<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_20_0224220</id>
	<title>Liberal Party of Canada Comes Out In Support of Net Neutrality</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1245521340000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>bryxal writes <i>"The Liberal Party of Canada, currently leading in <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/06/01/federal-poll357.html">most polls</a>, has <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4070/125/">announced yesterday that it supports Net Neutrality</a>, saying, 'Internet management should be neutral and not be permitted for anti-competitive behaviour, nor should it target certain websites, users, providers or legitimate software applications. We must <a href="http://www.liberal.ca/en/newsroom/media-releases/15947\_liberals-speak-out-in-support-of-net-neutrality">protect the openness and freedom of the internet</a>, and maintain competition to spur innovation, improve service levels and reduce costs to users.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>bryxal writes " The Liberal Party of Canada , currently leading in most polls , has announced yesterday that it supports Net Neutrality , saying , 'Internet management should be neutral and not be permitted for anti-competitive behaviour , nor should it target certain websites , users , providers or legitimate software applications .
We must protect the openness and freedom of the internet , and maintain competition to spur innovation , improve service levels and reduce costs to users .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bryxal writes "The Liberal Party of Canada, currently leading in most polls, has announced yesterday that it supports Net Neutrality, saying, 'Internet management should be neutral and not be permitted for anti-competitive behaviour, nor should it target certain websites, users, providers or legitimate software applications.
We must protect the openness and freedom of the internet, and maintain competition to spur innovation, improve service levels and reduce costs to users.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401271</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>danking</author>
	<datestamp>1245508260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No way man... if the Liberals call a new election less than a year after the last the general public will be mighty pissed. They will probably bide their time.

Anyways, I think a lot of the time the opposition party is in the business of saying anything that will gain more votes for their side. Whenever they gain more power we will see if their words turn to actions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No way man... if the Liberals call a new election less than a year after the last the general public will be mighty pissed .
They will probably bide their time .
Anyways , I think a lot of the time the opposition party is in the business of saying anything that will gain more votes for their side .
Whenever they gain more power we will see if their words turn to actions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No way man... if the Liberals call a new election less than a year after the last the general public will be mighty pissed.
They will probably bide their time.
Anyways, I think a lot of the time the opposition party is in the business of saying anything that will gain more votes for their side.
Whenever they gain more power we will see if their words turn to actions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402851</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>twidarkling</author>
	<datestamp>1245522240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any Canadian referred to as American is usually damned quick with a correction. You'll notice basically no one refers to themselves by what *continent* they live on. Only when you're talking about the Other do you generalize in such a fashion. "He is European. She is Asian. They are African." By labelling himself American, he's just about shot his chances of being PM in the face, because it's a constant worry about how much US-ian Ass our government kisses, and most Canadians would rather not be "the 51st state."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any Canadian referred to as American is usually damned quick with a correction .
You 'll notice basically no one refers to themselves by what * continent * they live on .
Only when you 're talking about the Other do you generalize in such a fashion .
" He is European .
She is Asian .
They are African .
" By labelling himself American , he 's just about shot his chances of being PM in the face , because it 's a constant worry about how much US-ian Ass our government kisses , and most Canadians would rather not be " the 51st state .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any Canadian referred to as American is usually damned quick with a correction.
You'll notice basically no one refers to themselves by what *continent* they live on.
Only when you're talking about the Other do you generalize in such a fashion.
"He is European.
She is Asian.
They are African.
" By labelling himself American, he's just about shot his chances of being PM in the face, because it's a constant worry about how much US-ian Ass our government kisses, and most Canadians would rather not be "the 51st state.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402143</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401729</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245512160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Now, if Ignatieff could take back the 34 years he spent outside Canada, his self-admitted snobbery, and his comment that he was American, he might stand a chance."</p><p>If living in Britain has taught me anything, it's that you shouldn't be afraid of foreigners and politics, even if he clearly isn't actually a foreigner despite his comments.</p><p>I say this because Europe has done a better job of governing Britain than Britain's own government has this last few years. We've had to depend on the European Court of Human rights to overturn some decisions passed by our ruling government that the vast majority of the population was against because the government wouldn't do it for us.</p><p>The more I see of the world, the more I realise patriotism is more often than not overrated. Judge people on their ability to actually do the job, not where they come from - if they're no good at the job then fair enough, but if they're damn good at their job, who cares about the rest of it?</p><p>FWIW I'll almost certainly be moving to Canada within a few years as my long time girlfriend is Canadian. You have a lovely country and I promise I wont try and stand for PM<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Now , if Ignatieff could take back the 34 years he spent outside Canada , his self-admitted snobbery , and his comment that he was American , he might stand a chance .
" If living in Britain has taught me anything , it 's that you should n't be afraid of foreigners and politics , even if he clearly is n't actually a foreigner despite his comments.I say this because Europe has done a better job of governing Britain than Britain 's own government has this last few years .
We 've had to depend on the European Court of Human rights to overturn some decisions passed by our ruling government that the vast majority of the population was against because the government would n't do it for us.The more I see of the world , the more I realise patriotism is more often than not overrated .
Judge people on their ability to actually do the job , not where they come from - if they 're no good at the job then fair enough , but if they 're damn good at their job , who cares about the rest of it ? FWIW I 'll almost certainly be moving to Canada within a few years as my long time girlfriend is Canadian .
You have a lovely country and I promise I wont try and stand for PM ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Now, if Ignatieff could take back the 34 years he spent outside Canada, his self-admitted snobbery, and his comment that he was American, he might stand a chance.
"If living in Britain has taught me anything, it's that you shouldn't be afraid of foreigners and politics, even if he clearly isn't actually a foreigner despite his comments.I say this because Europe has done a better job of governing Britain than Britain's own government has this last few years.
We've had to depend on the European Court of Human rights to overturn some decisions passed by our ruling government that the vast majority of the population was against because the government wouldn't do it for us.The more I see of the world, the more I realise patriotism is more often than not overrated.
Judge people on their ability to actually do the job, not where they come from - if they're no good at the job then fair enough, but if they're damn good at their job, who cares about the rest of it?FWIW I'll almost certainly be moving to Canada within a few years as my long time girlfriend is Canadian.
You have a lovely country and I promise I wont try and stand for PM ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400193</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>d\_jedi</author>
	<datestamp>1245491100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We do not need another election - 4 in 5 years?  Give me a break!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We do not need another election - 4 in 5 years ?
Give me a break !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We do not need another election - 4 in 5 years?
Give me a break!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28406437</id>
	<title>So what's new?</title>
	<author>thethibs</author>
	<datestamp>1245507120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To get net neutrality you need new regulations and more bureaucrats to enforce them and more bureaucrats to wipe the first gang's noses. What else would you expect from the Liberals?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To get net neutrality you need new regulations and more bureaucrats to enforce them and more bureaucrats to wipe the first gang 's noses .
What else would you expect from the Liberals ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To get net neutrality you need new regulations and more bureaucrats to enforce them and more bureaucrats to wipe the first gang's noses.
What else would you expect from the Liberals?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28403757</id>
	<title>Liberal = Bad choice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245529860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm still never voting Liberal.  Never.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm still never voting Liberal .
Never .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm still never voting Liberal.
Never.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400331</id>
	<title>Re:You don't care until your Skype is blocked..</title>
	<author>ls671</author>
	<datestamp>1245493620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Skype does eat your bandwidth even when you are not talking over it, it is a well known fact. Your computer might be used by Skype as a gateway for other people talking together which could not reach each other otherwise. I have a 1GB a month cap on an EVDO wireless connection and I would just about eat it all just by letting skype always on 24/7, even without ever talking to anybody.</p><p>Knowing this, I could understand the total cost of Skype might be non-negligible for ISPs.</p><p>Of course, it's kind of net non-neutrality, like idling torrents. I guess every customer should pay with regards to the share of bandwidth he uses, same as when you go buy some beer. It would solve a lot of problems<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)))</p><p>Skype wouldn't see so free anymore, their business model is technically based on "borrowing" bandwidth from its user. Most users wouldn't keep skype on if they had to pay for the bandwidth it uses, even if you never actually talk to anybody.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Skype does eat your bandwidth even when you are not talking over it , it is a well known fact .
Your computer might be used by Skype as a gateway for other people talking together which could not reach each other otherwise .
I have a 1GB a month cap on an EVDO wireless connection and I would just about eat it all just by letting skype always on 24/7 , even without ever talking to anybody.Knowing this , I could understand the total cost of Skype might be non-negligible for ISPs.Of course , it 's kind of net non-neutrality , like idling torrents .
I guess every customer should pay with regards to the share of bandwidth he uses , same as when you go buy some beer .
It would solve a lot of problems ; - ) ) ) Skype would n't see so free anymore , their business model is technically based on " borrowing " bandwidth from its user .
Most users would n't keep skype on if they had to pay for the bandwidth it uses , even if you never actually talk to anybody .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Skype does eat your bandwidth even when you are not talking over it, it is a well known fact.
Your computer might be used by Skype as a gateway for other people talking together which could not reach each other otherwise.
I have a 1GB a month cap on an EVDO wireless connection and I would just about eat it all just by letting skype always on 24/7, even without ever talking to anybody.Knowing this, I could understand the total cost of Skype might be non-negligible for ISPs.Of course, it's kind of net non-neutrality, like idling torrents.
I guess every customer should pay with regards to the share of bandwidth he uses, same as when you go buy some beer.
It would solve a lot of problems ;-)))Skype wouldn't see so free anymore, their business model is technically based on "borrowing" bandwidth from its user.
Most users wouldn't keep skype on if they had to pay for the bandwidth it uses, even if you never actually talk to anybody.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402753</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245521520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>He is "American." So am I. What continent did you think Canada was on?</p></div></blockquote><p>North America</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He is " American .
" So am I. What continent did you think Canada was on ? North America</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He is "American.
" So am I. What continent did you think Canada was on?North America
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402143</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401093</id>
	<title>Are those the same Liberals...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245505860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>..who are going to support the Conservatives' invasive, over-reaching legislation that will allow the RCMP to monitor our internet usage (the Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act)? Hardly consistent supporters of freedom, privacy, and individual liberty now are they?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>..who are going to support the Conservatives ' invasive , over-reaching legislation that will allow the RCMP to monitor our internet usage ( the Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act ) ?
Hardly consistent supporters of freedom , privacy , and individual liberty now are they ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..who are going to support the Conservatives' invasive, over-reaching legislation that will allow the RCMP to monitor our internet usage (the Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act)?
Hardly consistent supporters of freedom, privacy, and individual liberty now are they?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400135</id>
	<title>Re:Meaningless blather</title>
	<author>east coast</author>
	<datestamp>1245490080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That sounds like most parties to me. One offsetting what the other has to say just to get the support of those blindly against another party.<br> <br>The sad thing is that it hampers real progress since it's nothing more than who has what to sell this week. Party politics is a trap to keep the simpletons inline.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That sounds like most parties to me .
One offsetting what the other has to say just to get the support of those blindly against another party .
The sad thing is that it hampers real progress since it 's nothing more than who has what to sell this week .
Party politics is a trap to keep the simpletons inline .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That sounds like most parties to me.
One offsetting what the other has to say just to get the support of those blindly against another party.
The sad thing is that it hampers real progress since it's nothing more than who has what to sell this week.
Party politics is a trap to keep the simpletons inline.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28427645</id>
	<title>Net Neutrality is not the only issue unfortunately</title>
	<author>rayk\_sland</author>
	<datestamp>1245704100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ignatieff thinks he's a strong leader and wants to be the strong leader of Canada. He's disqualified on that basis, no matter what he says about net neutrality, I'm still waiting for a politician to be clear that that the electorate is the leader and the government is the management that we, the leaders, have hired. Now Harper used to behave like that, but may have forgotten. Ignatieff is not an option.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ignatieff thinks he 's a strong leader and wants to be the strong leader of Canada .
He 's disqualified on that basis , no matter what he says about net neutrality , I 'm still waiting for a politician to be clear that that the electorate is the leader and the government is the management that we , the leaders , have hired .
Now Harper used to behave like that , but may have forgotten .
Ignatieff is not an option .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ignatieff thinks he's a strong leader and wants to be the strong leader of Canada.
He's disqualified on that basis, no matter what he says about net neutrality, I'm still waiting for a politician to be clear that that the electorate is the leader and the government is the management that we, the leaders, have hired.
Now Harper used to behave like that, but may have forgotten.
Ignatieff is not an option.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400901</id>
	<title>Re:wow</title>
	<author>billcopc</author>
	<datestamp>1245503160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nah.  Our current PM, Stephen Harper, is a US-loving tool, a total sycophant to the Bushies and a kiss-ass to the upper-class.</p><p>The Liberals are currently the opposition, and their last few years have unbelievably weak.  The previous leader Stephan Dion had no balls, and embarrassed himself every time he opened his mouth, couldn't win a debate against a Lisa bot.  Their current leader has balls, but he comes off as a hypocrite and is constantly ridiculed by trash media over his daily contradictory statements.  He's so busy negating the conservatives' platform that he often steamrolls over his own.</p><p>Politics is, by definition, dominated by idiots, but this is the first time I can truly say every single party is moronic beyond belief.  Nobody's even trying to make sense, it doesn't matter who gets elected, they each have a laundry list of lopsided legislation to shove down our throats, and that itself is a very un-Canadian thing to do.  This place is slowly turning into the illegitimate lovechild of the US and UK, a little more each day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nah .
Our current PM , Stephen Harper , is a US-loving tool , a total sycophant to the Bushies and a kiss-ass to the upper-class.The Liberals are currently the opposition , and their last few years have unbelievably weak .
The previous leader Stephan Dion had no balls , and embarrassed himself every time he opened his mouth , could n't win a debate against a Lisa bot .
Their current leader has balls , but he comes off as a hypocrite and is constantly ridiculed by trash media over his daily contradictory statements .
He 's so busy negating the conservatives ' platform that he often steamrolls over his own.Politics is , by definition , dominated by idiots , but this is the first time I can truly say every single party is moronic beyond belief .
Nobody 's even trying to make sense , it does n't matter who gets elected , they each have a laundry list of lopsided legislation to shove down our throats , and that itself is a very un-Canadian thing to do .
This place is slowly turning into the illegitimate lovechild of the US and UK , a little more each day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nah.
Our current PM, Stephen Harper, is a US-loving tool, a total sycophant to the Bushies and a kiss-ass to the upper-class.The Liberals are currently the opposition, and their last few years have unbelievably weak.
The previous leader Stephan Dion had no balls, and embarrassed himself every time he opened his mouth, couldn't win a debate against a Lisa bot.
Their current leader has balls, but he comes off as a hypocrite and is constantly ridiculed by trash media over his daily contradictory statements.
He's so busy negating the conservatives' platform that he often steamrolls over his own.Politics is, by definition, dominated by idiots, but this is the first time I can truly say every single party is moronic beyond belief.
Nobody's even trying to make sense, it doesn't matter who gets elected, they each have a laundry list of lopsided legislation to shove down our throats, and that itself is a very un-Canadian thing to do.
This place is slowly turning into the illegitimate lovechild of the US and UK, a little more each day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28408971</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>Prune</author>
	<datestamp>1245577860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right, because net neutrality should be the overriding issue in any election *rolls eyes*</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , because net neutrality should be the overriding issue in any election * rolls eyes *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, because net neutrality should be the overriding issue in any election *rolls eyes*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400013</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245531300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The LPC couldn't survive an election amongst themselves for leader. A national election would destroy them. They have little money for campaigning, their internally divided and the old trick they have of calling the CPC 'too American' doesn't work when their leader made a career in the US. Michael Ignatieff will never be PM.</p><p>If you haven't noticed, the only reason we aren't having an election is because the Liberal Party of Canada keeps voting to keep the Conservatives in power.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The LPC could n't survive an election amongst themselves for leader .
A national election would destroy them .
They have little money for campaigning , their internally divided and the old trick they have of calling the CPC 'too American ' does n't work when their leader made a career in the US .
Michael Ignatieff will never be PM.If you have n't noticed , the only reason we are n't having an election is because the Liberal Party of Canada keeps voting to keep the Conservatives in power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The LPC couldn't survive an election amongst themselves for leader.
A national election would destroy them.
They have little money for campaigning, their internally divided and the old trick they have of calling the CPC 'too American' doesn't work when their leader made a career in the US.
Michael Ignatieff will never be PM.If you haven't noticed, the only reason we aren't having an election is because the Liberal Party of Canada keeps voting to keep the Conservatives in power.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399709</id>
	<title>Information about the "Liberal" in Liberal Party</title>
	<author>reporter</author>
	<datestamp>1245439920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you want more information about the Liberal Party of Canada, just visit their <a href="http://www.liberal.ca/" title="liberal.ca" rel="nofollow">web site</a> [liberal.ca].
<p>
The "liberal" in "Liberal Party" has the traditional American meaning and is not used in the European sense.  In Europe, a "liberal" is one who favors market liberalization:  lower taxes, less regulation, and longer work hours.  For example, France's Nicolas Sarkozy was accused of being a "liberal" when he ran in the presidential election.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want more information about the Liberal Party of Canada , just visit their web site [ liberal.ca ] .
The " liberal " in " Liberal Party " has the traditional American meaning and is not used in the European sense .
In Europe , a " liberal " is one who favors market liberalization : lower taxes , less regulation , and longer work hours .
For example , France 's Nicolas Sarkozy was accused of being a " liberal " when he ran in the presidential election .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want more information about the Liberal Party of Canada, just visit their web site [liberal.ca].
The "liberal" in "Liberal Party" has the traditional American meaning and is not used in the European sense.
In Europe, a "liberal" is one who favors market liberalization:  lower taxes, less regulation, and longer work hours.
For example, France's Nicolas Sarkozy was accused of being a "liberal" when he ran in the presidential election.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28403937</id>
	<title>Now if only the Liberal Party could be trusted</title>
	<author>jbr439</author>
	<datestamp>1245488760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While in Opposition, the Liberal Party of Canada campaigned against:<br>- wage and price controls<br>- increased gas tax<br>- against the FTA (Free Trade Agreement)<br>- against the GST (Good and Services Tax)</p><p>Once elected the LPC did a 180\% on each of those issues. The LPC has a history of saying what it thinks will get it elected and then doing whatever it wants to do (not that other parties are blameless on this). So I wouldn't put too much stock in this unless a senior member of the LPC said it was a matter of integrity and that he or she would resign if the party didn't follow through on its election promise - oh wait, we've been through that before. Seems "resign" doesn't quite mean what one would normally think it does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While in Opposition , the Liberal Party of Canada campaigned against : - wage and price controls- increased gas tax- against the FTA ( Free Trade Agreement ) - against the GST ( Good and Services Tax ) Once elected the LPC did a 180 \ % on each of those issues .
The LPC has a history of saying what it thinks will get it elected and then doing whatever it wants to do ( not that other parties are blameless on this ) .
So I would n't put too much stock in this unless a senior member of the LPC said it was a matter of integrity and that he or she would resign if the party did n't follow through on its election promise - oh wait , we 've been through that before .
Seems " resign " does n't quite mean what one would normally think it does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While in Opposition, the Liberal Party of Canada campaigned against:- wage and price controls- increased gas tax- against the FTA (Free Trade Agreement)- against the GST (Good and Services Tax)Once elected the LPC did a 180\% on each of those issues.
The LPC has a history of saying what it thinks will get it elected and then doing whatever it wants to do (not that other parties are blameless on this).
So I wouldn't put too much stock in this unless a senior member of the LPC said it was a matter of integrity and that he or she would resign if the party didn't follow through on its election promise - oh wait, we've been through that before.
Seems "resign" doesn't quite mean what one would normally think it does.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401249</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245507960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look, if there's one thing that Canadians agree on with a massive majority it is this one: <i>we don't want another election</i>.  Most polls suggest that sentiment is &gt;70\%.</p><p>The minority government we sent back there in the fall was a big "Play nice together in Parliament, dammit!" message for all of the parties.  The politicians have to get along because they know it's what the citizens want.  The politicians have to negotiate.  Yes, that doesn't seem to be in character for current government (witness the idiotic moves they made with the budget in the fall), but after nearly losing control they seem to have woken up to the fact that a slightly greater representation in a minority government is still a minority government (duh!).</p><p>Even so, any party that is perceived as the main cause of an election, or perceived as the unreasonable one in Parliament, will lose a significant chunk of the support they have, such that causing an election could ironically cost that party the election.  Any advantage the Liberals currently have in the polls could evaporate if they forced it over a minor issue.  So, I sure wouldn't take your advice if I was the head of the Liberal party, or any other party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look , if there 's one thing that Canadians agree on with a massive majority it is this one : we do n't want another election .
Most polls suggest that sentiment is &gt; 70 \ % .The minority government we sent back there in the fall was a big " Play nice together in Parliament , dammit !
" message for all of the parties .
The politicians have to get along because they know it 's what the citizens want .
The politicians have to negotiate .
Yes , that does n't seem to be in character for current government ( witness the idiotic moves they made with the budget in the fall ) , but after nearly losing control they seem to have woken up to the fact that a slightly greater representation in a minority government is still a minority government ( duh !
) .Even so , any party that is perceived as the main cause of an election , or perceived as the unreasonable one in Parliament , will lose a significant chunk of the support they have , such that causing an election could ironically cost that party the election .
Any advantage the Liberals currently have in the polls could evaporate if they forced it over a minor issue .
So , I sure would n't take your advice if I was the head of the Liberal party , or any other party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look, if there's one thing that Canadians agree on with a massive majority it is this one: we don't want another election.
Most polls suggest that sentiment is &gt;70\%.The minority government we sent back there in the fall was a big "Play nice together in Parliament, dammit!
" message for all of the parties.
The politicians have to get along because they know it's what the citizens want.
The politicians have to negotiate.
Yes, that doesn't seem to be in character for current government (witness the idiotic moves they made with the budget in the fall), but after nearly losing control they seem to have woken up to the fact that a slightly greater representation in a minority government is still a minority government (duh!
).Even so, any party that is perceived as the main cause of an election, or perceived as the unreasonable one in Parliament, will lose a significant chunk of the support they have, such that causing an election could ironically cost that party the election.
Any advantage the Liberals currently have in the polls could evaporate if they forced it over a minor issue.
So, I sure wouldn't take your advice if I was the head of the Liberal party, or any other party.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399667</id>
	<title>wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245439320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Canada just keeps getting more and more impressive.  Again, ahead of the curve on social justice.  They put the US to shame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Canada just keeps getting more and more impressive .
Again , ahead of the curve on social justice .
They put the US to shame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Canada just keeps getting more and more impressive.
Again, ahead of the curve on social justice.
They put the US to shame.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399825</id>
	<title>For those of you...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245528300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>For those of you thinking of moving to canada, remember this: <br>
If you die in Canada, you die in <b>real life</b>!
<a href="http://xkcd.com/180/" title="xkcd.com" rel="nofollow">http://xkcd.com/180/</a> [xkcd.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>For those of you thinking of moving to canada , remember this : If you die in Canada , you die in real life !
http : //xkcd.com/180/ [ xkcd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those of you thinking of moving to canada, remember this: 
If you die in Canada, you die in real life!
http://xkcd.com/180/ [xkcd.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400569</id>
	<title>Re:You don't care until your Skype is blocked..</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1245496920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why do you want a proprietary system?  There are a lot of SIP providers in Canada (a quick Google turned up a site which lists around 200 of them).  My provider (I think it's based in Germany, but operates in the UK and Germany) charges 1.5p/minute for calls to Canadian land lines or mobiles, but doesn't provide a Canadian phone number (you'd need a Canadian SIP gateway for that).  And, as an added bonus, because it uses an open standard there are a large number of clients, including softphones and hardware devices.  My (cheap) Nokia phone has WiFi and a SIP client, so I can use the same device for making SIP calls as I do for mobile calls; if I'm near an access point, it uses SIP, otherwise it uses the mobile network.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do you want a proprietary system ?
There are a lot of SIP providers in Canada ( a quick Google turned up a site which lists around 200 of them ) .
My provider ( I think it 's based in Germany , but operates in the UK and Germany ) charges 1.5p/minute for calls to Canadian land lines or mobiles , but does n't provide a Canadian phone number ( you 'd need a Canadian SIP gateway for that ) .
And , as an added bonus , because it uses an open standard there are a large number of clients , including softphones and hardware devices .
My ( cheap ) Nokia phone has WiFi and a SIP client , so I can use the same device for making SIP calls as I do for mobile calls ; if I 'm near an access point , it uses SIP , otherwise it uses the mobile network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do you want a proprietary system?
There are a lot of SIP providers in Canada (a quick Google turned up a site which lists around 200 of them).
My provider (I think it's based in Germany, but operates in the UK and Germany) charges 1.5p/minute for calls to Canadian land lines or mobiles, but doesn't provide a Canadian phone number (you'd need a Canadian SIP gateway for that).
And, as an added bonus, because it uses an open standard there are a large number of clients, including softphones and hardware devices.
My (cheap) Nokia phone has WiFi and a SIP client, so I can use the same device for making SIP calls as I do for mobile calls; if I'm near an access point, it uses SIP, otherwise it uses the mobile network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401543</id>
	<title>Nonsense Comparison</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245510540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lots of liberals in the US favor lower taxes (than in Europe), less regulation (than in Europe) and longer work hours (than in Europe). You need to qualify what they believe in, not what they want less of.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lots of liberals in the US favor lower taxes ( than in Europe ) , less regulation ( than in Europe ) and longer work hours ( than in Europe ) .
You need to qualify what they believe in , not what they want less of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lots of liberals in the US favor lower taxes (than in Europe), less regulation (than in Europe) and longer work hours (than in Europe).
You need to qualify what they believe in, not what they want less of.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399679</id>
	<title>To be Neutral means you are an idiot.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245439380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just like students that earn a 4.0 GPA or greater simply chose classes in which they didn't want to learn anything.</p><p>As for a political stance on pederasty, I prefer to stay neutral.  Same goes for that 5 to 6 vote that favors gangrape...and the lawsuit from the people that were injurred by Captain Crunch Cereals scratching infections into the roofs of their mouths.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like students that earn a 4.0 GPA or greater simply chose classes in which they did n't want to learn anything.As for a political stance on pederasty , I prefer to stay neutral .
Same goes for that 5 to 6 vote that favors gangrape...and the lawsuit from the people that were injurred by Captain Crunch Cereals scratching infections into the roofs of their mouths .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like students that earn a 4.0 GPA or greater simply chose classes in which they didn't want to learn anything.As for a political stance on pederasty, I prefer to stay neutral.
Same goes for that 5 to 6 vote that favors gangrape...and the lawsuit from the people that were injurred by Captain Crunch Cereals scratching infections into the roofs of their mouths.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399697</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245439740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now, if Ignatieff could take back the 34 years he spent outside Canada, his self-admitted snobbery, and his comment that he was American, he might stand a chance.</p><p>What's with the Liberals anyway?  For their last leader, Stephane Dion, they looked around and said "who can we find with less of a personality than Harper?"</p><p>Screw it, I'm in Alberta.  It doesn't matter whom I vote for, the Conservatives will win here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , if Ignatieff could take back the 34 years he spent outside Canada , his self-admitted snobbery , and his comment that he was American , he might stand a chance.What 's with the Liberals anyway ?
For their last leader , Stephane Dion , they looked around and said " who can we find with less of a personality than Harper ?
" Screw it , I 'm in Alberta .
It does n't matter whom I vote for , the Conservatives will win here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, if Ignatieff could take back the 34 years he spent outside Canada, his self-admitted snobbery, and his comment that he was American, he might stand a chance.What's with the Liberals anyway?
For their last leader, Stephane Dion, they looked around and said "who can we find with less of a personality than Harper?
"Screw it, I'm in Alberta.
It doesn't matter whom I vote for, the Conservatives will win here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401383</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>Locklin</author>
	<datestamp>1245509100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If he gets a minority, the NDP also supports net neutrality.</p><p><a href="http://www.ndp.ca/press/new-democrats-introduce-net-neutrality-bill" title="www.ndp.ca">http://www.ndp.ca/press/new-democrats-introduce-net-neutrality-bill</a> [www.ndp.ca]</p><p>For anyone interested in Canadian net neutrality, <a href="http://neutrality.ca/" title="neutrality.ca">http://neutrality.ca/</a> [neutrality.ca] has regular updates.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If he gets a minority , the NDP also supports net neutrality.http : //www.ndp.ca/press/new-democrats-introduce-net-neutrality-bill [ www.ndp.ca ] For anyone interested in Canadian net neutrality , http : //neutrality.ca/ [ neutrality.ca ] has regular updates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If he gets a minority, the NDP also supports net neutrality.http://www.ndp.ca/press/new-democrats-introduce-net-neutrality-bill [www.ndp.ca]For anyone interested in Canadian net neutrality, http://neutrality.ca/ [neutrality.ca] has regular updates.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401355</id>
	<title>Re:Not necessarily what Canadians are hoping for.</title>
	<author>Locklin</author>
	<datestamp>1245508800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are purchasing DSLAM equipment (see here for one example <a href="http://community.acanac.com/acanac/viewtopic.php?f=22&amp;t=7023" title="acanac.com">http://community.acanac.com/acanac/viewtopic.php?f=22&amp;t=7023</a> [acanac.com] ).</p><p>I believe Acanac and Teksavvy are sharing the investment, but it's still a massive, long term investment.</p><p>If Bell was only allowed to wholesale, they wouldn't be doing this. They are doing it because the small providers were taking customers by advertising un-throttled service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are purchasing DSLAM equipment ( see here for one example http : //community.acanac.com/acanac/viewtopic.php ? f = 22&amp;t = 7023 [ acanac.com ] ) .I believe Acanac and Teksavvy are sharing the investment , but it 's still a massive , long term investment.If Bell was only allowed to wholesale , they would n't be doing this .
They are doing it because the small providers were taking customers by advertising un-throttled service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are purchasing DSLAM equipment (see here for one example http://community.acanac.com/acanac/viewtopic.php?f=22&amp;t=7023 [acanac.com] ).I believe Acanac and Teksavvy are sharing the investment, but it's still a massive, long term investment.If Bell was only allowed to wholesale, they wouldn't be doing this.
They are doing it because the small providers were taking customers by advertising un-throttled service.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402895</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>thefringthing</author>
	<datestamp>1245522480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They may be a slight hassle, but it's the only way to get rid of Harper (coalition hijinx not withstanding).</htmltext>
<tokenext>They may be a slight hassle , but it 's the only way to get rid of Harper ( coalition hijinx not withstanding ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They may be a slight hassle, but it's the only way to get rid of Harper (coalition hijinx not withstanding).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401237</id>
	<title>Re:You don't care until your Skype is blocked..</title>
	<author>Locklin</author>
	<datestamp>1245507900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Skype isn't the answer to low-cost phone. Standards complient (SIP) Voip is. Acanac has unlimited calling in North America and a Canadian number for 10 bucks a month. Unlimitel has an a-la-carte model for $2.50 a month.</p><p>Standards compliant SIP means you can use a cheap voip ATA and a regular phone instead of a computer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Skype is n't the answer to low-cost phone .
Standards complient ( SIP ) Voip is .
Acanac has unlimited calling in North America and a Canadian number for 10 bucks a month .
Unlimitel has an a-la-carte model for $ 2.50 a month.Standards compliant SIP means you can use a cheap voip ATA and a regular phone instead of a computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Skype isn't the answer to low-cost phone.
Standards complient (SIP) Voip is.
Acanac has unlimited calling in North America and a Canadian number for 10 bucks a month.
Unlimitel has an a-la-carte model for $2.50 a month.Standards compliant SIP means you can use a cheap voip ATA and a regular phone instead of a computer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399777</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245441060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd much rather they wait 9 months. So that they don't seem like election-calling demons. Yeah, that's it. Nothing to do with my age.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd much rather they wait 9 months .
So that they do n't seem like election-calling demons .
Yeah , that 's it .
Nothing to do with my age .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd much rather they wait 9 months.
So that they don't seem like election-calling demons.
Yeah, that's it.
Nothing to do with my age.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28409003</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>Prune</author>
	<datestamp>1245578160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hardly think it appropriate voting based on a single issue, let alone an issue that pales in importance to others such as managing the economy, quashing the HRCs, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hardly think it appropriate voting based on a single issue , let alone an issue that pales in importance to others such as managing the economy , quashing the HRCs , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hardly think it appropriate voting based on a single issue, let alone an issue that pales in importance to others such as managing the economy, quashing the HRCs, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401383</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401541</id>
	<title>gn4a</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245510480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">Raadt's stubborn said one FrreBSD are almost OF AMERICA irc for it. I don't megs of ram runs</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Raadt 's stubborn said one FrreBSD are almost OF AMERICA irc for it .
I do n't megs of ram runs [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Raadt's stubborn said one FrreBSD are almost OF AMERICA irc for it.
I don't megs of ram runs [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402987</id>
	<title>The "Liberal" in Liberal Party is meaningless</title>
	<author>WebCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1245523260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Historically, the Liberal party started out as a classically liberal party, but it has been many decades since it has behafved even REMOTELY liberal.</p><p>The LPC does what is politically expedient, and has no principles AT ALL.  Policy and philosophy are shaped solely by opinion polls and the direction of the leader of the day.  It is for that reason that I don't hold much promise at all that switching parties would help further the cause of net neutrality.  How trustworthy are the Liberals, and can you believe everything Ignatieff says?  The track record (of the party OR the leader) is not promising.  The past two Liberal PMs made countless pre-election promises only to do nothing, or the exact opposite, when in office.  Cretien promised to get rid of the GST because it was a "stupid" regressive tax that was forced onto Canadians--and in his many years and terms in gov't left it intact.  Today the Liberals hew and cry over employment insurance being inadequate and not accessible enough, when it was the Liberal party that instituted the very policies they complain about now (when "UI" became "EI" and changed were made to reduce costs when Cretien was PM and another former PM, Martin, was finance minister).</p><p>Policies also change with new leaders.  Cretien was slightly "left-leaning" but would abandon his principles out of expediency (such as putting Martin in as long-term finance minister, making them one of the more fiscally conservative Liberal gov'ts).  Martin shifted the Liberals as far right as the Harper Tory gov't is behaving today.  Dion swung the party towards a socialist policy stance so close to that of the NDP the Liberals more than once formally approached the NDP about a coalition strategy--the result of which was electoral disaster (they got the second  lowest percentage of seats and lowest popular vote in the party's history).  Now Ignatieff is leader, and history shows that the Liberals policy is shaped by the leader.  The problem is that Ignatieff has not clearly defined his stance yet so what he says about particular policies cannot be fully trusted.</p><p>Ignatieff was the child of aristocratic Russian diplomats, born in Canada but raised much of his life overseas.  As a pre-teen he was sent to an Ontario boarding school, then attended Harvard in the US and spent over 20 years in the UK before moving to the US for over 5.  As a student he volunteered in Trudeau's election campaign, and because of those distant ties was enticed back to Canada to enter politics by friends who thought he'd be an eventual Liberal leadership contender (in part because his ties with the party WERE NOT that strong and the hope was that voters would see him as a fresh start).  Many make the argument that it is closed-minded to discount a candidate because they aren't "Canadian enough" (more "snobby" Canadians point to the US presidency requirements as how "backwards" such thinking is), but let's be reasonable--not only did this man who would lead Canada spend over half of his life in other countries--it was the LATTER HALF of that life that he spent away.  I'd have no problem if a 60 year old from overseas that moved here 20 or 30 years ago wanted to be PM but Ignatieff lived not a single day in Canada from the 1970s until mere WEEKS before he ran for office!  How can he profess to know what Canada of TODAY is about when all he knows first-hand is the Canada of the 1960s and 1970s?  He has been off the political radar in this country for ages--what does he stand for?  Nobody knows exactly, and more than any other party in Canada what the leader thinks matters most for the Liberals.  A lot of what he has said in the past completely counters what the Liberals stood for in the recent past--he is strongly supportive of military action in Afghanistan and even Iraq.  Though his motives might have differed from Bush, Ignatieff was a SUPPORTER of the GW Bush gov'ts "troop surge" for example, and there is speculation he would support military deployment of troops to Afghanistan indefinitely.  He says little about what he beli</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Historically , the Liberal party started out as a classically liberal party , but it has been many decades since it has behafved even REMOTELY liberal.The LPC does what is politically expedient , and has no principles AT ALL .
Policy and philosophy are shaped solely by opinion polls and the direction of the leader of the day .
It is for that reason that I do n't hold much promise at all that switching parties would help further the cause of net neutrality .
How trustworthy are the Liberals , and can you believe everything Ignatieff says ?
The track record ( of the party OR the leader ) is not promising .
The past two Liberal PMs made countless pre-election promises only to do nothing , or the exact opposite , when in office .
Cretien promised to get rid of the GST because it was a " stupid " regressive tax that was forced onto Canadians--and in his many years and terms in gov't left it intact .
Today the Liberals hew and cry over employment insurance being inadequate and not accessible enough , when it was the Liberal party that instituted the very policies they complain about now ( when " UI " became " EI " and changed were made to reduce costs when Cretien was PM and another former PM , Martin , was finance minister ) .Policies also change with new leaders .
Cretien was slightly " left-leaning " but would abandon his principles out of expediency ( such as putting Martin in as long-term finance minister , making them one of the more fiscally conservative Liberal gov'ts ) .
Martin shifted the Liberals as far right as the Harper Tory gov't is behaving today .
Dion swung the party towards a socialist policy stance so close to that of the NDP the Liberals more than once formally approached the NDP about a coalition strategy--the result of which was electoral disaster ( they got the second lowest percentage of seats and lowest popular vote in the party 's history ) .
Now Ignatieff is leader , and history shows that the Liberals policy is shaped by the leader .
The problem is that Ignatieff has not clearly defined his stance yet so what he says about particular policies can not be fully trusted.Ignatieff was the child of aristocratic Russian diplomats , born in Canada but raised much of his life overseas .
As a pre-teen he was sent to an Ontario boarding school , then attended Harvard in the US and spent over 20 years in the UK before moving to the US for over 5 .
As a student he volunteered in Trudeau 's election campaign , and because of those distant ties was enticed back to Canada to enter politics by friends who thought he 'd be an eventual Liberal leadership contender ( in part because his ties with the party WERE NOT that strong and the hope was that voters would see him as a fresh start ) .
Many make the argument that it is closed-minded to discount a candidate because they are n't " Canadian enough " ( more " snobby " Canadians point to the US presidency requirements as how " backwards " such thinking is ) , but let 's be reasonable--not only did this man who would lead Canada spend over half of his life in other countries--it was the LATTER HALF of that life that he spent away .
I 'd have no problem if a 60 year old from overseas that moved here 20 or 30 years ago wanted to be PM but Ignatieff lived not a single day in Canada from the 1970s until mere WEEKS before he ran for office !
How can he profess to know what Canada of TODAY is about when all he knows first-hand is the Canada of the 1960s and 1970s ?
He has been off the political radar in this country for ages--what does he stand for ?
Nobody knows exactly , and more than any other party in Canada what the leader thinks matters most for the Liberals .
A lot of what he has said in the past completely counters what the Liberals stood for in the recent past--he is strongly supportive of military action in Afghanistan and even Iraq .
Though his motives might have differed from Bush , Ignatieff was a SUPPORTER of the GW Bush gov'ts " troop surge " for example , and there is speculation he would support military deployment of troops to Afghanistan indefinitely .
He says little about what he beli</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Historically, the Liberal party started out as a classically liberal party, but it has been many decades since it has behafved even REMOTELY liberal.The LPC does what is politically expedient, and has no principles AT ALL.
Policy and philosophy are shaped solely by opinion polls and the direction of the leader of the day.
It is for that reason that I don't hold much promise at all that switching parties would help further the cause of net neutrality.
How trustworthy are the Liberals, and can you believe everything Ignatieff says?
The track record (of the party OR the leader) is not promising.
The past two Liberal PMs made countless pre-election promises only to do nothing, or the exact opposite, when in office.
Cretien promised to get rid of the GST because it was a "stupid" regressive tax that was forced onto Canadians--and in his many years and terms in gov't left it intact.
Today the Liberals hew and cry over employment insurance being inadequate and not accessible enough, when it was the Liberal party that instituted the very policies they complain about now (when "UI" became "EI" and changed were made to reduce costs when Cretien was PM and another former PM, Martin, was finance minister).Policies also change with new leaders.
Cretien was slightly "left-leaning" but would abandon his principles out of expediency (such as putting Martin in as long-term finance minister, making them one of the more fiscally conservative Liberal gov'ts).
Martin shifted the Liberals as far right as the Harper Tory gov't is behaving today.
Dion swung the party towards a socialist policy stance so close to that of the NDP the Liberals more than once formally approached the NDP about a coalition strategy--the result of which was electoral disaster (they got the second  lowest percentage of seats and lowest popular vote in the party's history).
Now Ignatieff is leader, and history shows that the Liberals policy is shaped by the leader.
The problem is that Ignatieff has not clearly defined his stance yet so what he says about particular policies cannot be fully trusted.Ignatieff was the child of aristocratic Russian diplomats, born in Canada but raised much of his life overseas.
As a pre-teen he was sent to an Ontario boarding school, then attended Harvard in the US and spent over 20 years in the UK before moving to the US for over 5.
As a student he volunteered in Trudeau's election campaign, and because of those distant ties was enticed back to Canada to enter politics by friends who thought he'd be an eventual Liberal leadership contender (in part because his ties with the party WERE NOT that strong and the hope was that voters would see him as a fresh start).
Many make the argument that it is closed-minded to discount a candidate because they aren't "Canadian enough" (more "snobby" Canadians point to the US presidency requirements as how "backwards" such thinking is), but let's be reasonable--not only did this man who would lead Canada spend over half of his life in other countries--it was the LATTER HALF of that life that he spent away.
I'd have no problem if a 60 year old from overseas that moved here 20 or 30 years ago wanted to be PM but Ignatieff lived not a single day in Canada from the 1970s until mere WEEKS before he ran for office!
How can he profess to know what Canada of TODAY is about when all he knows first-hand is the Canada of the 1960s and 1970s?
He has been off the political radar in this country for ages--what does he stand for?
Nobody knows exactly, and more than any other party in Canada what the leader thinks matters most for the Liberals.
A lot of what he has said in the past completely counters what the Liberals stood for in the recent past--he is strongly supportive of military action in Afghanistan and even Iraq.
Though his motives might have differed from Bush, Ignatieff was a SUPPORTER of the GW Bush gov'ts "troop surge" for example, and there is speculation he would support military deployment of troops to Afghanistan indefinitely.
He says little about what he beli</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673</id>
	<title>You don't care until your Skype is blocked..</title>
	<author>moon3</author>
	<datestamp>1245439380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Skype is actively blocked here in EU by many ISPs, because some big telcos and their ISP branches decided that Skype is eating too much into their pie. Skype is notorious low bandwidth app so claims of bandwidth concerns etc. are ill-founded. Canada is showing some sense and those EU drones in Brussels should do something, a constitutional amendment perhaps ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Skype is actively blocked here in EU by many ISPs , because some big telcos and their ISP branches decided that Skype is eating too much into their pie .
Skype is notorious low bandwidth app so claims of bandwidth concerns etc .
are ill-founded .
Canada is showing some sense and those EU drones in Brussels should do something , a constitutional amendment perhaps ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Skype is actively blocked here in EU by many ISPs, because some big telcos and their ISP branches decided that Skype is eating too much into their pie.
Skype is notorious low bandwidth app so claims of bandwidth concerns etc.
are ill-founded.
Canada is showing some sense and those EU drones in Brussels should do something, a constitutional amendment perhaps ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400785</id>
	<title>Re:Is BitTorrent a "legitimate software applicatio</title>
	<author>Klistvud</author>
	<datestamp>1245500460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is a car a "legitimate hardware appliance"? It CAN be used to kill people, you know... Not to mention airplanes...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is a car a " legitimate hardware appliance " ?
It CAN be used to kill people , you know... Not to mention airplanes.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is a car a "legitimate hardware appliance"?
It CAN be used to kill people, you know... Not to mention airplanes...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399933</id>
	<title>Meaningless blather</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245529920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Liberal Party is notorious for promising things in Opposition that they have no intention of following through with. Ultimately the Liberals will promise cash to the poor Provinces that will come out of the pockets of the rich Provinces, return to power and forget about Net Neutrality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Liberal Party is notorious for promising things in Opposition that they have no intention of following through with .
Ultimately the Liberals will promise cash to the poor Provinces that will come out of the pockets of the rich Provinces , return to power and forget about Net Neutrality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Liberal Party is notorious for promising things in Opposition that they have no intention of following through with.
Ultimately the Liberals will promise cash to the poor Provinces that will come out of the pockets of the rich Provinces, return to power and forget about Net Neutrality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401155</id>
	<title>Medical malpractice in Qu&#233;bec</title>
	<author>Ivlis</author>
	<datestamp>1245506940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Slashdot readers will remember that I was victim of medical malpractice in Qu&#233;bec. For anyone who would like to read my story, I posted it on <a href="http://www.ratemds.com/social/?q=node/36736" title="ratemds.com" rel="nofollow">ratemds.com</a> [ratemds.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot readers will remember that I was victim of medical malpractice in Qu   bec .
For anyone who would like to read my story , I posted it on ratemds.com [ ratemds.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot readers will remember that I was victim of medical malpractice in Québec.
For anyone who would like to read my story, I posted it on ratemds.com [ratemds.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399869</id>
	<title>Not necessarily what Canadians are hoping for.</title>
	<author>Jason Pollock</author>
	<datestamp>1245528780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bell Canada is in hot water with their wholesale ISP customers because they are throttling the bandwidth from the cabinets/COs upstream.  However, they are throttling both their own retail subscribers \_and\_ these ISP resellers.  Personally, I see this as a commercial issue between the ISPs and Bell.  The ISPs should have SLAs that document precisely how much bandwidth they are allowed to peak at.</p><p>However, ISPs, instead of negotiating, running their own wire, or buying their own DSLAMs have gone lobbying.  They tried the regulator, who told them to get lost.  They've managed to convince a lot of customers that Bell is being anti-competitive and against "Net Neutrality" by throttling.  Remember, Bell applies the same shaping to their own customers.</p><p>So, everyone is hoping that this means that the Liberals are against this throttling.  However, I can't see how it would have any bearing on that, since all subscribers are throttled the same.</p><p>Net Neutrality is a complex issue - where are you allowed to throttle, how are you allowed to throttle, are you allowed QoS, preferential feeds over a common connection, preferential feeds over independent connections.  What's the difference between a VPN on one wire and a separate wire?  Are you allowed to host local mirrors of high traffic sites?  Are you allowed to charge fees for that hosting?  If you're a VoIP provider as well as the ISP, are you allowed to provide preferential services?  If you offer DTV, how about then?  What makes a cable TV provider able to give preferential treatment to cable TV channels, but an ISP can't do it for Internet TV?</p><p>This was purely a publicity stunt without any real substance behind it.  Particularly since Canada has a minority government and could be voted down at any point in time.  Heck, they managed to get mentioned on slashdot - talk about hitting the target market!</p><p>I saw the same thing in New Zealand.  During the election, the opposition minister was quoting as saying that the copyright legislation was stupid, and that he didn't know why he voted for it.  As soon as they got in, NZ had S92A, three strikes and you're disconnected without appeal or evidence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bell Canada is in hot water with their wholesale ISP customers because they are throttling the bandwidth from the cabinets/COs upstream .
However , they are throttling both their own retail subscribers \ _and \ _ these ISP resellers .
Personally , I see this as a commercial issue between the ISPs and Bell .
The ISPs should have SLAs that document precisely how much bandwidth they are allowed to peak at.However , ISPs , instead of negotiating , running their own wire , or buying their own DSLAMs have gone lobbying .
They tried the regulator , who told them to get lost .
They 've managed to convince a lot of customers that Bell is being anti-competitive and against " Net Neutrality " by throttling .
Remember , Bell applies the same shaping to their own customers.So , everyone is hoping that this means that the Liberals are against this throttling .
However , I ca n't see how it would have any bearing on that , since all subscribers are throttled the same.Net Neutrality is a complex issue - where are you allowed to throttle , how are you allowed to throttle , are you allowed QoS , preferential feeds over a common connection , preferential feeds over independent connections .
What 's the difference between a VPN on one wire and a separate wire ?
Are you allowed to host local mirrors of high traffic sites ?
Are you allowed to charge fees for that hosting ?
If you 're a VoIP provider as well as the ISP , are you allowed to provide preferential services ?
If you offer DTV , how about then ?
What makes a cable TV provider able to give preferential treatment to cable TV channels , but an ISP ca n't do it for Internet TV ? This was purely a publicity stunt without any real substance behind it .
Particularly since Canada has a minority government and could be voted down at any point in time .
Heck , they managed to get mentioned on slashdot - talk about hitting the target market ! I saw the same thing in New Zealand .
During the election , the opposition minister was quoting as saying that the copyright legislation was stupid , and that he did n't know why he voted for it .
As soon as they got in , NZ had S92A , three strikes and you 're disconnected without appeal or evidence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bell Canada is in hot water with their wholesale ISP customers because they are throttling the bandwidth from the cabinets/COs upstream.
However, they are throttling both their own retail subscribers \_and\_ these ISP resellers.
Personally, I see this as a commercial issue between the ISPs and Bell.
The ISPs should have SLAs that document precisely how much bandwidth they are allowed to peak at.However, ISPs, instead of negotiating, running their own wire, or buying their own DSLAMs have gone lobbying.
They tried the regulator, who told them to get lost.
They've managed to convince a lot of customers that Bell is being anti-competitive and against "Net Neutrality" by throttling.
Remember, Bell applies the same shaping to their own customers.So, everyone is hoping that this means that the Liberals are against this throttling.
However, I can't see how it would have any bearing on that, since all subscribers are throttled the same.Net Neutrality is a complex issue - where are you allowed to throttle, how are you allowed to throttle, are you allowed QoS, preferential feeds over a common connection, preferential feeds over independent connections.
What's the difference between a VPN on one wire and a separate wire?
Are you allowed to host local mirrors of high traffic sites?
Are you allowed to charge fees for that hosting?
If you're a VoIP provider as well as the ISP, are you allowed to provide preferential services?
If you offer DTV, how about then?
What makes a cable TV provider able to give preferential treatment to cable TV channels, but an ISP can't do it for Internet TV?This was purely a publicity stunt without any real substance behind it.
Particularly since Canada has a minority government and could be voted down at any point in time.
Heck, they managed to get mentioned on slashdot - talk about hitting the target market!I saw the same thing in New Zealand.
During the election, the opposition minister was quoting as saying that the copyright legislation was stupid, and that he didn't know why he voted for it.
As soon as they got in, NZ had S92A, three strikes and you're disconnected without appeal or evidence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401441</id>
	<title>Yay libs.</title>
	<author>mindstrm</author>
	<datestamp>1245509580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Internet management should be neutral and not be permitted for anti-competitive behaviour, nor should it target certain websites, users, providers or legitimate software applications."</p><p>Well put.</p><p>I would add, though.</p><p>- If the network is privately funded,  not backed by public concession or right of way, this should not apply if the TOS of are clear about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Internet management should be neutral and not be permitted for anti-competitive behaviour , nor should it target certain websites , users , providers or legitimate software applications .
" Well put.I would add , though.- If the network is privately funded , not backed by public concession or right of way , this should not apply if the TOS of are clear about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Internet management should be neutral and not be permitted for anti-competitive behaviour, nor should it target certain websites, users, providers or legitimate software applications.
"Well put.I would add, though.- If the network is privately funded,  not backed by public concession or right of way, this should not apply if the TOS of are clear about it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28405915</id>
	<title>I don't really care for Ignatief</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245503520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't really care for Michael Ignatief.  He comes off looking a bit like a boob most of the time.  But if the Liberals have some half-assed policies that don't suck (or at least don't suck as much os the conservatives), then next time, they get my vote.  The bull-shit bill the conservatives have now (ISP's have to record everything that a person does on the net) is a massive massive invasion of privacy!  Think of the children!  Hackers could get into such a file system and violate childrens' rights of anonymity in criminal cases (young offenders names are never ever mentioned in the media).  To ensure their protection, such a system must never be implemented!  And if the fuck-wad conservatives try and push it through, they will LOSE THE NEXT ELECTION!   They have been kow-towing to American right wing agendas for a long time.  It must stop!  If they think otherwise, they can voice their concerns from the desks of the opposition (where they will be).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't really care for Michael Ignatief .
He comes off looking a bit like a boob most of the time .
But if the Liberals have some half-assed policies that do n't suck ( or at least do n't suck as much os the conservatives ) , then next time , they get my vote .
The bull-shit bill the conservatives have now ( ISP 's have to record everything that a person does on the net ) is a massive massive invasion of privacy !
Think of the children !
Hackers could get into such a file system and violate childrens ' rights of anonymity in criminal cases ( young offenders names are never ever mentioned in the media ) .
To ensure their protection , such a system must never be implemented !
And if the fuck-wad conservatives try and push it through , they will LOSE THE NEXT ELECTION !
They have been kow-towing to American right wing agendas for a long time .
It must stop !
If they think otherwise , they can voice their concerns from the desks of the opposition ( where they will be ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't really care for Michael Ignatief.
He comes off looking a bit like a boob most of the time.
But if the Liberals have some half-assed policies that don't suck (or at least don't suck as much os the conservatives), then next time, they get my vote.
The bull-shit bill the conservatives have now (ISP's have to record everything that a person does on the net) is a massive massive invasion of privacy!
Think of the children!
Hackers could get into such a file system and violate childrens' rights of anonymity in criminal cases (young offenders names are never ever mentioned in the media).
To ensure their protection, such a system must never be implemented!
And if the fuck-wad conservatives try and push it through, they will LOSE THE NEXT ELECTION!
They have been kow-towing to American right wing agendas for a long time.
It must stop!
If they think otherwise, they can voice their concerns from the desks of the opposition (where they will be).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399881</id>
	<title>Re:You don't care until your Skype is blocked..</title>
	<author>theshowmecanuck</author>
	<datestamp>1245528900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Skype in Canada doesn't provide you with a phone number (i.e.what they used to call 'Skype In'). We have the highest cell phone rates in the world or very close to it (some cell companies want you to pay long distance rates even if you are the one receiving the call!!!... granted some have stopped this practice but still...). The land area is so big, and the population density so small, you will find yourself talking long distance at least several times a week, just for personal business. In other words, long distance is a 'need to have' not a 'nice to have'. Oh and I forgot to mention, the cost for a plan that automatically includes long distance for the whole country is prohibitively high for a personal phone... i.e. generally, only those who have their companies pay for it will have that plan. The bottom line is that if there is one country in the world that is prime picking for a company that can offer extremely low long distance rates, it is Canada. But you NEED to have a telephone number so that people without Skype can dial you up. Too bad Skype is missing out. Too bad for Canadians.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:( </p><p>I have voted for the conservative for at least the last ten years. The liberals who used to be the middle of the road party have drifted much too far to the left. When they used to sit in the centre, sometimes they even drifted to the right a little bit, especially in terms of finances. They were the ones who balanced the budget federally, and started paying it down in a big way (it's why Canada is the country best off of the G8 and whose banks are still making profits). However they have gone so far left it is scary.</p><p>I'm hoping the Ignatieff (Canada's federal Liberal Party leader) moves the party back to the middle. If so, coupled with net neutrality, I'll definitely move back to the liberal camp. At least until it is passes parliament and gets Royal Assent. Heck, they only need to move a little towards centre. Once it is passed, I can always vote conservative again.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Skype in Canada does n't provide you with a phone number ( i.e.what they used to call 'Skype In ' ) .
We have the highest cell phone rates in the world or very close to it ( some cell companies want you to pay long distance rates even if you are the one receiving the call ! ! ! .. .
granted some have stopped this practice but still... ) .
The land area is so big , and the population density so small , you will find yourself talking long distance at least several times a week , just for personal business .
In other words , long distance is a 'need to have ' not a 'nice to have' .
Oh and I forgot to mention , the cost for a plan that automatically includes long distance for the whole country is prohibitively high for a personal phone... i.e. generally , only those who have their companies pay for it will have that plan .
The bottom line is that if there is one country in the world that is prime picking for a company that can offer extremely low long distance rates , it is Canada .
But you NEED to have a telephone number so that people without Skype can dial you up .
Too bad Skype is missing out .
Too bad for Canadians .
: ( I have voted for the conservative for at least the last ten years .
The liberals who used to be the middle of the road party have drifted much too far to the left .
When they used to sit in the centre , sometimes they even drifted to the right a little bit , especially in terms of finances .
They were the ones who balanced the budget federally , and started paying it down in a big way ( it 's why Canada is the country best off of the G8 and whose banks are still making profits ) .
However they have gone so far left it is scary.I 'm hoping the Ignatieff ( Canada 's federal Liberal Party leader ) moves the party back to the middle .
If so , coupled with net neutrality , I 'll definitely move back to the liberal camp .
At least until it is passes parliament and gets Royal Assent .
Heck , they only need to move a little towards centre .
Once it is passed , I can always vote conservative again .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Skype in Canada doesn't provide you with a phone number (i.e.what they used to call 'Skype In').
We have the highest cell phone rates in the world or very close to it (some cell companies want you to pay long distance rates even if you are the one receiving the call!!!...
granted some have stopped this practice but still...).
The land area is so big, and the population density so small, you will find yourself talking long distance at least several times a week, just for personal business.
In other words, long distance is a 'need to have' not a 'nice to have'.
Oh and I forgot to mention, the cost for a plan that automatically includes long distance for the whole country is prohibitively high for a personal phone... i.e. generally, only those who have their companies pay for it will have that plan.
The bottom line is that if there is one country in the world that is prime picking for a company that can offer extremely low long distance rates, it is Canada.
But you NEED to have a telephone number so that people without Skype can dial you up.
Too bad Skype is missing out.
Too bad for Canadians.
:( I have voted for the conservative for at least the last ten years.
The liberals who used to be the middle of the road party have drifted much too far to the left.
When they used to sit in the centre, sometimes they even drifted to the right a little bit, especially in terms of finances.
They were the ones who balanced the budget federally, and started paying it down in a big way (it's why Canada is the country best off of the G8 and whose banks are still making profits).
However they have gone so far left it is scary.I'm hoping the Ignatieff (Canada's federal Liberal Party leader) moves the party back to the middle.
If so, coupled with net neutrality, I'll definitely move back to the liberal camp.
At least until it is passes parliament and gets Royal Assent.
Heck, they only need to move a little towards centre.
Once it is passed, I can always vote conservative again.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399649</id>
	<title>NO WAI!</title>
	<author>jack2000</author>
	<datestamp>1245439080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Gee really? I never would have guessed!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gee really ?
I never would have guessed !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gee really?
I never would have guessed!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400021</id>
	<title>Re:You don't care until your Skype is blocked..</title>
	<author>jopsen</author>
	<datestamp>1245531480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... those EU drones in Brussels should do something, a constitutional amendment perhaps ?</p></div><p>I hope not... Then we'd have to make a constitutional amendment for every type of communication network that is invented in the future...<br>
 - But I'd like to see some regulations too...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... those EU drones in Brussels should do something , a constitutional amendment perhaps ? I hope not... Then we 'd have to make a constitutional amendment for every type of communication network that is invented in the future.. . - But I 'd like to see some regulations too.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... those EU drones in Brussels should do something, a constitutional amendment perhaps ?I hope not... Then we'd have to make a constitutional amendment for every type of communication network that is invented in the future...
 - But I'd like to see some regulations too...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400229</id>
	<title>Re:You don't care until your Skype is blocked..</title>
	<author>SigILL</author>
	<datestamp>1245491580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Skype is actively blocked here in EU by many ISPs, because some big telcos and their ISP branches decided that Skype is eating too much into their pie.</p></div></blockquote><p>Could you give an example? It's most certainly not the case here in the Netherlands, and there would be a huge outcry if this were so. The European Commission is pretty strict on anti-competitive measures, especially those by the former state monopolies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Skype is actively blocked here in EU by many ISPs , because some big telcos and their ISP branches decided that Skype is eating too much into their pie.Could you give an example ?
It 's most certainly not the case here in the Netherlands , and there would be a huge outcry if this were so .
The European Commission is pretty strict on anti-competitive measures , especially those by the former state monopolies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Skype is actively blocked here in EU by many ISPs, because some big telcos and their ISP branches decided that Skype is eating too much into their pie.Could you give an example?
It's most certainly not the case here in the Netherlands, and there would be a huge outcry if this were so.
The European Commission is pretty strict on anti-competitive measures, especially those by the former state monopolies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401257</id>
	<title>NetNeutrality=good; the legislation=not so much</title>
	<author>JohnBlueMO</author>
	<datestamp>1245508020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having had my nose pushed into actual regulatory politics over the last seven years, I'd like to add a cautionary note.
<p>
Don't be surprised that the first truly large forms of Internet censorship on a large scale occur because of net neutrality legislation. Ironic.
</p><p>
Right now, the government is not responsible for Internet content to any real extent. A net neutrality law essentially says 'Government, you make things right about that content stuff'. At first, this will be a good thing. "No censorship" it will say. But then, the politics show their true form. Someone will say, "you can't censor child porn because of net neutrality laws". The conservatives will push through an exception that forces censorship of child porn. Think of the children. Someone will say, "you can't censor pro-tobacco messages to children because of net neutrality laws". The liberals will push through an exception to censor tobacco messages. Think of the children. Then the next thing. Then the next. The government will, over time, take it to levels that today's QOS policy for VOIP look like innocent play.
</p><p>
Sorry to be pessimistic, but it opens a Pandora's box. Governments love laws. Lobbyists love laws. So, the question I ask myself is: is the net neutrality problem today better or worse than the net neutrality problem we would get with a law? Hard to predict. I suspect that things are not bad enough yet to make a law a good idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having had my nose pushed into actual regulatory politics over the last seven years , I 'd like to add a cautionary note .
Do n't be surprised that the first truly large forms of Internet censorship on a large scale occur because of net neutrality legislation .
Ironic . Right now , the government is not responsible for Internet content to any real extent .
A net neutrality law essentially says 'Government , you make things right about that content stuff' .
At first , this will be a good thing .
" No censorship " it will say .
But then , the politics show their true form .
Someone will say , " you ca n't censor child porn because of net neutrality laws " .
The conservatives will push through an exception that forces censorship of child porn .
Think of the children .
Someone will say , " you ca n't censor pro-tobacco messages to children because of net neutrality laws " .
The liberals will push through an exception to censor tobacco messages .
Think of the children .
Then the next thing .
Then the next .
The government will , over time , take it to levels that today 's QOS policy for VOIP look like innocent play .
Sorry to be pessimistic , but it opens a Pandora 's box .
Governments love laws .
Lobbyists love laws .
So , the question I ask myself is : is the net neutrality problem today better or worse than the net neutrality problem we would get with a law ?
Hard to predict .
I suspect that things are not bad enough yet to make a law a good idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having had my nose pushed into actual regulatory politics over the last seven years, I'd like to add a cautionary note.
Don't be surprised that the first truly large forms of Internet censorship on a large scale occur because of net neutrality legislation.
Ironic.

Right now, the government is not responsible for Internet content to any real extent.
A net neutrality law essentially says 'Government, you make things right about that content stuff'.
At first, this will be a good thing.
"No censorship" it will say.
But then, the politics show their true form.
Someone will say, "you can't censor child porn because of net neutrality laws".
The conservatives will push through an exception that forces censorship of child porn.
Think of the children.
Someone will say, "you can't censor pro-tobacco messages to children because of net neutrality laws".
The liberals will push through an exception to censor tobacco messages.
Think of the children.
Then the next thing.
Then the next.
The government will, over time, take it to levels that today's QOS policy for VOIP look like innocent play.
Sorry to be pessimistic, but it opens a Pandora's box.
Governments love laws.
Lobbyists love laws.
So, the question I ask myself is: is the net neutrality problem today better or worse than the net neutrality problem we would get with a law?
Hard to predict.
I suspect that things are not bad enough yet to make a law a good idea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399615</id>
	<title>Third post.</title>
	<author>fractoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245438600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...well, it was worth a try.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</htmltext>
<tokenext>...well , it was worth a try .
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...well, it was worth a try.
:P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399787</id>
	<title>Legitimate Software Applications</title>
	<author>ModernGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1245441180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder who gets to decide what a "Legitimate Software Application" is?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder who gets to decide what a " Legitimate Software Application " is ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder who gets to decide what a "Legitimate Software Application" is?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28403979</id>
	<title>You idiots never learn, do you?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245489120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you think fighting private industry to get what you want is no fun, wait until you have to fight the government to get what you want. And if you</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you think fighting private industry to get what you want is no fun , wait until you have to fight the government to get what you want .
And if you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you think fighting private industry to get what you want is no fun, wait until you have to fight the government to get what you want.
And if you</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400203</id>
	<title>Is BitTorrent a "legitimate software application"?</title>
	<author>d\_jedi</author>
	<datestamp>1245491280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Aye, there's the rub.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aye , there 's the rub .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aye, there's the rub.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400863</id>
	<title>Re:Not necessarily what Canadians are hoping for.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245502320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I saw the same thing in New Zealand.  During the election, the opposition minister was quoting as saying that the copyright legislation was stupid, and that he didn't know why he voted for it.  As soon as they got in, NZ had S92A, three strikes and you're disconnected without appeal or evidence.</p></div><p>Fortunately, that got deferred quickly under massive public backlash. It will hopefully be repealed before it goes into effect. I don't see how it can't really, the Govt. here does some stupid stuff but this one really took the cake.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw the same thing in New Zealand .
During the election , the opposition minister was quoting as saying that the copyright legislation was stupid , and that he did n't know why he voted for it .
As soon as they got in , NZ had S92A , three strikes and you 're disconnected without appeal or evidence.Fortunately , that got deferred quickly under massive public backlash .
It will hopefully be repealed before it goes into effect .
I do n't see how it ca n't really , the Govt .
here does some stupid stuff but this one really took the cake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw the same thing in New Zealand.
During the election, the opposition minister was quoting as saying that the copyright legislation was stupid, and that he didn't know why he voted for it.
As soon as they got in, NZ had S92A, three strikes and you're disconnected without appeal or evidence.Fortunately, that got deferred quickly under massive public backlash.
It will hopefully be repealed before it goes into effect.
I don't see how it can't really, the Govt.
here does some stupid stuff but this one really took the cake.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28403211</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>dual eyes</author>
	<datestamp>1245525240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I do not understand those who are upset when they get a say on how they are governed.  I would GLADLY go to the polls every month to vote if I could.  That would make governments truly accountable.  If you don't want to vote, then don't - no one is forcing you to vote.  Just because you may be happy having your life controlled by others doesn't mean the rest of us want to waive our right to choose our rulers.  If people really think that taking 10 minutes off their life to cast a vote 4 times in 5 years is too demanding, then God help us all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do not understand those who are upset when they get a say on how they are governed .
I would GLADLY go to the polls every month to vote if I could .
That would make governments truly accountable .
If you do n't want to vote , then do n't - no one is forcing you to vote .
Just because you may be happy having your life controlled by others does n't mean the rest of us want to waive our right to choose our rulers .
If people really think that taking 10 minutes off their life to cast a vote 4 times in 5 years is too demanding , then God help us all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do not understand those who are upset when they get a say on how they are governed.
I would GLADLY go to the polls every month to vote if I could.
That would make governments truly accountable.
If you don't want to vote, then don't - no one is forcing you to vote.
Just because you may be happy having your life controlled by others doesn't mean the rest of us want to waive our right to choose our rulers.
If people really think that taking 10 minutes off their life to cast a vote 4 times in 5 years is too demanding, then God help us all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400193</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402473</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245518640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One thing you should know about the Liberals. If they come out in support of something, they probably don't support it and will drop it as soon as in power. Supporting history.</p><p>1) They campaigned on getting rid of the GST. Once in power they left just the way it was.</p><p>2) The told Alberta that they wouldn't implement the National Energy Program (NEP) and double tax petroleum. Yet in 1980 that's exactly what they did.</p><p>Liberals will say anything to be elected but they can't be trusted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One thing you should know about the Liberals .
If they come out in support of something , they probably do n't support it and will drop it as soon as in power .
Supporting history.1 ) They campaigned on getting rid of the GST .
Once in power they left just the way it was.2 ) The told Alberta that they would n't implement the National Energy Program ( NEP ) and double tax petroleum .
Yet in 1980 that 's exactly what they did.Liberals will say anything to be elected but they ca n't be trusted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One thing you should know about the Liberals.
If they come out in support of something, they probably don't support it and will drop it as soon as in power.
Supporting history.1) They campaigned on getting rid of the GST.
Once in power they left just the way it was.2) The told Alberta that they wouldn't implement the National Energy Program (NEP) and double tax petroleum.
Yet in 1980 that's exactly what they did.Liberals will say anything to be elected but they can't be trusted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623</id>
	<title>Now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245438720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now, if Ignatieff (leader of the Liberal party) would just get his ass in gear and get a new election called so that Harper can be shown the door we could get that network neutrality into action....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , if Ignatieff ( leader of the Liberal party ) would just get his ass in gear and get a new election called so that Harper can be shown the door we could get that network neutrality into action... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, if Ignatieff (leader of the Liberal party) would just get his ass in gear and get a new election called so that Harper can be shown the door we could get that network neutrality into action....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399819</id>
	<title>The liberals are the opposition party.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245441540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Everything they say and do is opposite the conservatives. They don't care, they are just doing their jobs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everything they say and do is opposite the conservatives .
They do n't care , they are just doing their jobs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everything they say and do is opposite the conservatives.
They don't care, they are just doing their jobs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400549</id>
	<title>Re:You don't care until your Skype is blocked..</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1245496620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Skype is notorious low bandwidth app so claims of bandwidth concerns etc. are ill-founded</p></div><p>No it isn't.  Skype, if it decides that you have a non-NAT'd connection, or is able to find some forwarded ports, can produce enough traffic to saturate a consumer connection (or, could a couple of years ago when I had a housemate running Skype).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Skype is notorious low bandwidth app so claims of bandwidth concerns etc .
are ill-foundedNo it is n't .
Skype , if it decides that you have a non-NAT 'd connection , or is able to find some forwarded ports , can produce enough traffic to saturate a consumer connection ( or , could a couple of years ago when I had a housemate running Skype ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Skype is notorious low bandwidth app so claims of bandwidth concerns etc.
are ill-foundedNo it isn't.
Skype, if it decides that you have a non-NAT'd connection, or is able to find some forwarded ports, can produce enough traffic to saturate a consumer connection (or, could a couple of years ago when I had a housemate running Skype).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402143</id>
	<title>Re:Now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245515520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Now, if Ignatieff could take back the 34 years he spent outside Canada, his self-admitted snobbery, and his comment that he was American, he might stand a chance.</p></div></blockquote><p>He is "American." So am I. What continent did you think Canada was on?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , if Ignatieff could take back the 34 years he spent outside Canada , his self-admitted snobbery , and his comment that he was American , he might stand a chance.He is " American .
" So am I. What continent did you think Canada was on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, if Ignatieff could take back the 34 years he spent outside Canada, his self-admitted snobbery, and his comment that he was American, he might stand a chance.He is "American.
" So am I. What continent did you think Canada was on?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401281</id>
	<title>Re:Not necessarily what Canadians are hoping for.</title>
	<author>IPCanuck</author>
	<datestamp>1245508320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The fact that all subscribers are throttled is a red herring.  This is still anti-competitive behaviour, as it removes a significant point of competitive differentiation between Bell and the independent ISPs.  Bell saw it as 'unfair' that the other ISPs could offer unthrottled connections, but they were the ones who decided to throttle their own customers!  Bell was beginning to lose customers after they implemented throttling in Fall 2007, so they began throttling everyone over Easter weekend 2008.  Without notice, and after they promised the other ISPs they wouldn't.

We can see some of the same tactics going on now with the debate over Usage-Based Billing.  Bell currently allows their subscribers 60GB/month, so naturally the tariff should allow everyone to offer only 60GB/month.

This is not to mention the inherent conflict of interest Bell Canada has in this matter.  Of course they don't want people to get used to getting their content over the internet - that would eat into their Bell TV (satellite) subscriber base, not to mention their content holdings (CTV).  There's only one solution here - structural separation of Bell Canada.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact that all subscribers are throttled is a red herring .
This is still anti-competitive behaviour , as it removes a significant point of competitive differentiation between Bell and the independent ISPs .
Bell saw it as 'unfair ' that the other ISPs could offer unthrottled connections , but they were the ones who decided to throttle their own customers !
Bell was beginning to lose customers after they implemented throttling in Fall 2007 , so they began throttling everyone over Easter weekend 2008 .
Without notice , and after they promised the other ISPs they would n't .
We can see some of the same tactics going on now with the debate over Usage-Based Billing .
Bell currently allows their subscribers 60GB/month , so naturally the tariff should allow everyone to offer only 60GB/month .
This is not to mention the inherent conflict of interest Bell Canada has in this matter .
Of course they do n't want people to get used to getting their content over the internet - that would eat into their Bell TV ( satellite ) subscriber base , not to mention their content holdings ( CTV ) .
There 's only one solution here - structural separation of Bell Canada .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact that all subscribers are throttled is a red herring.
This is still anti-competitive behaviour, as it removes a significant point of competitive differentiation between Bell and the independent ISPs.
Bell saw it as 'unfair' that the other ISPs could offer unthrottled connections, but they were the ones who decided to throttle their own customers!
Bell was beginning to lose customers after they implemented throttling in Fall 2007, so they began throttling everyone over Easter weekend 2008.
Without notice, and after they promised the other ISPs they wouldn't.
We can see some of the same tactics going on now with the debate over Usage-Based Billing.
Bell currently allows their subscribers 60GB/month, so naturally the tariff should allow everyone to offer only 60GB/month.
This is not to mention the inherent conflict of interest Bell Canada has in this matter.
Of course they don't want people to get used to getting their content over the internet - that would eat into their Bell TV (satellite) subscriber base, not to mention their content holdings (CTV).
There's only one solution here - structural separation of Bell Canada.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401509</id>
	<title>CRTC</title>
	<author>javacowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1245510180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The CRTC regulates communications in Canada and it's an arm's length agency.   That is to say that the federal cabinet can't control its decisions.  The Conservatives tried to force them to deregulate VOIP.   The CRTC disobeyed the order.   There was nothing the cabinet could do.</p><p>How do the Liberals expect to get around this fact?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The CRTC regulates communications in Canada and it 's an arm 's length agency .
That is to say that the federal cabinet ca n't control its decisions .
The Conservatives tried to force them to deregulate VOIP .
The CRTC disobeyed the order .
There was nothing the cabinet could do.How do the Liberals expect to get around this fact ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The CRTC regulates communications in Canada and it's an arm's length agency.
That is to say that the federal cabinet can't control its decisions.
The Conservatives tried to force them to deregulate VOIP.
The CRTC disobeyed the order.
There was nothing the cabinet could do.How do the Liberals expect to get around this fact?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401355
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400901
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402987
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400785
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400203
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400569
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28409003
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401383
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399777
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401729
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401249
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400229
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28408971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_20_0224220_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28403211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401441
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399933
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400135
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399787
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400203
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400785
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399615
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400901
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399819
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399825
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28403937
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399869
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401355
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401281
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401093
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399881
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400569
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401237
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400021
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28408971
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399777
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401383
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28409003
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401249
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401271
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400193
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28403211
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402895
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28400013
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402473
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399697
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401729
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402143
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402753
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402851
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_20_0224220.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28399709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28402987
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_20_0224220.28401543
</commentlist>
</conversation>
