<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_15_0248208</id>
	<title>ESRB Eyeballing Ratings For iPhone Games</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1245062220000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Kotaku reports that the ESRB is thinking about expanding their game ratings to <a href="http://kotaku.com/5289370/esrb-on-iphone-games-we-can-handle-this">include games sold on the App Store</a>. They realize that <a href="http://kotaku.com/5281765/should-apple-iphone-games-be-rated-esa-says-yes">evaluating every single game is not feasible</a>, but they may still be underestimating the amount of work they'd be taking on, and it could negatively affect some developers. Quoting:
<i>"'ESRB has seen increases in rating submissions each year since its founding and has always been able to keep pace,' the ESRB's Eliot Mizrachi told us. 'We have rated more than 70 mobile games to date and will undoubtedly rate more in the future as the market grows.' Seventy? Over the past, what, four or five years? It's a piddling number when you think of the hundreds of games available through the App Store. Further, many of them are mobile adjuncts to console releases, a different sort of beast from iPhone games. Not all of those need or deserve a rating; but if Apple brings in the ESRB to rate games, with the idea that it'll help parents control what their kids buy for their iPods, then unrated games are likely to be blocked by such filters. The incentive would definitely be there to get a game rated. And what of the cost? Getting a game rated isn't a free service; the ESRB levies a fee that covers the cost of looking through the code and rating the game."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Kotaku reports that the ESRB is thinking about expanding their game ratings to include games sold on the App Store .
They realize that evaluating every single game is not feasible , but they may still be underestimating the amount of work they 'd be taking on , and it could negatively affect some developers .
Quoting : " 'ESRB has seen increases in rating submissions each year since its founding and has always been able to keep pace, ' the ESRB 's Eliot Mizrachi told us .
'We have rated more than 70 mobile games to date and will undoubtedly rate more in the future as the market grows .
' Seventy ?
Over the past , what , four or five years ?
It 's a piddling number when you think of the hundreds of games available through the App Store .
Further , many of them are mobile adjuncts to console releases , a different sort of beast from iPhone games .
Not all of those need or deserve a rating ; but if Apple brings in the ESRB to rate games , with the idea that it 'll help parents control what their kids buy for their iPods , then unrated games are likely to be blocked by such filters .
The incentive would definitely be there to get a game rated .
And what of the cost ?
Getting a game rated is n't a free service ; the ESRB levies a fee that covers the cost of looking through the code and rating the game .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kotaku reports that the ESRB is thinking about expanding their game ratings to include games sold on the App Store.
They realize that evaluating every single game is not feasible, but they may still be underestimating the amount of work they'd be taking on, and it could negatively affect some developers.
Quoting:
"'ESRB has seen increases in rating submissions each year since its founding and has always been able to keep pace,' the ESRB's Eliot Mizrachi told us.
'We have rated more than 70 mobile games to date and will undoubtedly rate more in the future as the market grows.
' Seventy?
Over the past, what, four or five years?
It's a piddling number when you think of the hundreds of games available through the App Store.
Further, many of them are mobile adjuncts to console releases, a different sort of beast from iPhone games.
Not all of those need or deserve a rating; but if Apple brings in the ESRB to rate games, with the idea that it'll help parents control what their kids buy for their iPods, then unrated games are likely to be blocked by such filters.
The incentive would definitely be there to get a game rated.
And what of the cost?
Getting a game rated isn't a free service; the ESRB levies a fee that covers the cost of looking through the code and rating the game.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334091</id>
	<title>Re:Seems pointless</title>
	<author>cgenman</author>
	<datestamp>1245074580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The next step up would be to crowdsource it.  Have users give each game a star rating and an age-appropriateness rating.  Let the broad population decide what is and isn't appropriate.</p><p>Only after self-rating and crowd rating have failed, should you resort to rating by elite secret boards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The next step up would be to crowdsource it .
Have users give each game a star rating and an age-appropriateness rating .
Let the broad population decide what is and is n't appropriate.Only after self-rating and crowd rating have failed , should you resort to rating by elite secret boards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The next step up would be to crowdsource it.
Have users give each game a star rating and an age-appropriateness rating.
Let the broad population decide what is and isn't appropriate.Only after self-rating and crowd rating have failed, should you resort to rating by elite secret boards.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333753</id>
	<title>Re:Seems pointless</title>
	<author>Devout\_IPUite</author>
	<datestamp>1245071040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um... ALL of the content that gets rated is fluff. It's gore levels and detail of the violence and amount of cleavage and bad words. You put that stuff in to attract mature audiences, why would you hide it with the rating tag?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um... ALL of the content that gets rated is fluff .
It 's gore levels and detail of the violence and amount of cleavage and bad words .
You put that stuff in to attract mature audiences , why would you hide it with the rating tag ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um... ALL of the content that gets rated is fluff.
It's gore levels and detail of the violence and amount of cleavage and bad words.
You put that stuff in to attract mature audiences, why would you hide it with the rating tag?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333593</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28336219</id>
	<title>Sorry ESRB, Apple is ahead of you</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1245085200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only reason a game maker would go to ESRB for ratings is that they are a known standard.  Companies pay money to the ESRB to rate games.</p><p>Well sorry ESRB, you're not going to be able to suck the life out of indie development on the iPhone.  You see, Apple has just replaced you - developers are now required to set age ratings on all apps, including games.</p><p>This basically means that Apple only has to police the line between adult and non-adult apps, to make sure anything lacking a 17+ rating is really clean.  That's all the ratings were ever good for anyway, below that line it hardly matters if you are a bit off.</p><p>With Apple doing the level of verification required through the app review process, there's really no need for an ESRB rating though I'm sure some of the bigger game makers will probably get them.  But the lack of them simply will not matter in the gaming environment on the iPhone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only reason a game maker would go to ESRB for ratings is that they are a known standard .
Companies pay money to the ESRB to rate games.Well sorry ESRB , you 're not going to be able to suck the life out of indie development on the iPhone .
You see , Apple has just replaced you - developers are now required to set age ratings on all apps , including games.This basically means that Apple only has to police the line between adult and non-adult apps , to make sure anything lacking a 17 + rating is really clean .
That 's all the ratings were ever good for anyway , below that line it hardly matters if you are a bit off.With Apple doing the level of verification required through the app review process , there 's really no need for an ESRB rating though I 'm sure some of the bigger game makers will probably get them .
But the lack of them simply will not matter in the gaming environment on the iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only reason a game maker would go to ESRB for ratings is that they are a known standard.
Companies pay money to the ESRB to rate games.Well sorry ESRB, you're not going to be able to suck the life out of indie development on the iPhone.
You see, Apple has just replaced you - developers are now required to set age ratings on all apps, including games.This basically means that Apple only has to police the line between adult and non-adult apps, to make sure anything lacking a 17+ rating is really clean.
That's all the ratings were ever good for anyway, below that line it hardly matters if you are a bit off.With Apple doing the level of verification required through the app review process, there's really no need for an ESRB rating though I'm sure some of the bigger game makers will probably get them.
But the lack of them simply will not matter in the gaming environment on the iPhone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333533</id>
	<title>Wild West</title>
	<author>Crock23A</author>
	<datestamp>1245068400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The iPhone is still a new platform and this is the Wild West of its development.  Because the device rivals handheld gaming consoles like the DSi and PSP, it is only inevitable that the ESRB gets involved.  Parental controls being added to iPhone OS 3.0 didn't surprise me either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The iPhone is still a new platform and this is the Wild West of its development .
Because the device rivals handheld gaming consoles like the DSi and PSP , it is only inevitable that the ESRB gets involved .
Parental controls being added to iPhone OS 3.0 did n't surprise me either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iPhone is still a new platform and this is the Wild West of its development.
Because the device rivals handheld gaming consoles like the DSi and PSP, it is only inevitable that the ESRB gets involved.
Parental controls being added to iPhone OS 3.0 didn't surprise me either.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333369</id>
	<title>I believe machinima said it best</title>
	<author>BadAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1245066000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you've got a browser, <a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5430343841227974645" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">this one's for you</a> [google.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 've got a browser , this one 's for you [ google.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you've got a browser, this one's for you [google.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334287</id>
	<title>Re:This is for children?</title>
	<author>rob1980</author>
	<datestamp>1245075900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe this applies to the iPod Touch as well.  Same OS, same access to games on the App Store.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe this applies to the iPod Touch as well .
Same OS , same access to games on the App Store .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe this applies to the iPod Touch as well.
Same OS, same access to games on the App Store.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334083</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334009</id>
	<title>Re:Seems pointless</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245073620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the ESRB believe it is a real ratings board and in order to prevent its irrelevance occasionally needs to stick its nose in where it doesn't belong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the ESRB believe it is a real ratings board and in order to prevent its irrelevance occasionally needs to stick its nose in where it does n't belong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the ESRB believe it is a real ratings board and in order to prevent its irrelevance occasionally needs to stick its nose in where it doesn't belong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333499</id>
	<title>Time is Money</title>
	<author>qpawn</author>
	<datestamp>1245067860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple has been known to take a long time to review many apps.  If they were to have games rated through the ESRB, how much longer the process would take?  On the same note, how much longer would it take to resubmit your app for approval if there is a rating dispute?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple has been known to take a long time to review many apps .
If they were to have games rated through the ESRB , how much longer the process would take ?
On the same note , how much longer would it take to resubmit your app for approval if there is a rating dispute ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple has been known to take a long time to review many apps.
If they were to have games rated through the ESRB, how much longer the process would take?
On the same note, how much longer would it take to resubmit your app for approval if there is a rating dispute?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333461</id>
	<title>what they really need....</title>
	<author>larry bagina</author>
	<datestamp>1245067260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>is a cowboyneal review board to certify the fart apps.</htmltext>
<tokenext>is a cowboyneal review board to certify the fart apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is a cowboyneal review board to certify the fart apps.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333391</id>
	<title>Seems pointless</title>
	<author>Bogtha</author>
	<datestamp>1245066300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>When you submit an app to the App Store, you already have to select various categories your app falls into (e.g. you might select <i>realistic violence: frequent/intense</i>), which result in a rating that is a direct analogue of ESRB ratings (Apple publishes a table showing the equivalents).  iPhone OS 3.0 will make use of these ratings so a parent can lock out content they think is inappropriate from their children's phones.  Apple have shown themselves more than willing to lay down the law to app developers, so why would the ESRB need to get involved?</htmltext>
<tokenext>When you submit an app to the App Store , you already have to select various categories your app falls into ( e.g .
you might select realistic violence : frequent/intense ) , which result in a rating that is a direct analogue of ESRB ratings ( Apple publishes a table showing the equivalents ) .
iPhone OS 3.0 will make use of these ratings so a parent can lock out content they think is inappropriate from their children 's phones .
Apple have shown themselves more than willing to lay down the law to app developers , so why would the ESRB need to get involved ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you submit an app to the App Store, you already have to select various categories your app falls into (e.g.
you might select realistic violence: frequent/intense), which result in a rating that is a direct analogue of ESRB ratings (Apple publishes a table showing the equivalents).
iPhone OS 3.0 will make use of these ratings so a parent can lock out content they think is inappropriate from their children's phones.
Apple have shown themselves more than willing to lay down the law to app developers, so why would the ESRB need to get involved?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333555</id>
	<title>Say what?</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1245068640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the ESRB levies a fee that covers the cost of looking through the code and rating the game.</p></div><p>The ESRB evaluates games by looking at the code? I very much doubt that. Wouldn't they be looking at the compiled game as it appears to the consumer?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the ESRB levies a fee that covers the cost of looking through the code and rating the game.The ESRB evaluates games by looking at the code ?
I very much doubt that .
Would n't they be looking at the compiled game as it appears to the consumer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the ESRB levies a fee that covers the cost of looking through the code and rating the game.The ESRB evaluates games by looking at the code?
I very much doubt that.
Wouldn't they be looking at the compiled game as it appears to the consumer?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28336907</id>
	<title>Last I checked</title>
	<author>stickrnan</author>
	<datestamp>1245088200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the developers didn't submit code to the ESRB. The packet submit to the ESRB includes video of the game and descriptions of material of note ("character makes racially inflamed comments at X cutscene" or "suggestive character animations with Y action").</p><p>It's been a while since I've been in the industry and I only had to prep a packet once (pre-hot coffee). If anyone feels they should correct me with recent changes, please feel free.</p><p>It's a pretty simple act of watching a tape and reading a report for the ESRB. They have a set of rules put against the information given and apply the rating based on that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the developers did n't submit code to the ESRB .
The packet submit to the ESRB includes video of the game and descriptions of material of note ( " character makes racially inflamed comments at X cutscene " or " suggestive character animations with Y action " ) .It 's been a while since I 've been in the industry and I only had to prep a packet once ( pre-hot coffee ) .
If anyone feels they should correct me with recent changes , please feel free.It 's a pretty simple act of watching a tape and reading a report for the ESRB .
They have a set of rules put against the information given and apply the rating based on that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the developers didn't submit code to the ESRB.
The packet submit to the ESRB includes video of the game and descriptions of material of note ("character makes racially inflamed comments at X cutscene" or "suggestive character animations with Y action").It's been a while since I've been in the industry and I only had to prep a packet once (pre-hot coffee).
If anyone feels they should correct me with recent changes, please feel free.It's a pretty simple act of watching a tape and reading a report for the ESRB.
They have a set of rules put against the information given and apply the rating based on that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335459</id>
	<title>Re:Game experience may change during online play</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1245082260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>based on the ohsosubjective ratings process. These guys provide no value-add [...]</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>ESRB staff reviews the raters' recommended rating category and content descriptors, conducts a parity examination where appropriate to maintain consistency in rating assignments</p></div><p>Taking them at their word (this should raise a red flag, but let's just play "what if" for the moment), they try to make the ratings consistent with at least themselves.</p><p>This would mean that if you have experienced, say, Twilight Princess which has PEGI rating 12+ for violence (let's just assume it's rated Teen:Violence by ESRB), you know that a rating of Mature:Violence is going to be more violent and a game rated "Everyone" (no violence) is going to be less violent.  That's (probably) the proposed value of ESRB.  Whether you find it valuable is for you to decide. Disagreeing is perfectly valid (I do); agreeing because you trust the ESRB is also valid (although the question "what do you based your trust in ESRB on?" might be revealing).  Acknowledging that you'd really want to judge yourself and discuss game content with your kids if you had the time, but you really prefer working so you can feed your kids... is also valid (and an unfortunate situation to be in).</p><p>Also, how could the process be made less subjective?  I'm sure it would be possible to do psych experiments to see whether the particular imagery in one game causes players to be violent, and how that causality is dependent on age, but that's expensive and time-consuming.  Guesstimating the game industry time scales, it can range between wildly or only moderately impossible.  You could also do broad-brushed experiments and build up general guidelines which you then use to judge the game in question.  For instance, do the potential harmful effects of depictions of violence depend on whether the target of violence is a human or not (say, an animal or a fantasy creature such as a dragon or zombie)?  Does the display of blood vs. cartoony "Kapoww!!!" jagged polygons influence this?  (And so forth).  Even if you know the general guidelines, with enough variables, the guesstimation you have to do will become subjective.</p><p>Do you have a good idea how it could be made less subjective?</p><p>(I don't know how well ESRB works in practice, although I suspect them to be over-cautious)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>based on the ohsosubjective ratings process .
These guys provide no value-add [ ... ] ESRB staff reviews the raters ' recommended rating category and content descriptors , conducts a parity examination where appropriate to maintain consistency in rating assignmentsTaking them at their word ( this should raise a red flag , but let 's just play " what if " for the moment ) , they try to make the ratings consistent with at least themselves.This would mean that if you have experienced , say , Twilight Princess which has PEGI rating 12 + for violence ( let 's just assume it 's rated Teen : Violence by ESRB ) , you know that a rating of Mature : Violence is going to be more violent and a game rated " Everyone " ( no violence ) is going to be less violent .
That 's ( probably ) the proposed value of ESRB .
Whether you find it valuable is for you to decide .
Disagreeing is perfectly valid ( I do ) ; agreeing because you trust the ESRB is also valid ( although the question " what do you based your trust in ESRB on ?
" might be revealing ) .
Acknowledging that you 'd really want to judge yourself and discuss game content with your kids if you had the time , but you really prefer working so you can feed your kids... is also valid ( and an unfortunate situation to be in ) .Also , how could the process be made less subjective ?
I 'm sure it would be possible to do psych experiments to see whether the particular imagery in one game causes players to be violent , and how that causality is dependent on age , but that 's expensive and time-consuming .
Guesstimating the game industry time scales , it can range between wildly or only moderately impossible .
You could also do broad-brushed experiments and build up general guidelines which you then use to judge the game in question .
For instance , do the potential harmful effects of depictions of violence depend on whether the target of violence is a human or not ( say , an animal or a fantasy creature such as a dragon or zombie ) ?
Does the display of blood vs. cartoony " Kapoww ! ! !
" jagged polygons influence this ?
( And so forth ) .
Even if you know the general guidelines , with enough variables , the guesstimation you have to do will become subjective.Do you have a good idea how it could be made less subjective ?
( I do n't know how well ESRB works in practice , although I suspect them to be over-cautious )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>based on the ohsosubjective ratings process.
These guys provide no value-add [...]ESRB staff reviews the raters' recommended rating category and content descriptors, conducts a parity examination where appropriate to maintain consistency in rating assignmentsTaking them at their word (this should raise a red flag, but let's just play "what if" for the moment), they try to make the ratings consistent with at least themselves.This would mean that if you have experienced, say, Twilight Princess which has PEGI rating 12+ for violence (let's just assume it's rated Teen:Violence by ESRB), you know that a rating of Mature:Violence is going to be more violent and a game rated "Everyone" (no violence) is going to be less violent.
That's (probably) the proposed value of ESRB.
Whether you find it valuable is for you to decide.
Disagreeing is perfectly valid (I do); agreeing because you trust the ESRB is also valid (although the question "what do you based your trust in ESRB on?
" might be revealing).
Acknowledging that you'd really want to judge yourself and discuss game content with your kids if you had the time, but you really prefer working so you can feed your kids... is also valid (and an unfortunate situation to be in).Also, how could the process be made less subjective?
I'm sure it would be possible to do psych experiments to see whether the particular imagery in one game causes players to be violent, and how that causality is dependent on age, but that's expensive and time-consuming.
Guesstimating the game industry time scales, it can range between wildly or only moderately impossible.
You could also do broad-brushed experiments and build up general guidelines which you then use to judge the game in question.
For instance, do the potential harmful effects of depictions of violence depend on whether the target of violence is a human or not (say, an animal or a fantasy creature such as a dragon or zombie)?
Does the display of blood vs. cartoony "Kapoww!!!
" jagged polygons influence this?
(And so forth).
Even if you know the general guidelines, with enough variables, the guesstimation you have to do will become subjective.Do you have a good idea how it could be made less subjective?
(I don't know how well ESRB works in practice, although I suspect them to be over-cautious)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333483</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333567</id>
	<title>Think of the children!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245068760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is to protect all those young, impressionable minds out there that can afford a $400 phone and $100 a month for 3G service! Seriously, if a kid has one of these, he has more important things to worry about than "mature" elements in the games. Like getting mugged for this very expensive piece of hardware for instance. Won't somebody think of the children, and not load them up with this expensive shit that is just an invitation for them to get jacked?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is to protect all those young , impressionable minds out there that can afford a $ 400 phone and $ 100 a month for 3G service !
Seriously , if a kid has one of these , he has more important things to worry about than " mature " elements in the games .
Like getting mugged for this very expensive piece of hardware for instance .
Wo n't somebody think of the children , and not load them up with this expensive shit that is just an invitation for them to get jacked ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is to protect all those young, impressionable minds out there that can afford a $400 phone and $100 a month for 3G service!
Seriously, if a kid has one of these, he has more important things to worry about than "mature" elements in the games.
Like getting mugged for this very expensive piece of hardware for instance.
Won't somebody think of the children, and not load them up with this expensive shit that is just an invitation for them to get jacked?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333483</id>
	<title>Game experience may change during online play</title>
	<author>Sun.Jedi</author>
	<datestamp>1245067620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't buy or play games based on their ESRB rating. I do not judge games or content for my children based on the ohsosubjective <a href="http://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings\_process.jsp" title="esrb.org">ratings process</a> [esrb.org]. These guys provide no value-add, just seems to be a money catch. <br> <br>

Oh, <a href="http://www.mpaa.org/FlmRat\_Ratings.asp" title="mpaa.org">MPAA</a> [mpaa.org], you can lose your ratings as well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I'm an adult, a participating parent, and I prefer to allow my children to experience and ask questions rather than become numb little fat kids with Nicktoons as a babysitter and therefore do not need your assistance in choosing appropriate content for my children.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't buy or play games based on their ESRB rating .
I do not judge games or content for my children based on the ohsosubjective ratings process [ esrb.org ] .
These guys provide no value-add , just seems to be a money catch .
Oh , MPAA [ mpaa.org ] , you can lose your ratings as well ... I 'm an adult , a participating parent , and I prefer to allow my children to experience and ask questions rather than become numb little fat kids with Nicktoons as a babysitter and therefore do not need your assistance in choosing appropriate content for my children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't buy or play games based on their ESRB rating.
I do not judge games or content for my children based on the ohsosubjective ratings process [esrb.org].
These guys provide no value-add, just seems to be a money catch.
Oh, MPAA [mpaa.org], you can lose your ratings as well ... I'm an adult, a participating parent, and I prefer to allow my children to experience and ask questions rather than become numb little fat kids with Nicktoons as a babysitter and therefore do not need your assistance in choosing appropriate content for my children.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333615</id>
	<title>Re:Say what?</title>
	<author>bipbop</author>
	<datestamp>1245069480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's changed a bit since the whole "Hot Coffee" thing, but for most of the existence of the ESRB, you basically rated your own game, sent them a tape with some stuff from the game, and then they rubber stamped it in exchange for your cash.  It's pretty stupid, really.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's changed a bit since the whole " Hot Coffee " thing , but for most of the existence of the ESRB , you basically rated your own game , sent them a tape with some stuff from the game , and then they rubber stamped it in exchange for your cash .
It 's pretty stupid , really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's changed a bit since the whole "Hot Coffee" thing, but for most of the existence of the ESRB, you basically rated your own game, sent them a tape with some stuff from the game, and then they rubber stamped it in exchange for your cash.
It's pretty stupid, really.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335993</id>
	<title>Re:ESRB Can Go Stick It</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245084360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Although it's a nice thought, the truth behind this is that many big retail stores such as Walmart and Target won't carry the game without a rating from the ESRB.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Although it 's a nice thought , the truth behind this is that many big retail stores such as Walmart and Target wo n't carry the game without a rating from the ESRB .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although it's a nice thought, the truth behind this is that many big retail stores such as Walmart and Target won't carry the game without a rating from the ESRB.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28336083</id>
	<title>Cashgrab?</title>
	<author>twidarkling</author>
	<datestamp>1245084660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The ESRB is <i>non-profit</i>. You can't exactly make a cash-grab if you're a non-profit entity. Anyone who says this is a cash grab is obviously just knee-jerk anti-regulatory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The ESRB is non-profit .
You ca n't exactly make a cash-grab if you 're a non-profit entity .
Anyone who says this is a cash grab is obviously just knee-jerk anti-regulatory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ESRB is non-profit.
You can't exactly make a cash-grab if you're a non-profit entity.
Anyone who says this is a cash grab is obviously just knee-jerk anti-regulatory.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334347</id>
	<title>Re:Game experience may change during online play</title>
	<author>jellomizer</author>
	<datestamp>1245076260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You shouldn't use Any rating system as a fixed in stone, however more of a guide line.</p><p>I have seen some fairly disturbing G movies. as well some tame R. However you should see them as a normal curve line where the peaks are at different parts of the scale.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should n't use Any rating system as a fixed in stone , however more of a guide line.I have seen some fairly disturbing G movies .
as well some tame R. However you should see them as a normal curve line where the peaks are at different parts of the scale .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You shouldn't use Any rating system as a fixed in stone, however more of a guide line.I have seen some fairly disturbing G movies.
as well some tame R. However you should see them as a normal curve line where the peaks are at different parts of the scale.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333483</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334569</id>
	<title>Re:Think of the children!</title>
	<author>EvilIdler</author>
	<datestamp>1245077700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They could also be one of the many kids with a $229 iPod touch and no monthly contract. With nearly half the iDevices being touches, I'm sure there are at least a few kids among them. Isn't a PSP slightly more expensive, or around the same price?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They could also be one of the many kids with a $ 229 iPod touch and no monthly contract .
With nearly half the iDevices being touches , I 'm sure there are at least a few kids among them .
Is n't a PSP slightly more expensive , or around the same price ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They could also be one of the many kids with a $229 iPod touch and no monthly contract.
With nearly half the iDevices being touches, I'm sure there are at least a few kids among them.
Isn't a PSP slightly more expensive, or around the same price?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333823</id>
	<title>Re:Seems pointless</title>
	<author>broken\_chaos</author>
	<datestamp>1245071760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why wouldn't they? If someone reports it as incorrectly rated, I would think Apple would either take it down or (hopefully) correct the inconsistency - and in either case, contact the developer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would n't they ?
If someone reports it as incorrectly rated , I would think Apple would either take it down or ( hopefully ) correct the inconsistency - and in either case , contact the developer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why wouldn't they?
If someone reports it as incorrectly rated, I would think Apple would either take it down or (hopefully) correct the inconsistency - and in either case, contact the developer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333593</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334671</id>
	<title>This could spell doom for variety...</title>
	<author>BobMcD</author>
	<datestamp>1245078300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Apple's behavior is <a href="http://apple.slashdot.org/story/09/05/21/218213/On-iPhone-Searching-For-Kama-Sutra--Porn" title="slashdot.org">consistent</a> [slashdot.org], this could be a very bad thing indeed.</p><p>If you remember from the linked story above, Apple blocked an e-reader because it was possible to read the Kama Sutra on it.</p><p>I would not be surprised in the least to see Apple adopt a 'no unrated games' option for their store.</p><p>Given the bandwidth issues and cost suggested in TFS, this could be quite bad indeed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Apple 's behavior is consistent [ slashdot.org ] , this could be a very bad thing indeed.If you remember from the linked story above , Apple blocked an e-reader because it was possible to read the Kama Sutra on it.I would not be surprised in the least to see Apple adopt a 'no unrated games ' option for their store.Given the bandwidth issues and cost suggested in TFS , this could be quite bad indeed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Apple's behavior is consistent [slashdot.org], this could be a very bad thing indeed.If you remember from the linked story above, Apple blocked an e-reader because it was possible to read the Kama Sutra on it.I would not be surprised in the least to see Apple adopt a 'no unrated games' option for their store.Given the bandwidth issues and cost suggested in TFS, this could be quite bad indeed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333593</id>
	<title>Re:Seems pointless</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245069000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As much as I'm opposed to these ratings in general...</p><p>You probably can't depend on the app developer to rate the app appropriately.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I 'm opposed to these ratings in general...You probably ca n't depend on the app developer to rate the app appropriately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as I'm opposed to these ratings in general...You probably can't depend on the app developer to rate the app appropriately.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28337691</id>
	<title>Re:This is for children?</title>
	<author>professorguy</author>
	<datestamp>1245091920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can I quickly ask what the fuck an 11 year old is doing with an iPod?  Or any device that REQUIRES him to start charging items to your credit card?
<br>
<br>
Are you people smoking crack?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I quickly ask what the fuck an 11 year old is doing with an iPod ?
Or any device that REQUIRES him to start charging items to your credit card ?
Are you people smoking crack ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I quickly ask what the fuck an 11 year old is doing with an iPod?
Or any device that REQUIRES him to start charging items to your credit card?
Are you people smoking crack?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334083</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28344117</id>
	<title>Re:Think of the children!</title>
	<author>ekhben</author>
	<datestamp>1245084840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a sad statement on modern civilisation that kids in "first world" countries are so likely to get mugged in their home towns in broad daylight that it's taken as par for the course.

</p><p>Wups, too down, time to read happy news!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a sad statement on modern civilisation that kids in " first world " countries are so likely to get mugged in their home towns in broad daylight that it 's taken as par for the course .
Wups , too down , time to read happy news !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a sad statement on modern civilisation that kids in "first world" countries are so likely to get mugged in their home towns in broad daylight that it's taken as par for the course.
Wups, too down, time to read happy news!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333873</id>
	<title>ESRB Can Go Stick It</title>
	<author>sanosuke001</author>
	<datestamp>1245072420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wish game companies would tell the ESRB to stick it. They're unregulated, inconsistent, and parents buy their kids games regardless of their ESRB rating most of the time. I would rather see a more useful rating system where they rate different categories separately. Give each game a 4-digit code; Violence, Sexual Content, Language, and Realism. 0-5 for each category. 0000 would be like Strawberry Shortcake's Magical Adventure and 5555 would be Duke Nukem Meets Leisure Suit Larry.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish game companies would tell the ESRB to stick it .
They 're unregulated , inconsistent , and parents buy their kids games regardless of their ESRB rating most of the time .
I would rather see a more useful rating system where they rate different categories separately .
Give each game a 4-digit code ; Violence , Sexual Content , Language , and Realism .
0-5 for each category .
0000 would be like Strawberry Shortcake 's Magical Adventure and 5555 would be Duke Nukem Meets Leisure Suit Larry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish game companies would tell the ESRB to stick it.
They're unregulated, inconsistent, and parents buy their kids games regardless of their ESRB rating most of the time.
I would rather see a more useful rating system where they rate different categories separately.
Give each game a 4-digit code; Violence, Sexual Content, Language, and Realism.
0-5 for each category.
0000 would be like Strawberry Shortcake's Magical Adventure and 5555 would be Duke Nukem Meets Leisure Suit Larry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333581</id>
	<title>Re:Game experience may change during online play</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1245068880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Still, I think the MPAA should require all new Disney children's releases to carry the label: "Warning: May contain fart jokes."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Still , I think the MPAA should require all new Disney children 's releases to carry the label : " Warning : May contain fart jokes .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Still, I think the MPAA should require all new Disney children's releases to carry the label: "Warning: May contain fart jokes.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333483</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28339753</id>
	<title>Re:Say what?</title>
	<author>g-san</author>
	<datestamp>1245056640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If that's the case, I'm going to run a genetic code generator for a few thousand iterations, get some really meaningless routines, make a random main(), add some TicTacToe code, then submit it for review: HotTicTacToe as a 7MB binary... Let them figure it out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If that 's the case , I 'm going to run a genetic code generator for a few thousand iterations , get some really meaningless routines , make a random main ( ) , add some TicTacToe code , then submit it for review : HotTicTacToe as a 7MB binary... Let them figure it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If that's the case, I'm going to run a genetic code generator for a few thousand iterations, get some really meaningless routines, make a random main(), add some TicTacToe code, then submit it for review: HotTicTacToe as a 7MB binary... Let them figure it out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335919</id>
	<title>Re:Cashgrab</title>
	<author>twidarkling</author>
	<datestamp>1245084000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, probably the best reason is this: Why should Apple get a free ride on its games? The PSP and DS need their games rated, and the iPhone is being pushed as a viable gaming platform, with an install base reaching the PSP's. If Apple's platform is outside the established ratings, and becomes very much popular, the voluntary ratings system falls apart. The ESRB is administered by the industry, which is preferable to a governmental agency doing so, and remember, the government over the years has said that if movies or video games didn't handle it themselves, they would.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , probably the best reason is this : Why should Apple get a free ride on its games ?
The PSP and DS need their games rated , and the iPhone is being pushed as a viable gaming platform , with an install base reaching the PSP 's .
If Apple 's platform is outside the established ratings , and becomes very much popular , the voluntary ratings system falls apart .
The ESRB is administered by the industry , which is preferable to a governmental agency doing so , and remember , the government over the years has said that if movies or video games did n't handle it themselves , they would .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, probably the best reason is this: Why should Apple get a free ride on its games?
The PSP and DS need their games rated, and the iPhone is being pushed as a viable gaming platform, with an install base reaching the PSP's.
If Apple's platform is outside the established ratings, and becomes very much popular, the voluntary ratings system falls apart.
The ESRB is administered by the industry, which is preferable to a governmental agency doing so, and remember, the government over the years has said that if movies or video games didn't handle it themselves, they would.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335279</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335279</id>
	<title>Cashgrab</title>
	<author>Alaren</author>
	<datestamp>1245081240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...so why would the ESRB need to get involved?</p></div></blockquote><p>Just read the tags.

</p><p>The ESRB doesn't rate games out of the goodness of its heart.  It's not funded by a generous contribution from viewers like you.  Ratings cost money, often far more money than small developers could hope to afford.  The ESRB sees a growing market and wants its cut.

</p><p>While there may be a political argument for ratings (i.e. keep the politicians out of that business), that political argument is completely separate from the "standards" argument--in other words, I believe that a consistent, instantly recognizable ratings system a la the ESRB is unnecessary to satisfy the courts that there is a "less restrictive means" than government interference, which plays a major role in relevant First Amendment cases (I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice).

</p><p>So yeah, if I were a small iPhone game developer, I would condemn the ESRB's reaching for my money in the strongest language possible, and point out that content is already put through a review process by Apple.

</p><p>P.S. Why is there no whitespace between my HTML paragraphs!?  Very sad...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...so why would the ESRB need to get involved ? Just read the tags .
The ESRB does n't rate games out of the goodness of its heart .
It 's not funded by a generous contribution from viewers like you .
Ratings cost money , often far more money than small developers could hope to afford .
The ESRB sees a growing market and wants its cut .
While there may be a political argument for ratings ( i.e .
keep the politicians out of that business ) , that political argument is completely separate from the " standards " argument--in other words , I believe that a consistent , instantly recognizable ratings system a la the ESRB is unnecessary to satisfy the courts that there is a " less restrictive means " than government interference , which plays a major role in relevant First Amendment cases ( I am not a lawyer , this is not legal advice ) .
So yeah , if I were a small iPhone game developer , I would condemn the ESRB 's reaching for my money in the strongest language possible , and point out that content is already put through a review process by Apple .
P.S. Why is there no whitespace between my HTML paragraphs ! ?
Very sad.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...so why would the ESRB need to get involved?Just read the tags.
The ESRB doesn't rate games out of the goodness of its heart.
It's not funded by a generous contribution from viewers like you.
Ratings cost money, often far more money than small developers could hope to afford.
The ESRB sees a growing market and wants its cut.
While there may be a political argument for ratings (i.e.
keep the politicians out of that business), that political argument is completely separate from the "standards" argument--in other words, I believe that a consistent, instantly recognizable ratings system a la the ESRB is unnecessary to satisfy the courts that there is a "less restrictive means" than government interference, which plays a major role in relevant First Amendment cases (I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice).
So yeah, if I were a small iPhone game developer, I would condemn the ESRB's reaching for my money in the strongest language possible, and point out that content is already put through a review process by Apple.
P.S. Why is there no whitespace between my HTML paragraphs!?
Very sad...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333391</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333633</id>
	<title>Come on parents . . .</title>
	<author>spamking</author>
	<datestamp>1245069780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Be involved with your kids and actually take a look at what they're playing/downloading and act accordingly.  Take it upon yourself to rate their games/apps.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Be involved with your kids and actually take a look at what they 're playing/downloading and act accordingly .
Take it upon yourself to rate their games/apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be involved with your kids and actually take a look at what they're playing/downloading and act accordingly.
Take it upon yourself to rate their games/apps.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334083</id>
	<title>This is for children?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245074460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So this is for all those 11 year olds with iPhones?  Can I quickly ask what the fuck an 11 year old is doing with an iPhone?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So this is for all those 11 year olds with iPhones ?
Can I quickly ask what the fuck an 11 year old is doing with an iPhone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So this is for all those 11 year olds with iPhones?
Can I quickly ask what the fuck an 11 year old is doing with an iPhone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333549</id>
	<title>EC, E, E10+, T, M, AO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245068520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ESRB should forget about the iPhone and start rating desktop applications. I'd like to know if it's acceptable to let teenagers play with NURBS in 3DS Max</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ESRB should forget about the iPhone and start rating desktop applications .
I 'd like to know if it 's acceptable to let teenagers play with NURBS in 3DS Max</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ESRB should forget about the iPhone and start rating desktop applications.
I'd like to know if it's acceptable to let teenagers play with NURBS in 3DS Max</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333525</id>
	<title>If I made a game...</title>
	<author>Stormwatch</author>
	<datestamp>1245068280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>...I'd use <a href="http://www.tigrs.org/" title="tigrs.org"> <b>TIGRS</b> </a> [tigrs.org] rather than ESRB.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...I 'd use TIGRS [ tigrs.org ] rather than ESRB .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...I'd use  TIGRS  [tigrs.org] rather than ESRB.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28337691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334083
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333873
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28339753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333615
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335279
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334347
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334569
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334287
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334083
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28344117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334091
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333593
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_0248208_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334009
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_0248208.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28336083
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_0248208.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333549
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_0248208.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333555
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28339753
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_0248208.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333483
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335459
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333581
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334347
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_0248208.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333525
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_0248208.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333499
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_0248208.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335993
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_0248208.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334083
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28337691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334287
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_0248208.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333391
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334009
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335279
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28335919
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334091
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333593
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333753
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333823
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_0248208.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333461
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_0248208.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28333567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28344117
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_0248208.28334569
</commentlist>
</conversation>
