<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_15_2245215</id>
	<title>Bing Gets Porn Domain To Filter Explicit Content</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1245057960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>sopssa writes <i>"Bing has set up a <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;articleId=9134395">separate domain just for porn images and videos</a>. '[The] general manager of Microsoft Bing said in a blog post that potentially explicit images and video content now will be coming from one separate domain &mdash; explicit.bing.net. 'This is invisible to the end customer, but allows for filtering of that content by domain which makes it much easier for customers at all levels to block this content regardless of what the SafeSearch settings might be.' When Bing was first launched, there was some online chatter about explicit images popping up when videos were 'previewed' in the search results. This means the thumbnails and videos are served from that domain, allowing easy filter of them in corporate and school networks. Users still normally use www.bing.com. Instead of heavily filtering the results, this is quite a good move."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>sopssa writes " Bing has set up a separate domain just for porn images and videos .
' [ The ] general manager of Microsoft Bing said in a blog post that potentially explicit images and video content now will be coming from one separate domain    explicit.bing.net .
'This is invisible to the end customer , but allows for filtering of that content by domain which makes it much easier for customers at all levels to block this content regardless of what the SafeSearch settings might be .
' When Bing was first launched , there was some online chatter about explicit images popping up when videos were 'previewed ' in the search results .
This means the thumbnails and videos are served from that domain , allowing easy filter of them in corporate and school networks .
Users still normally use www.bing.com .
Instead of heavily filtering the results , this is quite a good move .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sopssa writes "Bing has set up a separate domain just for porn images and videos.
'[The] general manager of Microsoft Bing said in a blog post that potentially explicit images and video content now will be coming from one separate domain — explicit.bing.net.
'This is invisible to the end customer, but allows for filtering of that content by domain which makes it much easier for customers at all levels to block this content regardless of what the SafeSearch settings might be.
' When Bing was first launched, there was some online chatter about explicit images popping up when videos were 'previewed' in the search results.
This means the thumbnails and videos are served from that domain, allowing easy filter of them in corporate and school networks.
Users still normally use www.bing.com.
Instead of heavily filtering the results, this is quite a good move.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346107</id>
	<title>A better idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245155700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think they should rename the domain boing.bing.com then let users search only that domain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think they should rename the domain boing.bing.com then let users search only that domain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think they should rename the domain boing.bing.com then let users search only that domain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347739</id>
	<title>"explicit": what dumb word</title>
	<author>Cajun Hell</author>
	<datestamp>1245168060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Explicit" is an even stupider way to describe porn than "graphic" is, because it always applies to <em>way</em> more than what you really <em>mean</em>.  If you mean porn, then say "porn."
</p><p>It always amused me when music albums used to come with an "parental advisory: explicit lyrics" warning; they might as well have just said, "look out, this album isn't all just instrumental" or "warning: not much abstract symbolism, the writer actually knows how to write."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Explicit " is an even stupider way to describe porn than " graphic " is , because it always applies to way more than what you really mean .
If you mean porn , then say " porn .
" It always amused me when music albums used to come with an " parental advisory : explicit lyrics " warning ; they might as well have just said , " look out , this album is n't all just instrumental " or " warning : not much abstract symbolism , the writer actually knows how to write .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Explicit" is an even stupider way to describe porn than "graphic" is, because it always applies to way more than what you really mean.
If you mean porn, then say "porn.
"
It always amused me when music albums used to come with an "parental advisory: explicit lyrics" warning; they might as well have just said, "look out, this album isn't all just instrumental" or "warning: not much abstract symbolism, the writer actually knows how to write.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28396263</id>
	<title>Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245408240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, but a subdomain is still a domain. Also if you closely RTFS, you'll note that the "porn mode" domain is a subdomain of bing.<em>net</em>, not bing.<em>com</em>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , but a subdomain is still a domain .
Also if you closely RTFS , you 'll note that the " porn mode " domain is a subdomain of bing.net , not bing.com .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, but a subdomain is still a domain.
Also if you closely RTFS, you'll note that the "porn mode" domain is a subdomain of bing.net, not bing.com.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28350381</id>
	<title>Re:Linux filter and interesting suggestions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245177600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The explanation for this that I found most plausible is as follows:</p><p>Bing's customer base is a higher percentage Microsoft fans than Google's is. Alternatively, internal testing means the majority of searches so far were by MS employees.</p><p>Microsofties are more likely to be searching for Windows-Linux comparisons, as an idea of what they're doing well and not-so-well on (for employees) and to see what this linux thing is and how hard it would be to try it out/if they should switch (others).</p><p>Additionally, what the fuck? "linux mint" is in the top five? I'd never even HEARD of mint before now (except for the plant, flavor, and financial management website)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The explanation for this that I found most plausible is as follows : Bing 's customer base is a higher percentage Microsoft fans than Google 's is .
Alternatively , internal testing means the majority of searches so far were by MS employees.Microsofties are more likely to be searching for Windows-Linux comparisons , as an idea of what they 're doing well and not-so-well on ( for employees ) and to see what this linux thing is and how hard it would be to try it out/if they should switch ( others ) .Additionally , what the fuck ?
" linux mint " is in the top five ?
I 'd never even HEARD of mint before now ( except for the plant , flavor , and financial management website )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The explanation for this that I found most plausible is as follows:Bing's customer base is a higher percentage Microsoft fans than Google's is.
Alternatively, internal testing means the majority of searches so far were by MS employees.Microsofties are more likely to be searching for Windows-Linux comparisons, as an idea of what they're doing well and not-so-well on (for employees) and to see what this linux thing is and how hard it would be to try it out/if they should switch (others).Additionally, what the fuck?
"linux mint" is in the top five?
I'd never even HEARD of mint before now (except for the plant, flavor, and financial management website)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346221</id>
	<title>Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...</title>
	<author>Barny</author>
	<datestamp>1245157620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You think an MCSE could tell the difference?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You think an MCSE could tell the difference ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You think an MCSE could tell the difference?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345757</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345935</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1245153300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://xkcd.com/305/" title="xkcd.com">Rule 34</a> [xkcd.com] <br> <br>That site now exists, and the content isn't half bad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Rule 34 [ xkcd.com ] That site now exists , and the content is n't half bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rule 34 [xkcd.com]  That site now exists, and the content isn't half bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346133</id>
	<title>how to block adult web sites</title>
	<author>viralMeme</author>
	<datestamp>1245156120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.opendns.com/support/article/116" title="opendns.com">how to block adult web sites</a> [opendns.com], the non Microsoft way. Of course this doesn't deserve a whole article on slashdot<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>how to block adult web sites [ opendns.com ] , the non Microsoft way .
Of course this does n't deserve a whole article on slashdot .. : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how to block adult web sites [opendns.com], the non Microsoft way.
Of course this doesn't deserve a whole article on slashdot .. :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28353047</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>soliptic</author>
	<datestamp>1245144480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.</p></div><p>
I'm not an expert and can't even be bothered to google for confirmation of my vague memories, but I'm pretty sure it can easily identify a nude.  What it can't do is distinguish between, say, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La\_maja\_desnuda" title="wikipedia.org">this</a> [wikipedia.org] and, well... you probably have your own bookmarks.</p><p>As the saying goes, obscenity is whatever gives a judge an erection.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it 's easy to identify a nude .
I 'm not an expert and ca n't even be bothered to google for confirmation of my vague memories , but I 'm pretty sure it can easily identify a nude .
What it ca n't do is distinguish between , say , this [ wikipedia.org ] and , well... you probably have your own bookmarks.As the saying goes , obscenity is whatever gives a judge an erection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.
I'm not an expert and can't even be bothered to google for confirmation of my vague memories, but I'm pretty sure it can easily identify a nude.
What it can't do is distinguish between, say, this [wikipedia.org] and, well... you probably have your own bookmarks.As the saying goes, obscenity is whatever gives a judge an erection.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345993</id>
	<title>Dingding, we have a winner</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245154140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For given content access pathway X, define owner of X as a winner if X leads most easily to the highest quality porn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For given content access pathway X , define owner of X as a winner if X leads most easily to the highest quality porn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For given content access pathway X, define owner of X as a winner if X leads most easily to the highest quality porn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28359629</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>ILongForDarkness</author>
	<datestamp>1245240600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Really? Type in pretty much any celebrity and you'll end up with pages of look a likes photoshop or leaked sextapes. I get that crap occasionally at work because people will be telling me about a show I've never heard of and say you know that girl from<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... is in it. Mhh, I get that even more because it is a new continent for me (so everything seems to be different oddly enough).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
Type in pretty much any celebrity and you 'll end up with pages of look a likes photoshop or leaked sextapes .
I get that crap occasionally at work because people will be telling me about a show I 've never heard of and say you know that girl from ... is in it .
Mhh , I get that even more because it is a new continent for me ( so everything seems to be different oddly enough ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
Type in pretty much any celebrity and you'll end up with pages of look a likes photoshop or leaked sextapes.
I get that crap occasionally at work because people will be telling me about a show I've never heard of and say you know that girl from ... is in it.
Mhh, I get that even more because it is a new continent for me (so everything seems to be different oddly enough).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347435</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>HaZardman27</author>
	<datestamp>1245166620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know what you're searching for, but when I search for images on google, unless I have SafeSearch off, I don't get the results you're describing.  Even when the filter is off, I'm still very rarely bombarded with pornographic content.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know what you 're searching for , but when I search for images on google , unless I have SafeSearch off , I do n't get the results you 're describing .
Even when the filter is off , I 'm still very rarely bombarded with pornographic content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know what you're searching for, but when I search for images on google, unless I have SafeSearch off, I don't get the results you're describing.
Even when the filter is off, I'm still very rarely bombarded with pornographic content.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347575</id>
	<title>Re:One hell of a statement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245167220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Microsoft is never done trying to find new ways to screw their users and kill any competitors no matter how lsrge or small small they may be"</p><p>There, fixed the quote for ya!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Microsoft is never done trying to find new ways to screw their users and kill any competitors no matter how lsrge or small small they may be " There , fixed the quote for ya !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Microsoft is never done trying to find new ways to screw their users and kill any competitors no matter how lsrge or small small they may be"There, fixed the quote for ya!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28350441</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>againjj</author>
	<datestamp>1245177840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Turn on safe search: <a href="http://images.google.com/preferences" title="google.com">http://images.google.com/preferences</a> [google.com]  You do not even have to be logged in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Turn on safe search : http : //images.google.com/preferences [ google.com ] You do not even have to be logged in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Turn on safe search: http://images.google.com/preferences [google.com]  You do not even have to be logged in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346319</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245158820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn. Okay when I'm at home but when I'm at work<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... not so cool.</p></div><p>My advice: spell check before you submit 'pretty much anal thing'. I've never had porn results whe searching for images on google yet...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn .
Okay when I 'm at home but when I 'm at work ... not so cool.My advice : spell check before you submit 'pretty much anal thing' .
I 've never had porn results whe searching for images on google yet.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn.
Okay when I'm at home but when I'm at work ... not so cool.My advice: spell check before you submit 'pretty much anal thing'.
I've never had porn results whe searching for images on google yet...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28351605</id>
	<title>Re:Several uses</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1245181980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>First, an observation:<p>
It would surely have amused - but not surprised - Orwell to hear cries of "Thoughtcrime!" raised when a real crime is being prosecuted.</p><p>
<i>I'd wager that is actually Microsofts main intended user, not individuals/concerned parents. Microsoft: the only halfway innovative technologies they ever come up with are tools of repression.</i> </p><p>
This is just too much.</p><p>
But you got it half right.</p><p> If you want to control the user, you don't begin with the client, you begin with the server.</p><p> The network. The backbone.</p><p>That is why the administrator is universally despised.</p><p>But on which side of the equation will you usually find the geek - and *NIX?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First , an observation : It would surely have amused - but not surprised - Orwell to hear cries of " Thoughtcrime !
" raised when a real crime is being prosecuted .
I 'd wager that is actually Microsofts main intended user , not individuals/concerned parents .
Microsoft : the only halfway innovative technologies they ever come up with are tools of repression .
This is just too much .
But you got it half right .
If you want to control the user , you do n't begin with the client , you begin with the server .
The network .
The backbone.That is why the administrator is universally despised.But on which side of the equation will you usually find the geek - and * NIX ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, an observation:
It would surely have amused - but not surprised - Orwell to hear cries of "Thoughtcrime!
" raised when a real crime is being prosecuted.
I'd wager that is actually Microsofts main intended user, not individuals/concerned parents.
Microsoft: the only halfway innovative technologies they ever come up with are tools of repression.
This is just too much.
But you got it half right.
If you want to control the user, you don't begin with the client, you begin with the server.
The network.
The backbone.That is why the administrator is universally despised.But on which side of the equation will you usually find the geek - and *NIX?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</id>
	<title>good idea</title>
	<author>ILongForDarkness</author>
	<datestamp>1245149520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn. Okay when I'm at home but when I'm at work<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... not so cool.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn .
Okay when I 'm at home but when I 'm at work ... not so cool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn.
Okay when I'm at home but when I'm at work ... not so cool.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345699</id>
	<title>Fear of MS Bob Hope *grips* Google</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245149280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft today heeded the lessons of technological history, taking the popular "preview porn videos in the search engine" feature and turning its <a href="http://notnews.today.com/2009/06/15/fear-of-microsoft-bob-hope-grips-google/" title="today.com" rel="nofollow">Bob Hope search engine</a> [today.com] into a porn finder at the address explicit.bobhope.microsoft.com.

</p><p>"It worked for VHS over Beta, porn sites were leading innovators in online payments. It's a natural synergy," said Steve Ballmer, looking somewhat sweaty and flushed.

</p><p>Porn sites are some of the keenest users of Microsoft technologies, using the undocumented interfaces in Internet Explorer to install helpful toolbars and bulk email tools on users' systems. "It's all about tools. Developers, developers, developers, developers!"

</p><p>Windows 7 final will include a "boot straight into porn" mode. "We found that was what users really wanted in an operating system." It will include the Storm, Conficker and FBI botnets as standard. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."

</p><p>Mr Ballmer promised that Microsoft will, as always, deliver. "Unlike porn sites, we don't just tease &mdash; we really will fuck you. Totally."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft today heeded the lessons of technological history , taking the popular " preview porn videos in the search engine " feature and turning its Bob Hope search engine [ today.com ] into a porn finder at the address explicit.bobhope.microsoft.com .
" It worked for VHS over Beta , porn sites were leading innovators in online payments .
It 's a natural synergy , " said Steve Ballmer , looking somewhat sweaty and flushed .
Porn sites are some of the keenest users of Microsoft technologies , using the undocumented interfaces in Internet Explorer to install helpful toolbars and bulk email tools on users ' systems .
" It 's all about tools .
Developers , developers , developers , developers !
" Windows 7 final will include a " boot straight into porn " mode .
" We found that was what users really wanted in an operating system .
" It will include the Storm , Conficker and FBI botnets as standard .
" If you ca n't beat 'em , join 'em .
" Mr Ballmer promised that Microsoft will , as always , deliver .
" Unlike porn sites , we do n't just tease    we really will fuck you .
Totally. "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft today heeded the lessons of technological history, taking the popular "preview porn videos in the search engine" feature and turning its Bob Hope search engine [today.com] into a porn finder at the address explicit.bobhope.microsoft.com.
"It worked for VHS over Beta, porn sites were leading innovators in online payments.
It's a natural synergy," said Steve Ballmer, looking somewhat sweaty and flushed.
Porn sites are some of the keenest users of Microsoft technologies, using the undocumented interfaces in Internet Explorer to install helpful toolbars and bulk email tools on users' systems.
"It's all about tools.
Developers, developers, developers, developers!
"

Windows 7 final will include a "boot straight into porn" mode.
"We found that was what users really wanted in an operating system.
" It will include the Storm, Conficker and FBI botnets as standard.
"If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
"

Mr Ballmer promised that Microsoft will, as always, deliver.
"Unlike porn sites, we don't just tease — we really will fuck you.
Totally."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346407</id>
	<title>da bing...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245159600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did anyone ask how Tony Soprano felt about this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone ask how Tony Soprano felt about this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone ask how Tony Soprano felt about this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348155</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245170100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.</p></div><p>I think this is actually quite possible. iPhoto (and possibly Picasa, I'm not sure) can detect faces on photos and can identify them. This could be adapted to detect boobs instead of faces, and verify that it's a boob by matching against a database.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it 's easy to identify a nude.I think this is actually quite possible .
iPhoto ( and possibly Picasa , I 'm not sure ) can detect faces on photos and can identify them .
This could be adapted to detect boobs instead of faces , and verify that it 's a boob by matching against a database .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.I think this is actually quite possible.
iPhoto (and possibly Picasa, I'm not sure) can detect faces on photos and can identify them.
This could be adapted to detect boobs instead of faces, and verify that it's a boob by matching against a database.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28353513</id>
	<title>Re:No Wonder MS Failed Once Again</title>
	<author>Elektroschock</author>
	<datestamp>1245146280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course, with Porn as a sales argument. Can't find my porn with Google, need to get Bing, the porn queen.</p><p>What surprises me is that "Porn" is an explicit sales argument for Microsoft. A pawn is a pawn, said Bobby Fisher. What is next? Buy your SS underwear at our nazi.shopping.bing.com? A special Bing for china without Tiananmen massacre plus a special BIng for the Chinese abroad WITH Tiananmen? Bing for you, bing for me?</p><p>MyBing, where you can censor your own web. YourBing, where you can watch what others bing.</p><p>Coming next: Windows Vista 7 launched at gay pride parade "My PCs bings the Mac"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , with Porn as a sales argument .
Ca n't find my porn with Google , need to get Bing , the porn queen.What surprises me is that " Porn " is an explicit sales argument for Microsoft .
A pawn is a pawn , said Bobby Fisher .
What is next ?
Buy your SS underwear at our nazi.shopping.bing.com ?
A special Bing for china without Tiananmen massacre plus a special BIng for the Chinese abroad WITH Tiananmen ?
Bing for you , bing for me ? MyBing , where you can censor your own web .
YourBing , where you can watch what others bing.Coming next : Windows Vista 7 launched at gay pride parade " My PCs bings the Mac "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, with Porn as a sales argument.
Can't find my porn with Google, need to get Bing, the porn queen.What surprises me is that "Porn" is an explicit sales argument for Microsoft.
A pawn is a pawn, said Bobby Fisher.
What is next?
Buy your SS underwear at our nazi.shopping.bing.com?
A special Bing for china without Tiananmen massacre plus a special BIng for the Chinese abroad WITH Tiananmen?
Bing for you, bing for me?MyBing, where you can censor your own web.
YourBing, where you can watch what others bing.Coming next: Windows Vista 7 launched at gay pride parade "My PCs bings the Mac"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346053</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345947</id>
	<title>Re:PR Stroke of Genius!</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1245153420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>normal Bing and <b>xXx</b> Bing</p></div><p>Must be a Vin Diesel thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>normal Bing and xXx BingMust be a Vin Diesel thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>normal Bing and xXx BingMust be a Vin Diesel thing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345773</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346977</id>
	<title>Re:They gave it the wrong name!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245163800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.........adding rimshot</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.........adding rimshot</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.........adding rimshot</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346185</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346803</id>
	<title>Linux filter and interesting suggestions</title>
	<author>avn</author>
	<datestamp>1245162600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>try typing linux into bing... after 'linu' it will give the following suggestions:<br>
linux<br>
linux windows<br>
linux microsoft<br>
linux vista<br>
linux commands<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br> <br>

while google suggests:<br>
linuxtoday<br>
linux<br>
linux commands<br>
linux mint <br>
linux download<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>
<br>
Already seems a little jaded.</htmltext>
<tokenext>try typing linux into bing... after 'linu ' it will give the following suggestions : linux linux windows linux microsoft linux vista linux commands .. . while google suggests : linuxtoday linux linux commands linux mint linux download .. . Already seems a little jaded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>try typing linux into bing... after 'linu' it will give the following suggestions:
linux
linux windows
linux microsoft
linux vista
linux commands ... 

while google suggests:
linuxtoday
linux
linux commands
linux mint 
linux download ...

Already seems a little jaded.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346033</id>
	<title>Re:Hrmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245154860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, there is already PornTube, PornoTube, YouPorn, RedTube, XTube, etc etc...</p><p>(shamefully posting as AC)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , there is already PornTube , PornoTube , YouPorn , RedTube , XTube , etc etc... ( shamefully posting as AC )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, there is already PornTube, PornoTube, YouPorn, RedTube, XTube, etc etc...(shamefully posting as AC)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346589</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>kid\_oliva</author>
	<datestamp>1245160980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What exactly are you typing in that porn is popping up? Me thinks that you forget you are at work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What exactly are you typing in that porn is popping up ?
Me thinks that you forget you are at work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What exactly are you typing in that porn is popping up?
Me thinks that you forget you are at work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346415</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>nem75</author>
	<datestamp>1245159660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Probably stating the obvious, but Google's search has filter options for explicit content, too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably stating the obvious , but Google 's search has filter options for explicit content , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably stating the obvious, but Google's search has filter options for explicit content, too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345693</id>
	<title>BadAnalogyGuy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245149220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BadAnalogyGuy has gone to ground after being outed as a Scientologist.<br>But if he should contact you, offering a free personality test, firmly refuse him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BadAnalogyGuy has gone to ground after being outed as a Scientologist.But if he should contact you , offering a free personality test , firmly refuse him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BadAnalogyGuy has gone to ground after being outed as a Scientologist.But if he should contact you, offering a free personality test, firmly refuse him.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345647</id>
	<title>I wonder...</title>
	<author>qpawn</author>
	<datestamp>1245148320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What are the odds the explicit site is mirrored on Steve Ballmer's personal computer?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What are the odds the explicit site is mirrored on Steve Ballmer 's personal computer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are the odds the explicit site is mirrored on Steve Ballmer's personal computer?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346023</id>
	<title>Surreal</title>
	<author>berpi</author>
	<datestamp>1245154680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who's got the explicitometer to decide which domain to place content in? Censorship is getting increasingly surreal.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who 's got the explicitometer to decide which domain to place content in ?
Censorship is getting increasingly surreal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who's got the explicitometer to decide which domain to place content in?
Censorship is getting increasingly surreal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346219</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>digitalchinky</author>
	<datestamp>1245157560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure if this is a BOFH thing or just a plain old bastardly thing in general, but it is always worth a bit of a chuckle modifying the HR prudes search engine to display unfiltered content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure if this is a BOFH thing or just a plain old bastardly thing in general , but it is always worth a bit of a chuckle modifying the HR prudes search engine to display unfiltered content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure if this is a BOFH thing or just a plain old bastardly thing in general, but it is always worth a bit of a chuckle modifying the HR prudes search engine to display unfiltered content.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28349479</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1245174840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm guessing their definition is something like "Well, no one's buying the whole bing thing, so put up whatever porn will get people there."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit ' ? I 'm guessing their definition is something like " Well , no one 's buying the whole bing thing , so put up whatever porn will get people there .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?I'm guessing their definition is something like "Well, no one's buying the whole bing thing, so put up whatever porn will get people there.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346185</id>
	<title>They gave it the wrong name!!</title>
	<author>ItaliaMatt</author>
	<datestamp>1245157200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Instead of explicit.bing.com it should have been bada.bing.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of explicit.bing.com it should have been bada.bing.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of explicit.bing.com it should have been bada.bing.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346209</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>Barny</author>
	<datestamp>1245157500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh yes, they have worked out a cross-certification deal with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/b/ residents, please expect official papers to arrive via certified post any day now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh yes , they have worked out a cross-certification deal with /b/ residents , please expect official papers to arrive via certified post any day now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh yes, they have worked out a cross-certification deal with /b/ residents, please expect official papers to arrive via certified post any day now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347479</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>RegularFry</author>
	<datestamp>1245166860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nudes? Please, have some <a href="http://www.yangsky.com/researches/physicallinguistics/PLUnderstand/humanbody/blowjob/blowjob.htm" title="yangsky.com">ambition</a> [yangsky.com]!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nudes ?
Please , have some ambition [ yangsky.com ] !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nudes?
Please, have some ambition [yangsky.com]!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346153</id>
	<title>Hands Up (above the table)</title>
	<author>Necroloth</author>
	<datestamp>1245156660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So quick vote for how many clicked on the link in the summary thinking it was a link to xXx Bing?

And I assume those that don't reply merely have sticky fingers...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/hands up</htmltext>
<tokenext>So quick vote for how many clicked on the link in the summary thinking it was a link to xXx Bing ?
And I assume those that do n't reply merely have sticky fingers... /hands up</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So quick vote for how many clicked on the link in the summary thinking it was a link to xXx Bing?
And I assume those that don't reply merely have sticky fingers... /hands up</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346289</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>george929a</author>
	<datestamp>1245158460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn. Okay when I'm at home but when I'm at work<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... not so cool.</p></div><p>....then stop searching for "Big hard disks"....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn .
Okay when I 'm at home but when I 'm at work ... not so cool.....then stop searching for " Big hard disks " ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn.
Okay when I'm at home but when I'm at work ... not so cool.....then stop searching for "Big hard disks"....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345757</id>
	<title>I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...</title>
	<author>Starayo</author>
	<datestamp>1245150000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't that technically a subdomain?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that technically a subdomain ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that technically a subdomain?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347753</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>dodongo</author>
	<datestamp>1245168180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>That would be an interesting job. Microsoft Smut Engineer.</p></div></blockquote><p>Heh.  I've actually done this; not for Microsoft, but another search company (for a \_real\_ search company, one might say to get in a cheap shot<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>It's actually not nearly as much fun as it sounds.  At some point, your soul just feels dirty -- it's not just porn; depending on the strength of the filter, you could also be looking for drugs, innuendo (OK, I really like the innuendo...), hate sites, etc.  Hate sites are the worst.</p><p>While blocking the domain really does sound like a nice feature for anyone running a network they want to lock down, this of course doesn't block the explicit content from any other search engine.  And it's relying on dolts like me (only they work for Microsoft) to make it happen.  I hope they have a lot of dolts.  There's a damn lot of explicit stuff out there!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be an interesting job .
Microsoft Smut Engineer.Heh .
I 've actually done this ; not for Microsoft , but another search company ( for a \ _real \ _ search company , one might say to get in a cheap shot ; ) It 's actually not nearly as much fun as it sounds .
At some point , your soul just feels dirty -- it 's not just porn ; depending on the strength of the filter , you could also be looking for drugs , innuendo ( OK , I really like the innuendo... ) , hate sites , etc .
Hate sites are the worst.While blocking the domain really does sound like a nice feature for anyone running a network they want to lock down , this of course does n't block the explicit content from any other search engine .
And it 's relying on dolts like me ( only they work for Microsoft ) to make it happen .
I hope they have a lot of dolts .
There 's a damn lot of explicit stuff out there !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would be an interesting job.
Microsoft Smut Engineer.Heh.
I've actually done this; not for Microsoft, but another search company (for a \_real\_ search company, one might say to get in a cheap shot ;)It's actually not nearly as much fun as it sounds.
At some point, your soul just feels dirty -- it's not just porn; depending on the strength of the filter, you could also be looking for drugs, innuendo (OK, I really like the innuendo...), hate sites, etc.
Hate sites are the worst.While blocking the domain really does sound like a nice feature for anyone running a network they want to lock down, this of course doesn't block the explicit content from any other search engine.
And it's relying on dolts like me (only they work for Microsoft) to make it happen.
I hope they have a lot of dolts.
There's a damn lot of explicit stuff out there!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346053</id>
	<title>No Wonder MS Failed Once Again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245155040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After the week of the usual standard Microsoft product marketing tactics:</p><p>* Astroturfing by marketing companies hiring people to sit around all day posting "I'm a Google fan but gosh darn it! I've switched to Bing!" posts all over the Net</p><p>* TV and other media spots</p><p>* Getting all their MS friendly people in the computing media to hype the crap out of the rebranded old Microsft search product</p><p>Microsoft's search engine plummeted right back down into irrelvancy in marketshare and all people are left talking about is "LOL! Bing is great for porn type posts and stories"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After the week of the usual standard Microsoft product marketing tactics : * Astroturfing by marketing companies hiring people to sit around all day posting " I 'm a Google fan but gosh darn it !
I 've switched to Bing !
" posts all over the Net * TV and other media spots * Getting all their MS friendly people in the computing media to hype the crap out of the rebranded old Microsft search productMicrosoft 's search engine plummeted right back down into irrelvancy in marketshare and all people are left talking about is " LOL !
Bing is great for porn type posts and stories "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After the week of the usual standard Microsoft product marketing tactics:* Astroturfing by marketing companies hiring people to sit around all day posting "I'm a Google fan but gosh darn it!
I've switched to Bing!
" posts all over the Net* TV and other media spots* Getting all their MS friendly people in the computing media to hype the crap out of the rebranded old Microsft search productMicrosoft's search engine plummeted right back down into irrelvancy in marketshare and all people are left talking about is "LOL!
Bing is great for porn type posts and stories"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345691</id>
	<title>Several uses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245149160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone realise how easy this makes it for Governments/Institutions to protect you from thoughtcrime? I'd wager that is actually Microsofts main intended user, not individuals/concerned parents. Microsoft: the only halfway innovative technologies they ever come up with are tools of repression.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone realise how easy this makes it for Governments/Institutions to protect you from thoughtcrime ?
I 'd wager that is actually Microsofts main intended user , not individuals/concerned parents .
Microsoft : the only halfway innovative technologies they ever come up with are tools of repression .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone realise how easy this makes it for Governments/Institutions to protect you from thoughtcrime?
I'd wager that is actually Microsofts main intended user, not individuals/concerned parents.
Microsoft: the only halfway innovative technologies they ever come up with are tools of repression.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348161</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>gzipped\_tar</author>
	<datestamp>1245170100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Easy. y = f(x) --&gt; explicit. f(x, y) = 0 --&gt; implicit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Easy .
y = f ( x ) -- &gt; explicit .
f ( x , y ) = 0 -- &gt; implicit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Easy.
y = f(x) --&gt; explicit.
f(x, y) = 0 --&gt; implicit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347089</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>secondhand\_Buddah</author>
	<datestamp>1245164460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Um, turn safe search on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , turn safe search on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, turn safe search on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346577</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>Aqualung812</author>
	<datestamp>1245160920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I remember seeing a demo at COMDEX that was designed to do exactly that, in 2000.  It did false on swimsuits, but not much else.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it 's easy to identify a nude .
I remember seeing a demo at COMDEX that was designed to do exactly that , in 2000 .
It did false on swimsuits , but not much else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.
I remember seeing a demo at COMDEX that was designed to do exactly that, in 2000.
It did false on swimsuits, but not much else.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28358885</id>
	<title>Re:Linux filter and interesting suggestions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245230880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Click through on "linux microsoft" option and the first article is how to remove linux and install windows</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Click through on " linux microsoft " option and the first article is how to remove linux and install windows</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Click through on "linux microsoft" option and the first article is how to remove linux and install windows</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346161</id>
	<title>somebody</title>
	<author>kampangptlk</author>
	<datestamp>1245156780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>please make a firefox search plugin for explicit bing please.</htmltext>
<tokenext>please make a firefox search plugin for explicit bing please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>please make a firefox search plugin for explicit bing please.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346633</id>
	<title>yuo Fail It..G.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245161400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the Bottoms butt roots and gets on</htmltext>
<tokenext>the Bottoms butt roots and gets on</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the Bottoms butt roots and gets on</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348151</id>
	<title>Re:Surreal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245170100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Surreal -- I really wish people would stop using this over-used, nearly meaningless, word. I don't think it belongs in your post, as used.</p><p>That being said, I like the term "explicitometer". Now someone just needs to invent it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Surreal -- I really wish people would stop using this over-used , nearly meaningless , word .
I do n't think it belongs in your post , as used.That being said , I like the term " explicitometer " .
Now someone just needs to invent it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surreal -- I really wish people would stop using this over-used, nearly meaningless, word.
I don't think it belongs in your post, as used.That being said, I like the term "explicitometer".
Now someone just needs to invent it!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346175</id>
	<title>Re:As a net admin for a school....</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1245157020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I will feel much better about allowing access to bing.com for our students now.</i></p><p>It's interesting that your post is modded "funny".  Evidentally many on slashdot that have read your post do not understand the terrible parent that school administrators have to deal with.  If porn did get through, I could see your mug on a bunch of news sites... "school lets kids look at porn..."  You have to clamp down, in your case, or parents would just eat you alive!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I will feel much better about allowing access to bing.com for our students now.It 's interesting that your post is modded " funny " .
Evidentally many on slashdot that have read your post do not understand the terrible parent that school administrators have to deal with .
If porn did get through , I could see your mug on a bunch of news sites... " school lets kids look at porn... " You have to clamp down , in your case , or parents would just eat you alive !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I will feel much better about allowing access to bing.com for our students now.It's interesting that your post is modded "funny".
Evidentally many on slashdot that have read your post do not understand the terrible parent that school administrators have to deal with.
If porn did get through, I could see your mug on a bunch of news sites... "school lets kids look at porn..."  You have to clamp down, in your case, or parents would just eat you alive!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28355537</id>
	<title>Re:One hell of a statement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245156780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sig in sig field, dippy. Who wants to read "j" after every one of your posts? No one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sig in sig field , dippy .
Who wants to read " j " after every one of your posts ?
No one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sig in sig field, dippy.
Who wants to read "j" after every one of your posts?
No one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345975</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>mcfatboy93</author>
	<datestamp>1245153780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anything without the words 'Microsoft', 'Windows', 'Vista', 'Office', 'insert any Microsoft product here' </p><p> way to go for marketing</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anything without the words 'Microsoft ' , 'Windows ' , 'Vista ' , 'Office ' , 'insert any Microsoft product here ' way to go for marketing</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anything without the words 'Microsoft', 'Windows', 'Vista', 'Office', 'insert any Microsoft product here'  way to go for marketing</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346997</id>
	<title>How is that better?</title>
	<author>Junta</author>
	<datestamp>1245163920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can either filter on a sophisticated ruleset te detect what you describe, or you can block one host in one domain (the same domain of 'bing.com', just a different host record within it....)</p><p>It's good that google accommodated the need, but just because Google did it one way and MS did it another that Google's way must be better (by better, this would mean easier).</p><p>It would help to have the flaws in MS's approach actually described and how Google's overcomes it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can either filter on a sophisticated ruleset te detect what you describe , or you can block one host in one domain ( the same domain of 'bing.com ' , just a different host record within it.... ) It 's good that google accommodated the need , but just because Google did it one way and MS did it another that Google 's way must be better ( by better , this would mean easier ) .It would help to have the flaws in MS 's approach actually described and how Google 's overcomes it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can either filter on a sophisticated ruleset te detect what you describe, or you can block one host in one domain (the same domain of 'bing.com', just a different host record within it....)It's good that google accommodated the need, but just because Google did it one way and MS did it another that Google's way must be better (by better, this would mean easier).It would help to have the flaws in MS's approach actually described and how Google's overcomes it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345775</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345775</id>
	<title>Google already came up with a better way</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245150360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Google just make sure they let the filtering people know how to categorise the pages based on if Safesearch is on or off. On my filter I can choose to block google images entirely or just when safesearch is off and that works just fine without needing another domain name.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Google just make sure they let the filtering people know how to categorise the pages based on if Safesearch is on or off .
On my filter I can choose to block google images entirely or just when safesearch is off and that works just fine without needing another domain name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google just make sure they let the filtering people know how to categorise the pages based on if Safesearch is on or off.
On my filter I can choose to block google images entirely or just when safesearch is off and that works just fine without needing another domain name.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346197</id>
	<title>Re:As a net admin for a school....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245157320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why on earth would you ever block porn or nudity to students? Any male and even female above 11-12 years will be and should be enjoying porn and their bodies daily, that's just healthy. Blocking it makes it seem like a taboo and bad which is ridiculous and sounds like some extremist puritan country like the US of Analretentive Virgins.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why on earth would you ever block porn or nudity to students ?
Any male and even female above 11-12 years will be and should be enjoying porn and their bodies daily , that 's just healthy .
Blocking it makes it seem like a taboo and bad which is ridiculous and sounds like some extremist puritan country like the US of Analretentive Virgins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why on earth would you ever block porn or nudity to students?
Any male and even female above 11-12 years will be and should be enjoying porn and their bodies daily, that's just healthy.
Blocking it makes it seem like a taboo and bad which is ridiculous and sounds like some extremist puritan country like the US of Analretentive Virgins.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347207</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>Tribbin</author>
	<datestamp>1245165180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude."</p><p>Or even more so; even a human can't sometimes tell the difference between a guy and a gal, until it's too late and your excitement is ruined.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it 's easy to identify a nude .
" Or even more so ; even a human ca n't sometimes tell the difference between a guy and a gal , until it 's too late and your excitement is ruined .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.
"Or even more so; even a human can't sometimes tell the difference between a guy and a gal, until it's too late and your excitement is ruined.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346017</id>
	<title>A SEPARATE domain for obscene content...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245154620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... coming from the corporation with the most obscene business model in the IT industry? Doesn't that come across as just a tiny bit redundant? *[For those still unaware of Microsoft's obscenities, you just have to hop over to boycottnovell.com or groklaw.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... coming from the corporation with the most obscene business model in the IT industry ?
Does n't that come across as just a tiny bit redundant ?
* [ For those still unaware of Microsoft 's obscenities , you just have to hop over to boycottnovell.com or groklaw.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... coming from the corporation with the most obscene business model in the IT industry?
Doesn't that come across as just a tiny bit redundant?
*[For those still unaware of Microsoft's obscenities, you just have to hop over to boycottnovell.com or groklaw.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345965</id>
	<title>Re:Hrmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245153660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is the reverse possible? I.e. explicit content only??!!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div><p>I'm guessing from the summary it's explicit.bing.com</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is the reverse possible ?
I.e. explicit content only ? ? ! !
: ) I 'm guessing from the summary it 's explicit.bing.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is the reverse possible?
I.e. explicit content only??!!
:)I'm guessing from the summary it's explicit.bing.com
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345909</id>
	<title>Re:Google already came up with a better way</title>
	<author>Aladrin</author>
	<datestamp>1245152940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That works great for individual users.  This is -not- meant for individuals.  This is meant for companies, schools, etc.  You can block that domain at your firewall/proxy/dns/whatever and make -sure- none of your users see it, no matter what settings they choose.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That works great for individual users .
This is -not- meant for individuals .
This is meant for companies , schools , etc .
You can block that domain at your firewall/proxy/dns/whatever and make -sure- none of your users see it , no matter what settings they choose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That works great for individual users.
This is -not- meant for individuals.
This is meant for companies, schools, etc.
You can block that domain at your firewall/proxy/dns/whatever and make -sure- none of your users see it, no matter what settings they choose.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345775</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347011</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245164040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good question... The poster says that this is quite a good move on Microsoft's part, because the domain can easily be blocked, but that ignores the simple fact that it all hinges on MS *identifying* explicit content and making it come from that domain.  This is really not much different than having a safe-search option or anything else on their side.  All it does differently is that it makes it possible for someone on the client side to prevent non-admin users from turning safe search off (such as in a school or library, etc).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good question... The poster says that this is quite a good move on Microsoft 's part , because the domain can easily be blocked , but that ignores the simple fact that it all hinges on MS * identifying * explicit content and making it come from that domain .
This is really not much different than having a safe-search option or anything else on their side .
All it does differently is that it makes it possible for someone on the client side to prevent non-admin users from turning safe search off ( such as in a school or library , etc ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good question... The poster says that this is quite a good move on Microsoft's part, because the domain can easily be blocked, but that ignores the simple fact that it all hinges on MS *identifying* explicit content and making it come from that domain.
This is really not much different than having a safe-search option or anything else on their side.
All it does differently is that it makes it possible for someone on the client side to prevent non-admin users from turning safe search off (such as in a school or library, etc).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28361111</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft blows it again</title>
	<author>maverick41</author>
	<datestamp>1245251520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>explicit.bing.net?</p><p>They should have gone with bada.bing.net.</p></div><p>Nah -- schwing.net</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>explicit.bing.net ? They should have gone with bada.bing.net.Nah -- schwing.net</tokentext>
<sentencetext>explicit.bing.net?They should have gone with bada.bing.net.Nah -- schwing.net
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346971</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346599</id>
	<title>Re:One hell of a statement</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1245161100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft is never done when it comes to providing tools</p></div><p>Yeah, most of their products seem rather unfinished...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft is never done when it comes to providing toolsYeah , most of their products seem rather unfinished.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft is never done when it comes to providing toolsYeah, most of their products seem rather unfinished...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348197</id>
	<title>Re:Hrmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245170280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be funny if the following worked, but alas, it produces no results:</p><p><a href="http://images.google.com/images?q=site:explicit.bing.net" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://images.google.com/images?q=site:explicit.bing.net</a> [google.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be funny if the following worked , but alas , it produces no results : http : //images.google.com/images ? q = site : explicit.bing.net [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be funny if the following worked, but alas, it produces no results:http://images.google.com/images?q=site:explicit.bing.net [google.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345721</id>
	<title>A nuclear blaster can point both ways</title>
	<author>janwedekind</author>
	<datestamp>1245149580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess they found a much more lucrative application for parental controls.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess they found a much more lucrative application for parental controls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess they found a much more lucrative application for parental controls.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657</id>
	<title>How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245148440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?<br> <br>  That would be an interesting job.  Microsoft Smut Engineer.  Wait, I think that's what they already call MS Office developers...</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit ' ?
That would be an interesting job .
Microsoft Smut Engineer .
Wait , I think that 's what they already call MS Office developers.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?
That would be an interesting job.
Microsoft Smut Engineer.
Wait, I think that's what they already call MS Office developers...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637</id>
	<title>Hrmmm</title>
	<author>Narkov</author>
	<datestamp>1245148260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is the reverse possible? I.e. explicit content only??!!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is the reverse possible ?
I.e. explicit content only ? ? ! !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is the reverse possible?
I.e. explicit content only??!!
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347695</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>polle404</author>
	<datestamp>1245167820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hate when i get pr0n off any search at home... at work, sure, but when I'm home<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...i have better things to do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate when i get pr0n off any search at home... at work , sure , but when I 'm home ...i have better things to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate when i get pr0n off any search at home... at work, sure, but when I'm home ...i have better things to do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345833</id>
	<title>Re:BadAnalogyGuy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245151560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>BadAnalogyGuy has gone to ground after being outed as a Scientologist.
But if he should contact you, offering a free personality test, firmly refuse him.</p></div><p>Thanks, but you don't have to worry. I have no personality.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>BadAnalogyGuy has gone to ground after being outed as a Scientologist .
But if he should contact you , offering a free personality test , firmly refuse him.Thanks , but you do n't have to worry .
I have no personality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BadAnalogyGuy has gone to ground after being outed as a Scientologist.
But if he should contact you, offering a free personality test, firmly refuse him.Thanks, but you don't have to worry.
I have no personality.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346113</id>
	<title>Re:Hrmmm</title>
	<author>Rude Turnip</author>
	<datestamp>1245155820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've heard about MagicTeapot.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've heard about MagicTeapot.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've heard about MagicTeapot.com</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346509</id>
	<title>Schwing?</title>
	<author>Purity Of Essence</author>
	<datestamp>1245160560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Got nothin'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Got nothin'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Got nothin'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345773</id>
	<title>PR Stroke of Genius!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245150300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What a way to get into the hearts and hands of millions of users worldwide! I think they'll be finding the usage of Bing shoot up dramatically but I'd like to see the comparison between normal Bing and xXx Bing!</htmltext>
<tokenext>What a way to get into the hearts and hands of millions of users worldwide !
I think they 'll be finding the usage of Bing shoot up dramatically but I 'd like to see the comparison between normal Bing and xXx Bing !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a way to get into the hearts and hands of millions of users worldwide!
I think they'll be finding the usage of Bing shoot up dramatically but I'd like to see the comparison between normal Bing and xXx Bing!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346195</id>
	<title>There goes ....</title>
	<author>Sem\_D\_D</author>
	<datestamp>1245157320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>an obligatory statement about the murky distinction between the "bing" for your "bang" coming in 3, 2, 1<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</htmltext>
<tokenext>an obligatory statement about the murky distinction between the " bing " for your " bang " coming in 3 , 2 , 1 ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>an obligatory statement about the murky distinction between the "bing" for your "bang" coming in 3, 2, 1 ....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346971</id>
	<title>Microsoft blows it again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245163800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>explicit.bing.net?</p><p>They should have gone with bada.bing.net.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>explicit.bing.net ? They should have gone with bada.bing.net .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>explicit.bing.net?They should have gone with bada.bing.net.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348927</id>
	<title>Re:As a net admin for a school....</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1245172980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>God forbid that impressionable young people in our schools should...gasp...actually see an exposed breast...</htmltext>
<tokenext>God forbid that impressionable young people in our schools should...gasp...actually see an exposed breast.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God forbid that impressionable young people in our schools should...gasp...actually see an exposed breast...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346029</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245154740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Microsoft Smut Engineer.  Wait, I think that's what they already call MS Office developers...</p></div><p>We need a certification program so people can call themselves Microsoft CERTIFIED Smut Engineer, or MCSE for short.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft Smut Engineer .
Wait , I think that 's what they already call MS Office developers...We need a certification program so people can call themselves Microsoft CERTIFIED Smut Engineer , or MCSE for short .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft Smut Engineer.
Wait, I think that's what they already call MS Office developers...We need a certification program so people can call themselves Microsoft CERTIFIED Smut Engineer, or MCSE for short.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28351793</id>
	<title>Re:PR Stroke of Genius!</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1245182640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What a way to get into the hearts and hands of millions of users worldwide!</i> </p><p>An adolescent obsession with porn seems to be one of the defining qualities of the geek.</p><p>Playing against the stereotype can be very profitable. Case in point: The Wii and the hard-core gamer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a way to get into the hearts and hands of millions of users worldwide !
An adolescent obsession with porn seems to be one of the defining qualities of the geek.Playing against the stereotype can be very profitable .
Case in point : The Wii and the hard-core gamer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a way to get into the hearts and hands of millions of users worldwide!
An adolescent obsession with porn seems to be one of the defining qualities of the geek.Playing against the stereotype can be very profitable.
Case in point: The Wii and the hard-core gamer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345773</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345865</id>
	<title>Re:PR Stroke of Genius!</title>
	<author>W33B</author>
	<datestamp>1245152160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Absolutely!
<br> <br>
When I first read about this yesterday my gut reaction was to immediatly go to bing and search for porn (after turning off the filtering of course)...
<br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and seeing as the speed of this thread is relatively slow for slashdot, i'm betting geeks around the world are doing the exact same thing.
<br> <br>
Marketing Genius....long live the porn providers!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely !
When I first read about this yesterday my gut reaction was to immediatly go to bing and search for porn ( after turning off the filtering of course ) .. . ...and seeing as the speed of this thread is relatively slow for slashdot , i 'm betting geeks around the world are doing the exact same thing .
Marketing Genius....long live the porn providers ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely!
When I first read about this yesterday my gut reaction was to immediatly go to bing and search for porn (after turning off the filtering of course)...
  ...and seeing as the speed of this thread is relatively slow for slashdot, i'm betting geeks around the world are doing the exact same thing.
Marketing Genius....long live the porn providers!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345773</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346087</id>
	<title>As a net admin for a school....</title>
	<author>jimbo-nally</author>
	<datestamp>1245155520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have to say that this is really nice.  I just added explicit.bing.net to the list of filtered content in our SonicWall and then did an images search for breasts on bing.com with safe-search off and the images that displayed were not what I would consider porn. Many of the images, if not most, were not displayed. I will feel much better about allowing access to bing.com for our students now. Can't believe I'm saying this...but "Good job, Microsoft!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to say that this is really nice .
I just added explicit.bing.net to the list of filtered content in our SonicWall and then did an images search for breasts on bing.com with safe-search off and the images that displayed were not what I would consider porn .
Many of the images , if not most , were not displayed .
I will feel much better about allowing access to bing.com for our students now .
Ca n't believe I 'm saying this...but " Good job , Microsoft !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to say that this is really nice.
I just added explicit.bing.net to the list of filtered content in our SonicWall and then did an images search for breasts on bing.com with safe-search off and the images that displayed were not what I would consider porn.
Many of the images, if not most, were not displayed.
I will feel much better about allowing access to bing.com for our students now.
Can't believe I'm saying this...but "Good job, Microsoft!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>l2718</author>
	<datestamp>1245149940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The easiest way is using the "keywords" META tag which I'm sure is used by most explicit sites to self-identify.

The problem of determining  the semantic content of a site (not to speak of interpreting images) is hard, but "Safe searches" of various kinds have been around for a long time so I'm sure there's been some progress on the text processing side.  I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The easiest way is using the " keywords " META tag which I 'm sure is used by most explicit sites to self-identify .
The problem of determining the semantic content of a site ( not to speak of interpreting images ) is hard , but " Safe searches " of various kinds have been around for a long time so I 'm sure there 's been some progress on the text processing side .
I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it 's easy to identify a nude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The easiest way is using the "keywords" META tag which I'm sure is used by most explicit sites to self-identify.
The problem of determining  the semantic content of a site (not to speak of interpreting images) is hard, but "Safe searches" of various kinds have been around for a long time so I'm sure there's been some progress on the text processing side.
I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347885</id>
	<title>Re:Surreal</title>
	<author>SpinyNorman</author>
	<datestamp>1245168840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I expect the "explicitometer" is just the same exact same none/moderate/strict classification that both Google and Bing's "Safe Search" preferences offer.</p><p>This change by Bing isn't some big brother restriction on your porn viewing... it's just coming closer** to honoring your wishes by not allowing you to view porn sites that you, yourself, have already chosen to block via Open DNS, Net Nanny or whatever!</p><p>** Of course, you can still see Microsoft hosted thumbnails (incl. videos) from sites that you've chosen to block but Microsoft hasn't classified as explicit, and Google does no better with their image thumbnails.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I expect the " explicitometer " is just the same exact same none/moderate/strict classification that both Google and Bing 's " Safe Search " preferences offer.This change by Bing is n't some big brother restriction on your porn viewing... it 's just coming closer * * to honoring your wishes by not allowing you to view porn sites that you , yourself , have already chosen to block via Open DNS , Net Nanny or whatever !
* * Of course , you can still see Microsoft hosted thumbnails ( incl .
videos ) from sites that you 've chosen to block but Microsoft has n't classified as explicit , and Google does no better with their image thumbnails .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I expect the "explicitometer" is just the same exact same none/moderate/strict classification that both Google and Bing's "Safe Search" preferences offer.This change by Bing isn't some big brother restriction on your porn viewing... it's just coming closer** to honoring your wishes by not allowing you to view porn sites that you, yourself, have already chosen to block via Open DNS, Net Nanny or whatever!
** Of course, you can still see Microsoft hosted thumbnails (incl.
videos) from sites that you've chosen to block but Microsoft hasn't classified as explicit, and Google does no better with their image thumbnails.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345841</id>
	<title>Re:Hrmmm</title>
	<author>sam0737</author>
	<datestamp>1245151680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use greasemonkey/AdBlock to remove all images from bing.com but whitelist explicit.bing.com? At least that would save you some bandwidth in downloading non-explicit content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use greasemonkey/AdBlock to remove all images from bing.com but whitelist explicit.bing.com ?
At least that would save you some bandwidth in downloading non-explicit content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use greasemonkey/AdBlock to remove all images from bing.com but whitelist explicit.bing.com?
At least that would save you some bandwidth in downloading non-explicit content.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346063</id>
	<title>Re:good idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245155160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chances are that both your boss and your coworkers know that the internet is full of porn and you cannot always avoid it. Unless of course they are one of those "think of the children" hypocrites<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chances are that both your boss and your coworkers know that the internet is full of porn and you can not always avoid it .
Unless of course they are one of those " think of the children " hypocrites .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chances are that both your boss and your coworkers know that the internet is full of porn and you cannot always avoid it.
Unless of course they are one of those "think of the children" hypocrites ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345655</id>
	<title>To be or not to be...</title>
	<author>pegdhcp</author>
	<datestamp>1245148440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>... an explicit content provider. I guess soon Linux related content would be served by nasty.bing.net, just in case...</htmltext>
<tokenext>... an explicit content provider .
I guess soon Linux related content would be served by nasty.bing.net , just in case.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... an explicit content provider.
I guess soon Linux related content would be served by nasty.bing.net, just in case...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345635</id>
	<title>Awesome!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245148200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm tired of non-explicit images ruining my Google searches!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm tired of non-explicit images ruining my Google searches !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm tired of non-explicit images ruining my Google searches!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346111</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>fotoguzzi</author>
	<datestamp>1245155700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Try "pile driver."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try " pile driver .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try "pile driver.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346193</id>
	<title>Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?</title>
	<author>SolitaryMan</author>
	<datestamp>1245157320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, laugh all you want, but where I work (our company does search.... kinda...) we have this position<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) At least some sort of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , laugh all you want , but where I work ( our company does search.... kinda... ) we have this position : ) At least some sort of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, laugh all you want, but where I work (our company does search.... kinda...) we have this position :) At least some sort of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28351067</id>
	<title>Re:Hrmmm</title>
	<author>RoFLKOPTr</author>
	<datestamp>1245180000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is the reverse possible? I.e. explicit content only??!!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div><p>How the hell is this modded insightful when it's blatantly obvious that he didn't read the summary?? This whole thing IS about explicit content only.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is the reverse possible ?
I.e. explicit content only ? ? ! !
: ) How the hell is this modded insightful when it 's blatantly obvious that he did n't read the summary ? ?
This whole thing IS about explicit content only .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is the reverse possible?
I.e. explicit content only??!!
:)How the hell is this modded insightful when it's blatantly obvious that he didn't read the summary??
This whole thing IS about explicit content only.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345683</id>
	<title>One hell of a statement</title>
	<author>jw3</author>
	<datestamp>1245149040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Microsoft is never done when it comes to providing tools to help customers, whether they are large enterprises, local school districts or parents" - Mike Nichols, general manager of Microsoft Bing.</p></div><p>Never done.<br>Yep, sounds informative.

</p><p>j.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Microsoft is never done when it comes to providing tools to help customers , whether they are large enterprises , local school districts or parents " - Mike Nichols , general manager of Microsoft Bing.Never done.Yep , sounds informative .
j .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Microsoft is never done when it comes to providing tools to help customers, whether they are large enterprises, local school districts or parents" - Mike Nichols, general manager of Microsoft Bing.Never done.Yep, sounds informative.
j.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347987</id>
	<title>Re:Fear of MS Bob Hope *grips* Google</title>
	<author>NotBornYesterday</author>
	<datestamp>1245169320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Windows 7 final will include a "boot straight into porn" mode.</p></div><p>Finally!  A new Windows feature that is actually useful.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows 7 final will include a " boot straight into porn " mode.Finally !
A new Windows feature that is actually useful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows 7 final will include a "boot straight into porn" mode.Finally!
A new Windows feature that is actually useful.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346949</id>
	<title>Re:They gave it the wrong name!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245163620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was half expecting www.dong.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was half expecting www.dong.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was half expecting www.dong.com</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346185</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347357</id>
	<title>Doesn't really solve the problem...</title>
	<author>chord.wav</author>
	<datestamp>1245166080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...if you search for "best loan insurance" and you get tons of broken images. Clever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...if you search for " best loan insurance " and you get tons of broken images .
Clever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...if you search for "best loan insurance" and you get tons of broken images.
Clever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346545</id>
	<title>Re:They gave it the wrong name!!</title>
	<author>StormReaver</author>
	<datestamp>1245160800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Instead of explicit.bing.com it should have been bada.bing.com</p><p>Or shark.chandler.bing.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Instead of explicit.bing.com it should have been bada.bing.comOr shark.chandler.bing.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Instead of explicit.bing.com it should have been bada.bing.comOr shark.chandler.bing.com</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346185</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346033
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345775
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346087
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345693
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346023
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347435
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347207
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346599
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28355537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28350381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346197
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346087
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346949
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348155
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28361111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345635
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28351793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347987
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347695
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28359629
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28349479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345975
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345775
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345757
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28358885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348927
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346087
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28396263
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345757
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346063
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28351067
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28353047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347575
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346545
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28353513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346053
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345935
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28351605
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28350441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346023
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346577
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_15_2245215_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345655
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345833
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346185
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346949
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346545
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346023
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348151
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345635
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346971
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28361111
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345775
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345909
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346997
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345757
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346221
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28396263
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28351605
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28351067
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346113
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345965
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345841
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346033
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346053
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28353513
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348197
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345773
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28351793
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345947
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345865
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345713
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346063
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347089
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346319
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28359629
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28350441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346589
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346289
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347435
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347695
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346415
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345935
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345683
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347575
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28355537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346599
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346087
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346197
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346175
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346195
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28358885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28350381
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346153
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346017
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345657
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345975
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28349479
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346209
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346111
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346193
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348161
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345743
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28353047
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28348155
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347479
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346577
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347207
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28346029
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28345699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347987
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_15_2245215.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_15_2245215.28347739
</commentlist>
</conversation>
