<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_14_0042226</id>
	<title>Explaining Corporate Culture Through "The Office"</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1255544820000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Writing in the ribbonfarm.com blog, Venkatesh Rao uses <em>The Office</em> to explain and illustrate a theory of management he calls <a href="http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-the-office-according-to-the-office/">the Gervais Principle</a> (after the TV series's creator). Taking off from Hugh MacLeod's cartoon laying out a corporate hierarchy in layers of <a href="http://gapingvoid.com/2004/06/27/company-hierarchy/">Sociopaths, the Clueless, and Losers</a>, Rao riffs on and updates the Peter Principle, in these terms: <i>"Sociopaths, in their own best interests, knowingly promote over-performing losers into [clueless] middle-management, groom under-performing losers into sociopaths, and leave the average bare-minimum-effort losers to fend for themselves."</i> Don't know about you, but this analysis suddenly makes sense of much that mystified me in my sojourn in corporate America.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Writing in the ribbonfarm.com blog , Venkatesh Rao uses The Office to explain and illustrate a theory of management he calls the Gervais Principle ( after the TV series 's creator ) .
Taking off from Hugh MacLeod 's cartoon laying out a corporate hierarchy in layers of Sociopaths , the Clueless , and Losers , Rao riffs on and updates the Peter Principle , in these terms : " Sociopaths , in their own best interests , knowingly promote over-performing losers into [ clueless ] middle-management , groom under-performing losers into sociopaths , and leave the average bare-minimum-effort losers to fend for themselves .
" Do n't know about you , but this analysis suddenly makes sense of much that mystified me in my sojourn in corporate America .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Writing in the ribbonfarm.com blog, Venkatesh Rao uses The Office to explain and illustrate a theory of management he calls the Gervais Principle (after the TV series's creator).
Taking off from Hugh MacLeod's cartoon laying out a corporate hierarchy in layers of Sociopaths, the Clueless, and Losers, Rao riffs on and updates the Peter Principle, in these terms: "Sociopaths, in their own best interests, knowingly promote over-performing losers into [clueless] middle-management, groom under-performing losers into sociopaths, and leave the average bare-minimum-effort losers to fend for themselves.
" Don't know about you, but this analysis suddenly makes sense of much that mystified me in my sojourn in corporate America.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741717</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255550640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cheer up. It could be worse!</p><p>For example your name could have been Michael Bolton, and/or one of your co-workers might make a "jump to conclusions" board game after he botches his suicide.</p><p>And don't get me started on the TPS reports.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cheer up .
It could be worse ! For example your name could have been Michael Bolton , and/or one of your co-workers might make a " jump to conclusions " board game after he botches his suicide.And do n't get me started on the TPS reports .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cheer up.
It could be worse!For example your name could have been Michael Bolton, and/or one of your co-workers might make a "jump to conclusions" board game after he botches his suicide.And don't get me started on the TPS reports.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29746785</id>
	<title>Re:The effect is the opposite of apparent intensio</title>
	<author>pgn674</author>
	<datestamp>1255543800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>, and while they think they are part of a large group ridiculing management and the corporate culture, the end effect of this effort is not change or revolution, but, au contraire, submission, acceptance and cooperation.</p></div><p>I don't think this article was written to try and induce change at all. I think the intent of the author was to explain the way things are, and I don't think he thinks he's part of a ridiculing group. It is true, though, that by explaining the way things are, he is probably helping lubricate the workforce, which may be a by-product and not an intent of his post.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>, and while they think they are part of a large group ridiculing management and the corporate culture , the end effect of this effort is not change or revolution , but , au contraire , submission , acceptance and cooperation.I do n't think this article was written to try and induce change at all .
I think the intent of the author was to explain the way things are , and I do n't think he thinks he 's part of a ridiculing group .
It is true , though , that by explaining the way things are , he is probably helping lubricate the workforce , which may be a by-product and not an intent of his post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>, and while they think they are part of a large group ridiculing management and the corporate culture, the end effect of this effort is not change or revolution, but, au contraire, submission, acceptance and cooperation.I don't think this article was written to try and induce change at all.
I think the intent of the author was to explain the way things are, and I don't think he thinks he's part of a ridiculing group.
It is true, though, that by explaining the way things are, he is probably helping lubricate the workforce, which may be a by-product and not an intent of his post.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741907</id>
	<title>I've gone to the Dark Side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255553460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>...and become a manager. It's hard work with lots of moving parts that need to keep spinning and lots of things that need to be done by this or that timeline. My team members respect me and do as I ask because I'm not full of shit.<br> <br>

But when I reflect on managers that I've had, a significant number have been seriously mentally ill. I refused to work for one recently when I realised he was paranoid schizophrenic (and I know what I'm talking about on that one).<br> <br>

Those managers appear to have been chosen because of their mental illness which makes them unable to empathize with their underlings and spend most of their time in controlfreakery or worse to keep the people below off balance and never know whats going on.<br> <br>

Not too many sociopaths but plenty of managers with schizophrenic spectrum type disorders.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and become a manager .
It 's hard work with lots of moving parts that need to keep spinning and lots of things that need to be done by this or that timeline .
My team members respect me and do as I ask because I 'm not full of shit .
But when I reflect on managers that I 've had , a significant number have been seriously mentally ill. I refused to work for one recently when I realised he was paranoid schizophrenic ( and I know what I 'm talking about on that one ) .
Those managers appear to have been chosen because of their mental illness which makes them unable to empathize with their underlings and spend most of their time in controlfreakery or worse to keep the people below off balance and never know whats going on .
Not too many sociopaths but plenty of managers with schizophrenic spectrum type disorders .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and become a manager.
It's hard work with lots of moving parts that need to keep spinning and lots of things that need to be done by this or that timeline.
My team members respect me and do as I ask because I'm not full of shit.
But when I reflect on managers that I've had, a significant number have been seriously mentally ill. I refused to work for one recently when I realised he was paranoid schizophrenic (and I know what I'm talking about on that one).
Those managers appear to have been chosen because of their mental illness which makes them unable to empathize with their underlings and spend most of their time in controlfreakery or worse to keep the people below off balance and never know whats going on.
Not too many sociopaths but plenty of managers with schizophrenic spectrum type disorders.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29746499</id>
	<title>From my wife's perspective,</title>
	<author>HungWeiLo</author>
	<datestamp>1255542540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>things like The Office and Office Space are more documentaries than comedies to her.</p><p>She's doomed to worked with a group of drama queens in her line of work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>things like The Office and Office Space are more documentaries than comedies to her.She 's doomed to worked with a group of drama queens in her line of work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>things like The Office and Office Space are more documentaries than comedies to her.She's doomed to worked with a group of drama queens in her line of work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742155</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255513200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You, sir, are either clueless or an authoritarian manipulator yourself. Your definitions are erroneous and not a little bit pompously wrong. A sociopath is not the same as a psychopath. A sociopath is aware of connsequences that affect him, though he may be guiltless and conscienceless in regard to effects of his actions on others. A psychopath on the other hand often does not care about effects on him, he will carry out destructive actions without bothering to worry about the future.<p>
In my career I've run into a more than average number of sociopaths in marketing positions and have come to realize they rise because they lie slickly, are destructive to companies without caring what happens as long as they benefit from their actions and are not personally damaged. I've also seen sociopaths in engineering and non engineering positions, and at the top of companies.</p><p>
And your last sentence is hogwash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You , sir , are either clueless or an authoritarian manipulator yourself .
Your definitions are erroneous and not a little bit pompously wrong .
A sociopath is not the same as a psychopath .
A sociopath is aware of connsequences that affect him , though he may be guiltless and conscienceless in regard to effects of his actions on others .
A psychopath on the other hand often does not care about effects on him , he will carry out destructive actions without bothering to worry about the future .
In my career I 've run into a more than average number of sociopaths in marketing positions and have come to realize they rise because they lie slickly , are destructive to companies without caring what happens as long as they benefit from their actions and are not personally damaged .
I 've also seen sociopaths in engineering and non engineering positions , and at the top of companies .
And your last sentence is hogwash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You, sir, are either clueless or an authoritarian manipulator yourself.
Your definitions are erroneous and not a little bit pompously wrong.
A sociopath is not the same as a psychopath.
A sociopath is aware of connsequences that affect him, though he may be guiltless and conscienceless in regard to effects of his actions on others.
A psychopath on the other hand often does not care about effects on him, he will carry out destructive actions without bothering to worry about the future.
In my career I've run into a more than average number of sociopaths in marketing positions and have come to realize they rise because they lie slickly, are destructive to companies without caring what happens as long as they benefit from their actions and are not personally damaged.
I've also seen sociopaths in engineering and non engineering positions, and at the top of companies.
And your last sentence is hogwash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743777</id>
	<title>Christophe Dejours</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255531020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I read this post I've recalled some texts from Christophe Dejours. He is a french scholar who has some very interesting and deep books about this subject. I suspect he is virtually unknown to american readers. Give him a try.</p><p>http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe\_Dejours</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I read this post I 've recalled some texts from Christophe Dejours .
He is a french scholar who has some very interesting and deep books about this subject .
I suspect he is virtually unknown to american readers .
Give him a try.http : //fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe \ _Dejours</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I read this post I've recalled some texts from Christophe Dejours.
He is a french scholar who has some very interesting and deep books about this subject.
I suspect he is virtually unknown to american readers.
Give him a try.http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe\_Dejours</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29748051</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255549380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never met a manager than wouldn't fit 1, 2, 3 and 7, and most also fit 4 and in privat they all also fit 5 and 6</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never met a manager than would n't fit 1 , 2 , 3 and 7 , and most also fit 4 and in privat they all also fit 5 and 6</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never met a manager than wouldn't fit 1, 2, 3 and 7, and most also fit 4 and in privat they all also fit 5 and 6</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29755229</id>
	<title>It's a documentary stupid!</title>
	<author>von Stalhein</author>
	<datestamp>1255609680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, with this level of incompetence, it's a wonder that any corporation or government entity is able to run anything.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , with this level of incompetence , it 's a wonder that any corporation or government entity is able to run anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, with this level of incompetence, it's a wonder that any corporation or government entity is able to run anything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742227</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255514040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nice post.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice post.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744781</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255535280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have no problem doing what the boss says.   Seriously. As long as my personal life is not affected and they pay me what I ask, then they can very well ask me to mop the floors or serve burgers in the cafeteria (all things I've done). Really,  If they request something that is contrary to another request (i.e., prevents the previous request from being completed) then I let them know in writing:</p><p>"OK, I can work on this. Please be aware that this request will delay Task A by X days. Do you want me to proceed?"</p><p>
&nbsp; I don't care as long as they pay me.  I love technology, but work is work, and I have no need for it to be fulfilling.   I do my work and do it well, but it is after all, just work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no problem doing what the boss says .
Seriously. As long as my personal life is not affected and they pay me what I ask , then they can very well ask me to mop the floors or serve burgers in the cafeteria ( all things I 've done ) .
Really , If they request something that is contrary to another request ( i.e. , prevents the previous request from being completed ) then I let them know in writing : " OK , I can work on this .
Please be aware that this request will delay Task A by X days .
Do you want me to proceed ?
"   I do n't care as long as they pay me .
I love technology , but work is work , and I have no need for it to be fulfilling .
I do my work and do it well , but it is after all , just work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no problem doing what the boss says.
Seriously. As long as my personal life is not affected and they pay me what I ask, then they can very well ask me to mop the floors or serve burgers in the cafeteria (all things I've done).
Really,  If they request something that is contrary to another request (i.e., prevents the previous request from being completed) then I let them know in writing:"OK, I can work on this.
Please be aware that this request will delay Task A by X days.
Do you want me to proceed?
"
  I don't care as long as they pay me.
I love technology, but work is work, and I have no need for it to be fulfilling.
I do my work and do it well, but it is after all, just work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743191</id>
	<title>Yay more labels</title>
	<author>happy\_place</author>
	<datestamp>1255527480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Honestly, what good does labeling folks do? If you want to help matters, identify the behaviors that don't work, but name-calling, while perhaps cathartic to some, doesn't engender any sort of helpful solutions to the problems that management has with communication and leadership. Of course that's probably not the intent. The truth is that most problems in management are equally shared by subordinants (at ALL LEVELS of a hierarchy) because no one knows how to effectively communicate problems without fear of how those problems will affect #1... Often because of ranking systems and fears of negative impacts on performance evaluations folks have nothing to say, and so it just gets passed along. And it turns out that management isn't trivial, especially the further removed one gets from the actual products a company delivers, so that's when they need more frank and open communication, but ironically they get less of it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , what good does labeling folks do ?
If you want to help matters , identify the behaviors that do n't work , but name-calling , while perhaps cathartic to some , does n't engender any sort of helpful solutions to the problems that management has with communication and leadership .
Of course that 's probably not the intent .
The truth is that most problems in management are equally shared by subordinants ( at ALL LEVELS of a hierarchy ) because no one knows how to effectively communicate problems without fear of how those problems will affect # 1... Often because of ranking systems and fears of negative impacts on performance evaluations folks have nothing to say , and so it just gets passed along .
And it turns out that management is n't trivial , especially the further removed one gets from the actual products a company delivers , so that 's when they need more frank and open communication , but ironically they get less of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, what good does labeling folks do?
If you want to help matters, identify the behaviors that don't work, but name-calling, while perhaps cathartic to some, doesn't engender any sort of helpful solutions to the problems that management has with communication and leadership.
Of course that's probably not the intent.
The truth is that most problems in management are equally shared by subordinants (at ALL LEVELS of a hierarchy) because no one knows how to effectively communicate problems without fear of how those problems will affect #1... Often because of ranking systems and fears of negative impacts on performance evaluations folks have nothing to say, and so it just gets passed along.
And it turns out that management isn't trivial, especially the further removed one gets from the actual products a company delivers, so that's when they need more frank and open communication, but ironically they get less of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742339</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255515780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Organisational sociopaths: rarely challenged, often promoted. Why?"<br>http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/2960020302.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Organisational sociopaths : rarely challenged , often promoted .
Why ? " http : //www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet ? Filename = Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/2960020302.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Organisational sociopaths: rarely challenged, often promoted.
Why?"http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/2960020302.html</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741905</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Sobrique</author>
	<datestamp>1255553400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dust off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dust off and nuke the site from orbit .
It 's the only way to be sure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dust off and nuke the site from orbit.
It's the only way to be sure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931</id>
	<title>The effect is the opposite of apparent intensions</title>
	<author>viking80</author>
	<datestamp>1255524540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Series like the Office and books like the Peter Principle makes "the sour pill go down". By that I mean that it gives the average guy a safety vent for frustration and irritation created by random acts of management as well as corporate cruel and unusual operations. It basically lubricates the workforce, and while they think they are part of a large group ridiculing management and the corporate culture, the end effect of this effort is not change or revolution, but, au contraire, submission, acceptance and cooperation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Series like the Office and books like the Peter Principle makes " the sour pill go down " .
By that I mean that it gives the average guy a safety vent for frustration and irritation created by random acts of management as well as corporate cruel and unusual operations .
It basically lubricates the workforce , and while they think they are part of a large group ridiculing management and the corporate culture , the end effect of this effort is not change or revolution , but , au contraire , submission , acceptance and cooperation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Series like the Office and books like the Peter Principle makes "the sour pill go down".
By that I mean that it gives the average guy a safety vent for frustration and irritation created by random acts of management as well as corporate cruel and unusual operations.
It basically lubricates the workforce, and while they think they are part of a large group ridiculing management and the corporate culture, the end effect of this effort is not change or revolution, but, au contraire, submission, acceptance and cooperation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742431</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255517100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well, for one thing, psychopaths are not typically ambitious, target-seeking people; they are generally lacking in purpose and direction and their choices often seem random and trivial.</p></div><p>I'm going to go with the general profile for someone with antisocial personality disorder (which is one of the more common forms of "sociopaths")</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Persistent lying or stealing<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Superficial charm<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Apparent lack of remorse or empathy; inability to care about hurting others<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Impulsivity and/or recklessness<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Poor behavioral controls &mdash; expressions of irritability, annoyance, impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate control of anger and temper<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Narcissism, elevated self-appraisal or a sense of extreme entitlement<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Tendency to violate the boundaries and rights of others<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Aggressive, often violent behavior; prone to getting involved in fights<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Disregard for the safety of self or others</p><p>Seems to me that this would be the PERFECT person that would climb the corporate ladder.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>A sociopath is what used to be called a psychopath in the not so old days</p></div><p>That works both ways. A psychopath ten years ago is called a sociopath today, a sociopath today would be called a psychopath ten years ago. It is not a term that changes the definition of what the person is suffering from. That you have a prejudiced view of "psychopaths" (no doubt fueled by decades of movie-portrayals) does not make it true.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>completely misunderstood what it was all about</p></div><p>Yes, yes you have.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , for one thing , psychopaths are not typically ambitious , target-seeking people ; they are generally lacking in purpose and direction and their choices often seem random and trivial.I 'm going to go with the general profile for someone with antisocial personality disorder ( which is one of the more common forms of " sociopaths " )         * Persistent lying or stealing         * Superficial charm         * Apparent lack of remorse or empathy ; inability to care about hurting others         * Impulsivity and/or recklessness         * Poor behavioral controls    expressions of irritability , annoyance , impatience , threats , aggression , and verbal abuse ; inadequate control of anger and temper         * Narcissism , elevated self-appraisal or a sense of extreme entitlement         * Tendency to violate the boundaries and rights of others         * Aggressive , often violent behavior ; prone to getting involved in fights         * Disregard for the safety of self or othersSeems to me that this would be the PERFECT person that would climb the corporate ladder.A sociopath is what used to be called a psychopath in the not so old daysThat works both ways .
A psychopath ten years ago is called a sociopath today , a sociopath today would be called a psychopath ten years ago .
It is not a term that changes the definition of what the person is suffering from .
That you have a prejudiced view of " psychopaths " ( no doubt fueled by decades of movie-portrayals ) does not make it true.completely misunderstood what it was all aboutYes , yes you have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, for one thing, psychopaths are not typically ambitious, target-seeking people; they are generally lacking in purpose and direction and their choices often seem random and trivial.I'm going to go with the general profile for someone with antisocial personality disorder (which is one of the more common forms of "sociopaths")
        * Persistent lying or stealing
        * Superficial charm
        * Apparent lack of remorse or empathy; inability to care about hurting others
        * Impulsivity and/or recklessness
        * Poor behavioral controls — expressions of irritability, annoyance, impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate control of anger and temper
        * Narcissism, elevated self-appraisal or a sense of extreme entitlement
        * Tendency to violate the boundaries and rights of others
        * Aggressive, often violent behavior; prone to getting involved in fights
        * Disregard for the safety of self or othersSeems to me that this would be the PERFECT person that would climb the corporate ladder.A sociopath is what used to be called a psychopath in the not so old daysThat works both ways.
A psychopath ten years ago is called a sociopath today, a sociopath today would be called a psychopath ten years ago.
It is not a term that changes the definition of what the person is suffering from.
That you have a prejudiced view of "psychopaths" (no doubt fueled by decades of movie-portrayals) does not make it true.completely misunderstood what it was all aboutYes, yes you have.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745701</id>
	<title>It's not that simple.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255539060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To this day I'm convinced that the problem with corporate culture in the West is that people with business majors are running companies. The rationale seems to be if you majored in business, economics, etc that somehow you have a more intimate understanding of business and are better equipped to manage a business. The thing is how many people actually get into this field because they're passionate about it and how many do it simply because they believe it's the easiest way to land a job? I'd wager the vast majority of people are in the latter category. How many of these people chose a business major because there was nothing else they were interested in but felt they had to go to college to land an acceptable job? They probably should have taken a trade but that, apparently, is beneath most people nowadays.</p><p>So you've got these passionless, ignorant (regarding the nature of the business where they work), drones who manage to climb up the corporate ladder by virtue of their degree. The people who actually have the skill and perform the work (engineers, programmers, designers, etc) have more of a tendency to get stuck because they're perceived as most valuable in the position they're currently occupying. And of course, it's human nature to protect yourself once you're in a position of authority. And interesting contrast to this are government workers who rarely have to worry about job security and for that reason could care less about the job they do.</p><p>Needless to say, not everyone is equipped to manage. Everyone says they want to be a manager simply because of the prospect of earning more money but when it comes down to it they're not willing to deal with the stress and responsibilities the job demands. Although, larger companies seem to come up with all kinds of fluff titles in order to give their employees the illusion that they're progressing. But if there were more technical people in high level positions I believe we'd be seeing better American products, less outsourcing and more efficiency. It wouldn't solve everything, because we're still dealing with humans, but it would help.</p><p>I think Asia is a good reflection of this. Engineers and designers routinely are the people running companies. Business majors end up in marketing, sales and accounting, where they belong. So you've got people with more intimate understanding of the nature of their company's business. However, managers in Asia can be brutal in a way Westerners can't imagine and in a way they couldn't even get away with here. They're extremely demanding and can be openly insulting towards their employees. They routinely resort to name-calling. I've had friends who have had papers thrown in their face because their manager was unhappy with something they had done. I've heard of people getting slapped, although that's very rare and nowadays people are more likely to take legal action. But this sort of thing happens everywhere, Japan, South Korea, China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, etc. Although it's likely worse in places like China.</p><p>Certainly, there's a level of elitism there. I have a friend who started his own company a few years ago and is tough on everyone who works with him. I have another friend who stopped working with him because she couldn't stand his tyrannical attitude. He's even rough with his own wife when it comes to work. But I've seen that level of demanding expectations from him even when it comes to service from a waiter in a restaurant or a hotel employee. Whatever problems he may have, I can't deny that he doesn't produce high quality work.</p><p>Americans are pretty bad about having pride in anything. And I've noticed this tendency to blame someone else for their own problems in order to justify their own shortcomings. Experience crap service at a store and what is the excuse the employee will give? They don't earn enough to care or their manager is a jerk. That's not an excuse. But they've all got this entitlement mentality and don't value quality. And with employees like that why should a manager care about anything but t</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To this day I 'm convinced that the problem with corporate culture in the West is that people with business majors are running companies .
The rationale seems to be if you majored in business , economics , etc that somehow you have a more intimate understanding of business and are better equipped to manage a business .
The thing is how many people actually get into this field because they 're passionate about it and how many do it simply because they believe it 's the easiest way to land a job ?
I 'd wager the vast majority of people are in the latter category .
How many of these people chose a business major because there was nothing else they were interested in but felt they had to go to college to land an acceptable job ?
They probably should have taken a trade but that , apparently , is beneath most people nowadays.So you 've got these passionless , ignorant ( regarding the nature of the business where they work ) , drones who manage to climb up the corporate ladder by virtue of their degree .
The people who actually have the skill and perform the work ( engineers , programmers , designers , etc ) have more of a tendency to get stuck because they 're perceived as most valuable in the position they 're currently occupying .
And of course , it 's human nature to protect yourself once you 're in a position of authority .
And interesting contrast to this are government workers who rarely have to worry about job security and for that reason could care less about the job they do.Needless to say , not everyone is equipped to manage .
Everyone says they want to be a manager simply because of the prospect of earning more money but when it comes down to it they 're not willing to deal with the stress and responsibilities the job demands .
Although , larger companies seem to come up with all kinds of fluff titles in order to give their employees the illusion that they 're progressing .
But if there were more technical people in high level positions I believe we 'd be seeing better American products , less outsourcing and more efficiency .
It would n't solve everything , because we 're still dealing with humans , but it would help.I think Asia is a good reflection of this .
Engineers and designers routinely are the people running companies .
Business majors end up in marketing , sales and accounting , where they belong .
So you 've got people with more intimate understanding of the nature of their company 's business .
However , managers in Asia can be brutal in a way Westerners ca n't imagine and in a way they could n't even get away with here .
They 're extremely demanding and can be openly insulting towards their employees .
They routinely resort to name-calling .
I 've had friends who have had papers thrown in their face because their manager was unhappy with something they had done .
I 've heard of people getting slapped , although that 's very rare and nowadays people are more likely to take legal action .
But this sort of thing happens everywhere , Japan , South Korea , China , Taiwan , Hong Kong , etc .
Although it 's likely worse in places like China.Certainly , there 's a level of elitism there .
I have a friend who started his own company a few years ago and is tough on everyone who works with him .
I have another friend who stopped working with him because she could n't stand his tyrannical attitude .
He 's even rough with his own wife when it comes to work .
But I 've seen that level of demanding expectations from him even when it comes to service from a waiter in a restaurant or a hotel employee .
Whatever problems he may have , I ca n't deny that he does n't produce high quality work.Americans are pretty bad about having pride in anything .
And I 've noticed this tendency to blame someone else for their own problems in order to justify their own shortcomings .
Experience crap service at a store and what is the excuse the employee will give ?
They do n't earn enough to care or their manager is a jerk .
That 's not an excuse .
But they 've all got this entitlement mentality and do n't value quality .
And with employees like that why should a manager care about anything but t</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To this day I'm convinced that the problem with corporate culture in the West is that people with business majors are running companies.
The rationale seems to be if you majored in business, economics, etc that somehow you have a more intimate understanding of business and are better equipped to manage a business.
The thing is how many people actually get into this field because they're passionate about it and how many do it simply because they believe it's the easiest way to land a job?
I'd wager the vast majority of people are in the latter category.
How many of these people chose a business major because there was nothing else they were interested in but felt they had to go to college to land an acceptable job?
They probably should have taken a trade but that, apparently, is beneath most people nowadays.So you've got these passionless, ignorant (regarding the nature of the business where they work), drones who manage to climb up the corporate ladder by virtue of their degree.
The people who actually have the skill and perform the work (engineers, programmers, designers, etc) have more of a tendency to get stuck because they're perceived as most valuable in the position they're currently occupying.
And of course, it's human nature to protect yourself once you're in a position of authority.
And interesting contrast to this are government workers who rarely have to worry about job security and for that reason could care less about the job they do.Needless to say, not everyone is equipped to manage.
Everyone says they want to be a manager simply because of the prospect of earning more money but when it comes down to it they're not willing to deal with the stress and responsibilities the job demands.
Although, larger companies seem to come up with all kinds of fluff titles in order to give their employees the illusion that they're progressing.
But if there were more technical people in high level positions I believe we'd be seeing better American products, less outsourcing and more efficiency.
It wouldn't solve everything, because we're still dealing with humans, but it would help.I think Asia is a good reflection of this.
Engineers and designers routinely are the people running companies.
Business majors end up in marketing, sales and accounting, where they belong.
So you've got people with more intimate understanding of the nature of their company's business.
However, managers in Asia can be brutal in a way Westerners can't imagine and in a way they couldn't even get away with here.
They're extremely demanding and can be openly insulting towards their employees.
They routinely resort to name-calling.
I've had friends who have had papers thrown in their face because their manager was unhappy with something they had done.
I've heard of people getting slapped, although that's very rare and nowadays people are more likely to take legal action.
But this sort of thing happens everywhere, Japan, South Korea, China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, etc.
Although it's likely worse in places like China.Certainly, there's a level of elitism there.
I have a friend who started his own company a few years ago and is tough on everyone who works with him.
I have another friend who stopped working with him because she couldn't stand his tyrannical attitude.
He's even rough with his own wife when it comes to work.
But I've seen that level of demanding expectations from him even when it comes to service from a waiter in a restaurant or a hotel employee.
Whatever problems he may have, I can't deny that he doesn't produce high quality work.Americans are pretty bad about having pride in anything.
And I've noticed this tendency to blame someone else for their own problems in order to justify their own shortcomings.
Experience crap service at a store and what is the excuse the employee will give?
They don't earn enough to care or their manager is a jerk.
That's not an excuse.
But they've all got this entitlement mentality and don't value quality.
And with employees like that why should a manager care about anything but t</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745381</id>
	<title>Re:The effect is the opposite of apparent intensio</title>
	<author>Omnifarious</author>
	<datestamp>1255537800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I sort of agree and sort of don't.  If people try to change the situation radically without having a good handle on the problem I think that the situation is just likely to repeat itself with different people on top, like Animal Farm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I sort of agree and sort of do n't .
If people try to change the situation radically without having a good handle on the problem I think that the situation is just likely to repeat itself with different people on top , like Animal Farm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sort of agree and sort of don't.
If people try to change the situation radically without having a good handle on the problem I think that the situation is just likely to repeat itself with different people on top, like Animal Farm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741693</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255463880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The result is that middle management is crammed with hyper reactive former engineers who jump from task to task on a seconds notice and literally cringe when the phone rings.</p></div><p>Wow! My work is the same way!  How do you think we should fix it?!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The result is that middle management is crammed with hyper reactive former engineers who jump from task to task on a seconds notice and literally cringe when the phone rings.Wow !
My work is the same way !
How do you think we should fix it ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The result is that middle management is crammed with hyper reactive former engineers who jump from task to task on a seconds notice and literally cringe when the phone rings.Wow!
My work is the same way!
How do you think we should fix it?
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1255553160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Firstly: I think this model, with 'sociopaths' on top and derogatory names all around, is a load of nonsense, really. A sociopath is what used to be called a psychopath in the not so old days; but since it turned out that the general public, helped by the entertainment industry, completely misunderstood what it was all about, the term 'sociopath' was coined instead. Now, of course, people use the term to try to sound as if they have a clue, which, alas, they still haven't - the author of the OP included.</p><p>So what is wrong with this description? Well, for one thing, psychopaths are not typically ambitious, target-seeking people; they are generally lacking in purpose and direction and their choices often seem random and trivial. They can land a top job only to throw it away a week later; they can steal an expensive item and almost give away on a whim to somebody in the pub - they seem to feel little in the way of regrets, remorse or empathy. This seems to be at the root of why psychopaths are unreliable and sometimes become serial killers - but it also makes it highly unlikely that they will be found at the top of any pyramid; IMO the most likely personality disorder to be found there is the one called narcissistic personality disorder, but that is only a layman's opinion.</p><p>The other problem I have with this sweeping description of companies is, that you are either 'sociopath', 'clueless' or 'loser'. While there are certainly some of those around in most companies, I don't think you see many successful businesses around if that was all there was to it; my personal experience from about 25 years as programmer and UNIX system manager is that most employees are 1) competent in their area, 2) want to do as good a job as they can, and 3) are not afraid of telling their managers that they disagree.</p><p>The real problem in many companies is, that there is an overweight of top-level managers with a background in sales or finances - too many MBAs and too few people with a genuine, technical background. This leads too often to a lack of appreciation of the very essential group of employees that go under the term 'engineers', and far too much focus on superficial sales-targets, that are often not realistic. And because the top-leaders don't understand why their targets are never met, they end up being timid and frustrated, which is then channeled into a climate of bullying and vengefulness.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firstly : I think this model , with 'sociopaths ' on top and derogatory names all around , is a load of nonsense , really .
A sociopath is what used to be called a psychopath in the not so old days ; but since it turned out that the general public , helped by the entertainment industry , completely misunderstood what it was all about , the term 'sociopath ' was coined instead .
Now , of course , people use the term to try to sound as if they have a clue , which , alas , they still have n't - the author of the OP included.So what is wrong with this description ?
Well , for one thing , psychopaths are not typically ambitious , target-seeking people ; they are generally lacking in purpose and direction and their choices often seem random and trivial .
They can land a top job only to throw it away a week later ; they can steal an expensive item and almost give away on a whim to somebody in the pub - they seem to feel little in the way of regrets , remorse or empathy .
This seems to be at the root of why psychopaths are unreliable and sometimes become serial killers - but it also makes it highly unlikely that they will be found at the top of any pyramid ; IMO the most likely personality disorder to be found there is the one called narcissistic personality disorder , but that is only a layman 's opinion.The other problem I have with this sweeping description of companies is , that you are either 'sociopath ' , 'clueless ' or 'loser' .
While there are certainly some of those around in most companies , I do n't think you see many successful businesses around if that was all there was to it ; my personal experience from about 25 years as programmer and UNIX system manager is that most employees are 1 ) competent in their area , 2 ) want to do as good a job as they can , and 3 ) are not afraid of telling their managers that they disagree.The real problem in many companies is , that there is an overweight of top-level managers with a background in sales or finances - too many MBAs and too few people with a genuine , technical background .
This leads too often to a lack of appreciation of the very essential group of employees that go under the term 'engineers ' , and far too much focus on superficial sales-targets , that are often not realistic .
And because the top-leaders do n't understand why their targets are never met , they end up being timid and frustrated , which is then channeled into a climate of bullying and vengefulness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firstly: I think this model, with 'sociopaths' on top and derogatory names all around, is a load of nonsense, really.
A sociopath is what used to be called a psychopath in the not so old days; but since it turned out that the general public, helped by the entertainment industry, completely misunderstood what it was all about, the term 'sociopath' was coined instead.
Now, of course, people use the term to try to sound as if they have a clue, which, alas, they still haven't - the author of the OP included.So what is wrong with this description?
Well, for one thing, psychopaths are not typically ambitious, target-seeking people; they are generally lacking in purpose and direction and their choices often seem random and trivial.
They can land a top job only to throw it away a week later; they can steal an expensive item and almost give away on a whim to somebody in the pub - they seem to feel little in the way of regrets, remorse or empathy.
This seems to be at the root of why psychopaths are unreliable and sometimes become serial killers - but it also makes it highly unlikely that they will be found at the top of any pyramid; IMO the most likely personality disorder to be found there is the one called narcissistic personality disorder, but that is only a layman's opinion.The other problem I have with this sweeping description of companies is, that you are either 'sociopath', 'clueless' or 'loser'.
While there are certainly some of those around in most companies, I don't think you see many successful businesses around if that was all there was to it; my personal experience from about 25 years as programmer and UNIX system manager is that most employees are 1) competent in their area, 2) want to do as good a job as they can, and 3) are not afraid of telling their managers that they disagree.The real problem in many companies is, that there is an overweight of top-level managers with a background in sales or finances - too many MBAs and too few people with a genuine, technical background.
This leads too often to a lack of appreciation of the very essential group of employees that go under the term 'engineers', and far too much focus on superficial sales-targets, that are often not realistic.
And because the top-leaders don't understand why their targets are never met, they end up being timid and frustrated, which is then channeled into a climate of bullying and vengefulness.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743087</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Nidi62</author>
	<datestamp>1255526280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>DSM-IV:
Diagnosis of anti-social personality disorder requires 3 or more of the following(after age 15):
1. failure to conform to social norms with respect towards lawful behaviors
2. deceitfulness, as indicated by repeat lying or conning others for personal pleasure/profit
3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead
4. irritability or aggressiveness
5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others
6. constant irresponsibility(failure to honor financial obligations)
7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another</htmltext>
<tokenext>DSM-IV : Diagnosis of anti-social personality disorder requires 3 or more of the following ( after age 15 ) : 1. failure to conform to social norms with respect towards lawful behaviors 2. deceitfulness , as indicated by repeat lying or conning others for personal pleasure/profit 3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead 4. irritability or aggressiveness 5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others 6. constant irresponsibility ( failure to honor financial obligations ) 7. lack of remorse , as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt , mistreated , or stolen from another</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DSM-IV:
Diagnosis of anti-social personality disorder requires 3 or more of the following(after age 15):
1. failure to conform to social norms with respect towards lawful behaviors
2. deceitfulness, as indicated by repeat lying or conning others for personal pleasure/profit
3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead
4. irritability or aggressiveness
5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others
6. constant irresponsibility(failure to honor financial obligations)
7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742307</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744733</id>
	<title>Re:The effect is the opposite of apparent intensio</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255535160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>parent is worth modding up. armchair activism should be getting far more attention in this light than it actually is.</p><p>the revolution will not be tweeted.</p><p>the services we enjoy to promote 'anti-' activities will not stick around to assist us when the owners of such systems will not be benefitting from the outcome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>parent is worth modding up .
armchair activism should be getting far more attention in this light than it actually is.the revolution will not be tweeted.the services we enjoy to promote 'anti- ' activities will not stick around to assist us when the owners of such systems will not be benefitting from the outcome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>parent is worth modding up.
armchair activism should be getting far more attention in this light than it actually is.the revolution will not be tweeted.the services we enjoy to promote 'anti-' activities will not stick around to assist us when the owners of such systems will not be benefitting from the outcome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</id>
	<title>Yes men</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1255462860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where I work a sure fire way to get promoted is to do <b>exactly</b> what your boss says, no matter how stupid or badly thought out. The boss is alwaye right.</p><p>The result is that middle management is crammed with hyper reactive former engineers who jump from task to task on a seconds notice and literally cringe when the phone rings.</p><p>The final result is that out product line is a mess of modules built with incompatible tool chains, and our actual code is a mess of short term hacks.</p><p>Fuck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where I work a sure fire way to get promoted is to do exactly what your boss says , no matter how stupid or badly thought out .
The boss is alwaye right.The result is that middle management is crammed with hyper reactive former engineers who jump from task to task on a seconds notice and literally cringe when the phone rings.The final result is that out product line is a mess of modules built with incompatible tool chains , and our actual code is a mess of short term hacks.Fuck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where I work a sure fire way to get promoted is to do exactly what your boss says, no matter how stupid or badly thought out.
The boss is alwaye right.The result is that middle management is crammed with hyper reactive former engineers who jump from task to task on a seconds notice and literally cringe when the phone rings.The final result is that out product line is a mess of modules built with incompatible tool chains, and our actual code is a mess of short term hacks.Fuck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742011</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255511760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh so you work for Cenitex too do you?<br><a href="http://www.cenitex.vic.gov.au/" title="vic.gov.au" rel="nofollow">http://www.cenitex.vic.gov.au/</a> [vic.gov.au]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh so you work for Cenitex too do you ? http : //www.cenitex.vic.gov.au/ [ vic.gov.au ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh so you work for Cenitex too do you?http://www.cenitex.vic.gov.au/ [vic.gov.au]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741725</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>cjfs</author>
	<datestamp>1255550820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Wow! My work is the same way!  How do you think we should fix it?!</p></div><p>Short the stock, then you're guaranteed to win!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow !
My work is the same way !
How do you think we should fix it ?
! Short the stock , then you 're guaranteed to win !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow!
My work is the same way!
How do you think we should fix it?
!Short the stock, then you're guaranteed to win!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743169</id>
	<title>Wow just wow.</title>
	<author>definate</author>
	<datestamp>1255527300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, I was ready to write this off as retarded, but it has an absurd amount of merit and I am thoroughly impressed.</p><p>I definitely see a lot of this happening in the work place, and it makes a lot of fucking sense. This definitely requires more research and thought, I know it will take a while for these ideas to sink in, before I have a better grasp of it. I am not sure yet exactly how this understanding can be exploited, as it seems to be more of a free market (or as it says Darwainism) approach to the organizational environment. I would be interested to see an analysis using this framework on how organizations with aggressive cultures with high burn out rates, are instinctively using this principle to cut out the clueless and possibly the over performing losers. Not that I am abdicating that such aggressive cultures are right for all organizations.</p><p>Under this classification, I'd be an under performing loser cum sociopath.</p><p>My background:<br>Dip. Programming<br>BEcon &amp; BFin<br>MBA<br>CFA</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , I was ready to write this off as retarded , but it has an absurd amount of merit and I am thoroughly impressed.I definitely see a lot of this happening in the work place , and it makes a lot of fucking sense .
This definitely requires more research and thought , I know it will take a while for these ideas to sink in , before I have a better grasp of it .
I am not sure yet exactly how this understanding can be exploited , as it seems to be more of a free market ( or as it says Darwainism ) approach to the organizational environment .
I would be interested to see an analysis using this framework on how organizations with aggressive cultures with high burn out rates , are instinctively using this principle to cut out the clueless and possibly the over performing losers .
Not that I am abdicating that such aggressive cultures are right for all organizations.Under this classification , I 'd be an under performing loser cum sociopath.My background : Dip .
ProgrammingBEcon &amp; BFinMBACFA</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, I was ready to write this off as retarded, but it has an absurd amount of merit and I am thoroughly impressed.I definitely see a lot of this happening in the work place, and it makes a lot of fucking sense.
This definitely requires more research and thought, I know it will take a while for these ideas to sink in, before I have a better grasp of it.
I am not sure yet exactly how this understanding can be exploited, as it seems to be more of a free market (or as it says Darwainism) approach to the organizational environment.
I would be interested to see an analysis using this framework on how organizations with aggressive cultures with high burn out rates, are instinctively using this principle to cut out the clueless and possibly the over performing losers.
Not that I am abdicating that such aggressive cultures are right for all organizations.Under this classification, I'd be an under performing loser cum sociopath.My background:Dip.
ProgrammingBEcon &amp; BFinMBACFA</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744193</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255532940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just plain don't think Hollywood humor is even funny anymore.  Office management has become litigation fearing, survivalist driven white men who maintain glass ceilings for everyone else.  It's dog pack mentality.</p><p>Now don't get me wrong.  I fit that description but I refuse to purge myself of a moral compass.  If you look at English shows like "The IT Crowd", they sit on the fence by making management and IT look silly.  Big deal!  If I were to ask those people if they thought "Amos and Andy" is funny today, they'd say no.  OK then!  Connect the dots!</p><p>They're class A jerks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just plain do n't think Hollywood humor is even funny anymore .
Office management has become litigation fearing , survivalist driven white men who maintain glass ceilings for everyone else .
It 's dog pack mentality.Now do n't get me wrong .
I fit that description but I refuse to purge myself of a moral compass .
If you look at English shows like " The IT Crowd " , they sit on the fence by making management and IT look silly .
Big deal !
If I were to ask those people if they thought " Amos and Andy " is funny today , they 'd say no .
OK then !
Connect the dots ! They 're class A jerks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just plain don't think Hollywood humor is even funny anymore.
Office management has become litigation fearing, survivalist driven white men who maintain glass ceilings for everyone else.
It's dog pack mentality.Now don't get me wrong.
I fit that description but I refuse to purge myself of a moral compass.
If you look at English shows like "The IT Crowd", they sit on the fence by making management and IT look silly.
Big deal!
If I were to ask those people if they thought "Amos and Andy" is funny today, they'd say no.
OK then!
Connect the dots!They're class A jerks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743515</id>
	<title>Losers and schoolkids</title>
	<author>microTodd</author>
	<datestamp>1255529640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a really, really good blog post.  Really made me think.</p><p>To understand the essay, you have to separate yourself from the culture stigma of the word "loser" to grok that he is not talking about "living-in-your-parents-basement" losers, he is talking about a defined category of person who is in a position where they are being taken advantage of by the company, and know it.  Basically, any worker in America.</p><p>Here's where it gets interesting.  Venkat talks about enlightened losers becoming slackers.  I immediately thought of the anecdote about underperforming elementary school kids.  Are they underperforming because they are not that bright?  Or is it because they are not being challenged enough, are bored, and need to be promoted to the gifted class?  This all ties back to the management lesson of challenging your people.</p><p>Here is where Venkat, I think, makes one error.  He bases the categorization of slacker losers upon the fact that they are not being paid well enough for their talent.  But not all workers look at their paycheck as their only form of payment.  Many people here on slashdot would perhaps be happy with a smaller paycheck if it was an awesome working environment where they could be challenged every day to do cool, neat things and write lots of code.</p><p>In any case, great reading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a really , really good blog post .
Really made me think.To understand the essay , you have to separate yourself from the culture stigma of the word " loser " to grok that he is not talking about " living-in-your-parents-basement " losers , he is talking about a defined category of person who is in a position where they are being taken advantage of by the company , and know it .
Basically , any worker in America.Here 's where it gets interesting .
Venkat talks about enlightened losers becoming slackers .
I immediately thought of the anecdote about underperforming elementary school kids .
Are they underperforming because they are not that bright ?
Or is it because they are not being challenged enough , are bored , and need to be promoted to the gifted class ?
This all ties back to the management lesson of challenging your people.Here is where Venkat , I think , makes one error .
He bases the categorization of slacker losers upon the fact that they are not being paid well enough for their talent .
But not all workers look at their paycheck as their only form of payment .
Many people here on slashdot would perhaps be happy with a smaller paycheck if it was an awesome working environment where they could be challenged every day to do cool , neat things and write lots of code.In any case , great reading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a really, really good blog post.
Really made me think.To understand the essay, you have to separate yourself from the culture stigma of the word "loser" to grok that he is not talking about "living-in-your-parents-basement" losers, he is talking about a defined category of person who is in a position where they are being taken advantage of by the company, and know it.
Basically, any worker in America.Here's where it gets interesting.
Venkat talks about enlightened losers becoming slackers.
I immediately thought of the anecdote about underperforming elementary school kids.
Are they underperforming because they are not that bright?
Or is it because they are not being challenged enough, are bored, and need to be promoted to the gifted class?
This all ties back to the management lesson of challenging your people.Here is where Venkat, I think, makes one error.
He bases the categorization of slacker losers upon the fact that they are not being paid well enough for their talent.
But not all workers look at their paycheck as their only form of payment.
Many people here on slashdot would perhaps be happy with a smaller paycheck if it was an awesome working environment where they could be challenged every day to do cool, neat things and write lots of code.In any case, great reading.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743785</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1255531020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>From the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology, the premier psychological dictionary of Britain</p></div><p>Since you quote a British work as well as the American checklist, I think you ought to be aware that the terms are used in slightly different ways in The US as compared to Europe.</p><p>However, before you dismiss a layman's views, perhaps you would benefit from reading at least some of the works of Robert Hare (who devised the checklist) and Hervey Cleckley; they give a number of interesting case studies of what can be considered typical behaviour for psychopaths.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Perhaps you have heard the saying "'tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt"?</p></div><p>Certainly; I have never heard it put better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology , the premier psychological dictionary of BritainSince you quote a British work as well as the American checklist , I think you ought to be aware that the terms are used in slightly different ways in The US as compared to Europe.However , before you dismiss a layman 's views , perhaps you would benefit from reading at least some of the works of Robert Hare ( who devised the checklist ) and Hervey Cleckley ; they give a number of interesting case studies of what can be considered typical behaviour for psychopaths.Perhaps you have heard the saying " 't is better to be silent and be thought a fool , than to speak and remove all doubt " ? Certainly ; I have never heard it put better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology, the premier psychological dictionary of BritainSince you quote a British work as well as the American checklist, I think you ought to be aware that the terms are used in slightly different ways in The US as compared to Europe.However, before you dismiss a layman's views, perhaps you would benefit from reading at least some of the works of Robert Hare (who devised the checklist) and Hervey Cleckley; they give a number of interesting case studies of what can be considered typical behaviour for psychopaths.Perhaps you have heard the saying "'tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt"?Certainly; I have never heard it put better.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742307</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29809075</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>jawahar</author>
	<datestamp>1256057100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Programmers think in terms of <i>right</i> or <i>wrong</i> and MBAs think in terms of <i>priorities.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Programmers think in terms of right or wrong and MBAs think in terms of priorities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Programmers think in terms of right or wrong and MBAs think in terms of priorities.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742307</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>DangerFace</author>
	<datestamp>1255515300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology, the premier psychological dictionary of Britain:</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <strong>sociopathy</strong> <em>n.</em> Another name for antisocial personality disorder. <strong>sociopath</strong> <em>n.</em> A person with sociopathy.</p></div><p>And here's the definiton of antisocial personality disorder:</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <strong>antisocial personality disorder</strong> <em>n.</em> A personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others, beginning in childhood or early adolescence and continuing into adulthood, with such signs and symptoms as failure to conform to social norms, manifested by repeated unlawful behaviour; deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying or swindling [confidence trickery] for pleasure or personal gain; impulsivity or failure to plan ahead; irritability and aggressiveness involving frequent assaults or fights; reckless disregard for the safety of self or others; consistent irresponsibilty involving failure to hold down jobs or to honour financial obligations; and lack of remorse for the mistreatment of others, as indicated by indifference or rationalization.</p></div><p>Please note that not all of these indicators need necessarily be present for a diagnosis of sociopathy, but my apologies, I don't have a copy of the DSMIV with me right now. In any case, jandersen is talking out of his arse, and has apparently made up a definition of sociopathy by watching some TV shows.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>... but that is only a layman's opinion.</p></div><p>Yes, jandersen, it is a layman's opinion. Perhaps you have heard the saying "'tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology , the premier psychological dictionary of Britain : sociopathy n. Another name for antisocial personality disorder .
sociopath n. A person with sociopathy.And here 's the definiton of antisocial personality disorder : antisocial personality disorder n. A personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others , beginning in childhood or early adolescence and continuing into adulthood , with such signs and symptoms as failure to conform to social norms , manifested by repeated unlawful behaviour ; deceitfulness , as indicated by repeated lying or swindling [ confidence trickery ] for pleasure or personal gain ; impulsivity or failure to plan ahead ; irritability and aggressiveness involving frequent assaults or fights ; reckless disregard for the safety of self or others ; consistent irresponsibilty involving failure to hold down jobs or to honour financial obligations ; and lack of remorse for the mistreatment of others , as indicated by indifference or rationalization.Please note that not all of these indicators need necessarily be present for a diagnosis of sociopathy , but my apologies , I do n't have a copy of the DSMIV with me right now .
In any case , jandersen is talking out of his arse , and has apparently made up a definition of sociopathy by watching some TV shows.... but that is only a layman 's opinion.Yes , jandersen , it is a layman 's opinion .
Perhaps you have heard the saying " 't is better to be silent and be thought a fool , than to speak and remove all doubt " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology, the premier psychological dictionary of Britain: sociopathy n. Another name for antisocial personality disorder.
sociopath n. A person with sociopathy.And here's the definiton of antisocial personality disorder: antisocial personality disorder n. A personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others, beginning in childhood or early adolescence and continuing into adulthood, with such signs and symptoms as failure to conform to social norms, manifested by repeated unlawful behaviour; deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying or swindling [confidence trickery] for pleasure or personal gain; impulsivity or failure to plan ahead; irritability and aggressiveness involving frequent assaults or fights; reckless disregard for the safety of self or others; consistent irresponsibilty involving failure to hold down jobs or to honour financial obligations; and lack of remorse for the mistreatment of others, as indicated by indifference or rationalization.Please note that not all of these indicators need necessarily be present for a diagnosis of sociopathy, but my apologies, I don't have a copy of the DSMIV with me right now.
In any case, jandersen is talking out of his arse, and has apparently made up a definition of sociopathy by watching some TV shows.... but that is only a layman's opinion.Yes, jandersen, it is a layman's opinion.
Perhaps you have heard the saying "'tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742191</id>
	<title>Re:I've gone to the Dark Side...</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1255513620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I turned my back on a good team leader position a year ago because I had been put under a manager who had something seriously wrong with him. Hard to say what. He <i>could</i> just be a good actor. But I don't want to work for somebody who can live with pissing people off the way he was, so I found a different position in the company.</p><p>This persons defining attribute was that he gave orders from the first hour he was there but clearly know nothing about the area he was managing. Most people learn their limitations in this business. Some apparently don't.</p><p>I don't know how I would recognise a schizophrenic spectrum type disorder. I associate that type of thing with people who overemphasise relationships. A lot of us engineers swing the other away I think. Engage brain before putting mouth into gear, and so on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I turned my back on a good team leader position a year ago because I had been put under a manager who had something seriously wrong with him .
Hard to say what .
He could just be a good actor .
But I do n't want to work for somebody who can live with pissing people off the way he was , so I found a different position in the company.This persons defining attribute was that he gave orders from the first hour he was there but clearly know nothing about the area he was managing .
Most people learn their limitations in this business .
Some apparently do n't.I do n't know how I would recognise a schizophrenic spectrum type disorder .
I associate that type of thing with people who overemphasise relationships .
A lot of us engineers swing the other away I think .
Engage brain before putting mouth into gear , and so on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I turned my back on a good team leader position a year ago because I had been put under a manager who had something seriously wrong with him.
Hard to say what.
He could just be a good actor.
But I don't want to work for somebody who can live with pissing people off the way he was, so I found a different position in the company.This persons defining attribute was that he gave orders from the first hour he was there but clearly know nothing about the area he was managing.
Most people learn their limitations in this business.
Some apparently don't.I don't know how I would recognise a schizophrenic spectrum type disorder.
I associate that type of thing with people who overemphasise relationships.
A lot of us engineers swing the other away I think.
Engage brain before putting mouth into gear, and so on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744231</id>
	<title>Re:The effect is the opposite of apparent intensio</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1255533120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You may be right but there comes a time when even the best controls slip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You may be right but there comes a time when even the best controls slip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You may be right but there comes a time when even the best controls slip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29746375</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Nekomusume</author>
	<datestamp>1255541820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742135</id>
	<title>Re:I've gone to the Dark Side...</title>
	<author>gwappo</author>
	<datestamp>1255512840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My team members respect me and do as I ask because I'm not full of shit.</p> </div><p>
Work up your courage and do an anonymous 360; you'll be surprised. I'm assuming the team you're managing is of a meaningful size (eg. 15-20) the diversity of comments you get back is amazing and educational. People tend to have diverse needs from their superiors but face to face you usually get mostly smiley faces.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My team members respect me and do as I ask because I 'm not full of shit .
Work up your courage and do an anonymous 360 ; you 'll be surprised .
I 'm assuming the team you 're managing is of a meaningful size ( eg .
15-20 ) the diversity of comments you get back is amazing and educational .
People tend to have diverse needs from their superiors but face to face you usually get mostly smiley faces .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My team members respect me and do as I ask because I'm not full of shit.
Work up your courage and do an anonymous 360; you'll be surprised.
I'm assuming the team you're managing is of a meaningful size (eg.
15-20) the diversity of comments you get back is amazing and educational.
People tend to have diverse needs from their superiors but face to face you usually get mostly smiley faces.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745565</id>
	<title>Re:The effect is the opposite of apparent intensio</title>
	<author>Punctuated\_Equilibri</author>
	<datestamp>1255538580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And yet this organization structure outperforms others, like family-dominated and bureaucratic.  Small supportive consensus based organizations may be 'better' in some philosophical sense, but if they are outcompeted by the 'pathological' organization they are not going to make it.
<p>
So you can regret that (metaphorically, I am still talking about organizations),  the bluebird and the butterfly become extinct while the starling, rat and cockroach thrive.  But you are going up against a natural law here.  Saying "somebody should do something about it" doesn't get you anywhere.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And yet this organization structure outperforms others , like family-dominated and bureaucratic .
Small supportive consensus based organizations may be 'better ' in some philosophical sense , but if they are outcompeted by the 'pathological ' organization they are not going to make it .
So you can regret that ( metaphorically , I am still talking about organizations ) , the bluebird and the butterfly become extinct while the starling , rat and cockroach thrive .
But you are going up against a natural law here .
Saying " somebody should do something about it " does n't get you anywhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And yet this organization structure outperforms others, like family-dominated and bureaucratic.
Small supportive consensus based organizations may be 'better' in some philosophical sense, but if they are outcompeted by the 'pathological' organization they are not going to make it.
So you can regret that (metaphorically, I am still talking about organizations),  the bluebird and the butterfly become extinct while the starling, rat and cockroach thrive.
But you are going up against a natural law here.
Saying "somebody should do something about it" doesn't get you anywhere.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29746099</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>GooberToo</author>
	<datestamp>1255540560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds exactly like a job I had... except the jump from task to task happened at least a half dozen times per day... and then I got dinged in review for not staying on task by the very same boss. Then when I informed the boss the reason I was not staying on task, he was shocked and horrified. The constant interruptions then dropped from a half dozen per day to two to three times per day where the new tasks took longer to perform; usually 1/2 - half the day and at his side, helping him with his own, self aggrandizing pet project. The next review the boss was absolutely sure his constant interruptions never happened, despite having been physically with him, and he could not understand where I was spending my time. Yep, got dinged again by the very same idiot. He couldn't understand where I had been spending my time - which was usually at his side...literally at his insistence and always after informing him tasks were suffering because of his insistence.</p><p>Meanwhile the rest of the office became jealous because they believed I was being shown favoritism and excused from the actual work product while having a grand 'ol time. After informing my co-workers of what was going on, I was then openly accused of lying. In reality, I was miserable and frustrated to no end...literally cringing every time my cell or office phone rang. Quiting that job was one of the happiest days of my life.</p><p>Even worse, the higher ups (Directors and CEO/CTO) thought the boss walked on water... I guess they took turns blowing each other...because reality was so far apart from perception.</p><p>Every time I watch the office, I'm always reminded of my experience of having worked with the smartest, incompetent idiots I've ever met in my life. So I can assure you Dilbert and the "Office" is very much alive in Corporate America. In my opinion, they are single handedly ruining American business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds exactly like a job I had... except the jump from task to task happened at least a half dozen times per day... and then I got dinged in review for not staying on task by the very same boss .
Then when I informed the boss the reason I was not staying on task , he was shocked and horrified .
The constant interruptions then dropped from a half dozen per day to two to three times per day where the new tasks took longer to perform ; usually 1/2 - half the day and at his side , helping him with his own , self aggrandizing pet project .
The next review the boss was absolutely sure his constant interruptions never happened , despite having been physically with him , and he could not understand where I was spending my time .
Yep , got dinged again by the very same idiot .
He could n't understand where I had been spending my time - which was usually at his side...literally at his insistence and always after informing him tasks were suffering because of his insistence.Meanwhile the rest of the office became jealous because they believed I was being shown favoritism and excused from the actual work product while having a grand 'ol time .
After informing my co-workers of what was going on , I was then openly accused of lying .
In reality , I was miserable and frustrated to no end...literally cringing every time my cell or office phone rang .
Quiting that job was one of the happiest days of my life.Even worse , the higher ups ( Directors and CEO/CTO ) thought the boss walked on water... I guess they took turns blowing each other...because reality was so far apart from perception.Every time I watch the office , I 'm always reminded of my experience of having worked with the smartest , incompetent idiots I 've ever met in my life .
So I can assure you Dilbert and the " Office " is very much alive in Corporate America .
In my opinion , they are single handedly ruining American business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds exactly like a job I had... except the jump from task to task happened at least a half dozen times per day... and then I got dinged in review for not staying on task by the very same boss.
Then when I informed the boss the reason I was not staying on task, he was shocked and horrified.
The constant interruptions then dropped from a half dozen per day to two to three times per day where the new tasks took longer to perform; usually 1/2 - half the day and at his side, helping him with his own, self aggrandizing pet project.
The next review the boss was absolutely sure his constant interruptions never happened, despite having been physically with him, and he could not understand where I was spending my time.
Yep, got dinged again by the very same idiot.
He couldn't understand where I had been spending my time - which was usually at his side...literally at his insistence and always after informing him tasks were suffering because of his insistence.Meanwhile the rest of the office became jealous because they believed I was being shown favoritism and excused from the actual work product while having a grand 'ol time.
After informing my co-workers of what was going on, I was then openly accused of lying.
In reality, I was miserable and frustrated to no end...literally cringing every time my cell or office phone rang.
Quiting that job was one of the happiest days of my life.Even worse, the higher ups (Directors and CEO/CTO) thought the boss walked on water... I guess they took turns blowing each other...because reality was so far apart from perception.Every time I watch the office, I'm always reminded of my experience of having worked with the smartest, incompetent idiots I've ever met in my life.
So I can assure you Dilbert and the "Office" is very much alive in Corporate America.
In my opinion, they are single handedly ruining American business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745367</id>
	<title>The root of all this...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255537740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the root of all of this bullshit is the selfish desire for more of something than anyone else has, to one-up, to compete, to p0wn, exploit, to have and wield power over others.  </p><p>I seriously think we need to rig society in such a way that selfishness is effectively disadvantaged.  We can start with a money-free economy, that'll remove 95\% of the sociopathy discussed here.  People can go back to doing what they do for love of craft rather than love or need for money.</p><p>Someone here mentioned that no matter what happens in the management levels, the bottom levels keep the company operating and moving forward.  Perhaps we need to remove the management levels in order to improve efficiency.  If a company can operate without managers, and I bet it can, then so can all levels of society and civilization.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the root of all of this bullshit is the selfish desire for more of something than anyone else has , to one-up , to compete , to p0wn , exploit , to have and wield power over others .
I seriously think we need to rig society in such a way that selfishness is effectively disadvantaged .
We can start with a money-free economy , that 'll remove 95 \ % of the sociopathy discussed here .
People can go back to doing what they do for love of craft rather than love or need for money.Someone here mentioned that no matter what happens in the management levels , the bottom levels keep the company operating and moving forward .
Perhaps we need to remove the management levels in order to improve efficiency .
If a company can operate without managers , and I bet it can , then so can all levels of society and civilization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the root of all of this bullshit is the selfish desire for more of something than anyone else has, to one-up, to compete, to p0wn, exploit, to have and wield power over others.
I seriously think we need to rig society in such a way that selfishness is effectively disadvantaged.
We can start with a money-free economy, that'll remove 95\% of the sociopathy discussed here.
People can go back to doing what they do for love of craft rather than love or need for money.Someone here mentioned that no matter what happens in the management levels, the bottom levels keep the company operating and moving forward.
Perhaps we need to remove the management levels in order to improve efficiency.
If a company can operate without managers, and I bet it can, then so can all levels of society and civilization.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744753</id>
	<title>Re:I've gone to the Dark Side...</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1255535220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I realised he was paranoid schizophrenic (and I know what I'm talking about on that one).</i> </p><blockquote><div><p> <a href="http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/schizophrenia/DS00196/DSECTION=symptoms" title="mayoclinic.com">Symptoms</a> [mayoclinic.com]<br>By Mayo Clinic staff</p><p>There are several types of schizophrenia, so signs and symptoms vary. In general, schizophrenia symptoms include:</p><p>Beliefs not based on reality (delusions), such as the belief that there's a conspiracy against you<br>Seeing or hearing things that don't exist (hallucinations), especially voices<br>Incoherent speech<br>Neglect of personal hygiene<br>Lack of emotions<br>Emotions inappropriate to the situation<br>Angry outbursts<br>Catatonic behavior<br>A persistent feeling of being watched<br>Trouble functioning at school and work<br>Social isolation<br>Clumsy, uncoordinated movements</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I realised he was paranoid schizophrenic ( and I know what I 'm talking about on that one ) .
Symptoms [ mayoclinic.com ] By Mayo Clinic staffThere are several types of schizophrenia , so signs and symptoms vary .
In general , schizophrenia symptoms include : Beliefs not based on reality ( delusions ) , such as the belief that there 's a conspiracy against youSeeing or hearing things that do n't exist ( hallucinations ) , especially voicesIncoherent speechNeglect of personal hygieneLack of emotionsEmotions inappropriate to the situationAngry outburstsCatatonic behaviorA persistent feeling of being watchedTrouble functioning at school and workSocial isolationClumsy , uncoordinated movements</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I realised he was paranoid schizophrenic (and I know what I'm talking about on that one).
Symptoms [mayoclinic.com]By Mayo Clinic staffThere are several types of schizophrenia, so signs and symptoms vary.
In general, schizophrenia symptoms include:Beliefs not based on reality (delusions), such as the belief that there's a conspiracy against youSeeing or hearing things that don't exist (hallucinations), especially voicesIncoherent speechNeglect of personal hygieneLack of emotionsEmotions inappropriate to the situationAngry outburstsCatatonic behaviorA persistent feeling of being watchedTrouble functioning at school and workSocial isolationClumsy, uncoordinated movements
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29751231</id>
	<title>Fooled by Randomness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255522020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You sure that this is not just rationalizations? Calling top management all psychopaths seems bitter. There is randomness in the markets, you know. It is entirely possible that they are all randomly promoted and then after that, due to their 17 million dollar pay cheque, we all feel bitter.</p><p>It's sort of like how we make fun of professional athletes for being stupid when they get the girl and they win the tour de france -- it's just jealousy.</p><p>I agree that things are never perfect and the wrong people get promoted, but if they weren't getting paid 17 million dollars a year would they be sociopaths? Or would we have another name for them -- less insulting?</p><p>In terms of discourse, these forms seem very dangerous, totally inaccurate, and an appeal to emotion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You sure that this is not just rationalizations ?
Calling top management all psychopaths seems bitter .
There is randomness in the markets , you know .
It is entirely possible that they are all randomly promoted and then after that , due to their 17 million dollar pay cheque , we all feel bitter.It 's sort of like how we make fun of professional athletes for being stupid when they get the girl and they win the tour de france -- it 's just jealousy.I agree that things are never perfect and the wrong people get promoted , but if they were n't getting paid 17 million dollars a year would they be sociopaths ?
Or would we have another name for them -- less insulting ? In terms of discourse , these forms seem very dangerous , totally inaccurate , and an appeal to emotion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You sure that this is not just rationalizations?
Calling top management all psychopaths seems bitter.
There is randomness in the markets, you know.
It is entirely possible that they are all randomly promoted and then after that, due to their 17 million dollar pay cheque, we all feel bitter.It's sort of like how we make fun of professional athletes for being stupid when they get the girl and they win the tour de france -- it's just jealousy.I agree that things are never perfect and the wrong people get promoted, but if they weren't getting paid 17 million dollars a year would they be sociopaths?
Or would we have another name for them -- less insulting?In terms of discourse, these forms seem very dangerous, totally inaccurate, and an appeal to emotion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743503</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1255529580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess this means the bankers weren't the only ones responsible for the economic meltdown. However, I think the ability to insure against losses was the #1 reason for the meltdown; if I could insura against gambling losses I'd be hitting the riverboat every week.</p><p>Incompetence at all levels and in all industries, it seems. Incompetent engineers ("middle management is crammed with hyper reactive former engineers who jump from task to task on a seconds notice and literally cringe when the phone rings"), incompetent upper management who get millions in bouses for ruining their own companies, and incompetent legislators in all countries who can't or won't legislate against corporate sleaze.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess this means the bankers were n't the only ones responsible for the economic meltdown .
However , I think the ability to insure against losses was the # 1 reason for the meltdown ; if I could insura against gambling losses I 'd be hitting the riverboat every week.Incompetence at all levels and in all industries , it seems .
Incompetent engineers ( " middle management is crammed with hyper reactive former engineers who jump from task to task on a seconds notice and literally cringe when the phone rings " ) , incompetent upper management who get millions in bouses for ruining their own companies , and incompetent legislators in all countries who ca n't or wo n't legislate against corporate sleaze .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess this means the bankers weren't the only ones responsible for the economic meltdown.
However, I think the ability to insure against losses was the #1 reason for the meltdown; if I could insura against gambling losses I'd be hitting the riverboat every week.Incompetence at all levels and in all industries, it seems.
Incompetent engineers ("middle management is crammed with hyper reactive former engineers who jump from task to task on a seconds notice and literally cringe when the phone rings"), incompetent upper management who get millions in bouses for ruining their own companies, and incompetent legislators in all countries who can't or won't legislate against corporate sleaze.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29778155</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>woolio</author>
	<datestamp>1255800480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>The final result is that out product line is a mess of modules built with incompatible tool chains, and our actual code is a mess of short term hacks.</b></p><p>This sounds strikingly familiar...</p><p>Mike, is that you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The final result is that out product line is a mess of modules built with incompatible tool chains , and our actual code is a mess of short term hacks.This sounds strikingly familiar...Mike , is that you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The final result is that out product line is a mess of modules built with incompatible tool chains, and our actual code is a mess of short term hacks.This sounds strikingly familiar...Mike, is that you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29747881</id>
	<title>Re:The root of all this...</title>
	<author>bzipitidoo</author>
	<datestamp>1255548660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Money or power is the root of all evil?  But what things are really evil?  The view of corporate life portrayed in Office Space, Dilbert, and the like is extremely cynical.  Yes of course such behavior is all too common, but perhaps not as prevalent as the cynics think.  Cynics have a tendency to view things through crap covered lenses.  Everyone sees that they are on to something-- Dilbert is undeniably popular-- but it isn't the whole truth.  I think some behavior that is not really bad is too easily seen as bad.  There is a difference between being tactful, and lying, but it's so easy to paint tactfulness as covering up for a favorite.  Then there is bad behavior that wouldn't matter if people didn't make too much of it.  Sure, it shouldn't be allowed, shouldn't be done, but a little bit shouldn't be cause to terminate.  It's a judgment call how much to accept.

</p><p>I used to read Dilbert regularly, but I feared it was poisoning my thinking.  And I suspect everyone's thinking has been poisoned somewhat.  Expectations have a way of being too self-fulfilling, so if everyone expects work to be a cesspit of nasty politicking, with backstabbing, treachery, credit stealing, blame shifting, and gross incompetence and stupidity, then work shifts that direction more than it need have had everyone's thinking not been predisposed.  As an example of something that I think has changed for the better, consider the military.  The gung-ho, tough guy, stiff upper lip, blind obedience attitude has changed somewhat.  Still there, but not so dominant.  Beetle Bailey, a cartoon about unwilling draftees who slack off every chance they can, and whom their superiors did not want to think, seems dated today.  Fewer of these insane Charge of the Light Brigade stunts, less viewing of soldiers as just so much cannon fodder, less reckless disregard for soldier's lives always being dressed up as courage or the military way.  What the leaders finally understood was that they could get more out of their soldiers with more intelligent management, and with volunteers rather than draftees.  They understood that they couldn't order everyone to have what they thought were appropriate attitudes, that sort of thing just doesn't work.  Vietnam was the last of the old way, the conflicts since then have vindicated the changes.  There is similar rethinking with the treatment of farm animals.  Stressed animals do not produce as much, do not grow as quickly.  I have heard at some milking operations, the cows themselves decide when they want to be milked.  Also, "spare the rod, spoil the child" is now mostly a bad legacy.  We know that technique simply doesn't work as well.  We shouldn't be kind because we're pansies or liberals, we should be kind because it works better.  I believe work continues to undergo improvements and will become more enlightened.  Happier workers are more productive workers.

</p><p>Workplaces could not function if things were really as bad as made out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Money or power is the root of all evil ?
But what things are really evil ?
The view of corporate life portrayed in Office Space , Dilbert , and the like is extremely cynical .
Yes of course such behavior is all too common , but perhaps not as prevalent as the cynics think .
Cynics have a tendency to view things through crap covered lenses .
Everyone sees that they are on to something-- Dilbert is undeniably popular-- but it is n't the whole truth .
I think some behavior that is not really bad is too easily seen as bad .
There is a difference between being tactful , and lying , but it 's so easy to paint tactfulness as covering up for a favorite .
Then there is bad behavior that would n't matter if people did n't make too much of it .
Sure , it should n't be allowed , should n't be done , but a little bit should n't be cause to terminate .
It 's a judgment call how much to accept .
I used to read Dilbert regularly , but I feared it was poisoning my thinking .
And I suspect everyone 's thinking has been poisoned somewhat .
Expectations have a way of being too self-fulfilling , so if everyone expects work to be a cesspit of nasty politicking , with backstabbing , treachery , credit stealing , blame shifting , and gross incompetence and stupidity , then work shifts that direction more than it need have had everyone 's thinking not been predisposed .
As an example of something that I think has changed for the better , consider the military .
The gung-ho , tough guy , stiff upper lip , blind obedience attitude has changed somewhat .
Still there , but not so dominant .
Beetle Bailey , a cartoon about unwilling draftees who slack off every chance they can , and whom their superiors did not want to think , seems dated today .
Fewer of these insane Charge of the Light Brigade stunts , less viewing of soldiers as just so much cannon fodder , less reckless disregard for soldier 's lives always being dressed up as courage or the military way .
What the leaders finally understood was that they could get more out of their soldiers with more intelligent management , and with volunteers rather than draftees .
They understood that they could n't order everyone to have what they thought were appropriate attitudes , that sort of thing just does n't work .
Vietnam was the last of the old way , the conflicts since then have vindicated the changes .
There is similar rethinking with the treatment of farm animals .
Stressed animals do not produce as much , do not grow as quickly .
I have heard at some milking operations , the cows themselves decide when they want to be milked .
Also , " spare the rod , spoil the child " is now mostly a bad legacy .
We know that technique simply does n't work as well .
We should n't be kind because we 're pansies or liberals , we should be kind because it works better .
I believe work continues to undergo improvements and will become more enlightened .
Happier workers are more productive workers .
Workplaces could not function if things were really as bad as made out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Money or power is the root of all evil?
But what things are really evil?
The view of corporate life portrayed in Office Space, Dilbert, and the like is extremely cynical.
Yes of course such behavior is all too common, but perhaps not as prevalent as the cynics think.
Cynics have a tendency to view things through crap covered lenses.
Everyone sees that they are on to something-- Dilbert is undeniably popular-- but it isn't the whole truth.
I think some behavior that is not really bad is too easily seen as bad.
There is a difference between being tactful, and lying, but it's so easy to paint tactfulness as covering up for a favorite.
Then there is bad behavior that wouldn't matter if people didn't make too much of it.
Sure, it shouldn't be allowed, shouldn't be done, but a little bit shouldn't be cause to terminate.
It's a judgment call how much to accept.
I used to read Dilbert regularly, but I feared it was poisoning my thinking.
And I suspect everyone's thinking has been poisoned somewhat.
Expectations have a way of being too self-fulfilling, so if everyone expects work to be a cesspit of nasty politicking, with backstabbing, treachery, credit stealing, blame shifting, and gross incompetence and stupidity, then work shifts that direction more than it need have had everyone's thinking not been predisposed.
As an example of something that I think has changed for the better, consider the military.
The gung-ho, tough guy, stiff upper lip, blind obedience attitude has changed somewhat.
Still there, but not so dominant.
Beetle Bailey, a cartoon about unwilling draftees who slack off every chance they can, and whom their superiors did not want to think, seems dated today.
Fewer of these insane Charge of the Light Brigade stunts, less viewing of soldiers as just so much cannon fodder, less reckless disregard for soldier's lives always being dressed up as courage or the military way.
What the leaders finally understood was that they could get more out of their soldiers with more intelligent management, and with volunteers rather than draftees.
They understood that they couldn't order everyone to have what they thought were appropriate attitudes, that sort of thing just doesn't work.
Vietnam was the last of the old way, the conflicts since then have vindicated the changes.
There is similar rethinking with the treatment of farm animals.
Stressed animals do not produce as much, do not grow as quickly.
I have heard at some milking operations, the cows themselves decide when they want to be milked.
Also, "spare the rod, spoil the child" is now mostly a bad legacy.
We know that technique simply doesn't work as well.
We shouldn't be kind because we're pansies or liberals, we should be kind because it works better.
I believe work continues to undergo improvements and will become more enlightened.
Happier workers are more productive workers.
Workplaces could not function if things were really as bad as made out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742297</id>
	<title>You WHAT?!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255515180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You stole the mans nigger?  Who's going to shine his shoes now?  That's just low</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You stole the mans nigger ?
Who 's going to shine his shoes now ?
That 's just low</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You stole the mans nigger?
Who's going to shine his shoes now?
That's just low</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744271</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1255533300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hah.  Where I work, you only need outlive everyone else to get promoted.</p><p>The Office?  I've never watched an entire episode.  All that I was ever able to see are some egotistical brain dead and possibly gay fools posing for a camera.  What do they DO at that office?  Nothing ever gets done, it seems.  I miss the days of Mary Tyler Moore. It was easy to see that THEIR office was a NEWS office.  They occasionally pretended to do news, in among all the silly humour. Having a plot makes it so much easier to follow the plot......</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hah .
Where I work , you only need outlive everyone else to get promoted.The Office ?
I 've never watched an entire episode .
All that I was ever able to see are some egotistical brain dead and possibly gay fools posing for a camera .
What do they DO at that office ?
Nothing ever gets done , it seems .
I miss the days of Mary Tyler Moore .
It was easy to see that THEIR office was a NEWS office .
They occasionally pretended to do news , in among all the silly humour .
Having a plot makes it so much easier to follow the plot..... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hah.
Where I work, you only need outlive everyone else to get promoted.The Office?
I've never watched an entire episode.
All that I was ever able to see are some egotistical brain dead and possibly gay fools posing for a camera.
What do they DO at that office?
Nothing ever gets done, it seems.
I miss the days of Mary Tyler Moore.
It was easy to see that THEIR office was a NEWS office.
They occasionally pretended to do news, in among all the silly humour.
Having a plot makes it so much easier to follow the plot......</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743571</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255530000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, this is part of simply being professional.  If management tells you to do something that you believe is a poor decision, the best you can do is politely tell them your opinion and suggest an alternative. If they don't listen to you, just do what they ask and move on--if you have documented the fact that you suggested an alternative to management and they rejected that's all you need to cover yourself.  They are paying you to do what they tell you to do.  The people who never let go, become armchair managers, and constantly criticize their decisions are the first one to get fired, not because management is arrogant, but because they are not doing their job and are detracting others from doing their job.  It's not about being a "Yes man", it's about the efficiency of the workplace and worrying about doing your own job well and letting others (i.e. the management) do their own job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , this is part of simply being professional .
If management tells you to do something that you believe is a poor decision , the best you can do is politely tell them your opinion and suggest an alternative .
If they do n't listen to you , just do what they ask and move on--if you have documented the fact that you suggested an alternative to management and they rejected that 's all you need to cover yourself .
They are paying you to do what they tell you to do .
The people who never let go , become armchair managers , and constantly criticize their decisions are the first one to get fired , not because management is arrogant , but because they are not doing their job and are detracting others from doing their job .
It 's not about being a " Yes man " , it 's about the efficiency of the workplace and worrying about doing your own job well and letting others ( i.e .
the management ) do their own job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, this is part of simply being professional.
If management tells you to do something that you believe is a poor decision, the best you can do is politely tell them your opinion and suggest an alternative.
If they don't listen to you, just do what they ask and move on--if you have documented the fact that you suggested an alternative to management and they rejected that's all you need to cover yourself.
They are paying you to do what they tell you to do.
The people who never let go, become armchair managers, and constantly criticize their decisions are the first one to get fired, not because management is arrogant, but because they are not doing their job and are detracting others from doing their job.
It's not about being a "Yes man", it's about the efficiency of the workplace and worrying about doing your own job well and letting others (i.e.
the management) do their own job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741619</id>
	<title>Office space</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255462620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That makes better sense for slashdotters.
</p><p>/I believe you have my stapler.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That makes better sense for slashdotters .
/I believe you have my stapler .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That makes better sense for slashdotters.
/I believe you have my stapler.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744751</id>
	<title>Re:Yes men</title>
	<author>Scrameustache</author>
	<datestamp>1255535220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>From the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology, the premier psychological dictionary of Britain:</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <strong>sociopathy</strong> <em>n.</em> Another name for antisocial personality disorder. <strong>sociopath</strong> <em>n.</em> A person with sociopathy.</p></div><p>And here's the definiton of antisocial personality disorder:</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <strong>antisocial personality disorder</strong> <em>n.</em> A personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others, beginning in childhood or early adolescence and continuing into adulthood, with such signs and symptoms as failure to conform to social norms, manifested by repeated unlawful behaviour; deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying or swindling [confidence trickery] for pleasure or personal gain; impulsivity or failure to plan ahead; irritability and aggressiveness involving frequent assaults or fights; reckless disregard for the safety of self or others; consistent irresponsibilty involving failure to hold down jobs or to honour financial obligations; and lack of remorse for the mistreatment of others, as indicated by indifference or rationalization.</p></div><p>Please note that not all of these indicators need necessarily be present for a diagnosis of sociopathy, but my apologies, I don't have a copy of the DSMIV with me right now. </p></div><p>If only you had acces to the internet, and therefore <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial\_personality\_disorder" title="wikipedia.org">wikipedia</a> [wikipedia.org]...</p><p>Diagnostic criteria (DSM-IV-TR)</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; A) There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and the rights of others occurring since the age of 15, as indicated by three (or more) of the following:[1]</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 2. deceitfulness, as indicated by repeatedly lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 4. irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; B) The individual is at least 18 years of age.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; C) There is evidence of Conduct disorder with onset before age 15.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; D) The occurrance of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of schizophrenia or a manic episode.</p><p>[3] Deceit and manipulation are considered essential features of the disorder. Therefore, it is essential in making the diagnosis to collect material from sources other than the individual being diagnosed.<br>[edit] Symptoms</p><p>Characteristics of people with antisocial personality disorder may include:[4]</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Persistent lying or stealing<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Superficial charm[5][6]<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Apparent lack of remorse[5] or empathy; inability to care about hurting others<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Inability to keep jobs or stay in school[5]<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Impulsivity and/or recklessness[5]<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Lack of realistic, long-term goals &mdash; an inability or persistent failure to develop and execute long-term plans and goals<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Inability to make or keep friends, or maintain relationships such as marriage<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Poor behavioral controls &mdash; expressions of irritability, annoyance, impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate control of anger and temper<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Narcissism, elevated self-appraisal or a sense of extreme entitlement<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * A persistent agitated or depressed feeling (dysphoria)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * A history of childhood conduct disorder<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Recurring difficulties with the law<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Tendency to violate the boundaries and rights of others<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Substance abuse<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Aggressive, often violent behavior; prone to getting involved in fights<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Inability to tolerate boredom<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Disregard for the safety of self or others<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Persistent attitude of irresponsibility and disregard for social rules, obligations, and norms<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Difficulties with authority figures [7]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology , the premier psychological dictionary of Britain : sociopathy n. Another name for antisocial personality disorder .
sociopath n. A person with sociopathy.And here 's the definiton of antisocial personality disorder : antisocial personality disorder n. A personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others , beginning in childhood or early adolescence and continuing into adulthood , with such signs and symptoms as failure to conform to social norms , manifested by repeated unlawful behaviour ; deceitfulness , as indicated by repeated lying or swindling [ confidence trickery ] for pleasure or personal gain ; impulsivity or failure to plan ahead ; irritability and aggressiveness involving frequent assaults or fights ; reckless disregard for the safety of self or others ; consistent irresponsibilty involving failure to hold down jobs or to honour financial obligations ; and lack of remorse for the mistreatment of others , as indicated by indifference or rationalization.Please note that not all of these indicators need necessarily be present for a diagnosis of sociopathy , but my apologies , I do n't have a copy of the DSMIV with me right now .
If only you had acces to the internet , and therefore wikipedia [ wikipedia.org ] ...Diagnostic criteria ( DSM-IV-TR )         A ) There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and the rights of others occurring since the age of 15 , as indicated by three ( or more ) of the following : [ 1 ]               1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest ;               2. deceitfulness , as indicated by repeatedly lying , use of aliases , or conning others for personal profit or pleasure ;               3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead ;               4. irritability and aggressiveness , as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults ;               5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others ;               6. consistent irresponsibility , as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations ;               7. lack of remorse , as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt , mistreated , or stolen from another .
        B ) The individual is at least 18 years of age .
        C ) There is evidence of Conduct disorder with onset before age 15 .
        D ) The occurrance of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of schizophrenia or a manic episode .
[ 3 ] Deceit and manipulation are considered essential features of the disorder .
Therefore , it is essential in making the diagnosis to collect material from sources other than the individual being diagnosed .
[ edit ] SymptomsCharacteristics of people with antisocial personality disorder may include : [ 4 ]         * Persistent lying or stealing         * Superficial charm [ 5 ] [ 6 ]         * Apparent lack of remorse [ 5 ] or empathy ; inability to care about hurting others         * Inability to keep jobs or stay in school [ 5 ]         * Impulsivity and/or recklessness [ 5 ]         * Lack of realistic , long-term goals    an inability or persistent failure to develop and execute long-term plans and goals         * Inability to make or keep friends , or maintain relationships such as marriage         * Poor behavioral controls    expressions of irritability , annoyance , impatience , threats , aggression , and verbal abuse ; inadequate control of anger and temper         * Narcissism , elevated self-appraisal or a sense of extreme entitlement         * A persistent agitated or depressed feeling ( dysphoria )         * A history of childhood conduct disorder         * Recurring difficulties with the law         * Tendency to violate the boundaries and rights of others         * Substance abuse         * Aggressive , often violent behavior ; prone to getting involved in fights         * Inability to tolerate boredom         * Disregard for the safety of self or others         * Persistent attitude of irresponsibility and disregard for social rules , obligations , and norms         * Difficulties with authority figures [ 7 ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology, the premier psychological dictionary of Britain: sociopathy n. Another name for antisocial personality disorder.
sociopath n. A person with sociopathy.And here's the definiton of antisocial personality disorder: antisocial personality disorder n. A personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others, beginning in childhood or early adolescence and continuing into adulthood, with such signs and symptoms as failure to conform to social norms, manifested by repeated unlawful behaviour; deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying or swindling [confidence trickery] for pleasure or personal gain; impulsivity or failure to plan ahead; irritability and aggressiveness involving frequent assaults or fights; reckless disregard for the safety of self or others; consistent irresponsibilty involving failure to hold down jobs or to honour financial obligations; and lack of remorse for the mistreatment of others, as indicated by indifference or rationalization.Please note that not all of these indicators need necessarily be present for a diagnosis of sociopathy, but my apologies, I don't have a copy of the DSMIV with me right now.
If only you had acces to the internet, and therefore wikipedia [wikipedia.org]...Diagnostic criteria (DSM-IV-TR)
        A) There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and the rights of others occurring since the age of 15, as indicated by three (or more) of the following:[1]
              1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest;
              2. deceitfulness, as indicated by repeatedly lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure;
              3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead;
              4. irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults;
              5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others;
              6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations;
              7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.
        B) The individual is at least 18 years of age.
        C) There is evidence of Conduct disorder with onset before age 15.
        D) The occurrance of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of schizophrenia or a manic episode.
[3] Deceit and manipulation are considered essential features of the disorder.
Therefore, it is essential in making the diagnosis to collect material from sources other than the individual being diagnosed.
[edit] SymptomsCharacteristics of people with antisocial personality disorder may include:[4]
        * Persistent lying or stealing
        * Superficial charm[5][6]
        * Apparent lack of remorse[5] or empathy; inability to care about hurting others
        * Inability to keep jobs or stay in school[5]
        * Impulsivity and/or recklessness[5]
        * Lack of realistic, long-term goals — an inability or persistent failure to develop and execute long-term plans and goals
        * Inability to make or keep friends, or maintain relationships such as marriage
        * Poor behavioral controls — expressions of irritability, annoyance, impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate control of anger and temper
        * Narcissism, elevated self-appraisal or a sense of extreme entitlement
        * A persistent agitated or depressed feeling (dysphoria)
        * A history of childhood conduct disorder
        * Recurring difficulties with the law
        * Tendency to violate the boundaries and rights of others
        * Substance abuse
        * Aggressive, often violent behavior; prone to getting involved in fights
        * Inability to tolerate boredom
        * Disregard for the safety of self or others
        * Persistent attitude of irresponsibility and disregard for social rules, obligations, and norms
        * Difficulties with authority figures [7]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742307</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29778155
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29746375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29746785
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743785
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741717
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743571
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742155
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29746099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744231
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29809075
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29747881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745367
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742339
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742227
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29748051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741725
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_0042226_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_0042226.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743515
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_0042226.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745367
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29747881
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_0042226.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741693
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741725
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741905
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741907
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742191
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744753
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742135
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743571
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29746099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741887
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742155
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742227
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742307
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743785
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744751
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743087
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29748051
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29809075
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742339
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742431
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744193
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744271
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29746375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29778155
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29743503
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744781
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_0042226.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745701
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_0042226.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742931
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29746785
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744231
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29744733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29745381
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_0042226.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29741619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_0042226.29742297
</commentlist>
</conversation>
