<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_22_2019252</id>
	<title>Minn. Supreme Court Upholds City's Right To Build Own Network</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1245659400000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>BcNexus writes with news from Minnesota that may have significance for cities around the US where municipal networks are either in place or planned: <i>"Here's the latest development in a <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/08/11/08/1532237/Telco-Appeals-Minnesota-Citys-Fiber-Optic-Win">fight pitting a telecommunication company against government competition</a>.  The telco, TDS, took its fight <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/11/too-important-to-lose-telco-appeals-citys-fiber-optic-win.ars">all the way to the Minnesota Supreme Court</a> because it thought the city had no right to serve people's internet, voice and television needs with its own network, <a href="http://www.twincities.com/business/ci\_12652086">but has failed.</a>"</i>

Also from Minnesota today, BcNexus writes <i>"The <a href="http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/06/08/regulators\_drop\_bid\_to\_block\_online\_gambling/">State of Minnesota was the first to blink</a> and chose to avoid a court showdown when it dropped <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/04/29/1745232/Minnesota-Latest-To-Try-To-Block-Gambling-Sites">its attempt to block online gambling sites</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>BcNexus writes with news from Minnesota that may have significance for cities around the US where municipal networks are either in place or planned : " Here 's the latest development in a fight pitting a telecommunication company against government competition .
The telco , TDS , took its fight all the way to the Minnesota Supreme Court because it thought the city had no right to serve people 's internet , voice and television needs with its own network , but has failed .
" Also from Minnesota today , BcNexus writes " The State of Minnesota was the first to blink and chose to avoid a court showdown when it dropped its attempt to block online gambling sites .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BcNexus writes with news from Minnesota that may have significance for cities around the US where municipal networks are either in place or planned: "Here's the latest development in a fight pitting a telecommunication company against government competition.
The telco, TDS, took its fight all the way to the Minnesota Supreme Court because it thought the city had no right to serve people's internet, voice and television needs with its own network, but has failed.
"

Also from Minnesota today, BcNexus writes "The State of Minnesota was the first to blink and chose to avoid a court showdown when it dropped its attempt to block online gambling sites.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28441449</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>u-235-sentinel</author>
	<datestamp>1245781740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Will it fail just like municipal electric, water, sewer, and telephone?</p><p>At some point I thought all of these private corporations suing the government because they can't compete with the government for efficiency would cause some light bulbs to go off. As long as it's implemented and controlled at the county level, doesn't prohibit the existence of private offerings, and pays for itself, what exactly is the problem?</p><p>Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting?</p></div><p>Despite all the advances of Concast the last couple of years, they still don't care.  Otherwise they would work with their customers to resolve issues rather than customers having to blog about it and complain to the media.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Will it fail just like municipal electric , water , sewer , and telephone ? At some point I thought all of these private corporations suing the government because they ca n't compete with the government for efficiency would cause some light bulbs to go off .
As long as it 's implemented and controlled at the county level , does n't prohibit the existence of private offerings , and pays for itself , what exactly is the problem ? Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting ? Despite all the advances of Concast the last couple of years , they still do n't care .
Otherwise they would work with their customers to resolve issues rather than customers having to blog about it and complain to the media .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will it fail just like municipal electric, water, sewer, and telephone?At some point I thought all of these private corporations suing the government because they can't compete with the government for efficiency would cause some light bulbs to go off.
As long as it's implemented and controlled at the county level, doesn't prohibit the existence of private offerings, and pays for itself, what exactly is the problem?Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting?Despite all the advances of Concast the last couple of years, they still don't care.
Otherwise they would work with their customers to resolve issues rather than customers having to blog about it and complain to the media.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28436981</id>
	<title>Re:Municipal ISP = Government Surveillance Society</title>
	<author>Jedi Alec</author>
	<datestamp>1245760080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesus fucking christ on a pogo stick!<br>What is it with you americans?</p><p>We're talking a city council here...either the people of said city want a surveillance society, in which case there is no issue, or they don't, in which case the council trying to implement one will result in said council not being reelected.</p><p>Especially at these local levels democratic processes work fine, and if they don't then people need to stop bitching on the web and start bitching on the street in front of the council where the camera's can pick it up.</p><p>Stop acting like bloody victims, will you? There's more to democracy then placing your vote and then spending an entire term bitching one way or the other.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesus fucking christ on a pogo stick ! What is it with you americans ? We 're talking a city council here...either the people of said city want a surveillance society , in which case there is no issue , or they do n't , in which case the council trying to implement one will result in said council not being reelected.Especially at these local levels democratic processes work fine , and if they do n't then people need to stop bitching on the web and start bitching on the street in front of the council where the camera 's can pick it up.Stop acting like bloody victims , will you ?
There 's more to democracy then placing your vote and then spending an entire term bitching one way or the other .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesus fucking christ on a pogo stick!What is it with you americans?We're talking a city council here...either the people of said city want a surveillance society, in which case there is no issue, or they don't, in which case the council trying to implement one will result in said council not being reelected.Especially at these local levels democratic processes work fine, and if they don't then people need to stop bitching on the web and start bitching on the street in front of the council where the camera's can pick it up.Stop acting like bloody victims, will you?
There's more to democracy then placing your vote and then spending an entire term bitching one way or the other.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429301</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28439913</id>
	<title>Wyandotte MI has it's own utilities</title>
	<author>AppleTwoGuru</author>
	<datestamp>1245776040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wyandotte MI is a self-sustaining city. It has it's own power, water, cable-tv, and probably it's own internet (wired or wireless) <a href="http://www.wyandotte.net/" title="wyandotte.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.wyandotte.net/</a> [wyandotte.net] in spite of the fact Detroit or Detroit companies hold a monopoly on most utilities in the area. When the Detroit utilities want to muscle communities in the area, where Wyandotte holds it's own, they laugh. Comcast is especially upset that Wyandotte had cable even before cable was available anywhere. Comcast can't touch it like they do in the Downriver Area. It is evident you know Wyandotte Cable has been around when the software for the teleprompter stops, and it shows 'Amiga OS 3.9' somewhere on the screen. The power of independence.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wyandotte MI is a self-sustaining city .
It has it 's own power , water , cable-tv , and probably it 's own internet ( wired or wireless ) http : //www.wyandotte.net/ [ wyandotte.net ] in spite of the fact Detroit or Detroit companies hold a monopoly on most utilities in the area .
When the Detroit utilities want to muscle communities in the area , where Wyandotte holds it 's own , they laugh .
Comcast is especially upset that Wyandotte had cable even before cable was available anywhere .
Comcast ca n't touch it like they do in the Downriver Area .
It is evident you know Wyandotte Cable has been around when the software for the teleprompter stops , and it shows 'Amiga OS 3.9 ' somewhere on the screen .
The power of independence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wyandotte MI is a self-sustaining city.
It has it's own power, water, cable-tv, and probably it's own internet (wired or wireless) http://www.wyandotte.net/ [wyandotte.net] in spite of the fact Detroit or Detroit companies hold a monopoly on most utilities in the area.
When the Detroit utilities want to muscle communities in the area, where Wyandotte holds it's own, they laugh.
Comcast is especially upset that Wyandotte had cable even before cable was available anywhere.
Comcast can't touch it like they do in the Downriver Area.
It is evident you know Wyandotte Cable has been around when the software for the teleprompter stops, and it shows 'Amiga OS 3.9' somewhere on the screen.
The power of independence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28440791</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1245779220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Social Security</p></div><p>You have got to be kidding me. Social Security is the most fantastic piece of Madison Avenue bullshit ever promulgated to the American people. Do you realize that there is in fact NO money in the social security "trust fund"? The current beneficiaries are paid from current contributions by workers and the number of beneficiaries per worker is increasing and will continue to increase in years to come. Social Security is Bernie Madoff writ large. In fact, it is the largest Ponzi scheme in the history of mankind. The only reason it can continue is because the government itself is perpetuating it at the expense of our futures and our childrens' futures. If the government offered me the chance right now to opt out of Social Security so that I could the money currently going into the black hole of FICA and Social Security and instead invest it privately under my own direction <i> <b>I would do it in a New York minute</b> </i> and so would any other younger American with half a brain. Social Security is effectively a <b> <i>negative</i> </b> return on investment for most of us here on Slashdot and as Donald Trump is fond of saying to those offering him the next greatest Ponzi scheme, "I know how to loose my own money, thank you." Hell, you could invest in 30 year Treasury Bills (the money would still be coming from the same source: The Federal Government) and do better than Social Security for no additional risk whatsoever. Of course, the Federal Government doesn't want to do that because then they would actually have to pay you a positive return on your investment instead of simply robbing you as they do now with Social Security.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Social SecurityYou have got to be kidding me .
Social Security is the most fantastic piece of Madison Avenue bullshit ever promulgated to the American people .
Do you realize that there is in fact NO money in the social security " trust fund " ?
The current beneficiaries are paid from current contributions by workers and the number of beneficiaries per worker is increasing and will continue to increase in years to come .
Social Security is Bernie Madoff writ large .
In fact , it is the largest Ponzi scheme in the history of mankind .
The only reason it can continue is because the government itself is perpetuating it at the expense of our futures and our childrens ' futures .
If the government offered me the chance right now to opt out of Social Security so that I could the money currently going into the black hole of FICA and Social Security and instead invest it privately under my own direction I would do it in a New York minute and so would any other younger American with half a brain .
Social Security is effectively a negative return on investment for most of us here on Slashdot and as Donald Trump is fond of saying to those offering him the next greatest Ponzi scheme , " I know how to loose my own money , thank you .
" Hell , you could invest in 30 year Treasury Bills ( the money would still be coming from the same source : The Federal Government ) and do better than Social Security for no additional risk whatsoever .
Of course , the Federal Government does n't want to do that because then they would actually have to pay you a positive return on your investment instead of simply robbing you as they do now with Social Security .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Social SecurityYou have got to be kidding me.
Social Security is the most fantastic piece of Madison Avenue bullshit ever promulgated to the American people.
Do you realize that there is in fact NO money in the social security "trust fund"?
The current beneficiaries are paid from current contributions by workers and the number of beneficiaries per worker is increasing and will continue to increase in years to come.
Social Security is Bernie Madoff writ large.
In fact, it is the largest Ponzi scheme in the history of mankind.
The only reason it can continue is because the government itself is perpetuating it at the expense of our futures and our childrens' futures.
If the government offered me the chance right now to opt out of Social Security so that I could the money currently going into the black hole of FICA and Social Security and instead invest it privately under my own direction  I would do it in a New York minute  and so would any other younger American with half a brain.
Social Security is effectively a  negative  return on investment for most of us here on Slashdot and as Donald Trump is fond of saying to those offering him the next greatest Ponzi scheme, "I know how to loose my own money, thank you.
" Hell, you could invest in 30 year Treasury Bills (the money would still be coming from the same source: The Federal Government) and do better than Social Security for no additional risk whatsoever.
Of course, the Federal Government doesn't want to do that because then they would actually have to pay you a positive return on your investment instead of simply robbing you as they do now with Social Security.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28432247</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28438719</id>
	<title>Internet as a Utility</title>
	<author>arjay-tea</author>
	<datestamp>1245771360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have long advocated community provision of local internet service as a public utility, like city streets and county roads. This posting leads me to believe that other people are starting to see the benefits of going in this direction too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have long advocated community provision of local internet service as a public utility , like city streets and county roads .
This posting leads me to believe that other people are starting to see the benefits of going in this direction too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have long advocated community provision of local internet service as a public utility, like city streets and county roads.
This posting leads me to believe that other people are starting to see the benefits of going in this direction too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28439517</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245774420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The suggestion that the government is more efficient than private enterprise is laughable.</i></p><p>We're not laughing in the UK. The privatised rail service soaks up twice the subsidy that it did when state owned. The privatised gas, electricity and water industries are legendary for their rip-off prices and abysmal service.</p><p>I've worked in the rail industry pre and post privatisation and from my direct experience, we didn't waste money when state run because we didn't have money to waste. We were forced to be lean and mean. Now all the money goes on fancy offices, unnecessary expensive equipment, wasteful duplication between the multiple private rail companies, shareholder dividends, truly massive management bonuses and all those other trappings of 'efficient' private industry.<br>On the plus side, the passengers get to see all the trains repainted every few years when the rail operator name and logo changes.</p><p>Small and medium private companies may well be (and are probably forced to be) efficient. The larger ones (particularly running any sort of service as opposed to just supplying goods) just seem to turn into huge leeches with all the worst attributes of state services but without any sort of even minimal accountability.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The suggestion that the government is more efficient than private enterprise is laughable.We 're not laughing in the UK .
The privatised rail service soaks up twice the subsidy that it did when state owned .
The privatised gas , electricity and water industries are legendary for their rip-off prices and abysmal service.I 've worked in the rail industry pre and post privatisation and from my direct experience , we did n't waste money when state run because we did n't have money to waste .
We were forced to be lean and mean .
Now all the money goes on fancy offices , unnecessary expensive equipment , wasteful duplication between the multiple private rail companies , shareholder dividends , truly massive management bonuses and all those other trappings of 'efficient ' private industry.On the plus side , the passengers get to see all the trains repainted every few years when the rail operator name and logo changes.Small and medium private companies may well be ( and are probably forced to be ) efficient .
The larger ones ( particularly running any sort of service as opposed to just supplying goods ) just seem to turn into huge leeches with all the worst attributes of state services but without any sort of even minimal accountability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The suggestion that the government is more efficient than private enterprise is laughable.We're not laughing in the UK.
The privatised rail service soaks up twice the subsidy that it did when state owned.
The privatised gas, electricity and water industries are legendary for their rip-off prices and abysmal service.I've worked in the rail industry pre and post privatisation and from my direct experience, we didn't waste money when state run because we didn't have money to waste.
We were forced to be lean and mean.
Now all the money goes on fancy offices, unnecessary expensive equipment, wasteful duplication between the multiple private rail companies, shareholder dividends, truly massive management bonuses and all those other trappings of 'efficient' private industry.On the plus side, the passengers get to see all the trains repainted every few years when the rail operator name and logo changes.Small and medium private companies may well be (and are probably forced to be) efficient.
The larger ones (particularly running any sort of service as opposed to just supplying goods) just seem to turn into huge leeches with all the worst attributes of state services but without any sort of even minimal accountability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28432111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428307</id>
	<title>Re:Free markets</title>
	<author>JJNess</author>
	<datestamp>1245663300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Trouble is, I'm sure there's some bit of our tax money being used to make this failnet, whether or not we as citizens use it. If my city decides to do something like this, I'll be sure to attend every city council meeting and read everything I can about it to try to gauge how well-built the network will be.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Trouble is , I 'm sure there 's some bit of our tax money being used to make this failnet , whether or not we as citizens use it .
If my city decides to do something like this , I 'll be sure to attend every city council meeting and read everything I can about it to try to gauge how well-built the network will be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trouble is, I'm sure there's some bit of our tax money being used to make this failnet, whether or not we as citizens use it.
If my city decides to do something like this, I'll be sure to attend every city council meeting and read everything I can about it to try to gauge how well-built the network will be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28446149</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>Radical Moderate</author>
	<datestamp>1245754980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry, Comcast &amp; AT&amp;T do not a free market make. It's called a duopoly, and it's only marginally better than a monopoly.  It sure aint competition.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , Comcast &amp; AT&amp;T do not a free market make .
It 's called a duopoly , and it 's only marginally better than a monopoly .
It sure aint competition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, Comcast &amp; AT&amp;T do not a free market make.
It's called a duopoly, and it's only marginally better than a monopoly.
It sure aint competition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28431233</id>
	<title>Re:The Gov't does not have 'Rights'</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245673500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That would be great if it was a Federal project, but it's not. The people have every right to organize and provide themselves with a fiber network. The US Constitution does not prohibit the creation of lower levels of government, does it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be great if it was a Federal project , but it 's not .
The people have every right to organize and provide themselves with a fiber network .
The US Constitution does not prohibit the creation of lower levels of government , does it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would be great if it was a Federal project, but it's not.
The people have every right to organize and provide themselves with a fiber network.
The US Constitution does not prohibit the creation of lower levels of government, does it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429467</id>
	<title>Re:The Gov't does not have 'Rights'</title>
	<author>Fulcrum of Evil</author>
	<datestamp>1245667080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Article 1, section 8:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Section 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;</p> </div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Article 1 , section 8 : Section 8 .
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes , Duties , Imposts and Excises , to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States ; but all Duties , Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Article 1, section 8:Section 8.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28437087</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>seekret</author>
	<datestamp>1245761160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How is it a monopoly if the town builds there own infrastructure? There's nothing stopping any of the other companies from building a competing system. The town voted on the issue and a large majority want this, this is there way of competing with the private market that is not satisfying their wants and needs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is it a monopoly if the town builds there own infrastructure ?
There 's nothing stopping any of the other companies from building a competing system .
The town voted on the issue and a large majority want this , this is there way of competing with the private market that is not satisfying their wants and needs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is it a monopoly if the town builds there own infrastructure?
There's nothing stopping any of the other companies from building a competing system.
The town voted on the issue and a large majority want this, this is there way of competing with the private market that is not satisfying their wants and needs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28434983</id>
	<title>Re:Good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245694380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ethernet over power lines gets killed for more reasons than just competition.  I haven't kept up on advances in the last couple of years, but last time I looked into it, it was producing massive RF that interferes with all kinds of communication, especially the public spectrum that HAMs use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ethernet over power lines gets killed for more reasons than just competition .
I have n't kept up on advances in the last couple of years , but last time I looked into it , it was producing massive RF that interferes with all kinds of communication , especially the public spectrum that HAMs use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ethernet over power lines gets killed for more reasons than just competition.
I haven't kept up on advances in the last couple of years, but last time I looked into it, it was producing massive RF that interferes with all kinds of communication, especially the public spectrum that HAMs use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428787</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429319</id>
	<title>Re:The Gov't does not have 'Rights'</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1245666540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's nothing in the Constitution that allows government to build roads and bridges, either - but I bet you're happy enough to use them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's nothing in the Constitution that allows government to build roads and bridges , either - but I bet you 're happy enough to use them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's nothing in the Constitution that allows government to build roads and bridges, either - but I bet you're happy enough to use them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430777</id>
	<title>!Competition</title>
	<author>MSTCrow5429</author>
	<datestamp>1245672060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>We call it something else when someone steals money from you, and then uses your stolen money to buy something, and then sets up shop in opposition to those in civil society, i.e. those who only ask for your money, and don't take it from you at gunpoint.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We call it something else when someone steals money from you , and then uses your stolen money to buy something , and then sets up shop in opposition to those in civil society , i.e .
those who only ask for your money , and do n't take it from you at gunpoint .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We call it something else when someone steals money from you, and then uses your stolen money to buy something, and then sets up shop in opposition to those in civil society, i.e.
those who only ask for your money, and don't take it from you at gunpoint.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28432111</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>mattwarden</author>
	<datestamp>1245677160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you completely ignorant of economics, or just trying to pick a fight?</p><p>The suggestion that the government is more efficient than private enterprise is laughable. The issue is that private enterprise cannot compete with an agency that can tax and that has endless guaranteed reserves. When the "price" is a forced fee, regardless of whether the service or product is consumed, then the consumer might as well consume, right? Further, if they pay $x already for service from taxes, then they'd have to come up with another $y to pay for this private "competitor", paying twice for the same service.</p><p>Your suggestion is like saying that private education cannot compete with public education. You're kidding yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you completely ignorant of economics , or just trying to pick a fight ? The suggestion that the government is more efficient than private enterprise is laughable .
The issue is that private enterprise can not compete with an agency that can tax and that has endless guaranteed reserves .
When the " price " is a forced fee , regardless of whether the service or product is consumed , then the consumer might as well consume , right ?
Further , if they pay $ x already for service from taxes , then they 'd have to come up with another $ y to pay for this private " competitor " , paying twice for the same service.Your suggestion is like saying that private education can not compete with public education .
You 're kidding yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you completely ignorant of economics, or just trying to pick a fight?The suggestion that the government is more efficient than private enterprise is laughable.
The issue is that private enterprise cannot compete with an agency that can tax and that has endless guaranteed reserves.
When the "price" is a forced fee, regardless of whether the service or product is consumed, then the consumer might as well consume, right?
Further, if they pay $x already for service from taxes, then they'd have to come up with another $y to pay for this private "competitor", paying twice for the same service.Your suggestion is like saying that private education cannot compete with public education.
You're kidding yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428913</id>
	<title>I applaud the court in their decision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245665100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And wish their efforts in this the best of luck. Not only that, but I hope more cities try something similar!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And wish their efforts in this the best of luck .
Not only that , but I hope more cities try something similar !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And wish their efforts in this the best of luck.
Not only that, but I hope more cities try something similar!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429499</id>
	<title>Re:Free markets</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1245667200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
That's too bad, I was looking forward to reading about successful municipal broadband projects.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's too bad , I was looking forward to reading about successful municipal broadband projects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
That's too bad, I was looking forward to reading about successful municipal broadband projects.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428373</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259</id>
	<title>Free markets</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245663180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm all for free Markets but the current Internet situation in Minnesota is pathetic. If the people want better service and are willing to fork out the dough let them however this project (if it gets off the ground) has a huge chance of failing like the many other attempts at Municipal Internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm all for free Markets but the current Internet situation in Minnesota is pathetic .
If the people want better service and are willing to fork out the dough let them however this project ( if it gets off the ground ) has a huge chance of failing like the many other attempts at Municipal Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm all for free Markets but the current Internet situation in Minnesota is pathetic.
If the people want better service and are willing to fork out the dough let them however this project (if it gets off the ground) has a huge chance of failing like the many other attempts at Municipal Internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429407</id>
	<title>mistagged</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245666840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No suddenoutbreakofcommonsense tag? For shame, editors. For shame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No suddenoutbreakofcommonsense tag ?
For shame , editors .
For shame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No suddenoutbreakofcommonsense tag?
For shame, editors.
For shame.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428903</id>
	<title>Public control utilities can work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245665040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I lived in Santa Clara, CA., the city owned the electric utility service.  I have since moved to neighboring San Jose and I am being serviced by PG&amp;E.  Since the change over, I pay a difference of about $180 a month more for about the same electricity usage.  That and the fact the Santa Clara's utilities actually is making a profit which they want to raid for a sports stadium can easily tell you, if its done right, it can make money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I lived in Santa Clara , CA. , the city owned the electric utility service .
I have since moved to neighboring San Jose and I am being serviced by PG&amp;E .
Since the change over , I pay a difference of about $ 180 a month more for about the same electricity usage .
That and the fact the Santa Clara 's utilities actually is making a profit which they want to raid for a sports stadium can easily tell you , if its done right , it can make money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I lived in Santa Clara, CA., the city owned the electric utility service.
I have since moved to neighboring San Jose and I am being serviced by PG&amp;E.
Since the change over, I pay a difference of about $180 a month more for about the same electricity usage.
That and the fact the Santa Clara's utilities actually is making a profit which they want to raid for a sports stadium can easily tell you, if its done right, it can make money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429391</id>
	<title>Re:Free markets</title>
	<author>LunaticTippy</author>
	<datestamp>1245666720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Trouble is, I'm sure there's some bit of our tax money being used to make this failnet, whether or not we as citizens use it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Oh good god.  There are steaming piles of tax money in the telcos and cablecos, not to mention their monopolies.  Tough titties if they can't deal with a little competition.<br> <br>If you want to be an idiot at a city council meeting, maybe you should bitch about all the wasted billions we've paid for telecom infrastructure that is now falling apart?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Trouble is , I 'm sure there 's some bit of our tax money being used to make this failnet , whether or not we as citizens use it.Oh good god .
There are steaming piles of tax money in the telcos and cablecos , not to mention their monopolies .
Tough titties if they ca n't deal with a little competition .
If you want to be an idiot at a city council meeting , maybe you should bitch about all the wasted billions we 've paid for telecom infrastructure that is now falling apart ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trouble is, I'm sure there's some bit of our tax money being used to make this failnet, whether or not we as citizens use it.Oh good god.
There are steaming piles of tax money in the telcos and cablecos, not to mention their monopolies.
Tough titties if they can't deal with a little competition.
If you want to be an idiot at a city council meeting, maybe you should bitch about all the wasted billions we've paid for telecom infrastructure that is now falling apart?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428307</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28441637</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>u-235-sentinel</author>
	<datestamp>1245782340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If it is a choice of Comcast <em>and</em> AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting, then I'll have Comcast and AT&amp;T.</p><p>If it is a choice of Comcast <em>or</em> AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting, then I'll have the local city or county meeting.</p><p>Private monopolies are generally worse than government monopolies, but private competition is better than both of those.</p></div><p>I was amused when my Senator said there were laws that protected you from abuse by these companies.  What's interesting is how little they really protect the customer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it is a choice of Comcast and AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting , then I 'll have Comcast and AT&amp;T.If it is a choice of Comcast or AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting , then I 'll have the local city or county meeting.Private monopolies are generally worse than government monopolies , but private competition is better than both of those.I was amused when my Senator said there were laws that protected you from abuse by these companies .
What 's interesting is how little they really protect the customer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it is a choice of Comcast and AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting, then I'll have Comcast and AT&amp;T.If it is a choice of Comcast or AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting, then I'll have the local city or county meeting.Private monopolies are generally worse than government monopolies, but private competition is better than both of those.I was amused when my Senator said there were laws that protected you from abuse by these companies.
What's interesting is how little they really protect the customer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429709</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>dkleinsc</author>
	<datestamp>1245667980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What if the choices are:<br>
&nbsp; Comcast - offers you Internet service at $75 / month<br>
&nbsp; AT&amp;T - offers you Internet service at $70 / month<br>
&nbsp; Municipal system - offers you Internet service at $30 / month (which is enough to pay for the system)</p><p>Private options in a competitive market can be beaten in all senses by public options if a few conditions are met:<br>
&nbsp; 1. The public organization has to be accountable to their customers via an electoral process.<br>
&nbsp; 2. The public option is required to break even (over a period of time).<br>
&nbsp; 3. The people who go to work for the public option do so because they genuinely want to do a good job. That includes management.</p><p>Something that you need to be very aware of is that oligopolies (e.g. you're left with a choice between Comcast and AT&amp;T and no other options) do not behave in the same way that competitive markets (e.g. lettuce at your local farmers' market) do, because each seller in an oligopoly has a significant amount of pricing power. For instance, airlines used to regularly raise their fares on Friday at 4:45 PM to give all their competitors time to follow suit before Monday morning when the travel agencies opened.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What if the choices are :   Comcast - offers you Internet service at $ 75 / month   AT&amp;T - offers you Internet service at $ 70 / month   Municipal system - offers you Internet service at $ 30 / month ( which is enough to pay for the system ) Private options in a competitive market can be beaten in all senses by public options if a few conditions are met :   1 .
The public organization has to be accountable to their customers via an electoral process .
  2 .
The public option is required to break even ( over a period of time ) .
  3 .
The people who go to work for the public option do so because they genuinely want to do a good job .
That includes management.Something that you need to be very aware of is that oligopolies ( e.g .
you 're left with a choice between Comcast and AT&amp;T and no other options ) do not behave in the same way that competitive markets ( e.g .
lettuce at your local farmers ' market ) do , because each seller in an oligopoly has a significant amount of pricing power .
For instance , airlines used to regularly raise their fares on Friday at 4 : 45 PM to give all their competitors time to follow suit before Monday morning when the travel agencies opened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if the choices are:
  Comcast - offers you Internet service at $75 / month
  AT&amp;T - offers you Internet service at $70 / month
  Municipal system - offers you Internet service at $30 / month (which is enough to pay for the system)Private options in a competitive market can be beaten in all senses by public options if a few conditions are met:
  1.
The public organization has to be accountable to their customers via an electoral process.
  2.
The public option is required to break even (over a period of time).
  3.
The people who go to work for the public option do so because they genuinely want to do a good job.
That includes management.Something that you need to be very aware of is that oligopolies (e.g.
you're left with a choice between Comcast and AT&amp;T and no other options) do not behave in the same way that competitive markets (e.g.
lettuce at your local farmers' market) do, because each seller in an oligopoly has a significant amount of pricing power.
For instance, airlines used to regularly raise their fares on Friday at 4:45 PM to give all their competitors time to follow suit before Monday morning when the travel agencies opened.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28437915</id>
	<title>Re:Television</title>
	<author>Forbman</author>
	<datestamp>1245767220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...but it's a good thing if Rupert Murdoch has say over the channels carried on DirecTV?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...but it 's a good thing if Rupert Murdoch has say over the channels carried on DirecTV ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...but it's a good thing if Rupert Murdoch has say over the channels carried on DirecTV?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28431065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430081</id>
	<title>Thank you Minnesota Supreme Court!</title>
	<author>osu-neko</author>
	<datestamp>1245669420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now, we can haz senator plz? kthxbai</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , we can haz senator plz ?
kthxbai</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, we can haz senator plz?
kthxbai</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28436953</id>
	<title>Re:!Competition</title>
	<author>Jedi Alec</author>
	<datestamp>1245759720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>We call it something else when someone steals money from you, and then uses your stolen money to buy something, and then sets up shop in opposition to those in civil society, i.e. those who only ask for your money, and don't take it from you at gunpoint.</i></p><p>Weeeeeeh, foam at the mouth libertarian alarm! The way you describe it, we call it paranoid delusion.</p><p>It's a municipal government, and 3/4's of the people in said municipality think it's a good idea. Oh, and the guys in civil society plain out refused to set up shop in the first place.</p><p>Off you go, back to dreaming about your Randian paradise(Somalia).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We call it something else when someone steals money from you , and then uses your stolen money to buy something , and then sets up shop in opposition to those in civil society , i.e .
those who only ask for your money , and do n't take it from you at gunpoint.Weeeeeeh , foam at the mouth libertarian alarm !
The way you describe it , we call it paranoid delusion.It 's a municipal government , and 3/4 's of the people in said municipality think it 's a good idea .
Oh , and the guys in civil society plain out refused to set up shop in the first place.Off you go , back to dreaming about your Randian paradise ( Somalia ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We call it something else when someone steals money from you, and then uses your stolen money to buy something, and then sets up shop in opposition to those in civil society, i.e.
those who only ask for your money, and don't take it from you at gunpoint.Weeeeeeh, foam at the mouth libertarian alarm!
The way you describe it, we call it paranoid delusion.It's a municipal government, and 3/4's of the people in said municipality think it's a good idea.
Oh, and the guys in civil society plain out refused to set up shop in the first place.Off you go, back to dreaming about your Randian paradise(Somalia).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430777</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129</id>
	<title>The Gov't does not have 'Rights'</title>
	<author>gregulator</author>
	<datestamp>1245665940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In the American system, Government does not have any 'rights.' Rights are affirmed by the gov't, granted by God. The gov't has responsibilities that it must do, and it has restrictions on what it can do. Anything not expressly regulated to the gov't is for the People to do.

I don't think muni internet falls into any of the Constitutional requirements or powers granted to the gov't by the people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the American system , Government does not have any 'rights .
' Rights are affirmed by the gov't , granted by God .
The gov't has responsibilities that it must do , and it has restrictions on what it can do .
Anything not expressly regulated to the gov't is for the People to do .
I do n't think muni internet falls into any of the Constitutional requirements or powers granted to the gov't by the people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the American system, Government does not have any 'rights.
' Rights are affirmed by the gov't, granted by God.
The gov't has responsibilities that it must do, and it has restrictions on what it can do.
Anything not expressly regulated to the gov't is for the People to do.
I don't think muni internet falls into any of the Constitutional requirements or powers granted to the gov't by the people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430039</id>
	<title>Re:The Gov't does not have 'Rights'</title>
	<author>HikingStick</author>
	<datestamp>1245669300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, those rights not granted to the Federal Government are granted to <i>the States</i> and <i>the People</i>.<br> <br>So, yes, while the government did not win an affirmation of its rights in this decision, the People, acting together as a municipal governing body, preserved their right to establish and maintain infrastructure when no players in the market are willing to do so.  TDS initially declined to build a fiber network in Monticello.  Only after the city decided it would provide its own connectivity did TDS suddenly become interested in providing fiber connectivity there.  Since then, TDS has completed a fiber network in the city, and they've also expedited fiber installs in many parts of rural Minnesota.<br> <br>  To me, that spells two wins for the People.  The fiber network is available to more people, and cities know they can put in the infrastructure they desire if they can't get the market players to do so on their own.  It seems clear to me that, had it not been for the legal threat, there would be no complete TDS fiber install in Monticello, and they wouldn't have dug up the corner near my house to install to my hometown, either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , those rights not granted to the Federal Government are granted to the States and the People .
So , yes , while the government did not win an affirmation of its rights in this decision , the People , acting together as a municipal governing body , preserved their right to establish and maintain infrastructure when no players in the market are willing to do so .
TDS initially declined to build a fiber network in Monticello .
Only after the city decided it would provide its own connectivity did TDS suddenly become interested in providing fiber connectivity there .
Since then , TDS has completed a fiber network in the city , and they 've also expedited fiber installs in many parts of rural Minnesota .
To me , that spells two wins for the People .
The fiber network is available to more people , and cities know they can put in the infrastructure they desire if they ca n't get the market players to do so on their own .
It seems clear to me that , had it not been for the legal threat , there would be no complete TDS fiber install in Monticello , and they would n't have dug up the corner near my house to install to my hometown , either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, those rights not granted to the Federal Government are granted to the States and the People.
So, yes, while the government did not win an affirmation of its rights in this decision, the People, acting together as a municipal governing body, preserved their right to establish and maintain infrastructure when no players in the market are willing to do so.
TDS initially declined to build a fiber network in Monticello.
Only after the city decided it would provide its own connectivity did TDS suddenly become interested in providing fiber connectivity there.
Since then, TDS has completed a fiber network in the city, and they've also expedited fiber installs in many parts of rural Minnesota.
To me, that spells two wins for the People.
The fiber network is available to more people, and cities know they can put in the infrastructure they desire if they can't get the market players to do so on their own.
It seems clear to me that, had it not been for the legal threat, there would be no complete TDS fiber install in Monticello, and they wouldn't have dug up the corner near my house to install to my hometown, either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28433549</id>
	<title>Re:</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1245684600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will it fail just like municipal electric, water, sewer, and telephone? Probably.  All of the above, except maybe sewer but I don't pay much attention to that, have failed.Electricity<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... better done privately (ohh, but ever deregulation always stirred up some kind of trouble...no, there was transition problems, but better service afterward.)Water<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... If your only level of success is "Mostly safe to drink" or "Doesn't kill most people" then yes.  Otherwise I buy most of my water from private industries.Sewer</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will it fail just like municipal electric , water , sewer , and telephone ?
Probably. All of the above , except maybe sewer but I do n't pay much attention to that , have failed.Electricity ... better done privately ( ohh , but ever deregulation always stirred up some kind of trouble...no , there was transition problems , but better service afterward .
) Water ... If your only level of success is " Mostly safe to drink " or " Does n't kill most people " then yes .
Otherwise I buy most of my water from private industries.Sewer</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will it fail just like municipal electric, water, sewer, and telephone?
Probably.  All of the above, except maybe sewer but I don't pay much attention to that, have failed.Electricity ... better done privately (ohh, but ever deregulation always stirred up some kind of trouble...no, there was transition problems, but better service afterward.
)Water ... If your only level of success is "Mostly safe to drink" or "Doesn't kill most people" then yes.
Otherwise I buy most of my water from private industries.Sewer</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429377</id>
	<title>Used to run an ISP in Monticello, MN</title>
	<author>phsonnek</author>
	<datestamp>1245666720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was taking business away from TDS, until they got the FCC to allow them to change their tariffs.  T-1 circuits for an ISP more than quadrupled overnight.  But only for ISPs.  If you were the hospital and you wanted a T-1 you got the old rate.   I did not have the finances to put up a legal fight; needless to say I was forced out of business.

TDS is getting whats coming to them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was taking business away from TDS , until they got the FCC to allow them to change their tariffs .
T-1 circuits for an ISP more than quadrupled overnight .
But only for ISPs .
If you were the hospital and you wanted a T-1 you got the old rate .
I did not have the finances to put up a legal fight ; needless to say I was forced out of business .
TDS is getting whats coming to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was taking business away from TDS, until they got the FCC to allow them to change their tariffs.
T-1 circuits for an ISP more than quadrupled overnight.
But only for ISPs.
If you were the hospital and you wanted a T-1 you got the old rate.
I did not have the finances to put up a legal fight; needless to say I was forced out of business.
TDS is getting whats coming to them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429763</id>
	<title>Re:The Gov't does not have 'Rights'</title>
	<author>onemorechip</author>
	<datestamp>1245668160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't think muni internet falls into any of the Constitutional requirements or powers granted to the gov't by the people.</p></div><p>I don't think muni *anything* falls under the Constitution, which only outlines powers and restraints for Federal (and to some extent State) governments.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think muni internet falls into any of the Constitutional requirements or powers granted to the gov't by the people.I do n't think muni * anything * falls under the Constitution , which only outlines powers and restraints for Federal ( and to some extent State ) governments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think muni internet falls into any of the Constitutional requirements or powers granted to the gov't by the people.I don't think muni *anything* falls under the Constitution, which only outlines powers and restraints for Federal (and to some extent State) governments.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28431065</id>
	<title>Television</title>
	<author>rm999</author>
	<datestamp>1245673020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"it thought the city had no right to serve people's internet, voice and television needs with its own network"</p><p>I think there is an argument to be made that the city shouldn't be serving television, especially anything public access. With internet and phone the user has full control over the service (assuming a non-tampered connection), but the choice of television stations is highly subjective and could be biased by politicians/bureaucrats. Because the city service will likely be (at least indirectly) subsidized by the tax payer, it may put companies that offer a less biased channel selection under a lot of pressure. This is a bad thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" it thought the city had no right to serve people 's internet , voice and television needs with its own network " I think there is an argument to be made that the city should n't be serving television , especially anything public access .
With internet and phone the user has full control over the service ( assuming a non-tampered connection ) , but the choice of television stations is highly subjective and could be biased by politicians/bureaucrats .
Because the city service will likely be ( at least indirectly ) subsidized by the tax payer , it may put companies that offer a less biased channel selection under a lot of pressure .
This is a bad thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"it thought the city had no right to serve people's internet, voice and television needs with its own network"I think there is an argument to be made that the city shouldn't be serving television, especially anything public access.
With internet and phone the user has full control over the service (assuming a non-tampered connection), but the choice of television stations is highly subjective and could be biased by politicians/bureaucrats.
Because the city service will likely be (at least indirectly) subsidized by the tax payer, it may put companies that offer a less biased channel selection under a lot of pressure.
This is a bad thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430177</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1245669840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>At some point I thought all of these private corporations suing the government because they can't compete with the government for efficiency would cause some light bulbs to go off.</p></div><p>What? Are we living on the same planet? The government and efficiency are essentially contradictory terms. The private companies don't want to compete against the government because the government does not go away even if it loses money on every transaction. It is not a fair competition and the consumer is the big loser since public money goes to fund a service that will be worse than the private service, yet paying for it is not optional for those who choose not to use it; sort of like the situation with public education in this country.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>As long as it's implemented and controlled at the county level, doesn't prohibit the existence of private offerings, and pays for itself, what exactly is the problem?</p></div><p>Right, what could possibly go wrong? It is the government. If you think that the government can provide the best quality service at the lowest possible prices then you are living in la-la-land. I defy you to name one government program that has provided better quality, cheaper access, and more efficient service than comparable private sector businesses.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting?</p></div><p>To put it plainly...yes. If we are going to judge public policies by their intentions rather than their actual results then we are simply setting ourselves up to be disappointed. You may not like Comcast or AT&amp;T, but the government service would almost certainly be even worse.</p><p>If the government provided goods and efficient services at decent prices then the Soviet Union would never have collapsed. Those on the left would do well to remember that before they put forth government as the answer to our problems. Also, there is a big difference between the government paying for and actually providing the a service (i.e. contracted out to AT&amp;T or Comcast). If we have to chose between them then the later is almost always better than the former.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At some point I thought all of these private corporations suing the government because they ca n't compete with the government for efficiency would cause some light bulbs to go off.What ?
Are we living on the same planet ?
The government and efficiency are essentially contradictory terms .
The private companies do n't want to compete against the government because the government does not go away even if it loses money on every transaction .
It is not a fair competition and the consumer is the big loser since public money goes to fund a service that will be worse than the private service , yet paying for it is not optional for those who choose not to use it ; sort of like the situation with public education in this country.As long as it 's implemented and controlled at the county level , does n't prohibit the existence of private offerings , and pays for itself , what exactly is the problem ? Right , what could possibly go wrong ?
It is the government .
If you think that the government can provide the best quality service at the lowest possible prices then you are living in la-la-land .
I defy you to name one government program that has provided better quality , cheaper access , and more efficient service than comparable private sector businesses.Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting ? To put it plainly...yes .
If we are going to judge public policies by their intentions rather than their actual results then we are simply setting ourselves up to be disappointed .
You may not like Comcast or AT&amp;T , but the government service would almost certainly be even worse.If the government provided goods and efficient services at decent prices then the Soviet Union would never have collapsed .
Those on the left would do well to remember that before they put forth government as the answer to our problems .
Also , there is a big difference between the government paying for and actually providing the a service ( i.e .
contracted out to AT&amp;T or Comcast ) .
If we have to chose between them then the later is almost always better than the former .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At some point I thought all of these private corporations suing the government because they can't compete with the government for efficiency would cause some light bulbs to go off.What?
Are we living on the same planet?
The government and efficiency are essentially contradictory terms.
The private companies don't want to compete against the government because the government does not go away even if it loses money on every transaction.
It is not a fair competition and the consumer is the big loser since public money goes to fund a service that will be worse than the private service, yet paying for it is not optional for those who choose not to use it; sort of like the situation with public education in this country.As long as it's implemented and controlled at the county level, doesn't prohibit the existence of private offerings, and pays for itself, what exactly is the problem?Right, what could possibly go wrong?
It is the government.
If you think that the government can provide the best quality service at the lowest possible prices then you are living in la-la-land.
I defy you to name one government program that has provided better quality, cheaper access, and more efficient service than comparable private sector businesses.Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting?To put it plainly...yes.
If we are going to judge public policies by their intentions rather than their actual results then we are simply setting ourselves up to be disappointed.
You may not like Comcast or AT&amp;T, but the government service would almost certainly be even worse.If the government provided goods and efficient services at decent prices then the Soviet Union would never have collapsed.
Those on the left would do well to remember that before they put forth government as the answer to our problems.
Also, there is a big difference between the government paying for and actually providing the a service (i.e.
contracted out to AT&amp;T or Comcast).
If we have to chose between them then the later is almost always better than the former.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28438175</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>Attila Dimedici</author>
	<datestamp>1245768660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are also no private investment firms that have such a horrendous rate of return. As a matter of fact, I am pretty sure it would be illegal for a private investment firm to offer as low a rate of return as SS. Of course, that overlooks the fact that SS is not an investment vehicle. I pay taxes out of my wages to pay current retirees, when I start collecting SS the money will come from people who are working at the time. Currently, there is a surplus of money paid in SS taxes, so the government spends it. All evidence suggests that when I reach the age to collect SS there will be a shortage and the government will have to raise the amount it collects from workers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are also no private investment firms that have such a horrendous rate of return .
As a matter of fact , I am pretty sure it would be illegal for a private investment firm to offer as low a rate of return as SS .
Of course , that overlooks the fact that SS is not an investment vehicle .
I pay taxes out of my wages to pay current retirees , when I start collecting SS the money will come from people who are working at the time .
Currently , there is a surplus of money paid in SS taxes , so the government spends it .
All evidence suggests that when I reach the age to collect SS there will be a shortage and the government will have to raise the amount it collects from workers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are also no private investment firms that have such a horrendous rate of return.
As a matter of fact, I am pretty sure it would be illegal for a private investment firm to offer as low a rate of return as SS.
Of course, that overlooks the fact that SS is not an investment vehicle.
I pay taxes out of my wages to pay current retirees, when I start collecting SS the money will come from people who are working at the time.
Currently, there is a surplus of money paid in SS taxes, so the government spends it.
All evidence suggests that when I reach the age to collect SS there will be a shortage and the government will have to raise the amount it collects from workers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28432247</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429301</id>
	<title>Municipal ISP = Government Surveillance Society</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245666540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>One of the things that makes me leery of governments becoming ISPs is the likelihood of an erosion of rights and freedom, namely, the ease of creating a surveillance society.  If a city owns a citywide network it's a short step to implementing redlight cameras, surveillance cameras, facial recognition software, automobile tracking, etc.  This will all be done under the guise of "safety" and "protecting the children" while becoming a profit center for generating revenue, all the while innocent citizens are monitored.  While I acknowledge the benefits of municipal owned and operated water, power and waste, I have a hard time believing that connectivity falls under the same headings.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the things that makes me leery of governments becoming ISPs is the likelihood of an erosion of rights and freedom , namely , the ease of creating a surveillance society .
If a city owns a citywide network it 's a short step to implementing redlight cameras , surveillance cameras , facial recognition software , automobile tracking , etc .
This will all be done under the guise of " safety " and " protecting the children " while becoming a profit center for generating revenue , all the while innocent citizens are monitored .
While I acknowledge the benefits of municipal owned and operated water , power and waste , I have a hard time believing that connectivity falls under the same headings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the things that makes me leery of governments becoming ISPs is the likelihood of an erosion of rights and freedom, namely, the ease of creating a surveillance society.
If a city owns a citywide network it's a short step to implementing redlight cameras, surveillance cameras, facial recognition software, automobile tracking, etc.
This will all be done under the guise of "safety" and "protecting the children" while becoming a profit center for generating revenue, all the while innocent citizens are monitored.
While I acknowledge the benefits of municipal owned and operated water, power and waste, I have a hard time believing that connectivity falls under the same headings.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28431519</id>
	<title>Re:Free markets</title>
	<author>Klistvud</author>
	<datestamp>1245674400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Trouble is, I'm sure there's some bit of our tax money being used to make this failnet.</p></div><p>That's *exactly* why the telco has taken this to the supreme court. They were concerned about the taxpayers' money!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Trouble is , I 'm sure there 's some bit of our tax money being used to make this failnet.That 's * exactly * why the telco has taken this to the supreme court .
They were concerned about the taxpayers ' money !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trouble is, I'm sure there's some bit of our tax money being used to make this failnet.That's *exactly* why the telco has taken this to the supreme court.
They were concerned about the taxpayers' money!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428307</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28436915</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>ultranova</author>
	<datestamp>1245759300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The private companies don't want to compete against the government because the government does not go away even if it loses money on every transaction.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Neither do big companies, judging by recent events.</p><blockquote><div><p>It is not a fair competition and the consumer is the big loser since public money goes to fund a service that will be worse than the private service, yet paying for it is not optional for those who choose not to use it; sort of like the situation with public education in this country.</p></div> </blockquote><p>How is a telecom the size of a small nation-state a "private" service? Who owns it? Who goes to jail if it breaks the law? Who bears its debt if it goes bankrupt while owing billions?</p><p>"Private entrepreneurs" originally referred to shopkeepers, barbers, butchers and other such people. A telecom is not a private enterprise in any sensible meaning of the word. Its closer to a twisted parody of a particularly nasty totalitarian government.</p><blockquote><div><p>If the government provided goods and efficient services at decent prices then the Soviet Union would never have collapsed.</p></div> </blockquote><p>How strange, then, that all large corporations have arranged their internal workings as command economy. Or maybe not so strange, when you remember that the rising Chinese economy works that way too. And Soviet Union was a near-miraculous success story, considering that it was built on the ruins of a collapsed agricultural (non-industrial) tsarist Russia and became the second-strongest nation on Earth in just a few decades.</p><p>It's not the economical model that killed Soviet Russia, but the expenses of a military dictatorship. When you have to simultaneously prepare to deal with enemies at both home and abroad, you can't possibly keep up with a country that doesn't have to worry about rebellions. Besides, I'd argue that the US also finally went bankrupt from the after effects of Cold War, it simply took a few decades more.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The private companies do n't want to compete against the government because the government does not go away even if it loses money on every transaction .
Neither do big companies , judging by recent events.It is not a fair competition and the consumer is the big loser since public money goes to fund a service that will be worse than the private service , yet paying for it is not optional for those who choose not to use it ; sort of like the situation with public education in this country .
How is a telecom the size of a small nation-state a " private " service ?
Who owns it ?
Who goes to jail if it breaks the law ?
Who bears its debt if it goes bankrupt while owing billions ?
" Private entrepreneurs " originally referred to shopkeepers , barbers , butchers and other such people .
A telecom is not a private enterprise in any sensible meaning of the word .
Its closer to a twisted parody of a particularly nasty totalitarian government.If the government provided goods and efficient services at decent prices then the Soviet Union would never have collapsed .
How strange , then , that all large corporations have arranged their internal workings as command economy .
Or maybe not so strange , when you remember that the rising Chinese economy works that way too .
And Soviet Union was a near-miraculous success story , considering that it was built on the ruins of a collapsed agricultural ( non-industrial ) tsarist Russia and became the second-strongest nation on Earth in just a few decades.It 's not the economical model that killed Soviet Russia , but the expenses of a military dictatorship .
When you have to simultaneously prepare to deal with enemies at both home and abroad , you ca n't possibly keep up with a country that does n't have to worry about rebellions .
Besides , I 'd argue that the US also finally went bankrupt from the after effects of Cold War , it simply took a few decades more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The private companies don't want to compete against the government because the government does not go away even if it loses money on every transaction.
Neither do big companies, judging by recent events.It is not a fair competition and the consumer is the big loser since public money goes to fund a service that will be worse than the private service, yet paying for it is not optional for those who choose not to use it; sort of like the situation with public education in this country.
How is a telecom the size of a small nation-state a "private" service?
Who owns it?
Who goes to jail if it breaks the law?
Who bears its debt if it goes bankrupt while owing billions?
"Private entrepreneurs" originally referred to shopkeepers, barbers, butchers and other such people.
A telecom is not a private enterprise in any sensible meaning of the word.
Its closer to a twisted parody of a particularly nasty totalitarian government.If the government provided goods and efficient services at decent prices then the Soviet Union would never have collapsed.
How strange, then, that all large corporations have arranged their internal workings as command economy.
Or maybe not so strange, when you remember that the rising Chinese economy works that way too.
And Soviet Union was a near-miraculous success story, considering that it was built on the ruins of a collapsed agricultural (non-industrial) tsarist Russia and became the second-strongest nation on Earth in just a few decades.It's not the economical model that killed Soviet Russia, but the expenses of a military dictatorship.
When you have to simultaneously prepare to deal with enemies at both home and abroad, you can't possibly keep up with a country that doesn't have to worry about rebellions.
Besides, I'd argue that the US also finally went bankrupt from the after effects of Cold War, it simply took a few decades more.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430177</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429647</id>
	<title>That's sum funny there</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245667680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting?</p></div><p>Hahaha!  You said "choose" and "Comcast or AT&amp;T" in the same sentence!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting ? Hahaha !
You said " choose " and " Comcast or AT&amp;T " in the same sentence !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting?Hahaha!
You said "choose" and "Comcast or AT&amp;T" in the same sentence!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28479325</id>
	<title>Re:Free markets</title>
	<author>soren202</author>
	<datestamp>1246011420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure whether that's supposed to read "I'm off to spend my intellectual resources on more intelligent people" or "I'm off to spend my physical resources on high school girls".</p><p>Normally I would take the former, but, then again, it is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure whether that 's supposed to read " I 'm off to spend my intellectual resources on more intelligent people " or " I 'm off to spend my physical resources on high school girls " .Normally I would take the former , but , then again , it is /. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure whether that's supposed to read "I'm off to spend my intellectual resources on more intelligent people" or "I'm off to spend my physical resources on high school girls".Normally I would take the former, but, then again, it is /..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428373</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429185</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245666180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Will it fail just like municipal electric, water, sewer, and telephone?</i></p><p>Probably.  All of the above, except maybe sewer but I don't pay much attention to that, have failed.</p><p>Electricity<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... better done privately (ohh, but ever deregulation always stirred up some kind of trouble...no, there was transition problems, but better service afterward.)<br>Water<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... If your only level of success is "Mostly safe to drink" or "Doesn't kill most people" then yes.  Otherwise I buy most of my water from private industries.<br>Sewer<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Like I said I may give you this one as I rarely hear of the shit backing up to bad.<br>Telephone<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Being replaced by commercial cell towers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will it fail just like municipal electric , water , sewer , and telephone ? Probably .
All of the above , except maybe sewer but I do n't pay much attention to that , have failed.Electricity ... better done privately ( ohh , but ever deregulation always stirred up some kind of trouble...no , there was transition problems , but better service afterward .
) Water ... If your only level of success is " Mostly safe to drink " or " Does n't kill most people " then yes .
Otherwise I buy most of my water from private industries.Sewer ... Like I said I may give you this one as I rarely hear of the shit backing up to bad.Telephone ... Being replaced by commercial cell towers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will it fail just like municipal electric, water, sewer, and telephone?Probably.
All of the above, except maybe sewer but I don't pay much attention to that, have failed.Electricity ... better done privately (ohh, but ever deregulation always stirred up some kind of trouble...no, there was transition problems, but better service afterward.
)Water ... If your only level of success is "Mostly safe to drink" or "Doesn't kill most people" then yes.
Otherwise I buy most of my water from private industries.Sewer ... Like I said I may give you this one as I rarely hear of the shit backing up to bad.Telephone ... Being replaced by commercial cell towers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28433397</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>Jason Levine</author>
	<datestamp>1245683640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, they're not suing because they can't compete.  They're suing because they don't want to compete.  To my knowledge, many, if not most, of the municipal internet access plans are being put forward by towns that don't have broadband service from the local cable or phone monopolies.  So the town steps in and says "We'll do it."  At this point, the monopolies say "Hey! We don't want to serve your area, but if we ever change our mind, we don't want to compete against you.  Shut down your operation so we can continue to ignore your area in peace."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , they 're not suing because they ca n't compete .
They 're suing because they do n't want to compete .
To my knowledge , many , if not most , of the municipal internet access plans are being put forward by towns that do n't have broadband service from the local cable or phone monopolies .
So the town steps in and says " We 'll do it .
" At this point , the monopolies say " Hey !
We do n't want to serve your area , but if we ever change our mind , we do n't want to compete against you .
Shut down your operation so we can continue to ignore your area in peace .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, they're not suing because they can't compete.
They're suing because they don't want to compete.
To my knowledge, many, if not most, of the municipal internet access plans are being put forward by towns that don't have broadband service from the local cable or phone monopolies.
So the town steps in and says "We'll do it.
"  At this point, the monopolies say "Hey!
We don't want to serve your area, but if we ever change our mind, we don't want to compete against you.
Shut down your operation so we can continue to ignore your area in peace.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428995</id>
	<title>Coleman v Franken</title>
	<author>Pretzalzz</author>
	<datestamp>1245665400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Minnesota Supreme Court shouldn't be doing anything else but finishing their ruling on Coleman v Franken.  It's been three weeks since they've heard oral arguments and over 8 months since the election took place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Minnesota Supreme Court should n't be doing anything else but finishing their ruling on Coleman v Franken .
It 's been three weeks since they 've heard oral arguments and over 8 months since the election took place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Minnesota Supreme Court shouldn't be doing anything else but finishing their ruling on Coleman v Franken.
It's been three weeks since they've heard oral arguments and over 8 months since the election took place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429117</id>
	<title>Broadband wireless starts to look good</title>
	<author>bzzfzz</author>
	<datestamp>1245665820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Internet connectivity in Minnesota is so bad that broadband wireless service, with its slow speed, download caps, and unpredictable coverage, is still an improvement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Internet connectivity in Minnesota is so bad that broadband wireless service , with its slow speed , download caps , and unpredictable coverage , is still an improvement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Internet connectivity in Minnesota is so bad that broadband wireless service, with its slow speed, download caps, and unpredictable coverage, is still an improvement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430361</id>
	<title>Old news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245670440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We debated this back home in '63, but it was sewers instead of intertubes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We debated this back home in '63 , but it was sewers instead of intertubes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We debated this back home in '63, but it was sewers instead of intertubes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28438285</id>
	<title>Re:The Gov't does not have 'Rights'</title>
	<author>Attila Dimedici</author>
	<datestamp>1245769320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Constitution has little to say about the powers granted to a municipal government. If this was the federal government, the Constitution would be relevant. The only relevance of the Constitution to municipal government is via the 14th Amendment which courts have ruled expands the Bill of Rights to apply to state and local government (before the 14th Amendment, the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government).</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Constitution has little to say about the powers granted to a municipal government .
If this was the federal government , the Constitution would be relevant .
The only relevance of the Constitution to municipal government is via the 14th Amendment which courts have ruled expands the Bill of Rights to apply to state and local government ( before the 14th Amendment , the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Constitution has little to say about the powers granted to a municipal government.
If this was the federal government, the Constitution would be relevant.
The only relevance of the Constitution to municipal government is via the 14th Amendment which courts have ruled expands the Bill of Rights to apply to state and local government (before the 14th Amendment, the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429791</id>
	<title>Re:Municipal ISP = Government Surveillance Society</title>
	<author>onemorechip</author>
	<datestamp>1245668280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If a city owns a citywide network it's a short step to implementing redlight cameras, surveillance cameras, facial recognition software, automobile tracking, etc.</p></div><p>Ah, so none of those things will happen if we nip this municipal ISP thing in the bud, right?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If a city owns a citywide network it 's a short step to implementing redlight cameras , surveillance cameras , facial recognition software , automobile tracking , etc.Ah , so none of those things will happen if we nip this municipal ISP thing in the bud , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a city owns a citywide network it's a short step to implementing redlight cameras, surveillance cameras, facial recognition software, automobile tracking, etc.Ah, so none of those things will happen if we nip this municipal ISP thing in the bud, right?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429301</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429491</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1245667200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no either or. You can have Comcast, AT&amp;T, the local city, AND some others. This is more or less what we have here in cologne. And the EU is suing Germany, because the Telekom (ex-government) did not open up its net for others.</p><p>The result is, that I can have a 10 Mb flat (and I mean a real flat, without an invisible cap, where your contract is terminated.), with digital TV and phone flat, for 25&euro;.<br>Or a 100 Mb flat with a phone flat for 35&euro;<br>I call that a pretty fair price.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no either or .
You can have Comcast , AT&amp;T , the local city , AND some others .
This is more or less what we have here in cologne .
And the EU is suing Germany , because the Telekom ( ex-government ) did not open up its net for others.The result is , that I can have a 10 Mb flat ( and I mean a real flat , without an invisible cap , where your contract is terminated .
) , with digital TV and phone flat , for 25    .Or a 100 Mb flat with a phone flat for 35    I call that a pretty fair price .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no either or.
You can have Comcast, AT&amp;T, the local city, AND some others.
This is more or less what we have here in cologne.
And the EU is suing Germany, because the Telekom (ex-government) did not open up its net for others.The result is, that I can have a 10 Mb flat (and I mean a real flat, without an invisible cap, where your contract is terminated.
), with digital TV and phone flat, for 25€.Or a 100 Mb flat with a phone flat for 35€I call that a pretty fair price.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428787</id>
	<title>Good</title>
	<author>DnemoniX</author>
	<datestamp>1245664680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I live in Minnesota and worked in Government IT for a decade. I have to say that the state of broadband is sad. The consumers lack the freedom of choice in most areas of the state. Comcast and Quest in the  Twin Cities and Charter almost everywhere else. There are a few smaller providers here and there with a minimal market share. The large companies have a monopoly in their respective territories. Although they deny this fact at every turn. A perfect example of this is Charter, in towns where they are the only player you will be charged at a rate that is much higher than in a city where they have direct competition. When this is pointed out they deny the fact and claim the difference in cost is due to the "cost of doing business in that town". Please. A few years ago in Rochester, MN the Public Utility (RPU) decided they wanted to test ethernet over power lines. As soon as word got out Charter had a melt down and had reps at all of the city council meetings crying unfair competition. The phones at city hall rang off the hook and the behind the scenes threats were made. The project was killed. You figure it out...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in Minnesota and worked in Government IT for a decade .
I have to say that the state of broadband is sad .
The consumers lack the freedom of choice in most areas of the state .
Comcast and Quest in the Twin Cities and Charter almost everywhere else .
There are a few smaller providers here and there with a minimal market share .
The large companies have a monopoly in their respective territories .
Although they deny this fact at every turn .
A perfect example of this is Charter , in towns where they are the only player you will be charged at a rate that is much higher than in a city where they have direct competition .
When this is pointed out they deny the fact and claim the difference in cost is due to the " cost of doing business in that town " .
Please. A few years ago in Rochester , MN the Public Utility ( RPU ) decided they wanted to test ethernet over power lines .
As soon as word got out Charter had a melt down and had reps at all of the city council meetings crying unfair competition .
The phones at city hall rang off the hook and the behind the scenes threats were made .
The project was killed .
You figure it out.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in Minnesota and worked in Government IT for a decade.
I have to say that the state of broadband is sad.
The consumers lack the freedom of choice in most areas of the state.
Comcast and Quest in the  Twin Cities and Charter almost everywhere else.
There are a few smaller providers here and there with a minimal market share.
The large companies have a monopoly in their respective territories.
Although they deny this fact at every turn.
A perfect example of this is Charter, in towns where they are the only player you will be charged at a rate that is much higher than in a city where they have direct competition.
When this is pointed out they deny the fact and claim the difference in cost is due to the "cost of doing business in that town".
Please. A few years ago in Rochester, MN the Public Utility (RPU) decided they wanted to test ethernet over power lines.
As soon as word got out Charter had a melt down and had reps at all of the city council meetings crying unfair competition.
The phones at city hall rang off the hook and the behind the scenes threats were made.
The project was killed.
You figure it out...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428373</id>
	<title>Re:Free markets</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245663480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was going to craft a well-thought out response regarding the difference between an ideal free market and Free Market Idealism, and point out that governments can be actors in a free market, and then I was going to dig up links to a couple of very successful municipal broadband projects.<br> <br>But then I thought to myself, "Looks like high schools have let out for the summer".<br> <br>I think it's time for a hiatus for me for a while...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to craft a well-thought out response regarding the difference between an ideal free market and Free Market Idealism , and point out that governments can be actors in a free market , and then I was going to dig up links to a couple of very successful municipal broadband projects .
But then I thought to myself , " Looks like high schools have let out for the summer " .
I think it 's time for a hiatus for me for a while.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to craft a well-thought out response regarding the difference between an ideal free market and Free Market Idealism, and point out that governments can be actors in a free market, and then I was going to dig up links to a couple of very successful municipal broadband projects.
But then I thought to myself, "Looks like high schools have let out for the summer".
I think it's time for a hiatus for me for a while...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430427</id>
	<title>In Utah...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245670680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I live right in the middle of Utah County, Utah. I currently use a multiple city Fiber to the home system and love it. Even if you are the most anti-government person, can you not see when the best option is shown? Now, the Utopia network really is just fiber to the premises with a private company (Mstar in my case) providing Fiber to my house and the service, but I'm sure that Mstar wouldn't be giving me my internet if it weren't for the GOVERNMENT being so awesome.</p><p>posting AC so my account doesn't get karma killed.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:S</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I live right in the middle of Utah County , Utah .
I currently use a multiple city Fiber to the home system and love it .
Even if you are the most anti-government person , can you not see when the best option is shown ?
Now , the Utopia network really is just fiber to the premises with a private company ( Mstar in my case ) providing Fiber to my house and the service , but I 'm sure that Mstar would n't be giving me my internet if it were n't for the GOVERNMENT being so awesome.posting AC so my account does n't get karma killed .
: S</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live right in the middle of Utah County, Utah.
I currently use a multiple city Fiber to the home system and love it.
Even if you are the most anti-government person, can you not see when the best option is shown?
Now, the Utopia network really is just fiber to the premises with a private company (Mstar in my case) providing Fiber to my house and the service, but I'm sure that Mstar wouldn't be giving me my internet if it weren't for the GOVERNMENT being so awesome.posting AC so my account doesn't get karma killed.
:S</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28432247</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>AK Marc</author>
	<datestamp>1245677820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I defy you to name one government program that has provided better quality, cheaper access, and more efficient service than comparable private sector businesses</i> <br> <br>Social Security.  There exist no private invenstment firms that have a money market mutual fund with overhead as low as SS.  None.  For the management per dollar for a minimally-managed investment account, SS beats all private firms.  Oh, and have you compared the cheapest USPS rates with everyone else?  What's the percentage difference?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I defy you to name one government program that has provided better quality , cheaper access , and more efficient service than comparable private sector businesses Social Security .
There exist no private invenstment firms that have a money market mutual fund with overhead as low as SS .
None. For the management per dollar for a minimally-managed investment account , SS beats all private firms .
Oh , and have you compared the cheapest USPS rates with everyone else ?
What 's the percentage difference ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I defy you to name one government program that has provided better quality, cheaper access, and more efficient service than comparable private sector businesses  Social Security.
There exist no private invenstment firms that have a money market mutual fund with overhead as low as SS.
None.  For the management per dollar for a minimally-managed investment account, SS beats all private firms.
Oh, and have you compared the cheapest USPS rates with everyone else?
What's the percentage difference?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430177</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430883</id>
	<title>Re:The Gov't does not have 'Rights'</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245672420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You *do* realize that this is at the local level, right? The Constitution limits the abilities of the Federal government and than delegates all other powers to the State governments. In any case, 75\% of the population in the area voted for this project. If a majority of people in a community want to do something to better their community, why exactly are they barred from doing it? This isn't some case of politicians making up decisions for themselves with little input from the people affected by it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You * do * realize that this is at the local level , right ?
The Constitution limits the abilities of the Federal government and than delegates all other powers to the State governments .
In any case , 75 \ % of the population in the area voted for this project .
If a majority of people in a community want to do something to better their community , why exactly are they barred from doing it ?
This is n't some case of politicians making up decisions for themselves with little input from the people affected by it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You *do* realize that this is at the local level, right?
The Constitution limits the abilities of the Federal government and than delegates all other powers to the State governments.
In any case, 75\% of the population in the area voted for this project.
If a majority of people in a community want to do something to better their community, why exactly are they barred from doing it?
This isn't some case of politicians making up decisions for themselves with little input from the people affected by it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28432401</id>
	<title>what a mess!</title>
	<author>FudRucker</author>
	<datestamp>1245678420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>looks like this submission is infested with astroturfers from various service providers, they can all go to hell, if a local government wants to offer internet it is a good thing,</htmltext>
<tokenext>looks like this submission is infested with astroturfers from various service providers , they can all go to hell , if a local government wants to offer internet it is a good thing,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>looks like this submission is infested with astroturfers from various service providers, they can all go to hell, if a local government wants to offer internet it is a good thing,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429975</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>sbeckstead</author>
	<datestamp>1245669060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean like the DWP in Los Angeles, that is cheaper than it's competition and didn't get scammed by Enron.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean like the DWP in Los Angeles , that is cheaper than it 's competition and did n't get scammed by Enron .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean like the DWP in Los Angeles, that is cheaper than it's competition and didn't get scammed by Enron.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047</id>
	<title>Re:Fail?</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1245665640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it is a choice of Comcast <em>and</em> AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting, then I'll have Comcast and AT&amp;T.</p><p>If it is a choice of Comcast <em>or</em> AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting, then I'll have the local city or county meeting.</p><p>Private monopolies are generally worse than government monopolies, but private competition is better than both of those.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it is a choice of Comcast and AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting , then I 'll have Comcast and AT&amp;T.If it is a choice of Comcast or AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting , then I 'll have the local city or county meeting.Private monopolies are generally worse than government monopolies , but private competition is better than both of those .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it is a choice of Comcast and AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting, then I'll have Comcast and AT&amp;T.If it is a choice of Comcast or AT&amp;T vs a local city or county meeting, then I'll have the local city or county meeting.Private monopolies are generally worse than government monopolies, but private competition is better than both of those.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493</id>
	<title>Fail?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245663840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will it fail just like municipal electric, water, sewer, and telephone?</p><p>At some point I thought all of these private corporations suing the government because they can't compete with the government for efficiency would cause some light bulbs to go off. As long as it's implemented and controlled at the county level, doesn't prohibit the existence of private offerings, and pays for itself, what exactly is the problem?</p><p>Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will it fail just like municipal electric , water , sewer , and telephone ? At some point I thought all of these private corporations suing the government because they ca n't compete with the government for efficiency would cause some light bulbs to go off .
As long as it 's implemented and controlled at the county level , does n't prohibit the existence of private offerings , and pays for itself , what exactly is the problem ? Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will it fail just like municipal electric, water, sewer, and telephone?At some point I thought all of these private corporations suing the government because they can't compete with the government for efficiency would cause some light bulbs to go off.
As long as it's implemented and controlled at the county level, doesn't prohibit the existence of private offerings, and pays for itself, what exactly is the problem?Do you really want to choose the tyranny of Comcast or AT&amp;T over that of a local city or county meeting?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429467
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28437915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28431065
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429391
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28434983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28438285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28437087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28433397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429491
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28441637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28446149
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28436953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28431233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429791
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429301
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430039
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28441449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28479325
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428373
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28436981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429301
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428373
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28431519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429647
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429185
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28438175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28432247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28436915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28439517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28432111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429975
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_22_2019252_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28440791
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28432247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_22_2019252.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428995
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_22_2019252.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429301
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429791
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28436981
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_22_2019252.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428259
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428373
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28479325
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429499
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428307
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28431519
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429391
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428493
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429975
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429047
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429491
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28441637
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429709
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28446149
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28437087
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28432111
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28439517
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28433397
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429185
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28441449
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429647
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430177
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28436915
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28432247
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28440791
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28438175
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_22_2019252.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430361
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_22_2019252.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28428787
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28434983
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_22_2019252.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430081
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_22_2019252.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28438285
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429763
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430039
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28431233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429319
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28429467
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_22_2019252.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28431065
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28437915
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_22_2019252.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28430777
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_22_2019252.28436953
</commentlist>
</conversation>
