<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_19_2211229</id>
	<title>Wikipedia To Add Video</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1245410100000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://blog.mainlined.org/" rel="nofollow">viyh</a> writes <i>"Wikipedia will be <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/web/22900/page1/">adding a video option within two or three months</a>, according to the MIT Technology Review. '... a person editing a Wikipedia article will find a new button labeled "Add Media." Clicking it will bring up an interface allowing her to search for video &mdash; initially from three repositories containing copyright-free material &mdash; and drag chosen portions into the article, without having to install any video-editing software or do any conversions herself. The results will appear as a clickable video clip embedded within the article.' They will be requiring all video to use open-source formats. This is in hopes of getting content providers to open up their material to gain wider exposure on the Wikipedia website. There is also an in-browser editor that <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506\_3-10269308-17.html">removes a lot of the headache</a> often associated with any kind of video editing. With the new Wikipedia system, 'people will be able to easily inject media into pages, in a way that wasn't possible before,' says Michael Dale, a software engineer from <a href="http://www.kaltura.com/">Kaltura</a>, the company assisting with development of the tools."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>viyh writes " Wikipedia will be adding a video option within two or three months , according to the MIT Technology Review .
'... a person editing a Wikipedia article will find a new button labeled " Add Media .
" Clicking it will bring up an interface allowing her to search for video    initially from three repositories containing copyright-free material    and drag chosen portions into the article , without having to install any video-editing software or do any conversions herself .
The results will appear as a clickable video clip embedded within the article .
' They will be requiring all video to use open-source formats .
This is in hopes of getting content providers to open up their material to gain wider exposure on the Wikipedia website .
There is also an in-browser editor that removes a lot of the headache often associated with any kind of video editing .
With the new Wikipedia system , 'people will be able to easily inject media into pages , in a way that was n't possible before, ' says Michael Dale , a software engineer from Kaltura , the company assisting with development of the tools .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>viyh writes "Wikipedia will be adding a video option within two or three months, according to the MIT Technology Review.
'... a person editing a Wikipedia article will find a new button labeled "Add Media.
" Clicking it will bring up an interface allowing her to search for video — initially from three repositories containing copyright-free material — and drag chosen portions into the article, without having to install any video-editing software or do any conversions herself.
The results will appear as a clickable video clip embedded within the article.
' They will be requiring all video to use open-source formats.
This is in hopes of getting content providers to open up their material to gain wider exposure on the Wikipedia website.
There is also an in-browser editor that removes a lot of the headache often associated with any kind of video editing.
With the new Wikipedia system, 'people will be able to easily inject media into pages, in a way that wasn't possible before,' says Michael Dale, a software engineer from Kaltura, the company assisting with development of the tools.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397291</id>
	<title>Will show admin porn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245413880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pmdrive1061, j.delanoy and nawlnwiki sucking the willy on wheels cock.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pmdrive1061 , j.delanoy and nawlnwiki sucking the willy on wheels cock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pmdrive1061, j.delanoy and nawlnwiki sucking the willy on wheels cock.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398599</id>
	<title>Re:Another Tool</title>
	<author>smoker2</author>
	<datestamp>1245425340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's no anus - THIS is an anus<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....<br>I'll leave the link out shall I ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's no anus - THIS is an anus ....I 'll leave the link out shall I ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's no anus - THIS is an anus ....I'll leave the link out shall I ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397547</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399925</id>
	<title>Re:Weird story gender...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245529740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"why not just go with "they"? I know it's not grammatically correct (according to an English teacher I had) but at least it works, and it should be correct."<br>Your English teacher is wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" why not just go with " they " ?
I know it 's not grammatically correct ( according to an English teacher I had ) but at least it works , and it should be correct .
" Your English teacher is wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"why not just go with "they"?
I know it's not grammatically correct (according to an English teacher I had) but at least it works, and it should be correct.
"Your English teacher is wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398753</id>
	<title>Re:Less is more.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245426960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So add a note on Wikipedia saying why it may be misleading.  That's just as relevant to the article as the purported astroturfing would be.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So add a note on Wikipedia saying why it may be misleading .
That 's just as relevant to the article as the purported astroturfing would be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So add a note on Wikipedia saying why it may be misleading.
That's just as relevant to the article as the purported astroturfing would be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398425</id>
	<title>Re:Donations?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245423360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know that videos don't have to load automatically don't you?</p><p>I guess your a Explorer user or a Firefox/etc user without the appropriate plugin.</p><p>PS: I imagine you can stop flash from loading automatically in Explorer too, don't know, don't use it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know that videos do n't have to load automatically do n't you ? I guess your a Explorer user or a Firefox/etc user without the appropriate plugin.PS : I imagine you can stop flash from loading automatically in Explorer too , do n't know , do n't use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know that videos don't have to load automatically don't you?I guess your a Explorer user or a Firefox/etc user without the appropriate plugin.PS: I imagine you can stop flash from loading automatically in Explorer too, don't know, don't use it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397623</id>
	<title>Re:Rather not.</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1245416760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you don't want to see that stuff, use greasemonkey or similar (heck, perhaps even just user CSS) to hide it. Heck, you could do it with adblock, perhaps with element hiding helper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't want to see that stuff , use greasemonkey or similar ( heck , perhaps even just user CSS ) to hide it .
Heck , you could do it with adblock , perhaps with element hiding helper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't want to see that stuff, use greasemonkey or similar (heck, perhaps even just user CSS) to hide it.
Heck, you could do it with adblock, perhaps with element hiding helper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28404383</id>
	<title>Re:No Male</title>
	<author>mpeskett</author>
	<datestamp>1245492960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Using the masculine form as a generic is pretty much standard practice, the alternative to push for isn't to simply switch the gender of that standard practice to have female pronouns everywhere, instead you could try promoting a gender-neutral pronoun. I believe I've seen "yo" suggested for that purpose...

</p><p>That or accept that grammatically, the way it's gone down is to have 'masculine' pronouns serve dual use as both masculine and neutral - you can try alternatives like "huwoman" or "herstory", but it does come off as a little excessive for a point of grammatical political incorrectness.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Using the masculine form as a generic is pretty much standard practice , the alternative to push for is n't to simply switch the gender of that standard practice to have female pronouns everywhere , instead you could try promoting a gender-neutral pronoun .
I believe I 've seen " yo " suggested for that purpose.. . That or accept that grammatically , the way it 's gone down is to have 'masculine ' pronouns serve dual use as both masculine and neutral - you can try alternatives like " huwoman " or " herstory " , but it does come off as a little excessive for a point of grammatical political incorrectness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using the masculine form as a generic is pretty much standard practice, the alternative to push for isn't to simply switch the gender of that standard practice to have female pronouns everywhere, instead you could try promoting a gender-neutral pronoun.
I believe I've seen "yo" suggested for that purpose...

That or accept that grammatically, the way it's gone down is to have 'masculine' pronouns serve dual use as both masculine and neutral - you can try alternatives like "huwoman" or "herstory", but it does come off as a little excessive for a point of grammatical political incorrectness.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398113</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399077</id>
	<title>obligatory xkcd</title>
	<author>iris-n</author>
	<datestamp>1245430860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://xkcd.com/145/" title="xkcd.com">http://xkcd.com/145/</a> [xkcd.com]</p><p>It is not <em>that</em> incorrect. Anyway, it is the type of linguistical hacking that I appreciate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //xkcd.com/145/ [ xkcd.com ] It is not that incorrect .
Anyway , it is the type of linguistical hacking that I appreciate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://xkcd.com/145/ [xkcd.com]It is not that incorrect.
Anyway, it is the type of linguistical hacking that I appreciate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397875</id>
	<title>Re:Weird story gender...</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1245418440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They is more correct than she, if you're referring to a group.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They is more correct than she , if you 're referring to a group .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They is more correct than she, if you're referring to a group.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398467</id>
	<title>Re:Rather not.</title>
	<author>Sir\_Real</author>
	<datestamp>1245423900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps it will be optional.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps it will be optional .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps it will be optional.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399053</id>
	<title>It's not.  Wikipedia content is Creative Commons</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245430620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You could copy all the wikipedia articles right now and suddenly start your own version.  It would be bit like a fork.  This is not a high barrier to entry.  I would be more inclined to agree with it being a monopoly if all the material was under a stricter license.</p><p>This is also precisely why the idea of open source monopolies are a red herring.  If IE was open source software, when MS stopped developing it it would have been forked.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>This is a great example of open source being an ideological battle setting out to destroy proporietary software. Although many often deny it (maybe they don't like awareness of the truth?), there's plenty of examples from the community.</p></div><p>Be wary of RMS.  While interesting, his views do not necessarily reflect he views of all the community.  Do not forget that there are the BSD and LGPL licenses as well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You could copy all the wikipedia articles right now and suddenly start your own version .
It would be bit like a fork .
This is not a high barrier to entry .
I would be more inclined to agree with it being a monopoly if all the material was under a stricter license.This is also precisely why the idea of open source monopolies are a red herring .
If IE was open source software , when MS stopped developing it it would have been forked.This is a great example of open source being an ideological battle setting out to destroy proporietary software .
Although many often deny it ( maybe they do n't like awareness of the truth ?
) , there 's plenty of examples from the community.Be wary of RMS .
While interesting , his views do not necessarily reflect he views of all the community .
Do not forget that there are the BSD and LGPL licenses as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could copy all the wikipedia articles right now and suddenly start your own version.
It would be bit like a fork.
This is not a high barrier to entry.
I would be more inclined to agree with it being a monopoly if all the material was under a stricter license.This is also precisely why the idea of open source monopolies are a red herring.
If IE was open source software, when MS stopped developing it it would have been forked.This is a great example of open source being an ideological battle setting out to destroy proporietary software.
Although many often deny it (maybe they don't like awareness of the truth?
), there's plenty of examples from the community.Be wary of RMS.
While interesting, his views do not necessarily reflect he views of all the community.
Do not forget that there are the BSD and LGPL licenses as well.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398407</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400787</id>
	<title>Re:Weird story gender...</title>
	<author>k.a.f.</author>
	<datestamp>1245500700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...a person editing a Wikipedia<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... allowing her to search for video...</p></div><p>Strange, apparently a "person" can only be female.</p><p>I know, I know, if it said "he" no one would notice, but obviously this person was going out of their way to say "her", so why not just go with "they"? I know it's not grammatically correct (according to an English teacher I had) but at least it works, and it should be correct.</p><p>Anyway, it just annoys me when someone goes out of their way to try to end the male gender bias only to throw in female gender bias instead of making it gender neutral.
-Taylor</p></div><p>Where have you lived the last ten years? This style has been
established in technical writing long ago. An increasing number of
people agree that it's silly to presume universal masculinity, so the
gender of pronouns becomes available as an additional discourse
marker.</p><p>For instance, a text on agile development might say, "When the
on-site customer notices that his account name is being truncated, he
can notify the project manager immediately, and she might either tell
the designer that he should create a larger text field, or ask for a
change to the specification" [example pulled totally out of
nowhere].</p><p> That doesn't mean that all users and designers are men and all
managers are women, it just allows you to use fewer repetitions of
noun phrases to say the same thing. I consider that a win. (Other
people use 'they' all the time, which is OK, I guess, but doesn't have
the same built-in reference management.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...a person editing a Wikipedia .... allowing her to search for video...Strange , apparently a " person " can only be female.I know , I know , if it said " he " no one would notice , but obviously this person was going out of their way to say " her " , so why not just go with " they " ?
I know it 's not grammatically correct ( according to an English teacher I had ) but at least it works , and it should be correct.Anyway , it just annoys me when someone goes out of their way to try to end the male gender bias only to throw in female gender bias instead of making it gender neutral .
-TaylorWhere have you lived the last ten years ?
This style has been established in technical writing long ago .
An increasing number of people agree that it 's silly to presume universal masculinity , so the gender of pronouns becomes available as an additional discourse marker.For instance , a text on agile development might say , " When the on-site customer notices that his account name is being truncated , he can notify the project manager immediately , and she might either tell the designer that he should create a larger text field , or ask for a change to the specification " [ example pulled totally out of nowhere ] .
That does n't mean that all users and designers are men and all managers are women , it just allows you to use fewer repetitions of noun phrases to say the same thing .
I consider that a win .
( Other people use 'they ' all the time , which is OK , I guess , but does n't have the same built-in reference management .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...a person editing a Wikipedia .... allowing her to search for video...Strange, apparently a "person" can only be female.I know, I know, if it said "he" no one would notice, but obviously this person was going out of their way to say "her", so why not just go with "they"?
I know it's not grammatically correct (according to an English teacher I had) but at least it works, and it should be correct.Anyway, it just annoys me when someone goes out of their way to try to end the male gender bias only to throw in female gender bias instead of making it gender neutral.
-TaylorWhere have you lived the last ten years?
This style has been
established in technical writing long ago.
An increasing number of
people agree that it's silly to presume universal masculinity, so the
gender of pronouns becomes available as an additional discourse
marker.For instance, a text on agile development might say, "When the
on-site customer notices that his account name is being truncated, he
can notify the project manager immediately, and she might either tell
the designer that he should create a larger text field, or ask for a
change to the specification" [example pulled totally out of
nowhere].
That doesn't mean that all users and designers are men and all
managers are women, it just allows you to use fewer repetitions of
noun phrases to say the same thing.
I consider that a win.
(Other
people use 'they' all the time, which is OK, I guess, but doesn't have
the same built-in reference management.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398113</id>
	<title>Re:No Male</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245420360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gendered language sure is horrible, isn't it? I mean, when it's not gendered like <em>you</em>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gendered language sure is horrible , is n't it ?
I mean , when it 's not gendered like you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gendered language sure is horrible, isn't it?
I mean, when it's not gendered like you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397321</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397487</id>
	<title>Re:No Male</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245415500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It'll be females only, but at least there will be an option to search an uploader's herstory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 'll be females only , but at least there will be an option to search an uploader 's herstory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It'll be females only, but at least there will be an option to search an uploader's herstory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397321</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398457</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>tiananmen tank man</author>
	<datestamp>1245423840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are mixing two things up, the ideas of OSS which are superior and the quality of the software at its current state.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are mixing two things up , the ideas of OSS which are superior and the quality of the software at its current state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are mixing two things up, the ideas of OSS which are superior and the quality of the software at its current state.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397841</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245418200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, if you embed mp4 file, Windows people will be required to install "evil quicktime" and as we know, mp4 is also somehow evil because the organisation has patents on it.</p><p>So, by embedding Flash (which is totally documented I hear), they can play Theora thing and Ogg inside it. As it is GPL now, they could choose Sun Java technology and use Java player, trust me a huge amount of people from newbie to technical has Java installed. Of course, that time they would be blamed for using "bulky java" (as, there is no progress since 1997 you know).</p><p>What they don't know/figure/care is, there is no way to satisfy open source fanatics. Both Adobe and Sun have opened their billion dollar languages, product formats to community and they are still labelled as something else. Hell, Nokia even paid more than $500 Million to open Symbian source. The result? "Oh it is too big, complex, its C variant sux"... Oh really?</p><p>The result shows who is really being hypocretic. While on it... <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnash" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnash</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if you embed mp4 file , Windows people will be required to install " evil quicktime " and as we know , mp4 is also somehow evil because the organisation has patents on it.So , by embedding Flash ( which is totally documented I hear ) , they can play Theora thing and Ogg inside it .
As it is GPL now , they could choose Sun Java technology and use Java player , trust me a huge amount of people from newbie to technical has Java installed .
Of course , that time they would be blamed for using " bulky java " ( as , there is no progress since 1997 you know ) .What they do n't know/figure/care is , there is no way to satisfy open source fanatics .
Both Adobe and Sun have opened their billion dollar languages , product formats to community and they are still labelled as something else .
Hell , Nokia even paid more than $ 500 Million to open Symbian source .
The result ?
" Oh it is too big , complex , its C variant sux " ... Oh really ? The result shows who is really being hypocretic .
While on it... http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnash [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if you embed mp4 file, Windows people will be required to install "evil quicktime" and as we know, mp4 is also somehow evil because the organisation has patents on it.So, by embedding Flash (which is totally documented I hear), they can play Theora thing and Ogg inside it.
As it is GPL now, they could choose Sun Java technology and use Java player, trust me a huge amount of people from newbie to technical has Java installed.
Of course, that time they would be blamed for using "bulky java" (as, there is no progress since 1997 you know).What they don't know/figure/care is, there is no way to satisfy open source fanatics.
Both Adobe and Sun have opened their billion dollar languages, product formats to community and they are still labelled as something else.
Hell, Nokia even paid more than $500 Million to open Symbian source.
The result?
"Oh it is too big, complex, its C variant sux"... Oh really?The result shows who is really being hypocretic.
While on it... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnash [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398761</id>
	<title>Re:Rather not.</title>
	<author>Dustie</author>
	<datestamp>1245427020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or, you could just not hit the Play button.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , you could just not hit the Play button .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, you could just not hit the Play button.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581</id>
	<title>Weird story gender...</title>
	<author>Facegarden</author>
	<datestamp>1245416460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...a person editing a Wikipedia<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... allowing her to search for video...</p></div><p>Strange, apparently a "person" can only be female.</p><p>I know, I know, if it said "he" no one would notice, but obviously this person was going out of their way to say "her", so why not just go with "they"? I know it's not grammatically correct (according to an English teacher I had) but at least it works, and it should be correct.</p><p>Anyway, it just annoys me when someone goes out of their way to try to end the male gender bias only to throw in female gender bias instead of making it gender neutral.<br>-Taylor</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...a person editing a Wikipedia .... allowing her to search for video...Strange , apparently a " person " can only be female.I know , I know , if it said " he " no one would notice , but obviously this person was going out of their way to say " her " , so why not just go with " they " ?
I know it 's not grammatically correct ( according to an English teacher I had ) but at least it works , and it should be correct.Anyway , it just annoys me when someone goes out of their way to try to end the male gender bias only to throw in female gender bias instead of making it gender neutral.-Taylor</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...a person editing a Wikipedia .... allowing her to search for video...Strange, apparently a "person" can only be female.I know, I know, if it said "he" no one would notice, but obviously this person was going out of their way to say "her", so why not just go with "they"?
I know it's not grammatically correct (according to an English teacher I had) but at least it works, and it should be correct.Anyway, it just annoys me when someone goes out of their way to try to end the male gender bias only to throw in female gender bias instead of making it gender neutral.-Taylor
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398975</id>
	<title>Re:Rather not.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245429540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>well, I like wikipedia (calling it just "wiki" suggests to me you're PHB material and dont understand the difference) because it's all encompassing and has just about all the info you could ever want about a lot of topics in one place. all the info you could ever want, except videos. i dont see how adding MORE INFORMATION can ever be a bad thing, assuming the information is factual (but false information is a issue completely separate to adding video content).</htmltext>
<tokenext>well , I like wikipedia ( calling it just " wiki " suggests to me you 're PHB material and dont understand the difference ) because it 's all encompassing and has just about all the info you could ever want about a lot of topics in one place .
all the info you could ever want , except videos .
i dont see how adding MORE INFORMATION can ever be a bad thing , assuming the information is factual ( but false information is a issue completely separate to adding video content ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well, I like wikipedia (calling it just "wiki" suggests to me you're PHB material and dont understand the difference) because it's all encompassing and has just about all the info you could ever want about a lot of topics in one place.
all the info you could ever want, except videos.
i dont see how adding MORE INFORMATION can ever be a bad thing, assuming the information is factual (but false information is a issue completely separate to adding video content).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397795</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>demachina</author>
	<datestamp>1245417780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm all for driving Flash out of existence, since Macromedia/Adobe should have never been allowed to acquire the near monopoly on web video they have.  Adobe has also been a horrible steward of their responsibility especially when its come to Flash player support for devices like smart phones.</p><p>But the flip side is you might recall back to what video was like before Flash.  Every freaking web site you went to had a different video standard, video player, and you were usually forced to launch a video player which either wasn't integrated in the browser or was integrated badly.  Flash only succeeded because it fixed a completely broken thing on the web where Apple, Real and Microsoft in particular were trying to acquire their own monopolies on web video.</p><p>For this to succeed Wikipedia needs to compel a new video player standard other than Flash and proprietary codecs like H.264, and insure near universal availability of the solution they create as an integrated browser component, either built in to the browser or as a plugin.</p><p>I'm kind of curious if HTML/5 is going to be able to achieve that lofty goal across all the warring browser factions in the world, especially IE and Microsoft.  Not sure JavaFX counts as open.  What other standard is their other than HTML/5.</p><p>You also have the little problem that all existing video is going to have to be transcoded if you reject H.264, VP6, MPEG, WMV, AVI and Flash H.263 as acceptable formats.  It sure isn't going to be easy to add video to Wikipedia if Joe and Jane user have to transcode the video to add it, or is Wikipedia going to automatically transcode video as they get it to their open standard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm all for driving Flash out of existence , since Macromedia/Adobe should have never been allowed to acquire the near monopoly on web video they have .
Adobe has also been a horrible steward of their responsibility especially when its come to Flash player support for devices like smart phones.But the flip side is you might recall back to what video was like before Flash .
Every freaking web site you went to had a different video standard , video player , and you were usually forced to launch a video player which either was n't integrated in the browser or was integrated badly .
Flash only succeeded because it fixed a completely broken thing on the web where Apple , Real and Microsoft in particular were trying to acquire their own monopolies on web video.For this to succeed Wikipedia needs to compel a new video player standard other than Flash and proprietary codecs like H.264 , and insure near universal availability of the solution they create as an integrated browser component , either built in to the browser or as a plugin.I 'm kind of curious if HTML/5 is going to be able to achieve that lofty goal across all the warring browser factions in the world , especially IE and Microsoft .
Not sure JavaFX counts as open .
What other standard is their other than HTML/5.You also have the little problem that all existing video is going to have to be transcoded if you reject H.264 , VP6 , MPEG , WMV , AVI and Flash H.263 as acceptable formats .
It sure is n't going to be easy to add video to Wikipedia if Joe and Jane user have to transcode the video to add it , or is Wikipedia going to automatically transcode video as they get it to their open standard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm all for driving Flash out of existence, since Macromedia/Adobe should have never been allowed to acquire the near monopoly on web video they have.
Adobe has also been a horrible steward of their responsibility especially when its come to Flash player support for devices like smart phones.But the flip side is you might recall back to what video was like before Flash.
Every freaking web site you went to had a different video standard, video player, and you were usually forced to launch a video player which either wasn't integrated in the browser or was integrated badly.
Flash only succeeded because it fixed a completely broken thing on the web where Apple, Real and Microsoft in particular were trying to acquire their own monopolies on web video.For this to succeed Wikipedia needs to compel a new video player standard other than Flash and proprietary codecs like H.264, and insure near universal availability of the solution they create as an integrated browser component, either built in to the browser or as a plugin.I'm kind of curious if HTML/5 is going to be able to achieve that lofty goal across all the warring browser factions in the world, especially IE and Microsoft.
Not sure JavaFX counts as open.
What other standard is their other than HTML/5.You also have the little problem that all existing video is going to have to be transcoded if you reject H.264, VP6, MPEG, WMV, AVI and Flash H.263 as acceptable formats.
It sure isn't going to be easy to add video to Wikipedia if Joe and Jane user have to transcode the video to add it, or is Wikipedia going to automatically transcode video as they get it to their open standard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397693</id>
	<title>Wikimedia Commons</title>
	<author>Trebawa</author>
	<datestamp>1245417240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't this exactly what Wikimedia Commons is for?  Why would this go on Wikipedia?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't this exactly what Wikimedia Commons is for ?
Why would this go on Wikipedia ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't this exactly what Wikimedia Commons is for?
Why would this go on Wikipedia?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397421</id>
	<title>I can see a problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245414900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The "Porn" entry bring down the whole Wikipedia site in the first hour.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The " Porn " entry bring down the whole Wikipedia site in the first hour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "Porn" entry bring down the whole Wikipedia site in the first hour.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400637</id>
	<title>Re:Title is misleading</title>
	<author>indiechild</author>
	<datestamp>1245497700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That Morris C8 video plays back like a broken slideshow. All I see is buffering... some movement... buffering etc. It's horrible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That Morris C8 video plays back like a broken slideshow .
All I see is buffering... some movement... buffering etc .
It 's horrible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That Morris C8 video plays back like a broken slideshow.
All I see is buffering... some movement... buffering etc.
It's horrible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400613</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>the\_womble</author>
	<datestamp>1245497460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Don't go FOSS because it's FOSS. Go FOSS because it's superior.</p></div><p>One major reason FOSS is superior is that it avoids lock-in,. which it does because it is FOSS.</p><p>Open formats with proprietary software can do the same, but leave room for sneakiness.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't go FOSS because it 's FOSS .
Go FOSS because it 's superior.One major reason FOSS is superior is that it avoids lock-in, .
which it does because it is FOSS.Open formats with proprietary software can do the same , but leave room for sneakiness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't go FOSS because it's FOSS.
Go FOSS because it's superior.One major reason FOSS is superior is that it avoids lock-in,.
which it does because it is FOSS.Open formats with proprietary software can do the same, but leave room for sneakiness.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398441</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>FudRucker</author>
	<datestamp>1245423660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>i dont see it often but on rare occasions i find source code that is GNU/GPLed by some clueless hack that was written in a windows machine with the wrong text editor and i open it up and see a crapload of ^M  on the end of every line so i rm the whole package and decide i dont want that package afterall</htmltext>
<tokenext>i dont see it often but on rare occasions i find source code that is GNU/GPLed by some clueless hack that was written in a windows machine with the wrong text editor and i open it up and see a crapload of ^ M on the end of every line so i rm the whole package and decide i dont want that package afterall</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i dont see it often but on rare occasions i find source code that is GNU/GPLed by some clueless hack that was written in a windows machine with the wrong text editor and i open it up and see a crapload of ^M  on the end of every line so i rm the whole package and decide i dont want that package afterall</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397863</id>
	<title>Encarta is dead.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245418380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Hard to beat that [flash] for a website trying to reel in customers.</p></div></blockquote><p><b>Is</b> Wikipedia trying to "reel in customers"?  Since when?</p><p>Frankly, I *would* go FOSS in Wikipedia's case <i>if it's sufficient</i>, even if there were some proprietary format that was superior in some way.  Good enough + free beats shiny but evil any day, and is more in line with Wikipedia's raison d'etre.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hard to beat that [ flash ] for a website trying to reel in customers.Is Wikipedia trying to " reel in customers " ?
Since when ? Frankly , I * would * go FOSS in Wikipedia 's case if it 's sufficient , even if there were some proprietary format that was superior in some way .
Good enough + free beats shiny but evil any day , and is more in line with Wikipedia 's raison d'etre .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hard to beat that [flash] for a website trying to reel in customers.Is Wikipedia trying to "reel in customers"?
Since when?Frankly, I *would* go FOSS in Wikipedia's case if it's sufficient, even if there were some proprietary format that was superior in some way.
Good enough + free beats shiny but evil any day, and is more in line with Wikipedia's raison d'etre.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28404769</id>
	<title>Re:I can see a problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245496200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That brings Jimmy Wales full circle then, I guess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That brings Jimmy Wales full circle then , I guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That brings Jimmy Wales full circle then, I guess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397421</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400363</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245494160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>God I hate this equal opportunity bullshit! It's like these people don't realize what Free Software means, which probably is exactly the crux of the issue...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>God I hate this equal opportunity bullshit !
It 's like these people do n't realize what Free Software means , which probably is exactly the crux of the issue... : -/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God I hate this equal opportunity bullshit!
It's like these people don't realize what Free Software means, which probably is exactly the crux of the issue... :-/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397547</id>
	<title>Another Tool</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245416280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's always nice to see new tools in the toolbox.  I just wonder what kind of edit wars we can look forward to seeing.  Could they be like this?</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Human\_anus" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Human\_anus</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's always nice to see new tools in the toolbox .
I just wonder what kind of edit wars we can look forward to seeing .
Could they be like this ? http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk : Human \ _anus [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's always nice to see new tools in the toolbox.
I just wonder what kind of edit wars we can look forward to seeing.
Could they be like this?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Human\_anus [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28404287</id>
	<title>Re:No Male</title>
	<author>Mozk</author>
	<datestamp>1245492180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>by Anonymous Cowardon</p></div></blockquote><p>What's a Cowardon?</p><p>Am I the only one seeing this? I think somebody messed up their CSS.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>by Anonymous CowardonWhat 's a Cowardon ? Am I the only one seeing this ?
I think somebody messed up their CSS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>by Anonymous CowardonWhat's a Cowardon?Am I the only one seeing this?
I think somebody messed up their CSS.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397321</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398003</id>
	<title>Re:Rather not.</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1245419760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But it will still be clean, fast, and mainly text layout. No one is forcing you to play the images.</p><p>I don't see how this is that different to allowing sound files, which is already possible in articles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But it will still be clean , fast , and mainly text layout .
No one is forcing you to play the images.I do n't see how this is that different to allowing sound files , which is already possible in articles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But it will still be clean, fast, and mainly text layout.
No one is forcing you to play the images.I don't see how this is that different to allowing sound files, which is already possible in articles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397959</id>
	<title>Donations?</title>
	<author>Itninja</author>
	<datestamp>1245419340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have donated to Wikipedia a few times over the years. But I think I will stop if this video 'enhancement' takes off. I can think of no article I have ever read that would have been served better by video on the same page. Just reference a video from a source site. I thought Wikipedia was a non-profit organization running an lean crew of committed semi-volunteers, not a business looking to 'drive traffic' to their site.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have donated to Wikipedia a few times over the years .
But I think I will stop if this video 'enhancement ' takes off .
I can think of no article I have ever read that would have been served better by video on the same page .
Just reference a video from a source site .
I thought Wikipedia was a non-profit organization running an lean crew of committed semi-volunteers , not a business looking to 'drive traffic ' to their site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have donated to Wikipedia a few times over the years.
But I think I will stop if this video 'enhancement' takes off.
I can think of no article I have ever read that would have been served better by video on the same page.
Just reference a video from a source site.
I thought Wikipedia was a non-profit organization running an lean crew of committed semi-volunteers, not a business looking to 'drive traffic' to their site.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400659</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>IntlHarvester</author>
	<datestamp>1245498120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; all of which had responsive, native controls</p><p>Lol. More like they were slow-loading and designed to stick their logo and shitty "stereo component" UIs and other branding crap in the middle of your page design.</p><p>If the user-experience of any of these plugins was any good, one of them would have taken over and Flash video would have never gotten off the ground.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; all of which had responsive , native controlsLol .
More like they were slow-loading and designed to stick their logo and shitty " stereo component " UIs and other branding crap in the middle of your page design.If the user-experience of any of these plugins was any good , one of them would have taken over and Flash video would have never gotten off the ground .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; all of which had responsive, native controlsLol.
More like they were slow-loading and designed to stick their logo and shitty "stereo component" UIs and other branding crap in the middle of your page design.If the user-experience of any of these plugins was any good, one of them would have taken over and Flash video would have never gotten off the ground.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398245</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397911</id>
	<title>Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245418860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down<br>Never gonna turn around and...desert you.</p><p>I know what video I will be uploading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Never gon na give you up , never gon na let you downNever gon na turn around and...desert you.I know what video I will be uploading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you downNever gonna turn around and...desert you.I know what video I will be uploading.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399523</id>
	<title>Re:Weird story gender...</title>
	<author>seyyah</author>
	<datestamp>1245436920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>so why not just go with "they"? I know it's not grammatically correct (according to an English teacher I had) but at least it works, and it should be correct.</p></div><p>NO! Stop! Singluar "they" <em>is</em> good English grammar. It has been in our language for hundreds of years (it passes the Shakespeare test, i.e. he used it), and it is well-established today. Use it!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>so why not just go with " they " ?
I know it 's not grammatically correct ( according to an English teacher I had ) but at least it works , and it should be correct.NO !
Stop ! Singluar " they " is good English grammar .
It has been in our language for hundreds of years ( it passes the Shakespeare test , i.e .
he used it ) , and it is well-established today .
Use it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so why not just go with "they"?
I know it's not grammatically correct (according to an English teacher I had) but at least it works, and it should be correct.NO!
Stop! Singluar "they" is good English grammar.
It has been in our language for hundreds of years (it passes the Shakespeare test, i.e.
he used it), and it is well-established today.
Use it!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398463</id>
	<title>Re:Another Tool</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245423900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dang, those are some high-resolution images.  Got me some new wallpaper!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dang , those are some high-resolution images .
Got me some new wallpaper !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dang, those are some high-resolution images.
Got me some new wallpaper!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397547</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398245</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>AnyoneEB</author>
	<datestamp>1245421500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But the flip side is you might recall back to what video was like before Flash. Every freaking web site you went to had a different video standard, video player, and you were usually forced to launch a video player which either wasn't integrated in the browser or was integrated badly. Flash only succeeded because it fixed a completely broken thing on the web where Apple, Real and Microsoft in particular were trying to acquire their own monopolies on web video.</p></div><p>Actually, I remember most sites usually offering a choice between at least two of Windows Media Player, Real Player, and QuickTime (not sure why they did not just use HTML fallbacks), all of which had responsive, native controls and properly used hardware acceleration (which at the time was just <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware\_overlay" title="wikipedia.org">hardware overlay</a> [wikipedia.org], not decoding help). Explain to me again how Flash was an improvement in usability?</p><p>What Flash did help with is that it had its own codecs which were more advanced than the ones that came with Windows or Mac OS at the time and, probably more importantly, Flash makes it significantly more difficult for users to download videos they are watching -- which is the real hurdle the &lt;video&gt; tag has to surpass to gain acceptance.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But the flip side is you might recall back to what video was like before Flash .
Every freaking web site you went to had a different video standard , video player , and you were usually forced to launch a video player which either was n't integrated in the browser or was integrated badly .
Flash only succeeded because it fixed a completely broken thing on the web where Apple , Real and Microsoft in particular were trying to acquire their own monopolies on web video.Actually , I remember most sites usually offering a choice between at least two of Windows Media Player , Real Player , and QuickTime ( not sure why they did not just use HTML fallbacks ) , all of which had responsive , native controls and properly used hardware acceleration ( which at the time was just hardware overlay [ wikipedia.org ] , not decoding help ) .
Explain to me again how Flash was an improvement in usability ? What Flash did help with is that it had its own codecs which were more advanced than the ones that came with Windows or Mac OS at the time and , probably more importantly , Flash makes it significantly more difficult for users to download videos they are watching -- which is the real hurdle the tag has to surpass to gain acceptance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But the flip side is you might recall back to what video was like before Flash.
Every freaking web site you went to had a different video standard, video player, and you were usually forced to launch a video player which either wasn't integrated in the browser or was integrated badly.
Flash only succeeded because it fixed a completely broken thing on the web where Apple, Real and Microsoft in particular were trying to acquire their own monopolies on web video.Actually, I remember most sites usually offering a choice between at least two of Windows Media Player, Real Player, and QuickTime (not sure why they did not just use HTML fallbacks), all of which had responsive, native controls and properly used hardware acceleration (which at the time was just hardware overlay [wikipedia.org], not decoding help).
Explain to me again how Flash was an improvement in usability?What Flash did help with is that it had its own codecs which were more advanced than the ones that came with Windows or Mac OS at the time and, probably more importantly, Flash makes it significantly more difficult for users to download videos they are watching -- which is the real hurdle the  tag has to surpass to gain acceptance.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399943</id>
	<title>Re:Media is the missing element</title>
	<author>WWWWolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245530040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Speaking of YouTube -- and maybe this is a disastrous idea -- but what if Wikipedia relied on a service like YouTube? Obviously that's not going to work (advertising, comments, flash player etc...), but think about it: Hosting videos and filtering inappropriate stuff is what they are good at.</p></div><p>It would fail. YouTube isn't concerned about supporting free licenses. Sure, you can upload Creative Commons videos in YT, but you won't get a nice big logo in the video description that says "this is a Creative Commons -licensed video, and you can reuse it".</p><p>Speaking of reuse, YouTube isn't particularly friendly toward people who want to download videos either for further reuse. If you want to download anyone else's videos but yours, you need third-party tools, possibly in violation of YouTube TOS last I checked. Not that anyone cares.</p><p>And most importantly, YouTube isn't concerned about copyright and proper licensing the way Wikimedia projects are. If someone posts copyright violations, they'll get deleted eventually, through a community-driven process, because everyone realises that dealing with real lawsuits is not fun and efficient. YouTube won't act on anything except a DMCA claim from the copyright holder. In other words, Wikimedia way is "Hey, this image is obviously not free to use, and is copied from a website X that says 'all rights reserved'." "Hey, you're right! Let's nuke it." YouTube way is "Well, it's not *your* site, so why don't you mind your own damn business?"</p><p>YouTube has the hardware for some heavy-duty video delivery, but if we used them as a video host, we'd need to bring in our own culture too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking of YouTube -- and maybe this is a disastrous idea -- but what if Wikipedia relied on a service like YouTube ?
Obviously that 's not going to work ( advertising , comments , flash player etc... ) , but think about it : Hosting videos and filtering inappropriate stuff is what they are good at.It would fail .
YouTube is n't concerned about supporting free licenses .
Sure , you can upload Creative Commons videos in YT , but you wo n't get a nice big logo in the video description that says " this is a Creative Commons -licensed video , and you can reuse it " .Speaking of reuse , YouTube is n't particularly friendly toward people who want to download videos either for further reuse .
If you want to download anyone else 's videos but yours , you need third-party tools , possibly in violation of YouTube TOS last I checked .
Not that anyone cares.And most importantly , YouTube is n't concerned about copyright and proper licensing the way Wikimedia projects are .
If someone posts copyright violations , they 'll get deleted eventually , through a community-driven process , because everyone realises that dealing with real lawsuits is not fun and efficient .
YouTube wo n't act on anything except a DMCA claim from the copyright holder .
In other words , Wikimedia way is " Hey , this image is obviously not free to use , and is copied from a website X that says 'all rights reserved' .
" " Hey , you 're right !
Let 's nuke it .
" YouTube way is " Well , it 's not * your * site , so why do n't you mind your own damn business ?
" YouTube has the hardware for some heavy-duty video delivery , but if we used them as a video host , we 'd need to bring in our own culture too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking of YouTube -- and maybe this is a disastrous idea -- but what if Wikipedia relied on a service like YouTube?
Obviously that's not going to work (advertising, comments, flash player etc...), but think about it: Hosting videos and filtering inappropriate stuff is what they are good at.It would fail.
YouTube isn't concerned about supporting free licenses.
Sure, you can upload Creative Commons videos in YT, but you won't get a nice big logo in the video description that says "this is a Creative Commons -licensed video, and you can reuse it".Speaking of reuse, YouTube isn't particularly friendly toward people who want to download videos either for further reuse.
If you want to download anyone else's videos but yours, you need third-party tools, possibly in violation of YouTube TOS last I checked.
Not that anyone cares.And most importantly, YouTube isn't concerned about copyright and proper licensing the way Wikimedia projects are.
If someone posts copyright violations, they'll get deleted eventually, through a community-driven process, because everyone realises that dealing with real lawsuits is not fun and efficient.
YouTube won't act on anything except a DMCA claim from the copyright holder.
In other words, Wikimedia way is "Hey, this image is obviously not free to use, and is copied from a website X that says 'all rights reserved'.
" "Hey, you're right!
Let's nuke it.
" YouTube way is "Well, it's not *your* site, so why don't you mind your own damn business?
"YouTube has the hardware for some heavy-duty video delivery, but if we used them as a video host, we'd need to bring in our own culture too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398501</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397321</id>
	<title>No Male</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245414060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Clicking it will bring up an interface allowing her to search for video"</p><p>So they only allow females to add videos!?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Clicking it will bring up an interface allowing her to search for video " So they only allow females to add videos ! ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Clicking it will bring up an interface allowing her to search for video"So they only allow females to add videos!?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398883</id>
	<title>wiki and youtube already</title>
	<author>doode</author>
	<datestamp>1245428580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This has already existed in a very unbiased way - <a href="http://www.wiki-surf.com/" title="wiki-surf.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.wiki-surf.com/</a> [wiki-surf.com] links wiki articles to youtube videos.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This has already existed in a very unbiased way - http : //www.wiki-surf.com/ [ wiki-surf.com ] links wiki articles to youtube videos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has already existed in a very unbiased way - http://www.wiki-surf.com/ [wiki-surf.com] links wiki articles to youtube videos.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400457</id>
	<title>Re:No Male</title>
	<author>pbhj</author>
	<datestamp>1245495240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Gendered language sure is horrible, isn't it? I mean, when it's not gendered like <em>you</em>.</p></div><p>Breaking with language conventions is horrible.</p><p>The convention is that plural pronouns use the masculine.</p><p>Do neo-feminists make all nouns feminine in gendered languages like French? It's just being immature.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gendered language sure is horrible , is n't it ?
I mean , when it 's not gendered like you.Breaking with language conventions is horrible.The convention is that plural pronouns use the masculine.Do neo-feminists make all nouns feminine in gendered languages like French ?
It 's just being immature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gendered language sure is horrible, isn't it?
I mean, when it's not gendered like you.Breaking with language conventions is horrible.The convention is that plural pronouns use the masculine.Do neo-feminists make all nouns feminine in gendered languages like French?
It's just being immature.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398113</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397535</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245416100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I imagine the goal is to allow the broadest  number of users to see it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I imagine the goal is to allow the broadest number of users to see it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I imagine the goal is to allow the broadest  number of users to see it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399723</id>
	<title>That is overstating it.</title>
	<author>Shandalar</author>
	<datestamp>1245440100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's no need to overstate things.  The Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse article would be enhanced with video (and it has had a video clip for a long time).  [[Atomic bomb]].  [[Nirvana]].  The [[wing]] article, showing the vortices of air.  It's easy to name a hundred articles that would benefit from a video clip right on the page, for the education of the reader.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no need to overstate things .
The Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse article would be enhanced with video ( and it has had a video clip for a long time ) .
[ [ Atomic bomb ] ] .
[ [ Nirvana ] ] . The [ [ wing ] ] article , showing the vortices of air .
It 's easy to name a hundred articles that would benefit from a video clip right on the page , for the education of the reader .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no need to overstate things.
The Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse article would be enhanced with video (and it has had a video clip for a long time).
[[Atomic bomb]].
[[Nirvana]].  The [[wing]] article, showing the vortices of air.
It's easy to name a hundred articles that would benefit from a video clip right on the page, for the education of the reader.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398097</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245420240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having worked on a project quite similar to Kaltura for the last several months, I can tell you without a doubt that if Flash is the best video streaming tool, we are all in big trouble.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having worked on a project quite similar to Kaltura for the last several months , I can tell you without a doubt that if Flash is the best video streaming tool , we are all in big trouble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having worked on a project quite similar to Kaltura for the last several months, I can tell you without a doubt that if Flash is the best video streaming tool, we are all in big trouble.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28409603</id>
	<title>That's value-dependent</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1245586320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Don't go FOSS because it's FOSS. Go FOSS because it's superior.</p><p>Not all FOSS is superior.</p></div><p>If you value software freedom over functionality, free software is superior exactly because it's <em>free</em> software.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Flash has the best video streaming available</p></div><p>Embedded {H.264,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.wmv,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.avi}, played with mplayer?  My "Flash experience" is Flash+Firefox, and that's pretty bollocks.  On the other hand, mplayer handles every single piece of crap you throw at it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't go FOSS because it 's FOSS .
Go FOSS because it 's superior.Not all FOSS is superior.If you value software freedom over functionality , free software is superior exactly because it 's free software.Flash has the best video streaming availableEmbedded { H.264 , .wmv , .avi } , played with mplayer ?
My " Flash experience " is Flash + Firefox , and that 's pretty bollocks .
On the other hand , mplayer handles every single piece of crap you throw at it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't go FOSS because it's FOSS.
Go FOSS because it's superior.Not all FOSS is superior.If you value software freedom over functionality, free software is superior exactly because it's free software.Flash has the best video streaming availableEmbedded {H.264, .wmv, .avi}, played with mplayer?
My "Flash experience" is Flash+Firefox, and that's pretty bollocks.
On the other hand, mplayer handles every single piece of crap you throw at it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398131</id>
	<title>Re:Weird story gender...</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1245420420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you acknowledge that all three possibilities offered by the English language are flawed, but you still criticise the author for picking one you evidently have a problem with?</p><p>For heaven's sake - get over it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you acknowledge that all three possibilities offered by the English language are flawed , but you still criticise the author for picking one you evidently have a problem with ? For heaven 's sake - get over it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you acknowledge that all three possibilities offered by the English language are flawed, but you still criticise the author for picking one you evidently have a problem with?For heaven's sake - get over it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398407</id>
	<title>Using a monopoly to destroy competing technology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245423240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wikipedia practically has a monopoly on information content, even stronger than Microsoft has a monopoly on OS software.</p><p>What is called for here, by a large number of people, is for Wikipedia to use this monopoly for the benefit of a single video standard, with the aim of destroying opposing technologies because they are not open source.</p><p>Why should someone who does not see open-source as a natural ideological destination not see this as evil, abusive and hypocritical on a mass scale? Wasn't there a discussion here just days/weeks ago where it was demanded that YouTube also allow open-source formats? Why is it so important that YouTube allows open-source, yet another site should never use anything but open source, unless the consistent goal is "always maximise the use of open source and minimise the use of anything else"?</p><p>This is a great example of open source being an ideological battle setting out to destroy proporietary software. Although many often deny it (maybe they don't like awareness of the truth?), there's plenty of examples from the community.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wikipedia practically has a monopoly on information content , even stronger than Microsoft has a monopoly on OS software.What is called for here , by a large number of people , is for Wikipedia to use this monopoly for the benefit of a single video standard , with the aim of destroying opposing technologies because they are not open source.Why should someone who does not see open-source as a natural ideological destination not see this as evil , abusive and hypocritical on a mass scale ?
Was n't there a discussion here just days/weeks ago where it was demanded that YouTube also allow open-source formats ?
Why is it so important that YouTube allows open-source , yet another site should never use anything but open source , unless the consistent goal is " always maximise the use of open source and minimise the use of anything else " ? This is a great example of open source being an ideological battle setting out to destroy proporietary software .
Although many often deny it ( maybe they do n't like awareness of the truth ?
) , there 's plenty of examples from the community .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wikipedia practically has a monopoly on information content, even stronger than Microsoft has a monopoly on OS software.What is called for here, by a large number of people, is for Wikipedia to use this monopoly for the benefit of a single video standard, with the aim of destroying opposing technologies because they are not open source.Why should someone who does not see open-source as a natural ideological destination not see this as evil, abusive and hypocritical on a mass scale?
Wasn't there a discussion here just days/weeks ago where it was demanded that YouTube also allow open-source formats?
Why is it so important that YouTube allows open-source, yet another site should never use anything but open source, unless the consistent goal is "always maximise the use of open source and minimise the use of anything else"?This is a great example of open source being an ideological battle setting out to destroy proporietary software.
Although many often deny it (maybe they don't like awareness of the truth?
), there's plenty of examples from the community.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400885</id>
	<title>Re:Using a monopoly to destroy competing technolog</title>
	<author>oddityfds</author>
	<datestamp>1245502680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Describe to me the harm that would arise against the good of humanity if Microsoft and Apple through customer demand were forced to implement Ogg Vorbis and Theora support in their browsers.</p><p>When you're done, you can continue by describing the harm that was inflicted on humanity when Microsoft was forced to start producing a web browser for Windows so that people wouldn't use non-Microsoft software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Describe to me the harm that would arise against the good of humanity if Microsoft and Apple through customer demand were forced to implement Ogg Vorbis and Theora support in their browsers.When you 're done , you can continue by describing the harm that was inflicted on humanity when Microsoft was forced to start producing a web browser for Windows so that people would n't use non-Microsoft software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Describe to me the harm that would arise against the good of humanity if Microsoft and Apple through customer demand were forced to implement Ogg Vorbis and Theora support in their browsers.When you're done, you can continue by describing the harm that was inflicted on humanity when Microsoft was forced to start producing a web browser for Windows so that people wouldn't use non-Microsoft software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398407</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397543</id>
	<title>Title is misleading</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245416220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Title is somewhat misleading. Wikipedia has had video for years. For example scroll down at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris\_C8" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris\_C8</a> [wikipedia.org] or for direct to video <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Morris\_C8\_towing.ogv" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Morris\_C8\_towing.ogv</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Title is somewhat misleading .
Wikipedia has had video for years .
For example scroll down at http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris \ _C8 [ wikipedia.org ] or for direct to video http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File : Morris \ _C8 \ _towing.ogv [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Title is somewhat misleading.
Wikipedia has had video for years.
For example scroll down at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris\_C8 [wikipedia.org] or for direct to video http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Morris\_C8\_towing.ogv [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397323</id>
	<title>There's just one problem...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245414060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Clicking it will bring up an interface allowing her to search for video</p></div><p>...there are no girls on the internet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Clicking it will bring up an interface allowing her to search for video...there are no girls on the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clicking it will bring up an interface allowing her to search for video...there are no girls on the internet.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397655</id>
	<title>Re:Weird story gender...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245417060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Anyway, it just annoys me when someone goes out of their way to try to end the male gender bias only to throw in female gender bias instead of making it gender neutral.
<br>-Taylor</i>
<br> <br>
Says "Taylor", which is a nice gender-neutral unisex name like Leslie.  Oh the sweet irony!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyway , it just annoys me when someone goes out of their way to try to end the male gender bias only to throw in female gender bias instead of making it gender neutral .
-Taylor Says " Taylor " , which is a nice gender-neutral unisex name like Leslie .
Oh the sweet irony !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyway, it just annoys me when someone goes out of their way to try to end the male gender bias only to throw in female gender bias instead of making it gender neutral.
-Taylor
 
Says "Taylor", which is a nice gender-neutral unisex name like Leslie.
Oh the sweet irony!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397855</id>
	<title>Re:Rather not.</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1245418320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wiki is a type of thing, not a thing.  You mean wikipedia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wiki is a type of thing , not a thing .
You mean wikipedia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wiki is a type of thing, not a thing.
You mean wikipedia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397533</id>
	<title>Less is more.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245416100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, presumably it will only be notable video that's allowed.<br> <br>

And presumably also, every band on Earth will have a sample of their video on every page they can get away with, as well as every company that now successfully uses Wikipedia to astroturf their products will get a nice demo video up too.<br> <br>

It seems that as each month passes wikipedia becomes less and less relevant, and less reputable. Wholly because of bad administrative decisions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , presumably it will only be notable video that 's allowed .
And presumably also , every band on Earth will have a sample of their video on every page they can get away with , as well as every company that now successfully uses Wikipedia to astroturf their products will get a nice demo video up too .
It seems that as each month passes wikipedia becomes less and less relevant , and less reputable .
Wholly because of bad administrative decisions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, presumably it will only be notable video that's allowed.
And presumably also, every band on Earth will have a sample of their video on every page they can get away with, as well as every company that now successfully uses Wikipedia to astroturf their products will get a nice demo video up too.
It seems that as each month passes wikipedia becomes less and less relevant, and less reputable.
Wholly because of bad administrative decisions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398095</id>
	<title>Re:Less is more.</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1245420240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>And presumably also, every band on Earth will have a sample of their video on every page they can get away with</i></p><p>In the same way that they advertise their band on every page? Except they don't. Same for the companies. (Yet the sad thing is that other people whine about Wikipedia precisely because too much stuff is deleted...)</p><p><i>It seems that as each month passes wikipedia becomes less and less relevant, and less reputable.</i></p><p>You are mistaking your preference, and your opinion, with actual general fact. Like it or not, it's still a Top 10 website, and if you as a random person posting of a forum are going to make claims about it becoming less reputable, I do hope you have a reference?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And presumably also , every band on Earth will have a sample of their video on every page they can get away withIn the same way that they advertise their band on every page ?
Except they do n't .
Same for the companies .
( Yet the sad thing is that other people whine about Wikipedia precisely because too much stuff is deleted... ) It seems that as each month passes wikipedia becomes less and less relevant , and less reputable.You are mistaking your preference , and your opinion , with actual general fact .
Like it or not , it 's still a Top 10 website , and if you as a random person posting of a forum are going to make claims about it becoming less reputable , I do hope you have a reference ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And presumably also, every band on Earth will have a sample of their video on every page they can get away withIn the same way that they advertise their band on every page?
Except they don't.
Same for the companies.
(Yet the sad thing is that other people whine about Wikipedia precisely because too much stuff is deleted...)It seems that as each month passes wikipedia becomes less and less relevant, and less reputable.You are mistaking your preference, and your opinion, with actual general fact.
Like it or not, it's still a Top 10 website, and if you as a random person posting of a forum are going to make claims about it becoming less reputable, I do hope you have a reference?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397869</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1245418380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Real Networks and Apple wasn't that stupid, Flash is in fact 7-8 years behind in terms of video streaming...</p><p>But, of course, both are stupid and I don't even mention Windows Media department of MS. While calling everyone stupid, in this context, Sun is the number 1 stupid for wasting the embedded browser Java market regarding the real potential of Java. It wasn't supposed to make dancing bears or flashing ads you know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Real Networks and Apple was n't that stupid , Flash is in fact 7-8 years behind in terms of video streaming...But , of course , both are stupid and I do n't even mention Windows Media department of MS. While calling everyone stupid , in this context , Sun is the number 1 stupid for wasting the embedded browser Java market regarding the real potential of Java .
It was n't supposed to make dancing bears or flashing ads you know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Real Networks and Apple wasn't that stupid, Flash is in fact 7-8 years behind in terms of video streaming...But, of course, both are stupid and I don't even mention Windows Media department of MS. While calling everyone stupid, in this context, Sun is the number 1 stupid for wasting the embedded browser Java market regarding the real potential of Java.
It wasn't supposed to make dancing bears or flashing ads you know.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399571</id>
	<title>Re:Donations?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245437580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really? You can't think of any article that wouldn't be better served with video?  I can think of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eadweard\_Muybridge" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">at least one</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
You ca n't think of any article that would n't be better served with video ?
I can think of at least one [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
You can't think of any article that wouldn't be better served with video?
I can think of at least one [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398311</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1245422160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, maybe that will change as HTML5 browser support grows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , maybe that will change as HTML5 browser support grows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, maybe that will change as HTML5 browser support grows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398167</id>
	<title>Re:Weird story gender...</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1245420720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait - political correctness? But you're the one getting offended over the use of someone else's language!</p><p>It might be political correctness if someone whined about the use of the word "he". But if someone uses "she", that's his, her, their or its choice[*]. And in this case, you're the one criticising the use of the word "she".</p><p>I have no problem with the use of "he" as a generic singular pronoun. But suggesting that people shouldn't use "she" as a generic singular pronoun, out of fear of offending people? <i>That's</i> political correctness.</p><p>[*] - is that okay for you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait - political correctness ?
But you 're the one getting offended over the use of someone else 's language ! It might be political correctness if someone whined about the use of the word " he " .
But if someone uses " she " , that 's his , her , their or its choice [ * ] .
And in this case , you 're the one criticising the use of the word " she " .I have no problem with the use of " he " as a generic singular pronoun .
But suggesting that people should n't use " she " as a generic singular pronoun , out of fear of offending people ?
That 's political correctness .
[ * ] - is that okay for you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait - political correctness?
But you're the one getting offended over the use of someone else's language!It might be political correctness if someone whined about the use of the word "he".
But if someone uses "she", that's his, her, their or its choice[*].
And in this case, you're the one criticising the use of the word "she".I have no problem with the use of "he" as a generic singular pronoun.
But suggesting that people shouldn't use "she" as a generic singular pronoun, out of fear of offending people?
That's political correctness.
[*] - is that okay for you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245416880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't go FOSS because it's FOSS. Go FOSS because it's superior.</p><p>Not all FOSS is superior. I trust they'll use the best video streaming for the job, with priority placed on being open source.</p><p>Flash has the best video streaming available at the moment, and the best compatibility. Hard to beat that for a website trying to reel in customers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't go FOSS because it 's FOSS .
Go FOSS because it 's superior.Not all FOSS is superior .
I trust they 'll use the best video streaming for the job , with priority placed on being open source.Flash has the best video streaming available at the moment , and the best compatibility .
Hard to beat that for a website trying to reel in customers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't go FOSS because it's FOSS.
Go FOSS because it's superior.Not all FOSS is superior.
I trust they'll use the best video streaming for the job, with priority placed on being open source.Flash has the best video streaming available at the moment, and the best compatibility.
Hard to beat that for a website trying to reel in customers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411</id>
	<title>Rather not.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245414840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like wiki because it's such a clean, fast, text layout with nothing special.   I don't see how this is going to improve things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like wiki because it 's such a clean , fast , text layout with nothing special .
I do n't see how this is going to improve things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like wiki because it's such a clean, fast, text layout with nothing special.
I don't see how this is going to improve things.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398291</id>
	<title>Title is misleading</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245421920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Creation\_and\_usage\_of\_media\_files#Video" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">They already have video</a> [wikipedia.org], they're just improving it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They already have video [ wikipedia.org ] , they 're just improving it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They already have video [wikipedia.org], they're just improving it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397565</id>
	<title>Last I Heard WikiP Was Broke...</title>
	<author>tunapez</author>
	<datestamp>1245416340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>now they're going to add video? Super swell idea there.</p><p>As a matter of fact, I was thinking just the other day <a href="http://www.archive.org/" title="archive.org" rel="nofollow">The Internet Archive</a> [archive.org] should add a peer-reviewed &amp; maintained encyclopedia service...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>now they 're going to add video ?
Super swell idea there.As a matter of fact , I was thinking just the other day The Internet Archive [ archive.org ] should add a peer-reviewed &amp; maintained encyclopedia service.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>now they're going to add video?
Super swell idea there.As a matter of fact, I was thinking just the other day The Internet Archive [archive.org] should add a peer-reviewed &amp; maintained encyclopedia service...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398395</id>
	<title>Video edit wars</title>
	<author>OutputLogic</author>
	<datestamp>1245423060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oftentimes Wikipedians engage in nasty <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lame\_edit\_wars" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">edit wars</a> [wikipedia.org] <br>I'm looking forward to seeing video edit wars.

<br> <br> <a href="http://outputlogic.com/" title="outputlogic.com" rel="nofollow">OutputLogic</a> [outputlogic.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oftentimes Wikipedians engage in nasty edit wars [ wikipedia.org ] I 'm looking forward to seeing video edit wars .
OutputLogic [ outputlogic.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oftentimes Wikipedians engage in nasty edit wars [wikipedia.org] I'm looking forward to seeing video edit wars.
OutputLogic [outputlogic.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397903</id>
	<title>Re:Rather not.</title>
	<author>buchner.johannes</author>
	<datestamp>1245418740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe the'll add a <a href="http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1178" title="phdcomics.com">comment section</a> [phdcomics.com] too.</p><p>Then people can express how they <em>feel</em> about your NPOV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe the 'll add a comment section [ phdcomics.com ] too.Then people can express how they feel about your NPOV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe the'll add a comment section [phdcomics.com] too.Then people can express how they feel about your NPOV.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453</id>
	<title>Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245415200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It amazes me that the <a href="http://corp.kaltura.com/" title="kaltura.com">company </a> [kaltura.com] that "promotes" open source uses a proprietary or not fully open method (read Flash), to deliver video. What's going on?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It amazes me that the company [ kaltura.com ] that " promotes " open source uses a proprietary or not fully open method ( read Flash ) , to deliver video .
What 's going on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It amazes me that the company  [kaltura.com] that "promotes" open source uses a proprietary or not fully open method (read Flash), to deliver video.
What's going on?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28445977</id>
	<title>Re:Rather not.</title>
	<author>badkarmadayaccount</author>
	<datestamp>1245754200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Flashblock. Or equivalent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Flashblock .
Or equivalent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flashblock.
Or equivalent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397953</id>
	<title>Re:Weird story gender...</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1245419280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've noticed this 'politically correct' way of writing documents nowadays. I assumed it was deluded female tech authors trying to make some kind of point. Its not grammatically correct (according to my old English teacher - <i>she</i> said "In English, He embraces She") as the masculine form always includes the feminine. Like "mankind" means women too. "Womenkind" on the other hand is very exclusive.</p><p>Pity us poor men, we don't have a gender bias, we have to share it with women, while women get their own.</p><p>So, yeah, it annoys me too - authors should know better than to write in this way, of all the incorrect forms of grammer, this is the one that really stands out for some reason.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've noticed this 'politically correct ' way of writing documents nowadays .
I assumed it was deluded female tech authors trying to make some kind of point .
Its not grammatically correct ( according to my old English teacher - she said " In English , He embraces She " ) as the masculine form always includes the feminine .
Like " mankind " means women too .
" Womenkind " on the other hand is very exclusive.Pity us poor men , we do n't have a gender bias , we have to share it with women , while women get their own.So , yeah , it annoys me too - authors should know better than to write in this way , of all the incorrect forms of grammer , this is the one that really stands out for some reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've noticed this 'politically correct' way of writing documents nowadays.
I assumed it was deluded female tech authors trying to make some kind of point.
Its not grammatically correct (according to my old English teacher - she said "In English, He embraces She") as the masculine form always includes the feminine.
Like "mankind" means women too.
"Womenkind" on the other hand is very exclusive.Pity us poor men, we don't have a gender bias, we have to share it with women, while women get their own.So, yeah, it annoys me too - authors should know better than to write in this way, of all the incorrect forms of grammer, this is the one that really stands out for some reason.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397531</id>
	<title>Big improvement</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1245416100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>At least it will make <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porn" title="wikipedia.org">this Wiki page</a> [wikipedia.org] a lot more interesting!</htmltext>
<tokenext>At least it will make this Wiki page [ wikipedia.org ] a lot more interesting !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least it will make this Wiki page [wikipedia.org] a lot more interesting!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398501</id>
	<title>Media is the missing element</title>
	<author>RudeIota</author>
	<datestamp>1245424320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wikipedia is missing the media rich content found on every other software-based encyclopedia, like Encarta and Worldbook. Since such software is dying off because the things like Wikipedia are so packed full of free, up-to-date information, it seems like a natural extension for the free encyclopedia.<br> <br>Sure, links to other websites are fine, but the archival of human knowledge found in Wikipedia is important too. Links get broken, external media disappears... I'm sure WP would much rather have their own content which they control, than rely on other sources that taint media with ads, that are inconsistent in formats etc... <br> <br>When you see the kind of junk on YouTube, I know, its worrysome. I know there will be copyright issues, pornography etc... It will cost more money for sure... But it's time to make use of the rich feature set Internet brings to us and WP. It's an advantage WP has over printed textbooks and they should use such advantages IF they can handle it.<br> <br>I guess that's the issue though: Even YouTube is having a hard time profiting from video hosting.<br> <br>Speaking of YouTube -- and maybe this is a disastrous idea -- but what if Wikipedia relied on a service like YouTube? Obviously that's not going to work (advertising, comments, flash player etc...), but think about it: Hosting videos and filtering inappropriate stuff is what they are good at. Maybe with some negotiation and charitable good will on YouTube's part, there could be special provisions for Wikipedia. For example, YouTube could host user-uploaded video content for WP, but without all the commercial baggage (Read: charitable). However, if you followed the link, it would take you to YouTube to show the video in high-def or whatever... commercial free, no junk comments etc. It wouldn't be profitable for YouTube, but they'd have *more* useful content on their website thanks to WP, drawing more users and good will. Also, WP would benefit from the already established efficiency of YouTube.<br> <br>Again though, that's kind of a crazy idea with a plethora of potential pit falls, but just brain storming. Yes, there would have to be many changes to accommodate these videos, WP would have to be pretty trusting of TY and finally YT would have to be in an awfully giving mood itself.<br> <br>Personally, I'd much rather have WP host the material, but find a way to do so for far less than I'm imagining the real cost will be.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wikipedia is missing the media rich content found on every other software-based encyclopedia , like Encarta and Worldbook .
Since such software is dying off because the things like Wikipedia are so packed full of free , up-to-date information , it seems like a natural extension for the free encyclopedia .
Sure , links to other websites are fine , but the archival of human knowledge found in Wikipedia is important too .
Links get broken , external media disappears... I 'm sure WP would much rather have their own content which they control , than rely on other sources that taint media with ads , that are inconsistent in formats etc... When you see the kind of junk on YouTube , I know , its worrysome .
I know there will be copyright issues , pornography etc... It will cost more money for sure... But it 's time to make use of the rich feature set Internet brings to us and WP .
It 's an advantage WP has over printed textbooks and they should use such advantages IF they can handle it .
I guess that 's the issue though : Even YouTube is having a hard time profiting from video hosting .
Speaking of YouTube -- and maybe this is a disastrous idea -- but what if Wikipedia relied on a service like YouTube ?
Obviously that 's not going to work ( advertising , comments , flash player etc... ) , but think about it : Hosting videos and filtering inappropriate stuff is what they are good at .
Maybe with some negotiation and charitable good will on YouTube 's part , there could be special provisions for Wikipedia .
For example , YouTube could host user-uploaded video content for WP , but without all the commercial baggage ( Read : charitable ) .
However , if you followed the link , it would take you to YouTube to show the video in high-def or whatever... commercial free , no junk comments etc .
It would n't be profitable for YouTube , but they 'd have * more * useful content on their website thanks to WP , drawing more users and good will .
Also , WP would benefit from the already established efficiency of YouTube .
Again though , that 's kind of a crazy idea with a plethora of potential pit falls , but just brain storming .
Yes , there would have to be many changes to accommodate these videos , WP would have to be pretty trusting of TY and finally YT would have to be in an awfully giving mood itself .
Personally , I 'd much rather have WP host the material , but find a way to do so for far less than I 'm imagining the real cost will be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wikipedia is missing the media rich content found on every other software-based encyclopedia, like Encarta and Worldbook.
Since such software is dying off because the things like Wikipedia are so packed full of free, up-to-date information, it seems like a natural extension for the free encyclopedia.
Sure, links to other websites are fine, but the archival of human knowledge found in Wikipedia is important too.
Links get broken, external media disappears... I'm sure WP would much rather have their own content which they control, than rely on other sources that taint media with ads, that are inconsistent in formats etc...  When you see the kind of junk on YouTube, I know, its worrysome.
I know there will be copyright issues, pornography etc... It will cost more money for sure... But it's time to make use of the rich feature set Internet brings to us and WP.
It's an advantage WP has over printed textbooks and they should use such advantages IF they can handle it.
I guess that's the issue though: Even YouTube is having a hard time profiting from video hosting.
Speaking of YouTube -- and maybe this is a disastrous idea -- but what if Wikipedia relied on a service like YouTube?
Obviously that's not going to work (advertising, comments, flash player etc...), but think about it: Hosting videos and filtering inappropriate stuff is what they are good at.
Maybe with some negotiation and charitable good will on YouTube's part, there could be special provisions for Wikipedia.
For example, YouTube could host user-uploaded video content for WP, but without all the commercial baggage (Read: charitable).
However, if you followed the link, it would take you to YouTube to show the video in high-def or whatever... commercial free, no junk comments etc.
It wouldn't be profitable for YouTube, but they'd have *more* useful content on their website thanks to WP, drawing more users and good will.
Also, WP would benefit from the already established efficiency of YouTube.
Again though, that's kind of a crazy idea with a plethora of potential pit falls, but just brain storming.
Yes, there would have to be many changes to accommodate these videos, WP would have to be pretty trusting of TY and finally YT would have to be in an awfully giving mood itself.
Personally, I'd much rather have WP host the material, but find a way to do so for far less than I'm imagining the real cost will be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398637</id>
	<title>Re:Weird story gender...</title>
	<author>smoker2</author>
	<datestamp>1245425820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>them, "allowing them to search for video." If you permit a user to do something you allow them to do it. Nothing grammatically wrong with that at all. Unless you have already specified a particular person.<br>If a worker needed to leave early, I would allow them to go.<br>If Dave needed to leave early, I would allow him to go. <br>etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>them , " allowing them to search for video .
" If you permit a user to do something you allow them to do it .
Nothing grammatically wrong with that at all .
Unless you have already specified a particular person.If a worker needed to leave early , I would allow them to go.If Dave needed to leave early , I would allow him to go .
etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>them, "allowing them to search for video.
" If you permit a user to do something you allow them to do it.
Nothing grammatically wrong with that at all.
Unless you have already specified a particular person.If a worker needed to leave early, I would allow them to go.If Dave needed to leave early, I would allow him to go.
etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28415213</id>
	<title>Re:Hipocrisy or something near that.</title>
	<author>JThundley</author>
	<datestamp>1245593460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But the flip side is you might recall back to what video was like before Flash.  Every freaking web site you went to had a different video standard, video player, and you were usually forced to launch a video player which either wasn't integrated in the browser or was integrated badly. </p></div><p>I remember this being a problem, this was back when I was using Windows 98. Nowadays I use Linux and mplayer  handles any video you can throw at it. I really wish the videos on the web would go back to how they were since my system and many others are now equipped to handle lots of different video formats.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But the flip side is you might recall back to what video was like before Flash .
Every freaking web site you went to had a different video standard , video player , and you were usually forced to launch a video player which either was n't integrated in the browser or was integrated badly .
I remember this being a problem , this was back when I was using Windows 98 .
Nowadays I use Linux and mplayer handles any video you can throw at it .
I really wish the videos on the web would go back to how they were since my system and many others are now equipped to handle lots of different video formats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But the flip side is you might recall back to what video was like before Flash.
Every freaking web site you went to had a different video standard, video player, and you were usually forced to launch a video player which either wasn't integrated in the browser or was integrated badly.
I remember this being a problem, this was back when I was using Windows 98.
Nowadays I use Linux and mplayer  handles any video you can throw at it.
I really wish the videos on the web would go back to how they were since my system and many others are now equipped to handle lots of different video formats.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397795</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28409603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397321
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399053
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398407
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400787
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398407
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28415213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398761
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398457
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28404769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397421
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399925
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398097
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28404287
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397321
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398975
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398003
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399943
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399571
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28404383
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397321
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397535
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398599
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28445977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397869
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400457
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398113
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397321
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_2211229_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398095
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397291
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397321
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28404287
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398113
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400457
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28404383
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397487
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397543
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400637
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397323
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397411
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397623
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28445977
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398761
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398467
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398003
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398975
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398463
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398599
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397959
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398501
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399943
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398425
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399571
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397421
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28404769
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397453
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397841
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397795
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398245
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400659
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28415213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397635
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400613
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400363
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397863
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28409603
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398457
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398097
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397869
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398311
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398407
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399053
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_2211229.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397581
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397875
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28400787
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28397953
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398167
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398131
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28398637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_2211229.28399523
</commentlist>
</conversation>
