<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_22_0333230</id>
	<title>Google Partners With Twitter For Search</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1256212620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"According to the Google blog, it has partnered up with Twitter to <a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/10/rt-google-tweets-and-updates-and-search.html">bring tweets into its search results</a> in the next few months. While this is exciting news, how the feature is going to present itself is a huge question. Indiblogger presents <a href="http://indiblogger.net/2009/10/twitter-google/">a comprehensive list of how it should be</a>. From the article, the points discussed are: relevance of tweets with the search term, twitter and Google advertising, even a Google-Twitter API."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " According to the Google blog , it has partnered up with Twitter to bring tweets into its search results in the next few months .
While this is exciting news , how the feature is going to present itself is a huge question .
Indiblogger presents a comprehensive list of how it should be .
From the article , the points discussed are : relevance of tweets with the search term , twitter and Google advertising , even a Google-Twitter API .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "According to the Google blog, it has partnered up with Twitter to bring tweets into its search results in the next few months.
While this is exciting news, how the feature is going to present itself is a huge question.
Indiblogger presents a comprehensive list of how it should be.
From the article, the points discussed are: relevance of tweets with the search term, twitter and Google advertising, even a Google-Twitter API.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729</id>
	<title>WTF!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256216580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why the f**k would I want to have mindless twits mixed in with my search results?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why the f * * k would I want to have mindless twits mixed in with my search results ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why the f**k would I want to have mindless twits mixed in with my search results?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834325</id>
	<title>Re:Been covered on TWiG</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1256221020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Twitter results valuable for real-time breaking news?</p><p>I can just see it now.  I hear about a gas main explosion in Portland and do a search to find out more.</p><p>Search for:  "explosion in portland maine"</p><p>Twitter:  100,000,000,000 duplicate results "OMFG did u reedz da n00z? Expl0zorz in P0rtlnd M@1nzorz!"<br>Local news has some relatively detailed breaking news pages.<br>Everyone else has regurgitated Reuters stories:  "Gas main explosion takes out home in some hicktown in middle of frozen hinterlands, no one hurt.  We assume that's because no one lives there"</p><p>I'd be VERY hard-pressed to imagine a circumstance where any original news would emanate from Twitter that would stand a chance of being original and accurate.  I subscribe to several newsfeeds on it, but those are available via the regular newsfeeds that go to Google News as well, so Twitter is a "regurgitation channel" for those newsblurbs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Twitter results valuable for real-time breaking news ? I can just see it now .
I hear about a gas main explosion in Portland and do a search to find out more.Search for : " explosion in portland maine " Twitter : 100,000,000,000 duplicate results " OMFG did u reedz da n00z ?
Expl0zorz in P0rtlnd M @ 1nzorz !
" Local news has some relatively detailed breaking news pages.Everyone else has regurgitated Reuters stories : " Gas main explosion takes out home in some hicktown in middle of frozen hinterlands , no one hurt .
We assume that 's because no one lives there " I 'd be VERY hard-pressed to imagine a circumstance where any original news would emanate from Twitter that would stand a chance of being original and accurate .
I subscribe to several newsfeeds on it , but those are available via the regular newsfeeds that go to Google News as well , so Twitter is a " regurgitation channel " for those newsblurbs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Twitter results valuable for real-time breaking news?I can just see it now.
I hear about a gas main explosion in Portland and do a search to find out more.Search for:  "explosion in portland maine"Twitter:  100,000,000,000 duplicate results "OMFG did u reedz da n00z?
Expl0zorz in P0rtlnd M@1nzorz!
"Local news has some relatively detailed breaking news pages.Everyone else has regurgitated Reuters stories:  "Gas main explosion takes out home in some hicktown in middle of frozen hinterlands, no one hurt.
We assume that's because no one lives there"I'd be VERY hard-pressed to imagine a circumstance where any original news would emanate from Twitter that would stand a chance of being original and accurate.
I subscribe to several newsfeeds on it, but those are available via the regular newsfeeds that go to Google News as well, so Twitter is a "regurgitation channel" for those newsblurbs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833807</id>
	<title>a comprehensive list of how it should be...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256217240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul><li>an easy way to turn it off</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>an easy way to turn it off</tokentext>
<sentencetext>an easy way to turn it off</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833751</id>
	<title>Response to Bing?</title>
	<author>TwistedGreen</author>
	<datestamp>1256216700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>That was fast. Yesterday Bing announced they were going to integrate realtime Twitter and Facebook status updates into search. Competition is good, but Bing will have to find a better strategy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That was fast .
Yesterday Bing announced they were going to integrate realtime Twitter and Facebook status updates into search .
Competition is good , but Bing will have to find a better strategy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was fast.
Yesterday Bing announced they were going to integrate realtime Twitter and Facebook status updates into search.
Competition is good, but Bing will have to find a better strategy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834025</id>
	<title>Re:Please go away</title>
	<author>tonycheese</author>
	<datestamp>1256219040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't really understand why people complain about things like twitter or "everquest". Sure, things like myspace are trashy and annoying, but it's not like anybody is FORCING you to go to these websites. I do not remember ever unintentionally running into a single myspace or twitter page, and that is with copious amounts of Stumbl(eUpon)ing in firefox. Sure, you hear about twitter in the news once in a while or companies set up myspace pages to try to be hip, but does that really affect you? If other people like playing everquest or using myspace, let them use it. It's not hurting anybody.
I (or someone who twitters) could just as easily complain that WoW is sucking away tons and tons of time and energy from all sorts of people that could be spent bettering society. Why don't more people whine about WoW?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't really understand why people complain about things like twitter or " everquest " .
Sure , things like myspace are trashy and annoying , but it 's not like anybody is FORCING you to go to these websites .
I do not remember ever unintentionally running into a single myspace or twitter page , and that is with copious amounts of Stumbl ( eUpon ) ing in firefox .
Sure , you hear about twitter in the news once in a while or companies set up myspace pages to try to be hip , but does that really affect you ?
If other people like playing everquest or using myspace , let them use it .
It 's not hurting anybody .
I ( or someone who twitters ) could just as easily complain that WoW is sucking away tons and tons of time and energy from all sorts of people that could be spent bettering society .
Why do n't more people whine about WoW ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't really understand why people complain about things like twitter or "everquest".
Sure, things like myspace are trashy and annoying, but it's not like anybody is FORCING you to go to these websites.
I do not remember ever unintentionally running into a single myspace or twitter page, and that is with copious amounts of Stumbl(eUpon)ing in firefox.
Sure, you hear about twitter in the news once in a while or companies set up myspace pages to try to be hip, but does that really affect you?
If other people like playing everquest or using myspace, let them use it.
It's not hurting anybody.
I (or someone who twitters) could just as easily complain that WoW is sucking away tons and tons of time and energy from all sorts of people that could be spent bettering society.
Why don't more people whine about WoW?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833835</id>
	<title>140 chars - the holder of so much info</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256217480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>Great. I'm sure that with Twitter messages in the search results they'll just become so packed with information. After all, 140chars can hol&lt;eof&gt;</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great .
I 'm sure that with Twitter messages in the search results they 'll just become so packed with information .
After all , 140chars can hol</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great.
I'm sure that with Twitter messages in the search results they'll just become so packed with information.
After all, 140chars can hol</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834239</id>
	<title>Re:This could be beneficial...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256220360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I can see this being immediately useful for news searching, as tweets tend to be an extremely fast source for breaking news in all fields.</p></div><p>Ain't that the truth.  RIP Jeff Goldblum and Kanye West!</p><p>What's that??  Those were rumors widely propagated on Twitter and are totally false??  You mean I can't trust that Random\_McLiar knows what he's talking about and is telling me the truth??  But it's on the Internet... it MUST be true... Heresy I tell ya...!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see this being immediately useful for news searching , as tweets tend to be an extremely fast source for breaking news in all fields.Ai n't that the truth .
RIP Jeff Goldblum and Kanye West ! What 's that ? ?
Those were rumors widely propagated on Twitter and are totally false ? ?
You mean I ca n't trust that Random \ _McLiar knows what he 's talking about and is telling me the truth ? ?
But it 's on the Internet... it MUST be true... Heresy I tell ya... !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see this being immediately useful for news searching, as tweets tend to be an extremely fast source for breaking news in all fields.Ain't that the truth.
RIP Jeff Goldblum and Kanye West!What's that??
Those were rumors widely propagated on Twitter and are totally false??
You mean I can't trust that Random\_McLiar knows what he's talking about and is telling me the truth??
But it's on the Internet... it MUST be true... Heresy I tell ya...!
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833947</id>
	<title>Just adds more noise..</title>
	<author>owlnation</author>
	<datestamp>1256218320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This does not seem to be a good thing. I find that Google already brings up far too much noise in the form of forum posts. All this does is add a whole new level of noise.<br> <br>

I dare say Demi Moore will find this useful, but I do not want this at all. I guess I now have to add a "-twitter" along with the "-ebay -amazon -wikipedia", etc qualifiers in order to actually find something of value.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This does not seem to be a good thing .
I find that Google already brings up far too much noise in the form of forum posts .
All this does is add a whole new level of noise .
I dare say Demi Moore will find this useful , but I do not want this at all .
I guess I now have to add a " -twitter " along with the " -ebay -amazon -wikipedia " , etc qualifiers in order to actually find something of value .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This does not seem to be a good thing.
I find that Google already brings up far too much noise in the form of forum posts.
All this does is add a whole new level of noise.
I dare say Demi Moore will find this useful, but I do not want this at all.
I guess I now have to add a "-twitter" along with the "-ebay -amazon -wikipedia", etc qualifiers in order to actually find something of value.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836819</id>
	<title>One important distinction</title>
	<author>notaprguy</author>
	<datestamp>1256233560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft has already implemented this in Bing (www.bing.com/twitter/) and Google is just announcing...vaporwarwe? That's sort of funny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft has already implemented this in Bing ( www.bing.com/twitter/ ) and Google is just announcing...vaporwarwe ?
That 's sort of funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft has already implemented this in Bing (www.bing.com/twitter/) and Google is just announcing...vaporwarwe?
That's sort of funny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833695</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29842913</id>
	<title>Re:Just adds more noise..</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1256233980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>forum posts arent really noise if youre looking to the answer to a question.  A lot of the info i look for is found in forum posts (ie, "Why does XX in symantec endpoint not work")</htmltext>
<tokenext>forum posts arent really noise if youre looking to the answer to a question .
A lot of the info i look for is found in forum posts ( ie , " Why does XX in symantec endpoint not work " )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>forum posts arent really noise if youre looking to the answer to a question.
A lot of the info i look for is found in forum posts (ie, "Why does XX in symantec endpoint not work")</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834505</id>
	<title>Re:WTF!</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1256222280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really hope it's turned off by default.  It's bad enough getting a hundred blog posts parroting the same press release or news article when you search for something, never mind having a few (hundred)thousand tweets mixed in there too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really hope it 's turned off by default .
It 's bad enough getting a hundred blog posts parroting the same press release or news article when you search for something , never mind having a few ( hundred ) thousand tweets mixed in there too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really hope it's turned off by default.
It's bad enough getting a hundred blog posts parroting the same press release or news article when you search for something, never mind having a few (hundred)thousand tweets mixed in there too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833773</id>
	<title>News</title>
	<author>AniVisual</author>
	<datestamp>1256216940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> This will be good in getting tweet-sized breaking news from Google. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This will be good in getting tweet-sized breaking news from Google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> This will be good in getting tweet-sized breaking news from Google. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834149</id>
	<title>Re:WTF!</title>
	<author>buchner.johannes</author>
	<datestamp>1256219700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if they filter out tweets that don't have retweets, it might be not that bad. Twitter addresses another aspect of the internet: Viral marketing, and near-realtime content</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if they filter out tweets that do n't have retweets , it might be not that bad .
Twitter addresses another aspect of the internet : Viral marketing , and near-realtime content</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if they filter out tweets that don't have retweets, it might be not that bad.
Twitter addresses another aspect of the internet: Viral marketing, and near-realtime content</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834665</id>
	<title>Who needs to search tweeter? To find what?</title>
	<author>ponos</author>
	<datestamp>1256223480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Honestly, given the nature of the site and the kind of communication it promotes, I wonder whether there is any *original* information that can be found in there. I mean, great scientists, philosophers and artists did exchange letters in the past, but even if we're talking about some real geniuses, I don't see how the "tweet" format can ever contain anything more than shit. It's not easy to convey a properly argumented original thought in 160 characters... So, in the end I don't see why anyone would care to search tweeter data at all. Other maybe for the purpose of some obscure IgNobel-worthy research or in the case of stalkers following the hot star of the moment (when exactly did she pee? that is the question...).</p><p>P.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , given the nature of the site and the kind of communication it promotes , I wonder whether there is any * original * information that can be found in there .
I mean , great scientists , philosophers and artists did exchange letters in the past , but even if we 're talking about some real geniuses , I do n't see how the " tweet " format can ever contain anything more than shit .
It 's not easy to convey a properly argumented original thought in 160 characters... So , in the end I do n't see why anyone would care to search tweeter data at all .
Other maybe for the purpose of some obscure IgNobel-worthy research or in the case of stalkers following the hot star of the moment ( when exactly did she pee ?
that is the question... ) .P .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, given the nature of the site and the kind of communication it promotes, I wonder whether there is any *original* information that can be found in there.
I mean, great scientists, philosophers and artists did exchange letters in the past, but even if we're talking about some real geniuses, I don't see how the "tweet" format can ever contain anything more than shit.
It's not easy to convey a properly argumented original thought in 160 characters... So, in the end I don't see why anyone would care to search tweeter data at all.
Other maybe for the purpose of some obscure IgNobel-worthy research or in the case of stalkers following the hot star of the moment (when exactly did she pee?
that is the question...).P.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833717</id>
	<title>Now I am quitting Twitter...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256216460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As I don't want my porn collection to appear on search engines........ Long live privacy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As I do n't want my porn collection to appear on search engines........ Long live privacy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I don't want my porn collection to appear on search engines........ Long live privacy!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834737</id>
	<title>Re:WTF!</title>
	<author>Jurily</author>
	<datestamp>1256224020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Twitter addresses another aspect of the internet: Viral marketing, and near-realtime content</p></div><p>You forgot "mindless drones yapping on about irrelevant bullshit". My search results are bad enough as it is, thank you very much.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Twitter addresses another aspect of the internet : Viral marketing , and near-realtime contentYou forgot " mindless drones yapping on about irrelevant bullshit " .
My search results are bad enough as it is , thank you very much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Twitter addresses another aspect of the internet: Viral marketing, and near-realtime contentYou forgot "mindless drones yapping on about irrelevant bullshit".
My search results are bad enough as it is, thank you very much.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834149</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833907</id>
	<title>Re:WTF!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256217960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you've been on the internet for a long while (read: &gt; 5 minutes), you're already accustomed to mindless twits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 've been on the internet for a long while ( read : &gt; 5 minutes ) , you 're already accustomed to mindless twits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you've been on the internet for a long while (read: &gt; 5 minutes), you're already accustomed to mindless twits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835595</id>
	<title>Here comes the noise...</title>
	<author>Scubafish</author>
	<datestamp>1256228280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm trying to figure out what kind of useful/relevant information a tweet could contain. Hell, I'm still trying to figure out why people use twitter. Does that make me old or just not a narcissist?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm trying to figure out what kind of useful/relevant information a tweet could contain .
Hell , I 'm still trying to figure out why people use twitter .
Does that make me old or just not a narcissist ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm trying to figure out what kind of useful/relevant information a tweet could contain.
Hell, I'm still trying to figure out why people use twitter.
Does that make me old or just not a narcissist?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29840625</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs to search tweeter? To find what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I don't see how the "tweet" format can ever contain anything more than shit</i></p><p>E=MC^2 (6 chars)</p><p>How's that?;)  For googling mathematical formulas, it might actually be nice.  I can imagine not remembering how to calculate standard deviation, check the value of a constant, or take some exotic integral off the top of my head...and 160 chars or less would be perfect for an answer.</p><p>Maybe what is the capital of X questions could be useful twitter fodder...maybe you could even ask topical questions like "Is interstate 10 closed right now in Houston?"...others like "Is Kanye West dead?" may not be so helpful;)</p><p>I'll wait and try it...maybe it won't suck...Google has released good products in the past and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see how the " tweet " format can ever contain anything more than shitE = MC ^ 2 ( 6 chars ) How 's that ?
; ) For googling mathematical formulas , it might actually be nice .
I can imagine not remembering how to calculate standard deviation , check the value of a constant , or take some exotic integral off the top of my head...and 160 chars or less would be perfect for an answer.Maybe what is the capital of X questions could be useful twitter fodder...maybe you could even ask topical questions like " Is interstate 10 closed right now in Houston ?
" ...others like " Is Kanye West dead ?
" may not be so helpful ; ) I 'll wait and try it...maybe it wo n't suck...Google has released good products in the past and I 'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see how the "tweet" format can ever contain anything more than shitE=MC^2 (6 chars)How's that?
;)  For googling mathematical formulas, it might actually be nice.
I can imagine not remembering how to calculate standard deviation, check the value of a constant, or take some exotic integral off the top of my head...and 160 chars or less would be perfect for an answer.Maybe what is the capital of X questions could be useful twitter fodder...maybe you could even ask topical questions like "Is interstate 10 closed right now in Houston?
"...others like "Is Kanye West dead?
" may not be so helpful;)I'll wait and try it...maybe it won't suck...Google has released good products in the past and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836611</id>
	<title>Value</title>
	<author>slashmojo</author>
	<datestamp>1256232720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and nothing of value was <i>found</i>..</p><p>Twitter does have its (commercial) uses but there seems to be such an enormous amount of crap posted and 'retweeted' ad infinitum. I hope bing/google can reliably filter and sort it so only good stuff surfaces but I have my doubts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and nothing of value was found..Twitter does have its ( commercial ) uses but there seems to be such an enormous amount of crap posted and 'retweeted ' ad infinitum .
I hope bing/google can reliably filter and sort it so only good stuff surfaces but I have my doubts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and nothing of value was found..Twitter does have its (commercial) uses but there seems to be such an enormous amount of crap posted and 'retweeted' ad infinitum.
I hope bing/google can reliably filter and sort it so only good stuff surfaces but I have my doubts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835101</id>
	<title>Re:Been covered on TWiG</title>
	<author>Phil06</author>
	<datestamp>1256226120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If they filter out all the Twitter spam it could be "full of info"
Twitter Trends is useless with all the people who put trending words in a tweet just to get their tinyurl hidden malware links looked at.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they filter out all the Twitter spam it could be " full of info " Twitter Trends is useless with all the people who put trending words in a tweet just to get their tinyurl hidden malware links looked at .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they filter out all the Twitter spam it could be "full of info"
Twitter Trends is useless with all the people who put trending words in a tweet just to get their tinyurl hidden malware links looked at.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29840547</id>
	<title>Re:Just let me turn it off.</title>
	<author>value\_added</author>
	<datestamp>1256208120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd hope most Slashdot users would know this, but it seems it's not the case. You can perform Google searches without visiting the google.com webpage, just as you can perform eBay, imdb, flickr, wiki, etc. searches without first visting those webpages.</p><p>With respect to filtering Google searches (along the lines of what's provided by givemebackmygoogle website), just create a bookmark with an appropriate Keyword (a simple "g" would suffice) with the Properties of:</p><blockquote><div><p> <tt>http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=\%s -inurl:(kelkoo|bizrate|pixmania|...)</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>When done, you can type "g mysearchwords" in the address bar to get your results.  Obviously, you can add additional search parameters into the URL. The "inurl:|-inurl:" is just one of many.</p><p>As always, Google for more info.  There's plenty of people who have already figured out the correct search strings for numerous sites and offer a convient, downloadale file you can import into Firefox's bookmarks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd hope most Slashdot users would know this , but it seems it 's not the case .
You can perform Google searches without visiting the google.com webpage , just as you can perform eBay , imdb , flickr , wiki , etc .
searches without first visting those webpages.With respect to filtering Google searches ( along the lines of what 's provided by givemebackmygoogle website ) , just create a bookmark with an appropriate Keyword ( a simple " g " would suffice ) with the Properties of : http : //www.google.com/search ? hl = en&amp;q = \ % s -inurl : ( kelkoo | bizrate | pixmania | ... ) When done , you can type " g mysearchwords " in the address bar to get your results .
Obviously , you can add additional search parameters into the URL .
The " inurl : | -inurl : " is just one of many.As always , Google for more info .
There 's plenty of people who have already figured out the correct search strings for numerous sites and offer a convient , downloadale file you can import into Firefox 's bookmarks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd hope most Slashdot users would know this, but it seems it's not the case.
You can perform Google searches without visiting the google.com webpage, just as you can perform eBay, imdb, flickr, wiki, etc.
searches without first visting those webpages.With respect to filtering Google searches (along the lines of what's provided by givemebackmygoogle website), just create a bookmark with an appropriate Keyword (a simple "g" would suffice) with the Properties of: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=\%s -inurl:(kelkoo|bizrate|pixmania|...) When done, you can type "g mysearchwords" in the address bar to get your results.
Obviously, you can add additional search parameters into the URL.
The "inurl:|-inurl:" is just one of many.As always, Google for more info.
There's plenty of people who have already figured out the correct search strings for numerous sites and offer a convient, downloadale file you can import into Firefox's bookmarks.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833905</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835183</id>
	<title>Leave the strings attached</title>
	<author>GrantRobertson</author>
	<datestamp>1256226600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see I am not in disagreement with anyone as to the additional clutter that this will likely add to our search results. It seems that Google continuously piles more straw on the metaphorical haystack, leaving the few needles of information I seek buried ever deeper. The thing is that all those pieces of straw really have strings attached in the form of metadata. Google knows - or should know - where all the pages they index come from. They should be able to relatively easily categorize those sites as manufacturer's sites, shopping sites, news sites, magazine sites, truly educational sites, blogs, forums, etc. But it seems Google cuts all those strings when they pile the indexed pages into the haystack leaving me to sort through them manually. Isn't that what we invented computers for? If they would simply leave the strings attached and allow users to "pull them" then we could simply choose not to receive results from shopping sites or whatever. As it is, looking for a manufacturer's specifications on something can be maddening because of all the shopping sites that come up instead. (Remember, one does not always know the URL to a manufacturer's web site.)</p><p>In effect, I wish Google would institute a system wherein we could check off or uncheck which types of sites we would like to receive search results from.</p><p>P.S. What the heck is wrong with this text edit box. The text cursor only shows up when I hover the mouse over some portions of the text in this box. When I hover over other portions the regular pointer cursor is displayed. If I click when that pointer is displayed it does not place the cursor into that location in the text. Instead it selects the box within the HTML and typing does not go into the box (the box does not have focus). This is a real pain. The code on Slashdot is getting worse with every revision. Geez, it even prevents me from selecting text in some locations even if I have already started the selection drag. This is insane! Please bring back the old editor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see I am not in disagreement with anyone as to the additional clutter that this will likely add to our search results .
It seems that Google continuously piles more straw on the metaphorical haystack , leaving the few needles of information I seek buried ever deeper .
The thing is that all those pieces of straw really have strings attached in the form of metadata .
Google knows - or should know - where all the pages they index come from .
They should be able to relatively easily categorize those sites as manufacturer 's sites , shopping sites , news sites , magazine sites , truly educational sites , blogs , forums , etc .
But it seems Google cuts all those strings when they pile the indexed pages into the haystack leaving me to sort through them manually .
Is n't that what we invented computers for ?
If they would simply leave the strings attached and allow users to " pull them " then we could simply choose not to receive results from shopping sites or whatever .
As it is , looking for a manufacturer 's specifications on something can be maddening because of all the shopping sites that come up instead .
( Remember , one does not always know the URL to a manufacturer 's web site .
) In effect , I wish Google would institute a system wherein we could check off or uncheck which types of sites we would like to receive search results from.P.S .
What the heck is wrong with this text edit box .
The text cursor only shows up when I hover the mouse over some portions of the text in this box .
When I hover over other portions the regular pointer cursor is displayed .
If I click when that pointer is displayed it does not place the cursor into that location in the text .
Instead it selects the box within the HTML and typing does not go into the box ( the box does not have focus ) .
This is a real pain .
The code on Slashdot is getting worse with every revision .
Geez , it even prevents me from selecting text in some locations even if I have already started the selection drag .
This is insane !
Please bring back the old editor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see I am not in disagreement with anyone as to the additional clutter that this will likely add to our search results.
It seems that Google continuously piles more straw on the metaphorical haystack, leaving the few needles of information I seek buried ever deeper.
The thing is that all those pieces of straw really have strings attached in the form of metadata.
Google knows - or should know - where all the pages they index come from.
They should be able to relatively easily categorize those sites as manufacturer's sites, shopping sites, news sites, magazine sites, truly educational sites, blogs, forums, etc.
But it seems Google cuts all those strings when they pile the indexed pages into the haystack leaving me to sort through them manually.
Isn't that what we invented computers for?
If they would simply leave the strings attached and allow users to "pull them" then we could simply choose not to receive results from shopping sites or whatever.
As it is, looking for a manufacturer's specifications on something can be maddening because of all the shopping sites that come up instead.
(Remember, one does not always know the URL to a manufacturer's web site.
)In effect, I wish Google would institute a system wherein we could check off or uncheck which types of sites we would like to receive search results from.P.S.
What the heck is wrong with this text edit box.
The text cursor only shows up when I hover the mouse over some portions of the text in this box.
When I hover over other portions the regular pointer cursor is displayed.
If I click when that pointer is displayed it does not place the cursor into that location in the text.
Instead it selects the box within the HTML and typing does not go into the box (the box does not have focus).
This is a real pain.
The code on Slashdot is getting worse with every revision.
Geez, it even prevents me from selecting text in some locations even if I have already started the selection drag.
This is insane!
Please bring back the old editor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29840705</id>
	<title>seriously</title>
	<author>mistahkurtz</author>
	<datestamp>1256209020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>this is about the most donotwant that i've seen in a while.</htmltext>
<tokenext>this is about the most donotwant that i 've seen in a while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this is about the most donotwant that i've seen in a while.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836719</id>
	<title>The dumbing down of Google</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1256233200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Over the past two years, it seems that Google has been redesigning their search system for dumber and dumber users.  They now seem to be targeting the room-temp IQ crowd.
</p><p>
Google used to just <i>suggest</i> spelling corrections.  Now, it applies them.  If you don't want spelling correction, you must put the search term in quotes.  This leads to results like the one for "ndia intellectual property", where NDIA is the National Defense Industrial Association.  Google gives back mostly results about "India", not "NDIA". This happens on all searches where the term searched is near a common word.
</p><p>
Then there's the missing word problem.  It used to be that if you searched for several words, all the words had to be present. That's no longer true.  Google will return results it likes that don't contain some of the words.  If you want to insist that a word be present, you have to quote it.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Over the past two years , it seems that Google has been redesigning their search system for dumber and dumber users .
They now seem to be targeting the room-temp IQ crowd .
Google used to just suggest spelling corrections .
Now , it applies them .
If you do n't want spelling correction , you must put the search term in quotes .
This leads to results like the one for " ndia intellectual property " , where NDIA is the National Defense Industrial Association .
Google gives back mostly results about " India " , not " NDIA " .
This happens on all searches where the term searched is near a common word .
Then there 's the missing word problem .
It used to be that if you searched for several words , all the words had to be present .
That 's no longer true .
Google will return results it likes that do n't contain some of the words .
If you want to insist that a word be present , you have to quote it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Over the past two years, it seems that Google has been redesigning their search system for dumber and dumber users.
They now seem to be targeting the room-temp IQ crowd.
Google used to just suggest spelling corrections.
Now, it applies them.
If you don't want spelling correction, you must put the search term in quotes.
This leads to results like the one for "ndia intellectual property", where NDIA is the National Defense Industrial Association.
Google gives back mostly results about "India", not "NDIA".
This happens on all searches where the term searched is near a common word.
Then there's the missing word problem.
It used to be that if you searched for several words, all the words had to be present.
That's no longer true.
Google will return results it likes that don't contain some of the words.
If you want to insist that a word be present, you have to quote it.

	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833795</id>
	<title>Been covered on TWiG</title>
	<author>RMH101</author>
	<datestamp>1256217180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Leo Laporte and This Week In Google covered this with an interview with Google.
<br>
Basically it boils down to: Twitter results can be valuable for real-time, breaking news.  Less so after the fact.  If you googled for "Trafigura" a week or so ago, you wouldn't have seen much of interest.  If you searched Twitter whilst it was breaking news of the injunction, it was full of info.  Google are savvy with search and I'm sure they've got this all factored into PageRank already.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Leo Laporte and This Week In Google covered this with an interview with Google .
Basically it boils down to : Twitter results can be valuable for real-time , breaking news .
Less so after the fact .
If you googled for " Trafigura " a week or so ago , you would n't have seen much of interest .
If you searched Twitter whilst it was breaking news of the injunction , it was full of info .
Google are savvy with search and I 'm sure they 've got this all factored into PageRank already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Leo Laporte and This Week In Google covered this with an interview with Google.
Basically it boils down to: Twitter results can be valuable for real-time, breaking news.
Less so after the fact.
If you googled for "Trafigura" a week or so ago, you wouldn't have seen much of interest.
If you searched Twitter whilst it was breaking news of the injunction, it was full of info.
Google are savvy with search and I'm sure they've got this all factored into PageRank already.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836239</id>
	<title>Re:WTF!</title>
	<author>KDEWolf</author>
	<datestamp>1256231100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>EVEN WORSE: How many Twitts are EXACTLY links to another (real) webpage? It'll be like shortening ow.ly urls with bit.ly... Endless chain of links.</htmltext>
<tokenext>EVEN WORSE : How many Twitts are EXACTLY links to another ( real ) webpage ?
It 'll be like shortening ow.ly urls with bit.ly... Endless chain of links .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>EVEN WORSE: How many Twitts are EXACTLY links to another (real) webpage?
It'll be like shortening ow.ly urls with bit.ly... Endless chain of links.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835119</id>
	<title>Twiggle</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256226240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't wait to Twiggle something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't wait to Twiggle something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't wait to Twiggle something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29840867</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs to search tweeter? To find what?</title>
	<author>Tussinator</author>
	<datestamp>1256210220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's not easy to convey a properly argumented original thought in 160 characters...</p></div><p>I agree that Twitter in its current form would be terrible for argument mapping. However, in one sense it would be beneficial to limit a single claim or assertion to a certain character length, provided that there is a way to represent the overall argument as a tree or web of assertions. The limitation would force the arguer to organize their elaboration.</p><p>Elaboration is crucial to productive arguing,  but it's something the reader should be allowed to hide during their initial encounter with the argument.</p><p>

I hope something like <a href="http://debategraph.org/" title="debategraph.org" rel="nofollow">DebateGraph.org</a> [debategraph.org] catches on as the infrastructure for arguing in the future.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not easy to convey a properly argumented original thought in 160 characters...I agree that Twitter in its current form would be terrible for argument mapping .
However , in one sense it would be beneficial to limit a single claim or assertion to a certain character length , provided that there is a way to represent the overall argument as a tree or web of assertions .
The limitation would force the arguer to organize their elaboration.Elaboration is crucial to productive arguing , but it 's something the reader should be allowed to hide during their initial encounter with the argument .
I hope something like DebateGraph.org [ debategraph.org ] catches on as the infrastructure for arguing in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not easy to convey a properly argumented original thought in 160 characters...I agree that Twitter in its current form would be terrible for argument mapping.
However, in one sense it would be beneficial to limit a single claim or assertion to a certain character length, provided that there is a way to represent the overall argument as a tree or web of assertions.
The limitation would force the arguer to organize their elaboration.Elaboration is crucial to productive arguing,  but it's something the reader should be allowed to hide during their initial encounter with the argument.
I hope something like DebateGraph.org [debategraph.org] catches on as the infrastructure for arguing in the future.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833905</id>
	<title>Re:Just let me turn it off.</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1256217960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>If in doubt, <a href="http://www.gmbmg.com/" title="gmbmg.com">GiveMeBackMyGoogle.com</a> [gmbmg.com] has succeeded in stripping out results from many "sponsored" domains and aggregating sites for a good long time. I expect they'll list twitter as one of the blocks before long.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If in doubt , GiveMeBackMyGoogle.com [ gmbmg.com ] has succeeded in stripping out results from many " sponsored " domains and aggregating sites for a good long time .
I expect they 'll list twitter as one of the blocks before long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If in doubt, GiveMeBackMyGoogle.com [gmbmg.com] has succeeded in stripping out results from many "sponsored" domains and aggregating sites for a good long time.
I expect they'll list twitter as one of the blocks before long.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29839123</id>
	<title>FRIST STOP!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256243700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>shall we? OK! rules are Th1s downward spiral. another folder. 20 too many rules and</htmltext>
<tokenext>shall we ?
OK ! rules are Th1s downward spiral .
another folder .
20 too many rules and</tokentext>
<sentencetext>shall we?
OK! rules are Th1s downward spiral.
another folder.
20 too many rules and</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834245</id>
	<title>Great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256220420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More crap and nonsense for Google to index.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More crap and nonsense for Google to index .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More crap and nonsense for Google to index.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29843931</id>
	<title>Re:Just let me turn it off.</title>
	<author>whyloginwhysubscribe</author>
	<datestamp>1256295360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... I expect they'll list twitter as one of the blocks before long.</p></div><p>From the <a href="http://www.gmbmg.com/faq.php" title="gmbmg.com">FAQ</a> [gmbmg.com]:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Thanks to everyone for your input, ideas, toolbars, support, etc, etc. This site will stay up (hundreds of you use it every day - yay!), but I probably won't put any more sites in, or respond to much email.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... I expect they 'll list twitter as one of the blocks before long.From the FAQ [ gmbmg.com ] : Thanks to everyone for your input , ideas , toolbars , support , etc , etc .
This site will stay up ( hundreds of you use it every day - yay !
) , but I probably wo n't put any more sites in , or respond to much email .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... I expect they'll list twitter as one of the blocks before long.From the FAQ [gmbmg.com]:Thanks to everyone for your input, ideas, toolbars, support, etc, etc.
This site will stay up (hundreds of you use it every day - yay!
), but I probably won't put any more sites in, or respond to much email.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833905</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835547</id>
	<title>Re:WTF!</title>
	<author>rwa2</author>
	<datestamp>1256228100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm hoping they'll turn up in a sidebar along with "sponsored" links.</p><p>But hopefully Google will only crawl twitter and use it to improve rankings, since twitter users seem to like to tweet links to URLs they like.</p><p>So this will probably just enhance google search results the same way they did when they brought in StumbleUpon.  A lot of google results show StumbleUpon rankings and listings to comments, maybe now they'll also have a "X,XXX tweets" metric as well.</p><p>But far be it from me to speculate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm hoping they 'll turn up in a sidebar along with " sponsored " links.But hopefully Google will only crawl twitter and use it to improve rankings , since twitter users seem to like to tweet links to URLs they like.So this will probably just enhance google search results the same way they did when they brought in StumbleUpon .
A lot of google results show StumbleUpon rankings and listings to comments , maybe now they 'll also have a " X,XXX tweets " metric as well.But far be it from me to speculate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm hoping they'll turn up in a sidebar along with "sponsored" links.But hopefully Google will only crawl twitter and use it to improve rankings, since twitter users seem to like to tweet links to URLs they like.So this will probably just enhance google search results the same way they did when they brought in StumbleUpon.
A lot of google results show StumbleUpon rankings and listings to comments, maybe now they'll also have a "X,XXX tweets" metric as well.But far be it from me to speculate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833957</id>
	<title>except for this:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256218500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most of the content on produced on twitter is complete garbage,<br>Clicking and reading any of the trending topics makes your wish you where eating your own excrement instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the content on produced on twitter is complete garbage,Clicking and reading any of the trending topics makes your wish you where eating your own excrement instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the content on produced on twitter is complete garbage,Clicking and reading any of the trending topics makes your wish you where eating your own excrement instead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834307</id>
	<title>Re:Just let me turn it off.</title>
	<author>Dersaidin</author>
	<datestamp>1256220840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hopefully it'll be similar to site: or url:
<p>
So you only get results on twitter if you search using:<br>
tweet:query here
</p><p>
And normal searches don't include twitter results at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hopefully it 'll be similar to site : or url : So you only get results on twitter if you search using : tweet : query here And normal searches do n't include twitter results at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hopefully it'll be similar to site: or url:

So you only get results on twitter if you search using:
tweet:query here

And normal searches don't include twitter results at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833987</id>
	<title>It would be nice</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1256218620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be nice if this could just be a preference, sort of like include special opt in from twitter, else just keep my searches the way they are....also by default this option is selected keep it the way it is, I hate having to rechange everything configured each patch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be nice if this could just be a preference , sort of like include special opt in from twitter , else just keep my searches the way they are....also by default this option is selected keep it the way it is , I hate having to rechange everything configured each patch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be nice if this could just be a preference, sort of like include special opt in from twitter, else just keep my searches the way they are....also by default this option is selected keep it the way it is, I hate having to rechange everything configured each patch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737</id>
	<title>Just let me turn it off.</title>
	<author>Remloc</author>
	<datestamp>1256216640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>As long as I can turn it off.  <b>Permanently</b> in my login profile.
<br> <br>
I do not want the inane ramblings of some twittering teen-ager littering my Google results.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as I can turn it off .
Permanently in my login profile .
I do not want the inane ramblings of some twittering teen-ager littering my Google results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as I can turn it off.
Permanently in my login profile.
I do not want the inane ramblings of some twittering teen-ager littering my Google results.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835821</id>
	<title>Re:Please go away</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256229240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How long before Twitter becomes a has-been like Everquest, Myspace, Tron Guy, and that rabbit that balances pancakes on its head? Anyone got an estimate on the timeline? Don't these things usually take 18 months to complete?</p></div></blockquote><p>Email and IM haven't gone away have they?  Twitter has been around for three years now, and really growing in mindshare and popularity for two.  It's not going anywhere.<br>
&nbsp; <br>
&nbsp; </p><blockquote><div><p>Oh yeah, right, twitter is a game-changer that can overthrow governments. Good job they did in Iran, wot?</p></div></blockquote><p>I predicted the lack of effectiveness back when the story hit Slashdot.  I was ignored.<br>
&nbsp; <br>I did recently read two interesting articles; one on the <a href="http://singularityhub.com/2009/09/16/the-power-of-twitter-accounts-with-massive-followers-or-lack-thereof/" title="singularityhub.com">lack of effect</a> [singularityhub.com] from accounts with large numbers of followers, and one speculating that a <a href="http://singularityhub.com/2009/04/22/tweetbomb-a-tweet-to-shake-the-world/" title="singularityhub.com">"tweetbomb"</a> [singularityhub.com] could possibly outshine the impact of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slashdot\_effect" title="wikipedia.org">Slashdot Effect</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How long before Twitter becomes a has-been like Everquest , Myspace , Tron Guy , and that rabbit that balances pancakes on its head ?
Anyone got an estimate on the timeline ?
Do n't these things usually take 18 months to complete ? Email and IM have n't gone away have they ?
Twitter has been around for three years now , and really growing in mindshare and popularity for two .
It 's not going anywhere .
    Oh yeah , right , twitter is a game-changer that can overthrow governments .
Good job they did in Iran , wot ? I predicted the lack of effectiveness back when the story hit Slashdot .
I was ignored .
  I did recently read two interesting articles ; one on the lack of effect [ singularityhub.com ] from accounts with large numbers of followers , and one speculating that a " tweetbomb " [ singularityhub.com ] could possibly outshine the impact of the Slashdot Effect [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long before Twitter becomes a has-been like Everquest, Myspace, Tron Guy, and that rabbit that balances pancakes on its head?
Anyone got an estimate on the timeline?
Don't these things usually take 18 months to complete?Email and IM haven't gone away have they?
Twitter has been around for three years now, and really growing in mindshare and popularity for two.
It's not going anywhere.
  
  Oh yeah, right, twitter is a game-changer that can overthrow governments.
Good job they did in Iran, wot?I predicted the lack of effectiveness back when the story hit Slashdot.
I was ignored.
  I did recently read two interesting articles; one on the lack of effect [singularityhub.com] from accounts with large numbers of followers, and one speculating that a "tweetbomb" [singularityhub.com] could possibly outshine the impact of the Slashdot Effect [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833695</id>
	<title>Bing Too</title>
	<author>stoolpigeon</author>
	<datestamp>1256216220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Twitter cut deals with <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/21/get-ready-for-the-firehose-search-is-about-to-get-realtime-real-fast/" title="techcrunch.com">Bing and Google.</a> [techcrunch.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Twitter cut deals with Bing and Google .
[ techcrunch.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Twitter cut deals with Bing and Google.
[techcrunch.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834477</id>
	<title>well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256222100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great, more useless results to sift through.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great , more useless results to sift through.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great, more useless results to sift through.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834253</id>
	<title>Google has no such feature.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256220480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you are safe.</p><p>Only Micro$ost Bink will parse Twits...</p><p>Ooo... The irony!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you are safe.Only Micro $ ost Bink will parse Twits...Ooo... The irony !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you are safe.Only Micro$ost Bink will parse Twits...Ooo... The irony!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833903</id>
	<title>Please go away</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1256217960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>How long before Twitter becomes a has-been like Everquest, Myspace, Tron Guy, and that rabbit that balances pancakes on its head?  Anyone got an estimate on the timeline?  Don't these things usually take 18 months to complete?  <p>Oh yeah, right, twitter is a game-changer that can overthrow governments.  Good job they did in Iran, wot?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How long before Twitter becomes a has-been like Everquest , Myspace , Tron Guy , and that rabbit that balances pancakes on its head ?
Anyone got an estimate on the timeline ?
Do n't these things usually take 18 months to complete ?
Oh yeah , right , twitter is a game-changer that can overthrow governments .
Good job they did in Iran , wot ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long before Twitter becomes a has-been like Everquest, Myspace, Tron Guy, and that rabbit that balances pancakes on its head?
Anyone got an estimate on the timeline?
Don't these things usually take 18 months to complete?
Oh yeah, right, twitter is a game-changer that can overthrow governments.
Good job they did in Iran, wot?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833917</id>
	<title>So, If I Google "Kayne West"</title>
	<author>aquatone282</author>
	<datestamp>1256218020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm going to get 140,000,000 hits of "RT @mrmarky RIP Kayne West Imma let you finish, but balloon boy had the best hoax of all time lol!"</p><p>Fuck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to get 140,000,000 hits of " RT @ mrmarky RIP Kayne West Imma let you finish , but balloon boy had the best hoax of all time lol !
" Fuck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to get 140,000,000 hits of "RT @mrmarky RIP Kayne West Imma let you finish, but balloon boy had the best hoax of all time lol!
"Fuck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834637</id>
	<title>Re:This could be beneficial...</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1256223240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can find useful articles on Twitter? Wow, that's quite an achievement. I've found Twitter accounts via blogs where the Twitter is just an RSS feed for the blog I came from, and I've found Twitter accounts that I thought might be interesting but weren't (like Miguel de Icaza, since I work with Mono/C#) but I've yet to actually find anything useful on there that isn't either a) available elsewhere (e.g. a proper RSS feed) or b) horribly drowned out by noise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can find useful articles on Twitter ?
Wow , that 's quite an achievement .
I 've found Twitter accounts via blogs where the Twitter is just an RSS feed for the blog I came from , and I 've found Twitter accounts that I thought might be interesting but were n't ( like Miguel de Icaza , since I work with Mono/C # ) but I 've yet to actually find anything useful on there that is n't either a ) available elsewhere ( e.g .
a proper RSS feed ) or b ) horribly drowned out by noise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can find useful articles on Twitter?
Wow, that's quite an achievement.
I've found Twitter accounts via blogs where the Twitter is just an RSS feed for the blog I came from, and I've found Twitter accounts that I thought might be interesting but weren't (like Miguel de Icaza, since I work with Mono/C#) but I've yet to actually find anything useful on there that isn't either a) available elsewhere (e.g.
a proper RSS feed) or b) horribly drowned out by noise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29839233</id>
	<title>Re:Been covered on TWiG</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256244300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Google is so amazing at search then why do I find the link a little ways up the page to Give me back my GOOGLE so useful?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Google is so amazing at search then why do I find the link a little ways up the page to Give me back my GOOGLE so useful ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Google is so amazing at search then why do I find the link a little ways up the page to Give me back my GOOGLE so useful?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834013</id>
	<title>Why the indiblogger link?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256218920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The indiblogger blog linked to in the summary isn't exactly providing an insightful or groundbreaking list of ideas.

A search engine considering relevance of results? They should look into how they are going to perform indexing?

Not exactly redefining the genre when it comes to search engine design considerations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The indiblogger blog linked to in the summary is n't exactly providing an insightful or groundbreaking list of ideas .
A search engine considering relevance of results ?
They should look into how they are going to perform indexing ?
Not exactly redefining the genre when it comes to search engine design considerations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The indiblogger blog linked to in the summary isn't exactly providing an insightful or groundbreaking list of ideas.
A search engine considering relevance of results?
They should look into how they are going to perform indexing?
Not exactly redefining the genre when it comes to search engine design considerations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836949</id>
	<title>Re:WTF!</title>
	<author>Greenisus</author>
	<datestamp>1256234100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Twitter's pretty handy if you want to search about something that's happening *right now* and hasn't had time to be blogged about and then indexed by the search engines.  For instance, there were several helicopters flying overhead and none of us knew what was going on, so we searched Twitter and discovered that someone was filming a scene for a movie.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Twitter 's pretty handy if you want to search about something that 's happening * right now * and has n't had time to be blogged about and then indexed by the search engines .
For instance , there were several helicopters flying overhead and none of us knew what was going on , so we searched Twitter and discovered that someone was filming a scene for a movie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Twitter's pretty handy if you want to search about something that's happening *right now* and hasn't had time to be blogged about and then indexed by the search engines.
For instance, there were several helicopters flying overhead and none of us knew what was going on, so we searched Twitter and discovered that someone was filming a scene for a movie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835845</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs to search tweeter? To find what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256229360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I wonder whether there is any *original* information that can be found in there.  It's not easy to convey a properly argumented original thought in 160 characters...</p></div></blockquote><p>I take it then, that you've never heard of a URL?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder whether there is any * original * information that can be found in there .
It 's not easy to convey a properly argumented original thought in 160 characters...I take it then , that you 've never heard of a URL ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder whether there is any *original* information that can be found in there.
It's not easy to convey a properly argumented original thought in 160 characters...I take it then, that you've never heard of a URL?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834471</id>
	<title>Re:Please go away</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256221980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What?  There's a rabbit that balances pancakes on its head? Why am I always the last to know these things?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What ?
There 's a rabbit that balances pancakes on its head ?
Why am I always the last to know these things ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What?
There's a rabbit that balances pancakes on its head?
Why am I always the last to know these things?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29837557</id>
	<title>Re:Please go away</title>
	<author>AlexBirch</author>
	<datestamp>1256236620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>
Email and IM haven't gone away have they? Twitter has been around for three years now, and really growing in mindshare and popularity for two. It's not going anywhere.
</i> <br> <br>
Email and IM now have a lovely child called <a href="http://wave.google.com/" title="google.com">Wave</a> [google.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Email and IM have n't gone away have they ?
Twitter has been around for three years now , and really growing in mindshare and popularity for two .
It 's not going anywhere .
Email and IM now have a lovely child called Wave [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Email and IM haven't gone away have they?
Twitter has been around for three years now, and really growing in mindshare and popularity for two.
It's not going anywhere.
Email and IM now have a lovely child called Wave [google.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834029</id>
	<title>Re:WTF!</title>
	<author>Daengbo</author>
	<datestamp>1256219040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly. I was upset enough when spammy blogs with duplicate content filled my search results, but now I wave to deal with one-line tweets, too? Ugh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
I was upset enough when spammy blogs with duplicate content filled my search results , but now I wave to deal with one-line tweets , too ?
Ugh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
I was upset enough when spammy blogs with duplicate content filled my search results, but now I wave to deal with one-line tweets, too?
Ugh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834051</id>
	<title>Selling ED Hardy :Handbags For Female,Jacket For M</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256219220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Http://www.tntshoes.com</p><p>
&nbsp; we are a prefession online store, you can see more photos and price in our website which is show in the photos<br>if you are interested in our product, please email me by<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,hellow pls see our website in the photos attached attached is our store's website, we are a online shopping store, we are selling large brand new shoes,clothing, handbag,sunglasses,hats etc, our products are all  best quality with the cheapest price. You will see the more pictures and the price for our product in our website, we are selling all brand new handbag, please see below some price list of the product. We accept paypal as payment, and give free shipping. Jeans : A&amp;f Armani artful dodger jeans Bape BBC christian audigier COOGI D&amp;G diesel ED HARDY lrg etc $33-50 free shipping. Jersey NBA Jersey MLB NLBM nike puma adidas $12-30 free shiping.</p><p>
&nbsp; OUR WEBSITE:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; YAHOO:shoppertrade@yahoo.com.cn</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; MSN:shoppertrade@hotmail.com</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; HTTP://www.tntshoes.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Http : //www.tntshoes.com   we are a prefession online store , you can see more photos and price in our website which is show in the photosif you are interested in our product , please email me by ,hellow pls see our website in the photos attached attached is our store 's website , we are a online shopping store , we are selling large brand new shoes,clothing , handbag,sunglasses,hats etc , our products are all best quality with the cheapest price .
You will see the more pictures and the price for our product in our website , we are selling all brand new handbag , please see below some price list of the product .
We accept paypal as payment , and give free shipping .
Jeans : A&amp;f Armani artful dodger jeans Bape BBC christian audigier COOGI D&amp;G diesel ED HARDY lrg etc $ 33-50 free shipping .
Jersey NBA Jersey MLB NLBM nike puma adidas $ 12-30 free shiping .
  OUR WEBSITE :                                                   YAHOO : shoppertrade @ yahoo.com.cn                                                         MSN : shoppertrade @ hotmail.com                                                               HTTP : //www.tntshoes.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Http://www.tntshoes.com
  we are a prefession online store, you can see more photos and price in our website which is show in the photosif you are interested in our product, please email me by ,hellow pls see our website in the photos attached attached is our store's website, we are a online shopping store, we are selling large brand new shoes,clothing, handbag,sunglasses,hats etc, our products are all  best quality with the cheapest price.
You will see the more pictures and the price for our product in our website, we are selling all brand new handbag, please see below some price list of the product.
We accept paypal as payment, and give free shipping.
Jeans : A&amp;f Armani artful dodger jeans Bape BBC christian audigier COOGI D&amp;G diesel ED HARDY lrg etc $33-50 free shipping.
Jersey NBA Jersey MLB NLBM nike puma adidas $12-30 free shiping.
  OUR WEBSITE:
                                                  YAHOO:shoppertrade@yahoo.com.cn
                                                        MSN:shoppertrade@hotmail.com
                                                              HTTP://www.tntshoes.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833999</id>
	<title>Re:Just let me turn it off.</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1256218740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If google is as good at figuring out the relevance of tweets as they are at figuring out the relevance of everything else, you won't mind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If google is as good at figuring out the relevance of tweets as they are at figuring out the relevance of everything else , you wo n't mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If google is as good at figuring out the relevance of tweets as they are at figuring out the relevance of everything else, you won't mind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833815</id>
	<title>Oh no!</title>
	<author>dkf</author>
	<datestamp>1256217300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's time for Twoogle!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's time for Twoogle !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's time for Twoogle!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834995</id>
	<title>Using Twitter to confirm Gmail is down</title>
	<author>stevegee58</author>
	<datestamp>1256225640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ironically when Gmail and Google go down, I search Twitter to see if it's just me or if anyone else is experiencing it too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ironically when Gmail and Google go down , I search Twitter to see if it 's just me or if anyone else is experiencing it too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ironically when Gmail and Google go down, I search Twitter to see if it's just me or if anyone else is experiencing it too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834159</id>
	<title>Re:Just let me turn it off.</title>
	<author>xaxa</author>
	<datestamp>1256219760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I do not want the inane ramblings of some twittering teen-ager littering my Google results.</p></div><p>Twitter doesn't seem to be popular with teenagers. The inane ramblings are from the 25-40 crowd who've just discovered this "social networking" thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do not want the inane ramblings of some twittering teen-ager littering my Google results.Twitter does n't seem to be popular with teenagers .
The inane ramblings are from the 25-40 crowd who 've just discovered this " social networking " thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do not want the inane ramblings of some twittering teen-ager littering my Google results.Twitter doesn't seem to be popular with teenagers.
The inane ramblings are from the 25-40 crowd who've just discovered this "social networking" thing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835843</id>
	<title>More cruft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256229360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Honestly, I don't understand the necessity of people to document the minutiae of their lives.  Nobody cares that you just ate a cheese and mustard sandwich, and now have gas.  I came up with this little gem discussing twitter the other day:<br> <br>
"What's in a name?  that which we call a turd<br>
By any other name would smell as tweet."<br> <br>
That about sums it up (with apologies to Willy the Shake, Romeo and his SO.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , I do n't understand the necessity of people to document the minutiae of their lives .
Nobody cares that you just ate a cheese and mustard sandwich , and now have gas .
I came up with this little gem discussing twitter the other day : " What 's in a name ?
that which we call a turd By any other name would smell as tweet .
" That about sums it up ( with apologies to Willy the Shake , Romeo and his SO .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, I don't understand the necessity of people to document the minutiae of their lives.
Nobody cares that you just ate a cheese and mustard sandwich, and now have gas.
I came up with this little gem discussing twitter the other day: 
"What's in a name?
that which we call a turd
By any other name would smell as tweet.
" 
That about sums it up (with apologies to Willy the Shake, Romeo and his SO.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833889</id>
	<title>This could be beneficial...</title>
	<author>MrCrassic</author>
	<datestamp>1256217840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can see this being immediately useful for news searching, as tweets tend to be an extremely fast source for breaking news in all fields. Twitter has also been useful for finding interesting articles on topics relevant to my interests (security, IT and a bit of politics), so tapping this could open up a lot of information previously hidden behind Twitter's walls.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see this being immediately useful for news searching , as tweets tend to be an extremely fast source for breaking news in all fields .
Twitter has also been useful for finding interesting articles on topics relevant to my interests ( security , IT and a bit of politics ) , so tapping this could open up a lot of information previously hidden behind Twitter 's walls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see this being immediately useful for news searching, as tweets tend to be an extremely fast source for breaking news in all fields.
Twitter has also been useful for finding interesting articles on topics relevant to my interests (security, IT and a bit of politics), so tapping this could open up a lot of information previously hidden behind Twitter's walls.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834717</id>
	<title>Oh no</title>
	<author>Lord Lode</author>
	<datestamp>1256223900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not interested in twitter and I'm already annoyed by the huge amount of auto generated blog pages that result from google searches these days. I'm using Wikipedia more and more than Google to search things because with Wikipedia I know I'll get an interesting page as result, not some unwitty blog page. And now even MORE twitter and similar things are going to mixed into this? No thanks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not interested in twitter and I 'm already annoyed by the huge amount of auto generated blog pages that result from google searches these days .
I 'm using Wikipedia more and more than Google to search things because with Wikipedia I know I 'll get an interesting page as result , not some unwitty blog page .
And now even MORE twitter and similar things are going to mixed into this ?
No thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not interested in twitter and I'm already annoyed by the huge amount of auto generated blog pages that result from google searches these days.
I'm using Wikipedia more and more than Google to search things because with Wikipedia I know I'll get an interesting page as result, not some unwitty blog page.
And now even MORE twitter and similar things are going to mixed into this?
No thanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836323</id>
	<title>wut u tkn bt?</title>
	<author>uncanny</author>
	<datestamp>1256231400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I dont understand the point of all of this?  How will joining twitter into google searches bring me more porn?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I dont understand the point of all of this ?
How will joining twitter into google searches bring me more porn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dont understand the point of all of this?
How will joining twitter into google searches bring me more porn?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834409</id>
	<title>Bing</title>
	<author>bravecanadian</author>
	<datestamp>1256221680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And the earlier announcement that Bing has also signed a Twitter &amp; Facebook search deal??</p><p>Oh right,  slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And the earlier announcement that Bing has also signed a Twitter &amp; Facebook search deal ?
? Oh right , slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the earlier announcement that Bing has also signed a Twitter &amp; Facebook search deal?
?Oh right,  slashdot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29847357</id>
	<title>site:twitter.com google bing</title>
	<author>tunapez</author>
	<datestamp>1256319480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There you go, I did it for both already. Let me know where to pick up my check.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There you go , I did it for both already .
Let me know where to pick up my check .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There you go, I did it for both already.
Let me know where to pick up my check.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835025</id>
	<title>Great... just great</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1256225760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So Google's signal to noise ratio just dropped through the floor. Each day it'll now be indexing several million variations on "I just ate a delicious sandwich for lunch - yum!" and other such high-quality Twitter content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So Google 's signal to noise ratio just dropped through the floor .
Each day it 'll now be indexing several million variations on " I just ate a delicious sandwich for lunch - yum !
" and other such high-quality Twitter content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So Google's signal to noise ratio just dropped through the floor.
Each day it'll now be indexing several million variations on "I just ate a delicious sandwich for lunch - yum!
" and other such high-quality Twitter content.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835179</id>
	<title>Exciting news?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256226600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What happened to "site:twitter.com"</p><p>That usually works for me.. if I ever had had the need to catch up on inane 140 char rants</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What happened to " site : twitter.com " That usually works for me.. if I ever had had the need to catch up on inane 140 char rants</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What happened to "site:twitter.com"That usually works for me.. if I ever had had the need to catch up on inane 140 char rants</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29839809</id>
	<title>May be OK</title>
	<author>GlobalEcho</author>
	<datestamp>1256204220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can I just contradict all the pessimists here for a sec?   The only people I know who currently use Twitter are techies who use it to exchange systems support tidbits with each other.  Things like "How do I make Cyrus IMAP listen on an alternate port?"</p><p>As long as the questions come with subsequent answers, Google will probably do a good job with this stuff.  And don't forget the information value in any links provided in response tweets.</p><p>(BTW I don't use Twitter myself, and have never even tried it)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I just contradict all the pessimists here for a sec ?
The only people I know who currently use Twitter are techies who use it to exchange systems support tidbits with each other .
Things like " How do I make Cyrus IMAP listen on an alternate port ?
" As long as the questions come with subsequent answers , Google will probably do a good job with this stuff .
And do n't forget the information value in any links provided in response tweets .
( BTW I do n't use Twitter myself , and have never even tried it )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I just contradict all the pessimists here for a sec?
The only people I know who currently use Twitter are techies who use it to exchange systems support tidbits with each other.
Things like "How do I make Cyrus IMAP listen on an alternate port?
"As long as the questions come with subsequent answers, Google will probably do a good job with this stuff.
And don't forget the information value in any links provided in response tweets.
(BTW I don't use Twitter myself, and have never even tried it)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29838671</id>
	<title>Re:Just let me turn it off.</title>
	<author>sootman</author>
	<datestamp>1256241540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Better still, it should be off by default, and be off for non-logged-in users. <em>If</em> I want tweets in my search results I should have to log in and go to preferences.</p><p>Or else make it one more link at the top: Web Images Videos Maps News Shopping Gmail Twitter more</p><p>But if tweets start showing up in my search results all the time with no action on my part I swear to God I'll switch to Yahoo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Better still , it should be off by default , and be off for non-logged-in users .
If I want tweets in my search results I should have to log in and go to preferences.Or else make it one more link at the top : Web Images Videos Maps News Shopping Gmail Twitter moreBut if tweets start showing up in my search results all the time with no action on my part I swear to God I 'll switch to Yahoo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better still, it should be off by default, and be off for non-logged-in users.
If I want tweets in my search results I should have to log in and go to preferences.Or else make it one more link at the top: Web Images Videos Maps News Shopping Gmail Twitter moreBut if tweets start showing up in my search results all the time with no action on my part I swear to God I'll switch to Yahoo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836819
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833695
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834325
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833795
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833795
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29842913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833947
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833999
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29843931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29837557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836949
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834239
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29840547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836239
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834253
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29840867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834665
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29838671
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834665
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834737
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834149
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29840625
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834665
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_22_0333230_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29839233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833795
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833947
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29842913
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833835
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29840625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29840867
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833889
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834239
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833795
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835101
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29839233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834325
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835843
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833729
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834029
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836949
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833907
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836239
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834149
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834737
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834505
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833917
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834025
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29835821
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29837557
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834471
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833751
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833737
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29838671
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833999
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834253
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833905
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29840547
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29843931
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834307
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29834159
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_22_0333230.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29833695
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_22_0333230.29836819
</commentlist>
</conversation>
