<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_18_0951259</id>
	<title>BenQ's GP1 LED Projector &mdash; Small Package, Good Thing</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1245340800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>The first projector I remember seeing in person had three great big glass eyes (for red, green, and blue lamps) and BNC connectors. It probably weighed more than 100 pounds, and had to be carefully calibrated to align the lenses. Now, I've got a projector above my head that weighs less than a Neal Stephenson novel and has a sharper, brighter image than that monster. I've been <a href="//hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/09/2116258&amp;tid=196">looking into LED projectors for a few years now</a>; in that time, I've been waiting for them to come down in price and bump up in lumens. So I was very curious about <a href="http://www.benq.us/page/?pageId=309&amp;click=showcases\%7Cscid\%7C391">BenQ's GP1 LED projector</a> (also known, somewhat oddly, as "Joybee"), and was happy to get a sample for review. It may seem retrograde to bother with an 800x600, 100 lumen (no missing zero there: one-<em>hundred</em> lumen) projector in 2009 A.D., but for the past four weeks, I've used it as my primary display, and come out happy. It has some drawbacks, but it's an impressive little device for its $499 pricetag, and I hope a harbinger of even better things to come. Read on for my take on what BenQ got right, and what rough spots stick out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first projector I remember seeing in person had three great big glass eyes ( for red , green , and blue lamps ) and BNC connectors .
It probably weighed more than 100 pounds , and had to be carefully calibrated to align the lenses .
Now , I 've got a projector above my head that weighs less than a Neal Stephenson novel and has a sharper , brighter image than that monster .
I 've been looking into LED projectors for a few years now ; in that time , I 've been waiting for them to come down in price and bump up in lumens .
So I was very curious about BenQ 's GP1 LED projector ( also known , somewhat oddly , as " Joybee " ) , and was happy to get a sample for review .
It may seem retrograde to bother with an 800x600 , 100 lumen ( no missing zero there : one-hundred lumen ) projector in 2009 A.D. , but for the past four weeks , I 've used it as my primary display , and come out happy .
It has some drawbacks , but it 's an impressive little device for its $ 499 pricetag , and I hope a harbinger of even better things to come .
Read on for my take on what BenQ got right , and what rough spots stick out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first projector I remember seeing in person had three great big glass eyes (for red, green, and blue lamps) and BNC connectors.
It probably weighed more than 100 pounds, and had to be carefully calibrated to align the lenses.
Now, I've got a projector above my head that weighs less than a Neal Stephenson novel and has a sharper, brighter image than that monster.
I've been looking into LED projectors for a few years now; in that time, I've been waiting for them to come down in price and bump up in lumens.
So I was very curious about BenQ's GP1 LED projector (also known, somewhat oddly, as "Joybee"), and was happy to get a sample for review.
It may seem retrograde to bother with an 800x600, 100 lumen (no missing zero there: one-hundred lumen) projector in 2009 A.D., but for the past four weeks, I've used it as my primary display, and come out happy.
It has some drawbacks, but it's an impressive little device for its $499 pricetag, and I hope a harbinger of even better things to come.
Read on for my take on what BenQ got right, and what rough spots stick out.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28379349</id>
	<title>Too limited</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245358440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>800x600 ??  Are we stll in the 90's?<br>No truly useful connections -- just USB, an ipod type dock, and a headphone jack.   You're going to get nickel and dimed to death by the time you're set up.</p><p>Maybe at $2-300, but not at $500</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>800x600 ? ?
Are we stll in the 90 's ? No truly useful connections -- just USB , an ipod type dock , and a headphone jack .
You 're going to get nickel and dimed to death by the time you 're set up.Maybe at $ 2-300 , but not at $ 500</tokentext>
<sentencetext>800x600 ??
Are we stll in the 90's?No truly useful connections -- just USB, an ipod type dock, and a headphone jack.
You're going to get nickel and dimed to death by the time you're set up.Maybe at $2-300, but not at $500</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375935</id>
	<title>I hope the video makes more sense with sound</title>
	<author>jeffmeden</author>
	<datestamp>1245347640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After watching the intro to the video on the product page which I will simply title "Mr. Joybee: Surfing Vampire"  I have to say that I hope it makes more sense to those with speakers attached to their PC.  Seriously, stick figures?</htmltext>
<tokenext>After watching the intro to the video on the product page which I will simply title " Mr. Joybee : Surfing Vampire " I have to say that I hope it makes more sense to those with speakers attached to their PC .
Seriously , stick figures ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After watching the intro to the video on the product page which I will simply title "Mr. Joybee: Surfing Vampire"  I have to say that I hope it makes more sense to those with speakers attached to their PC.
Seriously, stick figures?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375571</id>
	<title>A bit more than retrograde....</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1245346320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>800x600 is not merely retrograde, it's downright Cro-Magnon!  Four times that area was a minimum for me a decade ago.  These days it's minimum 1920 horizontal or bust!</p><p>Get this guy a Princeton monochrome monitor from 20 years ago and he'll probably still be happy.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>800x600 is not merely retrograde , it 's downright Cro-Magnon !
Four times that area was a minimum for me a decade ago .
These days it 's minimum 1920 horizontal or bust ! Get this guy a Princeton monochrome monitor from 20 years ago and he 'll probably still be happy .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>800x600 is not merely retrograde, it's downright Cro-Magnon!
Four times that area was a minimum for me a decade ago.
These days it's minimum 1920 horizontal or bust!Get this guy a Princeton monochrome monitor from 20 years ago and he'll probably still be happy.
:-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715</id>
	<title>Dark energy?</title>
	<author>Woek</author>
	<datestamp>1245346860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did anyone notice a problem with the picture at the top of the linked page? The projected images on the (white) walls actually have <i>darker</i> parts than the wall itself in the ambient light. What kind of light does this projector emit?? Or does it spray paint on the wall?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone notice a problem with the picture at the top of the linked page ?
The projected images on the ( white ) walls actually have darker parts than the wall itself in the ambient light .
What kind of light does this projector emit ? ?
Or does it spray paint on the wall ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone notice a problem with the picture at the top of the linked page?
The projected images on the (white) walls actually have darker parts than the wall itself in the ambient light.
What kind of light does this projector emit??
Or does it spray paint on the wall?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375991</id>
	<title>Warning</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245347760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do not look into LED projector with remaining eye.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do not look into LED projector with remaining eye .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do not look into LED projector with remaining eye.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375419</id>
	<title>small package?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245345600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>tag: cmdrtaco</htmltext>
<tokenext>tag : cmdrtaco</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tag: cmdrtaco</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28387129</id>
	<title>DisplayLink?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245408660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why on earth hasn't some Taiwanese OEM wed a DisplayLink chipset with a microprojector?</p><p>Considering the power consumption of the upcoming laser based microprojectors, you could have a USB powered microprojector that shows up as a monitor to your computer. No damn video adapter dongles necessary.</p><p>Is it really that hard?</p><p>Hell, how about regular projectors with a DisplayLink chipset, maybe a virtual CD-Rom containing drivers served over USB as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why on earth has n't some Taiwanese OEM wed a DisplayLink chipset with a microprojector ? Considering the power consumption of the upcoming laser based microprojectors , you could have a USB powered microprojector that shows up as a monitor to your computer .
No damn video adapter dongles necessary.Is it really that hard ? Hell , how about regular projectors with a DisplayLink chipset , maybe a virtual CD-Rom containing drivers served over USB as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why on earth hasn't some Taiwanese OEM wed a DisplayLink chipset with a microprojector?Considering the power consumption of the upcoming laser based microprojectors, you could have a USB powered microprojector that shows up as a monitor to your computer.
No damn video adapter dongles necessary.Is it really that hard?Hell, how about regular projectors with a DisplayLink chipset, maybe a virtual CD-Rom containing drivers served over USB as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28379137</id>
	<title>Re:An alternative pico projector</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1245357780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://dkc1.digikey.com/us/mkt/pico.html" title="digikey.com">http://dkc1.digikey.com/us/mkt/pico.html</a> [digikey.com]</p><p>Another one.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) And this one is available now.</p><p>But not very many lumens! I wonder how the quality is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //dkc1.digikey.com/us/mkt/pico.html [ digikey.com ] Another one .
: ) And this one is available now.But not very many lumens !
I wonder how the quality is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://dkc1.digikey.com/us/mkt/pico.html [digikey.com]Another one.
:) And this one is available now.But not very many lumens!
I wonder how the quality is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376541</id>
	<title>Re:Dark energy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245349920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have fallen prey to one of the classic blunders!</p><p>Never accept marketing images as valid when your geek cred is on the line!</p><p>Ahahahaha<br>Ahaha|</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have fallen prey to one of the classic blunders ! Never accept marketing images as valid when your geek cred is on the line ! AhahahahaAhaha |</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have fallen prey to one of the classic blunders!Never accept marketing images as valid when your geek cred is on the line!AhahahahaAhaha|</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28394983</id>
	<title>Misleading photos on BenQ site.</title>
	<author>holmstar</author>
	<datestamp>1245402960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>WOW...  the projector can actually suck the light off of a wall to make it black too! (when the wall is white, and well-lit by ambient lighting)<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.benq.us/page/?pageId=309&amp;click=showcases\%7Cscid\%7C391" title="www.benq.us" rel="nofollow">http://www.benq.us/page/?pageId=309&amp;click=showcases|scid|391</a> [www.benq.us]</htmltext>
<tokenext>WOW... the projector can actually suck the light off of a wall to make it black too !
( when the wall is white , and well-lit by ambient lighting ) http : //www.benq.us/page/ ? pageId = 309&amp;click = showcases | scid | 391 [ www.benq.us ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WOW...  the projector can actually suck the light off of a wall to make it black too!
(when the wall is white, and well-lit by ambient lighting)

http://www.benq.us/page/?pageId=309&amp;click=showcases|scid|391 [www.benq.us]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28384141</id>
	<title>Yet another alternative pico projector</title>
	<author>Dr.Who</author>
	<datestamp>1245335760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This one <a href="http://www.dlp.com/regional/dlp\_discovery/pico.aspx" title="dlp.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.dlp.com/regional/dlp\_discovery/pico.aspx</a> [dlp.com] is targeted at the BeagleBoard <a href="http://beagleboard.org/" title="beagleboard.org" rel="nofollow">http://beagleboard.org/</a> [beagleboard.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This one http : //www.dlp.com/regional/dlp \ _discovery/pico.aspx [ dlp.com ] is targeted at the BeagleBoard http : //beagleboard.org/ [ beagleboard.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This one http://www.dlp.com/regional/dlp\_discovery/pico.aspx [dlp.com] is targeted at the BeagleBoard http://beagleboard.org/ [beagleboard.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28378049</id>
	<title>Re:Dark energy?</title>
	<author>DinDaddy</author>
	<datestamp>1245354720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dark chip technology from TI<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Seriously, most of the projectors in this class are under 1000:1 on off contrast.  It should be very very low on your list of priorities if you are interested in these.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dark chip technology from TI : ) Seriously , most of the projectors in this class are under 1000 : 1 on off contrast .
It should be very very low on your list of priorities if you are interested in these .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dark chip technology from TI :)Seriously, most of the projectors in this class are under 1000:1 on off contrast.
It should be very very low on your list of priorities if you are interested in these.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427</id>
	<title>lumen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245345660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>100 lumen</i></p><p>uh yea, maybe you should've paid more attention in English class and less attention to your AV Club nerd-activities.</p><p>That's plural, its <i>lumens</i>. If you saw a 20 deer, would you say, "hey look at all those deer?"</p><p>no, you say, 'look at them deers'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>100 lumenuh yea , maybe you should 've paid more attention in English class and less attention to your AV Club nerd-activities.That 's plural , its lumens .
If you saw a 20 deer , would you say , " hey look at all those deer ?
" no , you say , 'look at them deers'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>100 lumenuh yea, maybe you should've paid more attention in English class and less attention to your AV Club nerd-activities.That's plural, its lumens.
If you saw a 20 deer, would you say, "hey look at all those deer?
"no, you say, 'look at them deers'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375759</id>
	<title>How good is it for a 19" display?</title>
	<author>Jah-Wren Ryel</author>
	<datestamp>1245347040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With the really low lumens I'm less interested in these pico-projectors for large washed-out displays, instead I'd like to see them reviewed as portable monitors - bigger than a netbook's LCD but not too much bigger - say 19 or 20 inches in diagonal.  Can they focus down that small?  What is the throw range for such a small image, and of course, how is the brightness when it is all concentrated over such a small surface area - good enough for daylight viewing?</p><p>Also, anyone try using a pico-projector for a home-made HUD in their car?  Is 100 lumens enough for a 5" display on glass?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With the really low lumens I 'm less interested in these pico-projectors for large washed-out displays , instead I 'd like to see them reviewed as portable monitors - bigger than a netbook 's LCD but not too much bigger - say 19 or 20 inches in diagonal .
Can they focus down that small ?
What is the throw range for such a small image , and of course , how is the brightness when it is all concentrated over such a small surface area - good enough for daylight viewing ? Also , anyone try using a pico-projector for a home-made HUD in their car ?
Is 100 lumens enough for a 5 " display on glass ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the really low lumens I'm less interested in these pico-projectors for large washed-out displays, instead I'd like to see them reviewed as portable monitors - bigger than a netbook's LCD but not too much bigger - say 19 or 20 inches in diagonal.
Can they focus down that small?
What is the throw range for such a small image, and of course, how is the brightness when it is all concentrated over such a small surface area - good enough for daylight viewing?Also, anyone try using a pico-projector for a home-made HUD in their car?
Is 100 lumens enough for a 5" display on glass?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28380733</id>
	<title>fp TacjO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245319860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">in a head 5pinning and sold in the and+ financial</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>in a head 5pinning and sold in the and + financial [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in a head 5pinning and sold in the and+ financial [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375953</id>
	<title>A poor man's monitor</title>
	<author>philpalm</author>
	<datestamp>1245347700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can get a monitor card for your computer and view whatever is on your monitor onto your HDTV. Some HDTV has a card slot so that you can project JPeg on your HDTV.

My PSP (slim) only requires a $20 cord adaptor to project JPeg or movies onto a television screen YMMV.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can get a monitor card for your computer and view whatever is on your monitor onto your HDTV .
Some HDTV has a card slot so that you can project JPeg on your HDTV .
My PSP ( slim ) only requires a $ 20 cord adaptor to project JPeg or movies onto a television screen YMMV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can get a monitor card for your computer and view whatever is on your monitor onto your HDTV.
Some HDTV has a card slot so that you can project JPeg on your HDTV.
My PSP (slim) only requires a $20 cord adaptor to project JPeg or movies onto a television screen YMMV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28383795</id>
	<title>Incomprehensible Review</title>
	<author>skoda</author>
	<datestamp>1245333540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"keeping the signal locked,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..., doesn't always work. My Gnome desktop has blinked on and off a few times, inexplicably; a "Searching all signals" message appears on screen, but it only manages to automatically recapture the signal about half the time.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the lamp will cycle through several colors and brightness levels. Sometimes this is fleeting -- just a momentary change -- but sometimes the image takes on a new hue and stays that way for minutes."</p><p>The projector doesn't work correctly, sporadically dropping the signal and randomly changing color temperature...and it's given an 80\% grade? What sort of nonsense review is this?</p><p>Who is this review for? Who pays $500 for a dim, low resolution display to watch movies or surf the web? For the same price you can get a 22" - 36" 1080p display for home use, that shows a consistent, quality image. For the same price, you can buy a portable projector, that works properly, for professional presentations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" keeping the signal locked , ... , does n't always work .
My Gnome desktop has blinked on and off a few times , inexplicably ; a " Searching all signals " message appears on screen , but it only manages to automatically recapture the signal about half the time .
... ... the lamp will cycle through several colors and brightness levels .
Sometimes this is fleeting -- just a momentary change -- but sometimes the image takes on a new hue and stays that way for minutes .
" The projector does n't work correctly , sporadically dropping the signal and randomly changing color temperature...and it 's given an 80 \ % grade ?
What sort of nonsense review is this ? Who is this review for ?
Who pays $ 500 for a dim , low resolution display to watch movies or surf the web ?
For the same price you can get a 22 " - 36 " 1080p display for home use , that shows a consistent , quality image .
For the same price , you can buy a portable projector , that works properly , for professional presentations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"keeping the signal locked, ..., doesn't always work.
My Gnome desktop has blinked on and off a few times, inexplicably; a "Searching all signals" message appears on screen, but it only manages to automatically recapture the signal about half the time.
... ... the lamp will cycle through several colors and brightness levels.
Sometimes this is fleeting -- just a momentary change -- but sometimes the image takes on a new hue and stays that way for minutes.
"The projector doesn't work correctly, sporadically dropping the signal and randomly changing color temperature...and it's given an 80\% grade?
What sort of nonsense review is this?Who is this review for?
Who pays $500 for a dim, low resolution display to watch movies or surf the web?
For the same price you can get a 22" - 36" 1080p display for home use, that shows a consistent, quality image.
For the same price, you can buy a portable projector, that works properly, for professional presentations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289</id>
	<title>An alternative pico projector</title>
	<author>Rooked\_One</author>
	<datestamp>1245345180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.microvision.com/" title="microvision.com">http://www.microvision.com/</a> [microvision.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.microvision.com/ [ microvision.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.microvision.com/ [microvision.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28380845</id>
	<title>The cute little video...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245320340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who'd have thought that a stick-figure vampire playing Nintendo could look so cute.</p><p>I'm glad we didn't have to watch Mr Joybee whip out his joystick though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who 'd have thought that a stick-figure vampire playing Nintendo could look so cute.I 'm glad we did n't have to watch Mr Joybee whip out his joystick though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who'd have thought that a stick-figure vampire playing Nintendo could look so cute.I'm glad we didn't have to watch Mr Joybee whip out his joystick though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28384025</id>
	<title>Not just for video</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245334920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been interested in trying to find a cheap projector that can be used for monochromatic display instead of full colour.  Why monochromatic?  Well, laser-based should be able to have great intensities, and great clarity.  Would we wonderful for simple presentations or mostly textual displays.</p><p>Do these things exist in the sub $500 range?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been interested in trying to find a cheap projector that can be used for monochromatic display instead of full colour .
Why monochromatic ?
Well , laser-based should be able to have great intensities , and great clarity .
Would we wonderful for simple presentations or mostly textual displays.Do these things exist in the sub $ 500 range ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been interested in trying to find a cheap projector that can be used for monochromatic display instead of full colour.
Why monochromatic?
Well, laser-based should be able to have great intensities, and great clarity.
Would we wonderful for simple presentations or mostly textual displays.Do these things exist in the sub $500 range?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375867</id>
	<title>Re:A bit more than retrograde....</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1245347400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>800x600 is not merely retrograde, it's downright Cro-Magnon!  Four times that area was a minimum for me a decade ago.</p></div><p>For a desktop, sure. For media, it's not too bad. I do find it a bit odd not to go up the few percent to 720 lines, bringing it in line with a typical 32" HTDV.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>800x600 is not merely retrograde , it 's downright Cro-Magnon !
Four times that area was a minimum for me a decade ago.For a desktop , sure .
For media , it 's not too bad .
I do find it a bit odd not to go up the few percent to 720 lines , bringing it in line with a typical 32 " HTDV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>800x600 is not merely retrograde, it's downright Cro-Magnon!
Four times that area was a minimum for me a decade ago.For a desktop, sure.
For media, it's not too bad.
I do find it a bit odd not to go up the few percent to 720 lines, bringing it in line with a typical 32" HTDV.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375571</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28384381</id>
	<title>Re:lumen</title>
	<author>proverbialcow</author>
	<datestamp>1245337320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The plural ain't <i>lumens</i>, it's <i>lumen group</i>. (I should know - I seen them fellers in Vegas; they was pretty good.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The plural ai n't lumens , it 's lumen group .
( I should know - I seen them fellers in Vegas ; they was pretty good .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The plural ain't lumens, it's lumen group.
(I should know - I seen them fellers in Vegas; they was pretty good.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28384459</id>
	<title>Re:Dark energy?</title>
	<author>Trogre</author>
	<datestamp>1245338040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, obviously faked (just look at those scintillating beams coming from the projector).</p><p>But still not 100\% impossible.  Before you start wondering if a cuckoo is about to spring from my forehead, let me explain:</p><p>A few years ago researchers developed a dark cloth that reflected three very narrow wavelengths corresponding roughly to pure red, green and blue, designed for DLP and other sequential colour-channel projection technologies.  This cloth would look very dark, except when illuminated with high intensities of these three wavelengths.  This way you could have a small black square on your white wall, and get an effect similar to those publicity shots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , obviously faked ( just look at those scintillating beams coming from the projector ) .But still not 100 \ % impossible .
Before you start wondering if a cuckoo is about to spring from my forehead , let me explain : A few years ago researchers developed a dark cloth that reflected three very narrow wavelengths corresponding roughly to pure red , green and blue , designed for DLP and other sequential colour-channel projection technologies .
This cloth would look very dark , except when illuminated with high intensities of these three wavelengths .
This way you could have a small black square on your white wall , and get an effect similar to those publicity shots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, obviously faked (just look at those scintillating beams coming from the projector).But still not 100\% impossible.
Before you start wondering if a cuckoo is about to spring from my forehead, let me explain:A few years ago researchers developed a dark cloth that reflected three very narrow wavelengths corresponding roughly to pure red, green and blue, designed for DLP and other sequential colour-channel projection technologies.
This cloth would look very dark, except when illuminated with high intensities of these three wavelengths.
This way you could have a small black square on your white wall, and get an effect similar to those publicity shots.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376429</id>
	<title>Re:lumen</title>
	<author>dskoll</author>
	<datestamp>1245349440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm waiting for followups from all the sheeps.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm waiting for followups from all the sheeps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm waiting for followups from all the sheeps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375587</id>
	<title>Re:Benq build quality.</title>
	<author>mr\_mischief</author>
	<datestamp>1245346380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, sinc eyou own another model I guess it's too late to point out that they do have a product line rather than just the one product. If 100 lumens doesn't work for someone, there are other BenQ options (for more money, of course). For $699 you get 2000 lumens, for $1399 you get 3500, and for $1999 you get 4000.</p><p><a href="http://www.benq.us/products/Projector/" title="www.benq.us">BenQ projectors</a> [www.benq.us]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , sinc eyou own another model I guess it 's too late to point out that they do have a product line rather than just the one product .
If 100 lumens does n't work for someone , there are other BenQ options ( for more money , of course ) .
For $ 699 you get 2000 lumens , for $ 1399 you get 3500 , and for $ 1999 you get 4000.BenQ projectors [ www.benq.us ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, sinc eyou own another model I guess it's too late to point out that they do have a product line rather than just the one product.
If 100 lumens doesn't work for someone, there are other BenQ options (for more money, of course).
For $699 you get 2000 lumens, for $1399 you get 3500, and for $1999 you get 4000.BenQ projectors [www.benq.us]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375185</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28446589</id>
	<title>Not worth it...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1245757080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a 1024x768 1700 ANSI lumen (that's 17 times and bright, and 1.6 times as big) beamer, with a price tag of only $200 more. Sure it is bigger, but the last thing that I care about is the size. Why would I move it anyway? I mean I have positioned it all carefully for the best home cinema experience.</p><p>The only point of such a beamer would be a mobile phone. But then it would have to be at least 3000 ANSI lumen, to be of an actual use.</p><p>So it is still a long way to go.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br>Which does not mean that I think there is anything bad in the concept of LED beamers.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a 1024x768 1700 ANSI lumen ( that 's 17 times and bright , and 1.6 times as big ) beamer , with a price tag of only $ 200 more .
Sure it is bigger , but the last thing that I care about is the size .
Why would I move it anyway ?
I mean I have positioned it all carefully for the best home cinema experience.The only point of such a beamer would be a mobile phone .
But then it would have to be at least 3000 ANSI lumen , to be of an actual use.So it is still a long way to go .
: ) Which does not mean that I think there is anything bad in the concept of LED beamers .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a 1024x768 1700 ANSI lumen (that's 17 times and bright, and 1.6 times as big) beamer, with a price tag of only $200 more.
Sure it is bigger, but the last thing that I care about is the size.
Why would I move it anyway?
I mean I have positioned it all carefully for the best home cinema experience.The only point of such a beamer would be a mobile phone.
But then it would have to be at least 3000 ANSI lumen, to be of an actual use.So it is still a long way to go.
:)Which does not mean that I think there is anything bad in the concept of LED beamers.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376251</id>
	<title>Re:Dark energy?</title>
	<author>Toonol</author>
	<datestamp>1245348780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, those pictures are pretty obviously faked.  In fairness, though, it's probably pretty much impossible to catch an image of the projected screen using flash photography.  On the gripping hand, it's faked FAR better than it actually would look.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , those pictures are pretty obviously faked .
In fairness , though , it 's probably pretty much impossible to catch an image of the projected screen using flash photography .
On the gripping hand , it 's faked FAR better than it actually would look .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, those pictures are pretty obviously faked.
In fairness, though, it's probably pretty much impossible to catch an image of the projected screen using flash photography.
On the gripping hand, it's faked FAR better than it actually would look.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375151</id>
	<title>TL;DR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245344520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>TL;DR TL;DR</htmltext>
<tokenext>TL ; DR TL ; DR</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TL;DR TL;DR</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375479</id>
	<title>Good projector for a netbook</title>
	<author>chiph</author>
	<datestamp>1245345960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sounds like.  Moderate resolution, highly portable, not super expensive.</p><p>Chip H.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sounds like .
Moderate resolution , highly portable , not super expensive.Chip H .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sounds like.
Moderate resolution, highly portable, not super expensive.Chip H.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28377949</id>
	<title>I have to out-pedant you here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245354480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your English teacher obviously was not a native user of the language.<ul> <li>We say "100 watt bulb", not 100 watts bulb</li>
<li>We say "100 meter sprint"</li>
<li>Old time carpenters had a "three foot rule" not a three feet rule</li>
<li>Cars have a "fifteen gallon tank" or a "60 litre tank"</li>
<li>Porn actors have an "eleven inch penis"</li>
</ul><p>
Spot the rule? When specifying a dimension beginning with the quantity, the quantity name is singular (and has been for very many years.) Thus "100 lumen" is correct.</p><p>
But when the order is different, the grammar changes:</p><ul> <li>"This bulb is 100 watts"</li>
<li>"I just ran 200 meters to catch the bus"</li>
<li>"This plank is eight feet six inches"</li>
<li>"This tank holds fifteen gallons"</li>
<li>"Six feet ten inches? Forget the six feet, let's talk about the ten inches" (attr. Mae West)</li>
</ul><p>

There. Does that help?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your English teacher obviously was not a native user of the language .
We say " 100 watt bulb " , not 100 watts bulb We say " 100 meter sprint " Old time carpenters had a " three foot rule " not a three feet rule Cars have a " fifteen gallon tank " or a " 60 litre tank " Porn actors have an " eleven inch penis " Spot the rule ?
When specifying a dimension beginning with the quantity , the quantity name is singular ( and has been for very many years .
) Thus " 100 lumen " is correct .
But when the order is different , the grammar changes : " This bulb is 100 watts " " I just ran 200 meters to catch the bus " " This plank is eight feet six inches " " This tank holds fifteen gallons " " Six feet ten inches ?
Forget the six feet , let 's talk about the ten inches " ( attr .
Mae West ) There .
Does that help ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your English teacher obviously was not a native user of the language.
We say "100 watt bulb", not 100 watts bulb
We say "100 meter sprint"
Old time carpenters had a "three foot rule" not a three feet rule
Cars have a "fifteen gallon tank" or a "60 litre tank"
Porn actors have an "eleven inch penis"

Spot the rule?
When specifying a dimension beginning with the quantity, the quantity name is singular (and has been for very many years.
) Thus "100 lumen" is correct.
But when the order is different, the grammar changes: "This bulb is 100 watts"
"I just ran 200 meters to catch the bus"
"This plank is eight feet six inches"
"This tank holds fifteen gallons"
"Six feet ten inches?
Forget the six feet, let's talk about the ten inches" (attr.
Mae West)


There.
Does that help?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375501</id>
	<title>800x600? Meh.</title>
	<author>MarcQuadra</author>
	<datestamp>1245345960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, I know it's neat to use a projector and all, but 800x600 wasn't enough for me in 1992, let alone now. I suppose you could play StarCraft on it, and maybe type some things, but that resolution just can't cut it for any sort of thing I'd want to do.</p><p>I'd need at least 1024x768 for a reasonable computing experience, and preferably much, much more.</p><p>Right now that's actually the only thing keeping me away from the netbooks I've seen, until they have a better screen than my eight year-old Dell's 12" 1024x768 display, I'll stick with 'old high-end' rather than 'new low-end'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , I know it 's neat to use a projector and all , but 800x600 was n't enough for me in 1992 , let alone now .
I suppose you could play StarCraft on it , and maybe type some things , but that resolution just ca n't cut it for any sort of thing I 'd want to do.I 'd need at least 1024x768 for a reasonable computing experience , and preferably much , much more.Right now that 's actually the only thing keeping me away from the netbooks I 've seen , until they have a better screen than my eight year-old Dell 's 12 " 1024x768 display , I 'll stick with 'old high-end ' rather than 'new low-end' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, I know it's neat to use a projector and all, but 800x600 wasn't enough for me in 1992, let alone now.
I suppose you could play StarCraft on it, and maybe type some things, but that resolution just can't cut it for any sort of thing I'd want to do.I'd need at least 1024x768 for a reasonable computing experience, and preferably much, much more.Right now that's actually the only thing keeping me away from the netbooks I've seen, until they have a better screen than my eight year-old Dell's 12" 1024x768 display, I'll stick with 'old high-end' rather than 'new low-end'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28377661</id>
	<title>Re:lumen</title>
	<author>invalid-access</author>
	<datestamp>1245353820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's just silly - everyone knows that lumen is the plural of luman.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's just silly - everyone knows that lumen is the plural of luman .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's just silly - everyone knows that lumen is the plural of luman.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375449</id>
	<title>Euphemisms</title>
	<author>tb3</author>
	<datestamp>1245345780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>random internet curiosities from the "misc" folder of my hard drive</p></div><p>That's the best description of porn I've ever seen!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>random internet curiosities from the " misc " folder of my hard driveThat 's the best description of porn I 've ever seen !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>random internet curiosities from the "misc" folder of my hard driveThat's the best description of porn I've ever seen!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376947</id>
	<title>Re:Which Neal Stephenson novel?</title>
	<author>Kyont</author>
	<datestamp>1245351480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...weighs less than a Neal Stephenson novel and has a sharper, brighter image than that monster</p></div><p>Nobody has a sharper, brighter image than Neal Stephenson!  This review is heresy!  And calling him a monster, that's just going too far (even if you did slog through the Baroque Cycle).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...weighs less than a Neal Stephenson novel and has a sharper , brighter image than that monsterNobody has a sharper , brighter image than Neal Stephenson !
This review is heresy !
And calling him a monster , that 's just going too far ( even if you did slog through the Baroque Cycle ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...weighs less than a Neal Stephenson novel and has a sharper, brighter image than that monsterNobody has a sharper, brighter image than Neal Stephenson!
This review is heresy!
And calling him a monster, that's just going too far (even if you did slog through the Baroque Cycle).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375721</id>
	<title>"incandescent"? or plasma arc?</title>
	<author>fortunatus</author>
	<datestamp>1245346860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He keeps talking about projectors at 1200 lumens using incandescent lamps - but I'm pretty sure he means "xenon plasma arc" lamps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He keeps talking about projectors at 1200 lumens using incandescent lamps - but I 'm pretty sure he means " xenon plasma arc " lamps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He keeps talking about projectors at 1200 lumens using incandescent lamps - but I'm pretty sure he means "xenon plasma arc" lamps.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375229</id>
	<title>Which Neal Stephenson novel?</title>
	<author>mfnickster</author>
	<datestamp>1245344880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Now, I've got a projector above my head that weighs less than a Neal Stephenson novel
</p><p>
That's still pretty heavy... unless it's <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=dPtgrK0piu4C&amp;lpg=PP1&amp;dq=\%22the\%20big\%20u\%22&amp;pg=PP1" title="google.com">The Big U</a> [google.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Now , I 've got a projector above my head that weighs less than a Neal Stephenson novel That 's still pretty heavy... unless it 's The Big U [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Now, I've got a projector above my head that weighs less than a Neal Stephenson novel

That's still pretty heavy... unless it's The Big U [google.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28383255</id>
	<title>Re:Dark energy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245330540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wish that could get them sued for deceptive advertising, since most non-technical people simply won't notice anything wrong in these photos. Heck, this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.er didn't even notice it before reading your post, even if it's quite literally plain as day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish that could get them sued for deceptive advertising , since most non-technical people simply wo n't notice anything wrong in these photos .
Heck , this /.er did n't even notice it before reading your post , even if it 's quite literally plain as day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish that could get them sued for deceptive advertising, since most non-technical people simply won't notice anything wrong in these photos.
Heck, this /.er didn't even notice it before reading your post, even if it's quite literally plain as day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28389817</id>
	<title>Re:I have to out-pedant you here</title>
	<author>IpalindromeI</author>
	<datestamp>1245425760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be even more specific: In your first set of examples, the dimensions are actually adjectives <i>describing</i> some noun, and adjectives aren't pluralized. (Although I'm sure someone can find a counter-example.) In the second set, the measurements are nouns themselves, so they get the plural treatment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be even more specific : In your first set of examples , the dimensions are actually adjectives describing some noun , and adjectives are n't pluralized .
( Although I 'm sure someone can find a counter-example .
) In the second set , the measurements are nouns themselves , so they get the plural treatment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be even more specific: In your first set of examples, the dimensions are actually adjectives describing some noun, and adjectives aren't pluralized.
(Although I'm sure someone can find a counter-example.
) In the second set, the measurements are nouns themselves, so they get the plural treatment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28377949</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28383731</id>
	<title>Possible DIY Surface Projector?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245333120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Might be an interesting option for a DIY Surface PC. Would like to see someone take one and use it for that. The resolution is about right and the size definitely helps!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Might be an interesting option for a DIY Surface PC .
Would like to see someone take one and use it for that .
The resolution is about right and the size definitely helps !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Might be an interesting option for a DIY Surface PC.
Would like to see someone take one and use it for that.
The resolution is about right and the size definitely helps!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376321</id>
	<title>Re:Ouch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245349020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WARNING!!! Don't look into projector with remaining eye!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WARNING ! ! !
Do n't look into projector with remaining eye !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WARNING!!!
Don't look into projector with remaining eye!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28393985</id>
	<title>800x600 is NOT "good enough" for widescreen SD</title>
	<author>sremick</author>
	<datestamp>1245442920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"I'm probably at least a few years from buying a Blu-Ray or other ultra-high definition device, so beating the 720x480 resolution of typical NTSC DVDs meets most of my movie- and Hulu-watching demands."</p></div><p>Not if you're watching widescreen DVDs. At worse, watching a 2.35:1 movie inside of a 800x600 (4:3) screen means you only get 340 lines vertical resolution, by my math. That's a lost of 20\%.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I 'm probably at least a few years from buying a Blu-Ray or other ultra-high definition device , so beating the 720x480 resolution of typical NTSC DVDs meets most of my movie- and Hulu-watching demands .
" Not if you 're watching widescreen DVDs .
At worse , watching a 2.35 : 1 movie inside of a 800x600 ( 4 : 3 ) screen means you only get 340 lines vertical resolution , by my math .
That 's a lost of 20 \ % .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I'm probably at least a few years from buying a Blu-Ray or other ultra-high definition device, so beating the 720x480 resolution of typical NTSC DVDs meets most of my movie- and Hulu-watching demands.
"Not if you're watching widescreen DVDs.
At worse, watching a 2.35:1 movie inside of a 800x600 (4:3) screen means you only get 340 lines vertical resolution, by my math.
That's a lost of 20\%.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376573</id>
	<title>Re:800x600? Meh.</title>
	<author>moonbender</author>
	<datestamp>1245350100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, most netbooks have a 10" 1024x600 display, which implies a higher ppi resolution than that Dell laptop. They're certainly not worse, just smaller. Furthermore, you can get some 10" netbooks (e.g. Dell's) with a higher-res screen. And the Dell 12" netbook has a res of 1280x800, again, higher than your old one. So much for that.</p><p>Furthermore, nobody is suggesting using a projector like that -- or really ANY consumer projector -- for a "reasonable computing experience". They're built for watching movies and playing games... If that's not the thing you do then you're really not the target demographic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , most netbooks have a 10 " 1024x600 display , which implies a higher ppi resolution than that Dell laptop .
They 're certainly not worse , just smaller .
Furthermore , you can get some 10 " netbooks ( e.g .
Dell 's ) with a higher-res screen .
And the Dell 12 " netbook has a res of 1280x800 , again , higher than your old one .
So much for that.Furthermore , nobody is suggesting using a projector like that -- or really ANY consumer projector -- for a " reasonable computing experience " .
They 're built for watching movies and playing games... If that 's not the thing you do then you 're really not the target demographic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, most netbooks have a 10" 1024x600 display, which implies a higher ppi resolution than that Dell laptop.
They're certainly not worse, just smaller.
Furthermore, you can get some 10" netbooks (e.g.
Dell's) with a higher-res screen.
And the Dell 12" netbook has a res of 1280x800, again, higher than your old one.
So much for that.Furthermore, nobody is suggesting using a projector like that -- or really ANY consumer projector -- for a "reasonable computing experience".
They're built for watching movies and playing games... If that's not the thing you do then you're really not the target demographic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375501</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375629</id>
	<title>SofA Projector</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245346500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Laser diode projectors are the latest/greatest and priced at $399.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Laser diode projectors are the latest/greatest and priced at $ 399 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Laser diode projectors are the latest/greatest and priced at $399.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376059</id>
	<title>Re:An alternative pico projector</title>
	<author>iamhassi</author>
	<datestamp>1245348060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"800x600, 100 lumen (no missing zero there: one-hundred lumen) projector in 2009 A.D., but for the past four weeks, I've used it as my primary display, and come out happy. It has some drawbacks, but it's an impressive little device for its $499 pricetag"</i>
<br> <br>
If you liked that, you might want to check out the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/24/100-eyeclops-mini-projector-announced-for-untatered-tots/" title="engadget.com">$100 LED projector.
</a> [engadget.com]<br> <br>
At that price I'm thinking about having all my walls be projectors, so I can change the colors whenever I like, or have a giant screen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" 800x600 , 100 lumen ( no missing zero there : one-hundred lumen ) projector in 2009 A.D. , but for the past four weeks , I 've used it as my primary display , and come out happy .
It has some drawbacks , but it 's an impressive little device for its $ 499 pricetag " If you liked that , you might want to check out the $ 100 LED projector .
[ engadget.com ] At that price I 'm thinking about having all my walls be projectors , so I can change the colors whenever I like , or have a giant screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"800x600, 100 lumen (no missing zero there: one-hundred lumen) projector in 2009 A.D., but for the past four weeks, I've used it as my primary display, and come out happy.
It has some drawbacks, but it's an impressive little device for its $499 pricetag"
 
If you liked that, you might want to check out the $100 LED projector.
[engadget.com] 
At that price I'm thinking about having all my walls be projectors, so I can change the colors whenever I like, or have a giant screen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28403911</id>
	<title>9 lumen microvision display</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245488460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, but the microvision display only promises 9 lumens of output spread out over your projection area.</p><p>That is one full order of magnitude less.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but the microvision display only promises 9 lumens of output spread out over your projection area.That is one full order of magnitude less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but the microvision display only promises 9 lumens of output spread out over your projection area.That is one full order of magnitude less.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376833</id>
	<title>Re:Dark energy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245351060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm... the web site tells me to "let my imagination work it." This is <i>is</i> for pr0n!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm... the web site tells me to " let my imagination work it .
" This is is for pr0n !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm... the web site tells me to "let my imagination work it.
" This is is for pr0n!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375327</id>
	<title>Photo?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245345300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>How hard is it to include just ONE photo of the device you're so meticulously writing to us about?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How hard is it to include just ONE photo of the device you 're so meticulously writing to us about ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How hard is it to include just ONE photo of the device you're so meticulously writing to us about?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375185</id>
	<title>Benq build quality.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245344760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've got a 4 year old Benq projector and it's still going strong with regular use.  They seem to have good build quality, and I love not having a visible TV box in the living room, just a pull down screen for when it's movie time.  I'm surprised at the 100 lumen rating, that seems really low, but I guess it works in a dark enough environment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got a 4 year old Benq projector and it 's still going strong with regular use .
They seem to have good build quality , and I love not having a visible TV box in the living room , just a pull down screen for when it 's movie time .
I 'm surprised at the 100 lumen rating , that seems really low , but I guess it works in a dark enough environment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got a 4 year old Benq projector and it's still going strong with regular use.
They seem to have good build quality, and I love not having a visible TV box in the living room, just a pull down screen for when it's movie time.
I'm surprised at the 100 lumen rating, that seems really low, but I guess it works in a dark enough environment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375161</id>
	<title>Ouch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245344580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've been looking into LED projectors for a few years now</p></div><p>There's a Visine for that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been looking into LED projectors for a few years nowThere 's a Visine for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been looking into LED projectors for a few years nowThere's a Visine for that.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28381961</id>
	<title>Re:Dark energy?</title>
	<author>rs79</author>
	<datestamp>1245325140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"<i> <b>Did anyone notice a problem with the picture at the top of the linked page? The projected images on the (white) walls actually have darker parts than the wall itself in the ambient light. What kind of light does this projector emit?? Or does it spray paint on the wall?</b></i> "</p><p>You use dark emitting diodes. Duh. LEDs and solar power get all the glory but I'm telling you now the future belongs to DEDs and Lunar power - all that moonlight going to waste that could be powering arrays of dark emitting diodes. Don't even get me started on monodes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Did anyone notice a problem with the picture at the top of the linked page ?
The projected images on the ( white ) walls actually have darker parts than the wall itself in the ambient light .
What kind of light does this projector emit ? ?
Or does it spray paint on the wall ?
" You use dark emitting diodes .
Duh. LEDs and solar power get all the glory but I 'm telling you now the future belongs to DEDs and Lunar power - all that moonlight going to waste that could be powering arrays of dark emitting diodes .
Do n't even get me started on monodes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>" Did anyone notice a problem with the picture at the top of the linked page?
The projected images on the (white) walls actually have darker parts than the wall itself in the ambient light.
What kind of light does this projector emit??
Or does it spray paint on the wall?
"You use dark emitting diodes.
Duh. LEDs and solar power get all the glory but I'm telling you now the future belongs to DEDs and Lunar power - all that moonlight going to waste that could be powering arrays of dark emitting diodes.
Don't even get me started on monodes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375839</id>
	<title>if your gonna be cheap go all out.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245347280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>my insight on this,... and this is coming from a DIY work with my hands kind of guy.</p><p>With the economic down turn the way it is.<br>Ive been picking up flawed projectors on ebay for $20 - $40.<br>some with lamps near the end of life, some with mechanical or physical defects but a strong lamp life.</p><p>trying to get multiples of the same or similar models with different issues.</p><p>doing this I have aquired 5 lcd projectors. 3 in excellent shape and long lamp life, 2 with minor blemishes in the image but long lamp life.</p><p>the average cost of each of these home refurbs is $60 to $75 out of pocket and each projector has a minimum of 700 lumens and up to 2000 lumens.</p><p>so for under $400 I have enough projectors to rent out for events, set up art installations, set up rogue inprompto drive ins and home theater for many years to come, with very little refurb needed to get me there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>my insight on this,... and this is coming from a DIY work with my hands kind of guy.With the economic down turn the way it is.Ive been picking up flawed projectors on ebay for $ 20 - $ 40.some with lamps near the end of life , some with mechanical or physical defects but a strong lamp life.trying to get multiples of the same or similar models with different issues.doing this I have aquired 5 lcd projectors .
3 in excellent shape and long lamp life , 2 with minor blemishes in the image but long lamp life.the average cost of each of these home refurbs is $ 60 to $ 75 out of pocket and each projector has a minimum of 700 lumens and up to 2000 lumens.so for under $ 400 I have enough projectors to rent out for events , set up art installations , set up rogue inprompto drive ins and home theater for many years to come , with very little refurb needed to get me there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>my insight on this,... and this is coming from a DIY work with my hands kind of guy.With the economic down turn the way it is.Ive been picking up flawed projectors on ebay for $20 - $40.some with lamps near the end of life, some with mechanical or physical defects but a strong lamp life.trying to get multiples of the same or similar models with different issues.doing this I have aquired 5 lcd projectors.
3 in excellent shape and long lamp life, 2 with minor blemishes in the image but long lamp life.the average cost of each of these home refurbs is $60 to $75 out of pocket and each projector has a minimum of 700 lumens and up to 2000 lumens.so for under $400 I have enough projectors to rent out for events, set up art installations, set up rogue inprompto drive ins and home theater for many years to come, with very little refurb needed to get me there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28378711</id>
	<title>Re:An alternative pico projector</title>
	<author>korbin\_dallas</author>
	<datestamp>1245356460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh, how about not posting vaporware about your company.  This thing isn't shipping AND I am not about to join your 'club' to find out.</p><p>Gee you'd think a real company would post a target ship date if they REALLY were legit.</p><p>The BenQ is available today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , how about not posting vaporware about your company .
This thing is n't shipping AND I am not about to join your 'club ' to find out.Gee you 'd think a real company would post a target ship date if they REALLY were legit.The BenQ is available today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, how about not posting vaporware about your company.
This thing isn't shipping AND I am not about to join your 'club' to find out.Gee you'd think a real company would post a target ship date if they REALLY were legit.The BenQ is available today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28377775</id>
	<title>What's Your First Projector</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245354120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first projector I saw was my Dad's slide projector.  Most video projectors (except theater-grade DLPs) can't hold a candle to a Kodak Carousel that you can get at a garage sale for 25 bucks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first projector I saw was my Dad 's slide projector .
Most video projectors ( except theater-grade DLPs ) ca n't hold a candle to a Kodak Carousel that you can get at a garage sale for 25 bucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first projector I saw was my Dad's slide projector.
Most video projectors (except theater-grade DLPs) can't hold a candle to a Kodak Carousel that you can get at a garage sale for 25 bucks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376989</id>
	<title>Re:lumen</title>
	<author>at\_slashdot</author>
	<datestamp>1245351720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Googling for 120 Volt gives more results than 120 Volts...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Googling for 120 Volt gives more results than 120 Volts.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Googling for 120 Volt gives more results than 120 Volts...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28403911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28384141
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28384459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376989
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28384381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375571
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375587
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28379137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28378049
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28377661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28378711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28389817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28377949
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376251
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28383255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_18_0951259_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28381961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28383795
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375289
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28379137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28403911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28378711
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28384141
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376059
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375759
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375161
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376321
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28380845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375501
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376573
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375935
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375427
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376429
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28377949
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28389817
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28384381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376989
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28377661
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375327
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375571
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375867
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376251
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28384459
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28378049
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28381961
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28383255
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376833
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28377775
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375185
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375587
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_18_0951259.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28375229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_18_0951259.28376947
</commentlist>
</conversation>
