n had hired a person to get an employment at this ISP , and that all the illegal copies found on the servers were placed there by this person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's perfectly legitimate to suspect that this guy did this himself to make the pirate party look more childish and discredit them.
We've seen the anti-piracy fucks do weirder, stupider and more far fetched things in the past.
We cannot know if he did it himself to discredit the pirates.
But he did break this story just days before the election where the Pirate Party according to the polls at that time was going to win two seats (they ended up with only one seat).
And he used the media time he got because of this to blame the Pirate Party for a lot of alledged harrasment, including death threats.
Some of the harrasment he blamed the Pirate Party for dates back to long before the Pirate Party was even founded.
He is currently head of the swedish anti-piracy outfit Antipiratbyrån, who has a history of doing wrong and attempting to blame others for it.
One example is the Bahnhof case.
This was a big raid against an ISP, initiated by Antipiratbyrån.
Servers were confiscated, as a lot of illegal copies were found on them.
Later it was revealed that Antipiratbyrån had hired a person to get an employment at this ISP, and that all the illegal copies found on the servers were placed there by this person.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256281</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244454480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...who ever changed his name is <b>anonymous</b>.</p></div><p>I don't think that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous\_(group)" title="wikipedia.org">Anonymous</a> [wikipedia.org] is responsible for this, but while we're speaking of them, I predict that a great number of prominent Swedish Scientologists will soon find themselves with creative names as soon as word gets out that you don't have to give your real name.  Although Scientologists have had as much scandal in Sweden as they have in most of the world, I think they still have a population there at least proportional to many other places and are about as well-received.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...who ever changed his name is anonymous.I do n't think that Anonymous [ wikipedia.org ] is responsible for this , but while we 're speaking of them , I predict that a great number of prominent Swedish Scientologists will soon find themselves with creative names as soon as word gets out that you do n't have to give your real name .
Although Scientologists have had as much scandal in Sweden as they have in most of the world , I think they still have a population there at least proportional to many other places and are about as well-received .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...who ever changed his name is anonymous.I don't think that Anonymous [wikipedia.org] is responsible for this, but while we're speaking of them, I predict that a great number of prominent Swedish Scientologists will soon find themselves with creative names as soon as word gets out that you don't have to give your real name.
Although Scientologists have had as much scandal in Sweden as they have in most of the world, I think they still have a population there at least proportional to many other places and are about as well-received.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259275</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244468340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It was an attempt to defraud the firm, the intent wasn't legitimate, and the idea that anybody, let alone a court, would be fooled by that crap is preposterous.   Sorry, but believe it or not, judges aren't idiots.  Even in Sweden.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was an attempt to defraud the firm , the intent was n't legitimate , and the idea that anybody , let alone a court , would be fooled by that crap is preposterous .
Sorry , but believe it or not , judges are n't idiots .
Even in Sweden .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was an attempt to defraud the firm, the intent wasn't legitimate, and the idea that anybody, let alone a court, would be fooled by that crap is preposterous.
Sorry, but believe it or not, judges aren't idiots.
Even in Sweden.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28261231</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244479620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I changed his name.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I changed his name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I changed his name.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256367</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>openfrog</author>
	<datestamp>1244454780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would say that this reinforces more the uncontrolled "outlaw" stereotype than the "childish" one, right in line with the Rand Corporation propaganda, which links file sharing to organized crime and terrorism. This precisely and effectively serves that purpose, whoever it is who did this. And I don't find anything redeeming in the fact that it is a brilliant prank or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would say that this reinforces more the uncontrolled " outlaw " stereotype than the " childish " one , right in line with the Rand Corporation propaganda , which links file sharing to organized crime and terrorism .
This precisely and effectively serves that purpose , whoever it is who did this .
And I do n't find anything redeeming in the fact that it is a brilliant prank or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would say that this reinforces more the uncontrolled "outlaw" stereotype than the "childish" one, right in line with the Rand Corporation propaganda, which links file sharing to organized crime and terrorism.
This precisely and effectively serves that purpose, whoever it is who did this.
And I don't find anything redeeming in the fact that it is a brilliant prank or not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259537</id>
	<title>Who do you think you're kidding?</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1244469720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The simplest solution is USUALLY correct. It doesn't mean that the simplest solution is ALWAYS correct.</i> </p><p>The race isn't always to the swiftest and the strongest.</p><p> But that is the way to bet.</p><p>The stunt is transparent - adolescent - pure geek.</p><p>No other mind could contrive it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The simplest solution is USUALLY correct .
It does n't mean that the simplest solution is ALWAYS correct .
The race is n't always to the swiftest and the strongest .
But that is the way to bet.The stunt is transparent - adolescent - pure geek.No other mind could contrive it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The simplest solution is USUALLY correct.
It doesn't mean that the simplest solution is ALWAYS correct.
The race isn't always to the swiftest and the strongest.
But that is the way to bet.The stunt is transparent - adolescent - pure geek.No other mind could contrive it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257435</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244458800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist?</p></div><p>Yep, especially if their first name was changed to RIAA or MPAA.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist ? Yep , especially if their first name was changed to RIAA or MPAA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist?Yep, especially if their first name was changed to RIAA or MPAA.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244454240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you realize how paranoid you sound? Why don't we apply Occams Razor here<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..... let's see, either the anti-piracy agency as you call it could be playing some subtle mind game in an attempt to discredit, uh, people who are already criminals and have a history of stupid harassment. <b>Or</b> it could be yet another inspired piece of retardedness from the same people who brought you "let's DoS a law firm with fraudulent wire transfers". Hmmm, I wonder which is more likely?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you realize how paranoid you sound ?
Why do n't we apply Occams Razor here ..... let 's see , either the anti-piracy agency as you call it could be playing some subtle mind game in an attempt to discredit , uh , people who are already criminals and have a history of stupid harassment .
Or it could be yet another inspired piece of retardedness from the same people who brought you " let 's DoS a law firm with fraudulent wire transfers " .
Hmmm , I wonder which is more likely ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you realize how paranoid you sound?
Why don't we apply Occams Razor here ..... let's see, either the anti-piracy agency as you call it could be playing some subtle mind game in an attempt to discredit, uh, people who are already criminals and have a history of stupid harassment.
Or it could be yet another inspired piece of retardedness from the same people who brought you "let's DoS a law firm with fraudulent wire transfers".
Hmmm, I wonder which is more likely?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28269819</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>thtrgremlin</author>
	<datestamp>1244577600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>so you are saying that non-violence is not just ineffective, but also confusing?</htmltext>
<tokenext>so you are saying that non-violence is not just ineffective , but also confusing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so you are saying that non-violence is not just ineffective, but also confusing?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258093</id>
	<title>"identity theft" - get the fuck out</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1244461320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>noone STOLE their identity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>noone STOLE their identity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>noone STOLE their identity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256145</id>
	<title>Who is he really now?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244454060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wonder if he has to sign the request to revert his name, with "Pirate Ponten" for it to be considered?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wonder if he has to sign the request to revert his name , with " Pirate Ponten " for it to be considered ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wonder if he has to sign the request to revert his name, with "Pirate Ponten" for it to be considered?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260409</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>shaitand</author>
	<datestamp>1244474760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only because said tax authorities and officials have a stick up their tailpipe. This is a fairly harmless prank incited by the mans own public actions.</p><p>Most things are pretty heavily criminal conduct in the U.S. The problem is that people often confuse criminal/illegal with wrong/immoral/bad/evil/nefarious.</p><p>This may have been highly illegal but it wasn't particularly bad and certainly not evil. No harm was intended except ridicule and in the U.S. at least, someone who has made themselves such a public figure loses their right to protection against ridicule, they are expected to endure it as the price for living a public life. Lets not forget the free speech rights of those who made this statement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only because said tax authorities and officials have a stick up their tailpipe .
This is a fairly harmless prank incited by the mans own public actions.Most things are pretty heavily criminal conduct in the U.S. The problem is that people often confuse criminal/illegal with wrong/immoral/bad/evil/nefarious.This may have been highly illegal but it was n't particularly bad and certainly not evil .
No harm was intended except ridicule and in the U.S. at least , someone who has made themselves such a public figure loses their right to protection against ridicule , they are expected to endure it as the price for living a public life .
Lets not forget the free speech rights of those who made this statement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only because said tax authorities and officials have a stick up their tailpipe.
This is a fairly harmless prank incited by the mans own public actions.Most things are pretty heavily criminal conduct in the U.S. The problem is that people often confuse criminal/illegal with wrong/immoral/bad/evil/nefarious.This may have been highly illegal but it wasn't particularly bad and certainly not evil.
No harm was intended except ridicule and in the U.S. at least, someone who has made themselves such a public figure loses their right to protection against ridicule, they are expected to endure it as the price for living a public life.
Lets not forget the free speech rights of those who made this statement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28269743</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>DM9290</author>
	<datestamp>1244577300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>  Furthermore, Occam razor doesn't mean jack shit.  "The simplest solution is USUALLY correct".  It doesn't mean that the simplest solution is ALWAYS correct.</p></div><p>You are misstating what Occam's Razor is.  The principle is that if you have 2 alternate theories that both make identical predictions and the only difference is that 1 theory includes additional complications with no additional explanatory power, then the simpler one should be kept and the complex one discarded.</p><p>Occam's Razor says absolutely nothing about how to compare 2 alternate theories that don't both make the same predictions. In order to choose between theories with different predictions the correct procedure is to pick the theory that better matches the evidence.</p><p>Without occam's razor you could take any theory "N" and make a competing version called "N+transcendental pixies". The pixies don't add any explanatory power but they make the theory more complex and have absolutely no method for selecting one over the other except flipping a coin.</p><p>By your re-statement of occam's razor the ultimate explanation for everything would simply be "because".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Furthermore , Occam razor does n't mean jack shit .
" The simplest solution is USUALLY correct " .
It does n't mean that the simplest solution is ALWAYS correct.You are misstating what Occam 's Razor is .
The principle is that if you have 2 alternate theories that both make identical predictions and the only difference is that 1 theory includes additional complications with no additional explanatory power , then the simpler one should be kept and the complex one discarded.Occam 's Razor says absolutely nothing about how to compare 2 alternate theories that do n't both make the same predictions .
In order to choose between theories with different predictions the correct procedure is to pick the theory that better matches the evidence.Without occam 's razor you could take any theory " N " and make a competing version called " N + transcendental pixies " .
The pixies do n't add any explanatory power but they make the theory more complex and have absolutely no method for selecting one over the other except flipping a coin.By your re-statement of occam 's razor the ultimate explanation for everything would simply be " because " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  Furthermore, Occam razor doesn't mean jack shit.
"The simplest solution is USUALLY correct".
It doesn't mean that the simplest solution is ALWAYS correct.You are misstating what Occam's Razor is.
The principle is that if you have 2 alternate theories that both make identical predictions and the only difference is that 1 theory includes additional complications with no additional explanatory power, then the simpler one should be kept and the complex one discarded.Occam's Razor says absolutely nothing about how to compare 2 alternate theories that don't both make the same predictions.
In order to choose between theories with different predictions the correct procedure is to pick the theory that better matches the evidence.Without occam's razor you could take any theory "N" and make a competing version called "N+transcendental pixies".
The pixies don't add any explanatory power but they make the theory more complex and have absolutely no method for selecting one over the other except flipping a coin.By your re-statement of occam's razor the ultimate explanation for everything would simply be "because".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244458560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>They weren't fraudulent wire transfers, idiot.  They were perfectly legitimate, small value transfers.  It just so happened that there was a processing fee greater than the value of the intended transfer amount.  Furthermore, Occam razor doesn't mean jack shit.  "The simplest solution is USUALLY correct".  It doesn't mean that the simplest solution is ALWAYS correct.<br><br>It's perfectly legitimate to suspect that this guy did this himself to make the pirate party look more childish and discredit them.  We've seen the anti-piracy fucks do weirder, stupider and more far fetched things in the past.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They were n't fraudulent wire transfers , idiot .
They were perfectly legitimate , small value transfers .
It just so happened that there was a processing fee greater than the value of the intended transfer amount .
Furthermore , Occam razor does n't mean jack shit .
" The simplest solution is USUALLY correct " .
It does n't mean that the simplest solution is ALWAYS correct.It 's perfectly legitimate to suspect that this guy did this himself to make the pirate party look more childish and discredit them .
We 've seen the anti-piracy fucks do weirder , stupider and more far fetched things in the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They weren't fraudulent wire transfers, idiot.
They were perfectly legitimate, small value transfers.
It just so happened that there was a processing fee greater than the value of the intended transfer amount.
Furthermore, Occam razor doesn't mean jack shit.
"The simplest solution is USUALLY correct".
It doesn't mean that the simplest solution is ALWAYS correct.It's perfectly legitimate to suspect that this guy did this himself to make the pirate party look more childish and discredit them.
We've seen the anti-piracy fucks do weirder, stupider and more far fetched things in the past.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28262547</id>
	<title>Re:"identity theft" - get the fuck out</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244580060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Noone" title="encycloped...matica.com" rel="nofollow">Noone</a> [encycloped...matica.com] stole their identity?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Noone [ encycloped...matica.com ] stole their identity ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Noone [encycloped...matica.com] stole their identity?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258093</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28261847</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Cruciform</author>
	<datestamp>1244485620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Definitely a broken system.<br>At least they didn't change his name to "Kinderfucker" or whatever the Swedish equivalent would be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Definitely a broken system.At least they did n't change his name to " Kinderfucker " or whatever the Swedish equivalent would be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Definitely a broken system.At least they didn't change his name to "Kinderfucker" or whatever the Swedish equivalent would be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260037</id>
	<title>Re:Who is he really now?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244472900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dear Mr. Pirate Ponten,</p><p>In light of recent fraudulent name-change submissions, we now request that you provide a proof of identity in order to verify that you are indeed Pirate Ponten.</p><p>Sincerely,</p><p>Registration</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear Mr. Pirate Ponten,In light of recent fraudulent name-change submissions , we now request that you provide a proof of identity in order to verify that you are indeed Pirate Ponten.Sincerely,Registration</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear Mr. Pirate Ponten,In light of recent fraudulent name-change submissions, we now request that you provide a proof of identity in order to verify that you are indeed Pirate Ponten.Sincerely,Registration</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256145</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244453760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is also the possibility that he did this too himself, nobody knows since who ever changed his name is anonymous.</p><p>And know this, the news article was published on the day before the Swedish election. Very suspicious timing by the anti-piracy agency here...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is also the possibility that he did this too himself , nobody knows since who ever changed his name is anonymous.And know this , the news article was published on the day before the Swedish election .
Very suspicious timing by the anti-piracy agency here.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is also the possibility that he did this too himself, nobody knows since who ever changed his name is anonymous.And know this, the news article was published on the day before the Swedish election.
Very suspicious timing by the anti-piracy agency here...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>BaronHethorSamedi</author>
	<datestamp>1244457420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But goddamn that's a brilliant prank.</p></div><p>In my mind, this is actually a little beyond childish prank territory.<br>
<br>
To all you folks who are going to write in with "ZOMG LMAO!  Grow a sense of humor!" and so on, ask yourselves: would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist?  This isn't a prank--the man's signature was forged on an official document, and then (apparently) submitted to the Swedish tax authorities.  I don't know about Sweden, but in the U.S. that's pretty heavily criminal conduct.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But goddamn that 's a brilliant prank.In my mind , this is actually a little beyond childish prank territory .
To all you folks who are going to write in with " ZOMG LMAO !
Grow a sense of humor !
" and so on , ask yourselves : would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist ?
This is n't a prank--the man 's signature was forged on an official document , and then ( apparently ) submitted to the Swedish tax authorities .
I do n't know about Sweden , but in the U.S. that 's pretty heavily criminal conduct .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But goddamn that's a brilliant prank.In my mind, this is actually a little beyond childish prank territory.
To all you folks who are going to write in with "ZOMG LMAO!
Grow a sense of humor!
" and so on, ask yourselves: would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist?
This isn't a prank--the man's signature was forged on an official document, and then (apparently) submitted to the Swedish tax authorities.
I don't know about Sweden, but in the U.S. that's pretty heavily criminal conduct.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28262631</id>
	<title>Re:"identity theft" - get the fuck out</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244581140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Attributing your actions to someone else is the definition of identity theft. Can I send in name change papers for someone other than myself in your country?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Attributing your actions to someone else is the definition of identity theft .
Can I send in name change papers for someone other than myself in your country ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Attributing your actions to someone else is the definition of identity theft.
Can I send in name change papers for someone other than myself in your country?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258093</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258977</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>ChromeAeonium</author>
	<datestamp>1244466300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In other words, you're starting with a conclusion (anti-piracy is teh fascism, pirates are saints) and moving backwards from there, and any facts that doesn't fit that model are a conspiracy to discredit those wonderful pirates.  I wish I could say this thought surprised me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other words , you 're starting with a conclusion ( anti-piracy is teh fascism , pirates are saints ) and moving backwards from there , and any facts that does n't fit that model are a conspiracy to discredit those wonderful pirates .
I wish I could say this thought surprised me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other words, you're starting with a conclusion (anti-piracy is teh fascism, pirates are saints) and moving backwards from there, and any facts that doesn't fit that model are a conspiracy to discredit those wonderful pirates.
I wish I could say this thought surprised me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28273139</id>
	<title>Re:"identity theft" - get the fuck out</title>
	<author>tkw954</author>
	<datestamp>1244550780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>noone STOLE their identity.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
In fact, they GAVE him a new one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>noone STOLE their identity .
In fact , they GAVE him a new one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>noone STOLE their identity.
In fact, they GAVE him a new one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258093</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256579</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244455560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or we could admit that speculation either way is pointless. People do fake crimes, and Occam's Razor != knowing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or we could admit that speculation either way is pointless .
People do fake crimes , and Occam 's Razor ! = knowing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or we could admit that speculation either way is pointless.
People do fake crimes, and Occam's Razor != knowing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256555</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Rakshasa Taisab</author>
	<datestamp>1244455440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, the guy can't both demand people have less personal information protection \_AND\_ demand people have more personal information protection.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the guy ca n't both demand people have less personal information protection \ _AND \ _ demand people have more personal information protection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the guy can't both demand people have less personal information protection \_AND\_ demand people have more personal information protection.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256859</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>sdpuppy</author>
	<datestamp>1244456520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would be even funnier if they change the law such that you can only apply for a name change <b>once</b>.

Now <i>that</i> would be cool!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would be even funnier if they change the law such that you can only apply for a name change once .
Now that would be cool !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would be even funnier if they change the law such that you can only apply for a name change once.
Now that would be cool!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943</id>
	<title>it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>VMaN</author>
	<datestamp>1244453460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Horribly childish, and just gives the opposition more ammo, and reinforces the childish stereotype.</p><p>But goddamn that's a brilliant prank.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Horribly childish , and just gives the opposition more ammo , and reinforces the childish stereotype.But goddamn that 's a brilliant prank .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Horribly childish, and just gives the opposition more ammo, and reinforces the childish stereotype.But goddamn that's a brilliant prank.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256601</id>
	<title>Not childish</title>
	<author>s-whs</author>
	<datestamp>1244455680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you think that's childish you don't know what the word childish means.
<br> <br>
And I really dislike those type of killjoy remarks.
<br> <br>
It reminds me about another area I've been investigating over the past 5 years: The lies and incompetence in the airtravel industry in the Netherlands and Schiphol.
<br> <br>
Groups who are against expansion usually take the route of seriously and respectfully opposing people in Schiphol, airtraffic control LVNL, and other organisations such as NLR (air/space 'research' organisation) and PNL (a lobby group lead by serial liar Benno Baksteen).
<br> <br>
I don't. I have examined their claims about cost of insulation, noise being generated being supposedly less, noise insulation not helping to reduce annoyance with people by the metric of number of complaints which don't go down.
<br> <br>
I have shown all these claims to be lies. Insulation cost is not anywhere near as high as claimed by PNL, noise is not less than in 1990 when applying a <b>useful</b> metric, number of complaints is not a good metric as these can vary easily by a factor of 10-20 x larger or smaller depending on outside factors (e.g. increase in complaints after the twin towers, decrease in complaints by a huge factor in Australia after collapse of a large airline Ansett), and NLR is an amateurish organisation that doesn't even know when to use uppercase/lower case for units (contrary to general use in physics as taught even in schools).
<br> <br>
So, how do you deal with those people? Seriously? With respect? You can do that but you won't get anywhere. Those nutters need to be told the truth which is the facts about the above subjects, the facts about their incompetence, the facts about their anti-social nature. You can deal with them respectfully, but unless you don't mind a 30 year gameplan, it's pointless.
<br> <br>
What I do is write them emails and put stuff on my website for 2 reasons: To tell those people the truth and show them that I think they are worthless. This is good for me (it's fun), it's good for others (to show them you can call them liars etc. without any fear for a lawsuit, which I don't have as I use their own words against them), <b>also good because it shows others how those people manipulate others</b>. E.g. a common one is claiming the people do something which they actually don't. This is apparantly also common in politics. It bogs down the competition and enables you to go ahead with your own plans without much resistance. An example is that airtravel industry people say the people who complain about the noise make 'emotional arguments' but when examining the arguments, it's actually the airtravel people (e.g. lobby group PNL, former director of Schiphol Gerlach 'the liar' Cerfontaine) who do this all the time.
<br> <br>
Would you want to be taken seriously by such people? Who cares what those nutters think!
<br> <br>
This is exactly the same as with copyright nonsense. RIAA type organisations abuse the law? Why not give something similar back to them...
<br> <br>
To conclude: If you want to be taken seriously by doing everything respectfully, you won't get anywhere within a reasonable time. Also, why can't they do things like this when the opponent is lying/making up facts about lost income or economic problems caused by 'piracy' all the time?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you think that 's childish you do n't know what the word childish means .
And I really dislike those type of killjoy remarks .
It reminds me about another area I 've been investigating over the past 5 years : The lies and incompetence in the airtravel industry in the Netherlands and Schiphol .
Groups who are against expansion usually take the route of seriously and respectfully opposing people in Schiphol , airtraffic control LVNL , and other organisations such as NLR ( air/space 'research ' organisation ) and PNL ( a lobby group lead by serial liar Benno Baksteen ) .
I do n't .
I have examined their claims about cost of insulation , noise being generated being supposedly less , noise insulation not helping to reduce annoyance with people by the metric of number of complaints which do n't go down .
I have shown all these claims to be lies .
Insulation cost is not anywhere near as high as claimed by PNL , noise is not less than in 1990 when applying a useful metric , number of complaints is not a good metric as these can vary easily by a factor of 10-20 x larger or smaller depending on outside factors ( e.g .
increase in complaints after the twin towers , decrease in complaints by a huge factor in Australia after collapse of a large airline Ansett ) , and NLR is an amateurish organisation that does n't even know when to use uppercase/lower case for units ( contrary to general use in physics as taught even in schools ) .
So , how do you deal with those people ?
Seriously ? With respect ?
You can do that but you wo n't get anywhere .
Those nutters need to be told the truth which is the facts about the above subjects , the facts about their incompetence , the facts about their anti-social nature .
You can deal with them respectfully , but unless you do n't mind a 30 year gameplan , it 's pointless .
What I do is write them emails and put stuff on my website for 2 reasons : To tell those people the truth and show them that I think they are worthless .
This is good for me ( it 's fun ) , it 's good for others ( to show them you can call them liars etc .
without any fear for a lawsuit , which I do n't have as I use their own words against them ) , also good because it shows others how those people manipulate others .
E.g. a common one is claiming the people do something which they actually do n't .
This is apparantly also common in politics .
It bogs down the competition and enables you to go ahead with your own plans without much resistance .
An example is that airtravel industry people say the people who complain about the noise make 'emotional arguments ' but when examining the arguments , it 's actually the airtravel people ( e.g .
lobby group PNL , former director of Schiphol Gerlach 'the liar ' Cerfontaine ) who do this all the time .
Would you want to be taken seriously by such people ?
Who cares what those nutters think !
This is exactly the same as with copyright nonsense .
RIAA type organisations abuse the law ?
Why not give something similar back to them.. . To conclude : If you want to be taken seriously by doing everything respectfully , you wo n't get anywhere within a reasonable time .
Also , why ca n't they do things like this when the opponent is lying/making up facts about lost income or economic problems caused by 'piracy ' all the time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you think that's childish you don't know what the word childish means.
And I really dislike those type of killjoy remarks.
It reminds me about another area I've been investigating over the past 5 years: The lies and incompetence in the airtravel industry in the Netherlands and Schiphol.
Groups who are against expansion usually take the route of seriously and respectfully opposing people in Schiphol, airtraffic control LVNL, and other organisations such as NLR (air/space 'research' organisation) and PNL (a lobby group lead by serial liar Benno Baksteen).
I don't.
I have examined their claims about cost of insulation, noise being generated being supposedly less, noise insulation not helping to reduce annoyance with people by the metric of number of complaints which don't go down.
I have shown all these claims to be lies.
Insulation cost is not anywhere near as high as claimed by PNL, noise is not less than in 1990 when applying a useful metric, number of complaints is not a good metric as these can vary easily by a factor of 10-20 x larger or smaller depending on outside factors (e.g.
increase in complaints after the twin towers, decrease in complaints by a huge factor in Australia after collapse of a large airline Ansett), and NLR is an amateurish organisation that doesn't even know when to use uppercase/lower case for units (contrary to general use in physics as taught even in schools).
So, how do you deal with those people?
Seriously? With respect?
You can do that but you won't get anywhere.
Those nutters need to be told the truth which is the facts about the above subjects, the facts about their incompetence, the facts about their anti-social nature.
You can deal with them respectfully, but unless you don't mind a 30 year gameplan, it's pointless.
What I do is write them emails and put stuff on my website for 2 reasons: To tell those people the truth and show them that I think they are worthless.
This is good for me (it's fun), it's good for others (to show them you can call them liars etc.
without any fear for a lawsuit, which I don't have as I use their own words against them), also good because it shows others how those people manipulate others.
E.g. a common one is claiming the people do something which they actually don't.
This is apparantly also common in politics.
It bogs down the competition and enables you to go ahead with your own plans without much resistance.
An example is that airtravel industry people say the people who complain about the noise make 'emotional arguments' but when examining the arguments, it's actually the airtravel people (e.g.
lobby group PNL, former director of Schiphol Gerlach 'the liar' Cerfontaine) who do this all the time.
Would you want to be taken seriously by such people?
Who cares what those nutters think!
This is exactly the same as with copyright nonsense.
RIAA type organisations abuse the law?
Why not give something similar back to them...
 
To conclude: If you want to be taken seriously by doing everything respectfully, you won't get anywhere within a reasonable time.
Also, why can't they do things like this when the opponent is lying/making up facts about lost income or economic problems caused by 'piracy' all the time?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256165</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>rbrausse</author>
	<datestamp>1244454120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; childish stereotype<br>maybe not the worst outcome: if we* can change the meaning of "think of the children" a lot of the opposition's ammo is ruined...</p><p>*) a generic "I as part of an interest group", not "we as united and one<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. crowd"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; childish stereotypemaybe not the worst outcome : if we * can change the meaning of " think of the children " a lot of the opposition 's ammo is ruined... * ) a generic " I as part of an interest group " , not " we as united and one / .
crowd " : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; childish stereotypemaybe not the worst outcome: if we* can change the meaning of "think of the children" a lot of the opposition's ammo is ruined...*) a generic "I as part of an interest group", not "we as united and one /.
crowd" :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256141</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244454060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is indeed a good prank. He should be more interested in securing the name change process instead of trying to pin it on the Pirate Party or one of their supporters. They may never know who actually submitted the change.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is indeed a good prank .
He should be more interested in securing the name change process instead of trying to pin it on the Pirate Party or one of their supporters .
They may never know who actually submitted the change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is indeed a good prank.
He should be more interested in securing the name change process instead of trying to pin it on the Pirate Party or one of their supporters.
They may never know who actually submitted the change.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260441</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244474880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is it not a prank? it can be undone and is little more than annoyance. yes laws were broken to do.   But no more than say, dismantling a Dean's car, and rebuilding it inside a gymnasium is.  yes, one could argue that they are guilty of theft, vandalism, trespassing  and a whole slough of other things as well for all I know, but in any Reasonable Society, even getting caught, the instigators of the car prank would face the penalty of a public apology, and maybe community service.</p><p>On the other side is the government, and they should take a serious look at themselves, if a signature is all that's required for proof of identity for them, they need to do a serious overhaul.  Even if its just for the one specific service.<br>Don't punish the citizen who shows your governments blatant weaknesses, pay him and ask him to find more, so they can be  fixed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is it not a prank ?
it can be undone and is little more than annoyance .
yes laws were broken to do .
But no more than say , dismantling a Dean 's car , and rebuilding it inside a gymnasium is .
yes , one could argue that they are guilty of theft , vandalism , trespassing and a whole slough of other things as well for all I know , but in any Reasonable Society , even getting caught , the instigators of the car prank would face the penalty of a public apology , and maybe community service.On the other side is the government , and they should take a serious look at themselves , if a signature is all that 's required for proof of identity for them , they need to do a serious overhaul .
Even if its just for the one specific service.Do n't punish the citizen who shows your governments blatant weaknesses , pay him and ask him to find more , so they can be fixed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is it not a prank?
it can be undone and is little more than annoyance.
yes laws were broken to do.
But no more than say, dismantling a Dean's car, and rebuilding it inside a gymnasium is.
yes, one could argue that they are guilty of theft, vandalism, trespassing  and a whole slough of other things as well for all I know, but in any Reasonable Society, even getting caught, the instigators of the car prank would face the penalty of a public apology, and maybe community service.On the other side is the government, and they should take a serious look at themselves, if a signature is all that's required for proof of identity for them, they need to do a serious overhaul.
Even if its just for the one specific service.Don't punish the citizen who shows your governments blatant weaknesses, pay him and ask him to find more, so they can be  fixed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28263783</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Ginger Unicorn</author>
	<datestamp>1244552040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Occam's razor is a bit more specific and logically rigorous than the airy-fairy rule of thumb that you're making it out to be. It states that the explanation containing the least number of assumptions is most likely to be correct. Statistically speaking this is rigorous, since each extra assumption has a non zero chance of being wrong - so every new assumption increases the chances that the explanation is wrong. The most rational choice of explanations is the one that, given all the information you have to hand, is the most statistically likely to be true.</p><p>Of course, the fact that it isn't a certainty still doesn't change the fact that it is a more likely explanation than all the other less likely explanations. The fact that you prefer to believe one of the less likely explanations doesn't justify writing off occams razor as "not meaning jack shit"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Occam 's razor is a bit more specific and logically rigorous than the airy-fairy rule of thumb that you 're making it out to be .
It states that the explanation containing the least number of assumptions is most likely to be correct .
Statistically speaking this is rigorous , since each extra assumption has a non zero chance of being wrong - so every new assumption increases the chances that the explanation is wrong .
The most rational choice of explanations is the one that , given all the information you have to hand , is the most statistically likely to be true.Of course , the fact that it is n't a certainty still does n't change the fact that it is a more likely explanation than all the other less likely explanations .
The fact that you prefer to believe one of the less likely explanations does n't justify writing off occams razor as " not meaning jack shit "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Occam's razor is a bit more specific and logically rigorous than the airy-fairy rule of thumb that you're making it out to be.
It states that the explanation containing the least number of assumptions is most likely to be correct.
Statistically speaking this is rigorous, since each extra assumption has a non zero chance of being wrong - so every new assumption increases the chances that the explanation is wrong.
The most rational choice of explanations is the one that, given all the information you have to hand, is the most statistically likely to be true.Of course, the fact that it isn't a certainty still doesn't change the fact that it is a more likely explanation than all the other less likely explanations.
The fact that you prefer to believe one of the less likely explanations doesn't justify writing off occams razor as "not meaning jack shit"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257519</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>twidarkling</author>
	<datestamp>1244459160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think it's blazingly hilarious, but if the system's letting anyone change anyone else's name because they're not bothering to check identities, then the system is broken. Simple as that. Better it's abused in such a fashion now, rather than something more serious, so that it can be fixed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think it 's blazingly hilarious , but if the system 's letting anyone change anyone else 's name because they 're not bothering to check identities , then the system is broken .
Simple as that .
Better it 's abused in such a fashion now , rather than something more serious , so that it can be fixed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think it's blazingly hilarious, but if the system's letting anyone change anyone else's name because they're not bothering to check identities, then the system is broken.
Simple as that.
Better it's abused in such a fashion now, rather than something more serious, so that it can be fixed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28267989</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>mcvos</author>
	<datestamp>1244571120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist?</p></div><p>No, but this wasn't identity theft. It's more like an identity gift.</p><p>In any case, it's most likely fraud, but still funny.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist ? No , but this was n't identity theft .
It 's more like an identity gift.In any case , it 's most likely fraud , but still funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist?No, but this wasn't identity theft.
It's more like an identity gift.In any case, it's most likely fraud, but still funny.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28265237</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Jason Levine</author>
	<datestamp>1244560560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That was my first thought as well.  Then again, I've been a victim of Identity Theft.  Someone got a hold of my name, address, SSN, and DOB and opened a credit card in my name. (Despite not having the correct Mother's Maiden Name - thank you Capital One for requiring this "Security Question" and then not checking the answer!!!)  Luckily, I caught it quickly so no real damage was done, but it's still horrifying to know that your information is out there for any criminal to use.</p><p>I'd hate to think what havoc could be wrecked if a name change could be affected merely by forging one signature.  One roommate could change the other roommate's official name.  Then, this roommate could use this name change to worm his way into the other's Identity all the while pretending that those letters with the strange name on them must be junk mail.  By time the victim knows what's happening, the roommate could skip town with the victim's entire life savings and leaving the victim's credit in shambles for years to come.</p><p>So while some might get a bit of a thrill that this was directed at an anti-piracy/pro-copyright individual, the fact that their system is that broken is too scary to me to get any joy out of this guy's suffering.  The only good part in all of this is that there will likely be a push now to tighten up the loophole.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was my first thought as well .
Then again , I 've been a victim of Identity Theft .
Someone got a hold of my name , address , SSN , and DOB and opened a credit card in my name .
( Despite not having the correct Mother 's Maiden Name - thank you Capital One for requiring this " Security Question " and then not checking the answer ! ! !
) Luckily , I caught it quickly so no real damage was done , but it 's still horrifying to know that your information is out there for any criminal to use.I 'd hate to think what havoc could be wrecked if a name change could be affected merely by forging one signature .
One roommate could change the other roommate 's official name .
Then , this roommate could use this name change to worm his way into the other 's Identity all the while pretending that those letters with the strange name on them must be junk mail .
By time the victim knows what 's happening , the roommate could skip town with the victim 's entire life savings and leaving the victim 's credit in shambles for years to come.So while some might get a bit of a thrill that this was directed at an anti-piracy/pro-copyright individual , the fact that their system is that broken is too scary to me to get any joy out of this guy 's suffering .
The only good part in all of this is that there will likely be a push now to tighten up the loophole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was my first thought as well.
Then again, I've been a victim of Identity Theft.
Someone got a hold of my name, address, SSN, and DOB and opened a credit card in my name.
(Despite not having the correct Mother's Maiden Name - thank you Capital One for requiring this "Security Question" and then not checking the answer!!!
)  Luckily, I caught it quickly so no real damage was done, but it's still horrifying to know that your information is out there for any criminal to use.I'd hate to think what havoc could be wrecked if a name change could be affected merely by forging one signature.
One roommate could change the other roommate's official name.
Then, this roommate could use this name change to worm his way into the other's Identity all the while pretending that those letters with the strange name on them must be junk mail.
By time the victim knows what's happening, the roommate could skip town with the victim's entire life savings and leaving the victim's credit in shambles for years to come.So while some might get a bit of a thrill that this was directed at an anti-piracy/pro-copyright individual, the fact that their system is that broken is too scary to me to get any joy out of this guy's suffering.
The only good part in all of this is that there will likely be a push now to tighten up the loophole.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257399</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>zig007</author>
	<datestamp>1244458680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist?</p></div><p>No...But it was.<br>Which(actually, factually and objectively) was funny enough to outweigh the not very horrible-murder-level crime being committed.</p><p>So, ZOMG LMAO! Grow a sense of humor!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist ? No...But it was.Which ( actually , factually and objectively ) was funny enough to outweigh the not very horrible-murder-level crime being committed.So , ZOMG LMAO !
Grow a sense of humor !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would a straight-up act of identity theft be as funny if it were aimed at an anti-copyright lobbyist?No...But it was.Which(actually, factually and objectively) was funny enough to outweigh the not very horrible-murder-level crime being committed.So, ZOMG LMAO!
Grow a sense of humor!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256875</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244456580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I completely agree with your suspicion. This could be just opposition generating more ammo for themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I completely agree with your suspicion .
This could be just opposition generating more ammo for themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I completely agree with your suspicion.
This could be just opposition generating more ammo for themselves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256435</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1244455080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or someone on his team.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or someone on his team .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or someone on his team.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256897</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>vertinox</author>
	<datestamp>1244456700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Horribly childish, and just gives the opposition more ammo, and reinforces the childish stereotype.</i></p><p>But hey... <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8089102.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">They got a seat on the EU parliament.</a> [bbc.co.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Horribly childish , and just gives the opposition more ammo , and reinforces the childish stereotype.But hey... They got a seat on the EU parliament .
[ bbc.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Horribly childish, and just gives the opposition more ammo, and reinforces the childish stereotype.But hey... They got a seat on the EU parliament.
[bbc.co.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258893</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>pembo13</author>
	<datestamp>1244465880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hadn't read the article, and thought it was about an anti-piracy activist... in which case the name 'Pirate' would make sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had n't read the article , and thought it was about an anti-piracy activist... in which case the name 'Pirate ' would make sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hadn't read the article, and thought it was about an anti-piracy activist... in which case the name 'Pirate' would make sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259451</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1244469300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Occam's Razor != knowing</p></div><p>Actually, Occam did indeed show that occam's razor was in fact knowing, by using occam's razor, calling "dibs."  He successfully defended this in debates by putting his fingers in his ears and yelling "nananananan! I'm Occam I cant hear you!  NANANAN!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Occam 's Razor ! = knowingActually , Occam did indeed show that occam 's razor was in fact knowing , by using occam 's razor , calling " dibs .
" He successfully defended this in debates by putting his fingers in his ears and yelling " nananananan !
I 'm Occam I cant hear you !
NANANAN ! "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Occam's Razor != knowingActually, Occam did indeed show that occam's razor was in fact knowing, by using occam's razor, calling "dibs.
"  He successfully defended this in debates by putting his fingers in his ears and yelling "nananananan!
I'm Occam I cant hear you!
NANANAN!"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259419</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>gilbert64</author>
	<datestamp>1244469120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes they were fraudulent wire transfer, intent matters. And this kind of childish behavior is just par for the course for the Swedish pro-piracy lobby.

Furthermore, slashdot discussions are often about making guesstimates and assumption based on history and Occam's razor is indeed relevant, it would be hypocritical to start dismissing it now just because slashdot group psyche wants Swedish pirates to be more mature than they really are. (Again an assumption based on your +5 moderation).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes they were fraudulent wire transfer , intent matters .
And this kind of childish behavior is just par for the course for the Swedish pro-piracy lobby .
Furthermore , slashdot discussions are often about making guesstimates and assumption based on history and Occam 's razor is indeed relevant , it would be hypocritical to start dismissing it now just because slashdot group psyche wants Swedish pirates to be more mature than they really are .
( Again an assumption based on your + 5 moderation ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes they were fraudulent wire transfer, intent matters.
And this kind of childish behavior is just par for the course for the Swedish pro-piracy lobby.
Furthermore, slashdot discussions are often about making guesstimates and assumption based on history and Occam's razor is indeed relevant, it would be hypocritical to start dismissing it now just because slashdot group psyche wants Swedish pirates to be more mature than they really are.
(Again an assumption based on your +5 moderation).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257819</id>
	<title>Re:it will only hurt the cause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244460240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just think, if the Pirate Party were in charge, their strong views of privacy would never let some random person walk into a government office and change the name of someone else without having to prove that it's their identity to change!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just think , if the Pirate Party were in charge , their strong views of privacy would never let some random person walk into a government office and change the name of someone else without having to prove that it 's their identity to change !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just think, if the Pirate Party were in charge, their strong views of privacy would never let some random person walk into a government office and change the name of someone else without having to prove that it's their identity to change!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28273139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28269743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259451
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28261231
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256141
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256601
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28261847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257819
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28274111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259275
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28268305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28265237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256435
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28262631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28262547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28269819
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28263783
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28267989
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28272725
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257435
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_08_1641237_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_08_1641237.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28255943
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256859
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256165
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256023
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256281
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28261231
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258977
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256435
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256555
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28272725
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256875
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256209
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257357
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28263783
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260935
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259419
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259537
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28268305
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259275
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28269743
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256579
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259451
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28269819
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257081
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260409
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257435
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257519
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28261847
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28259663
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28274111
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28265237
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258093
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28273139
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28262547
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28262631
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260441
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28267989
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257399
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28257819
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28258893
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256897
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256141
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256145
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28260037
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256601
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_08_1641237.28256367
</commentlist>
</conversation>
