<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_30_1713258</id>
	<title>Facebook Awarded $711 Million In Anti-Spam Case</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1256924760000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Facebook is on a never-before-seen legal rampage against high profile internet spammers. Today <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023\_3-10387021-93.html">Facebook was awarded yet another nine-figure settlement</a>, this time for over $700 million. Facebook also has a criminal contempt case on Wallace, which means a high likelihood of prison, a big win for the internet and a milestone in cyber law. 'The record demonstrates that Wallace willfully violated the statutes in question with blatant disregard for the rights of Facebook and the thousands of Facebook users whose accounts were compromised by his conduct,' Jeremy Fogel wrote in his judgment order, which permanently prohibits Wallace from accessing the Facebook Web site or creating a Facebook account, among other restrictions."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Facebook is on a never-before-seen legal rampage against high profile internet spammers .
Today Facebook was awarded yet another nine-figure settlement , this time for over $ 700 million .
Facebook also has a criminal contempt case on Wallace , which means a high likelihood of prison , a big win for the internet and a milestone in cyber law .
'The record demonstrates that Wallace willfully violated the statutes in question with blatant disregard for the rights of Facebook and the thousands of Facebook users whose accounts were compromised by his conduct, ' Jeremy Fogel wrote in his judgment order , which permanently prohibits Wallace from accessing the Facebook Web site or creating a Facebook account , among other restrictions .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Facebook is on a never-before-seen legal rampage against high profile internet spammers.
Today Facebook was awarded yet another nine-figure settlement, this time for over $700 million.
Facebook also has a criminal contempt case on Wallace, which means a high likelihood of prison, a big win for the internet and a milestone in cyber law.
'The record demonstrates that Wallace willfully violated the statutes in question with blatant disregard for the rights of Facebook and the thousands of Facebook users whose accounts were compromised by his conduct,' Jeremy Fogel wrote in his judgment order, which permanently prohibits Wallace from accessing the Facebook Web site or creating a Facebook account, among other restrictions.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927823</id>
	<title>Re:Facebook for Grand Nagus. Re:A Time Line</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256935020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unwritten Rule of Acquisition #317-: " If you are a big bully, go beet up on someone who annoys the hell out of everyone else.  It's highly profitable in direct Latinum and customer willingness to give you more Latinum."<br>Facebook should be appointed Grand Nagus for coming up with such a lucrative idea.</p></div><p>Maybe... but what does borsht have to do with this?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unwritten Rule of Acquisition # 317- : " If you are a big bully , go beet up on someone who annoys the hell out of everyone else .
It 's highly profitable in direct Latinum and customer willingness to give you more Latinum .
" Facebook should be appointed Grand Nagus for coming up with such a lucrative idea.Maybe... but what does borsht have to do with this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unwritten Rule of Acquisition #317-: " If you are a big bully, go beet up on someone who annoys the hell out of everyone else.
It's highly profitable in direct Latinum and customer willingness to give you more Latinum.
"Facebook should be appointed Grand Nagus for coming up with such a lucrative idea.Maybe... but what does borsht have to do with this?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926919</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926419</id>
	<title>SO..</title>
	<author>CrackedButter</author>
	<datestamp>1256928720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Facebook have turned a profit now right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Facebook have turned a profit now right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Facebook have turned a profit now right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929131</id>
	<title>So...</title>
	<author>Mister Whirly</author>
	<datestamp>1256898420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So that was Rupert Murdoch's plan for making money with Facebook - sue spammers. And here I thought he was stupid for buying it thinking he would never make a ton of money from it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So that was Rupert Murdoch 's plan for making money with Facebook - sue spammers .
And here I thought he was stupid for buying it thinking he would never make a ton of money from it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So that was Rupert Murdoch's plan for making money with Facebook - sue spammers.
And here I thought he was stupid for buying it thinking he would never make a ton of money from it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926779</id>
	<title>Re:How is Facebook going to distribute...</title>
	<author>arthurpaliden</author>
	<datestamp>1256930220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Become a pay site and give them all free accounts?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Become a pay site and give them all free accounts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Become a pay site and give them all free accounts?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926987</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>JamesP</author>
	<datestamp>1256931120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just have a small pebble thrown at him, (and it can be thrown lightly), for every spam he sent...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just have a small pebble thrown at him , ( and it can be thrown lightly ) , for every spam he sent.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just have a small pebble thrown at him, (and it can be thrown lightly), for every spam he sent...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29948130</id>
	<title>Anyone interested in suing LinkedIn</title>
	<author>abbe</author>
	<datestamp>1257193560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Came across this[1] few years ago, not sure if this is still applicable...</p><p>References:<br>[1] <a href="http://wahjava.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/linkedincom-violating-can-spam-act/" title="wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">http://wahjava.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/linkedincom-violating-can-spam-act/</a> [wordpress.com]</p><p>abbe</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Came across this [ 1 ] few years ago , not sure if this is still applicable...References : [ 1 ] http : //wahjava.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/linkedincom-violating-can-spam-act/ [ wordpress.com ] abbe</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Came across this[1] few years ago, not sure if this is still applicable...References:[1] http://wahjava.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/linkedincom-violating-can-spam-act/ [wordpress.com]abbe</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926613</id>
	<title>Where do I add this new app?</title>
	<author>Sebastopol</author>
	<datestamp>1256929560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Facebook's application for a default judgment against Wallace for violating the Can-Spam Act"</p><p>Cool new app!</p><p>I crack myself up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Facebook 's application for a default judgment against Wallace for violating the Can-Spam Act " Cool new app ! I crack myself up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Facebook's application for a default judgment against Wallace for violating the Can-Spam Act"Cool new app!I crack myself up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</id>
	<title>Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>JoshuaZ</author>
	<datestamp>1256929260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's a certain point where we need to consider the death penalty for this sort of thing. Sure, we normally only use the death penalty for heinous crimes, but from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society. If Wallace is taken out and shot he'll lose about 365*50*24= 438,000 life hours. On the other hand, even a year or two of Wallace's normal behavior causes the rest of society to lose far more time. We should consider a death penalty for serious spammers or possibly a long sentence where he is kept far away from any computer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a certain point where we need to consider the death penalty for this sort of thing .
Sure , we normally only use the death penalty for heinous crimes , but from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society .
If Wallace is taken out and shot he 'll lose about 365 * 50 * 24 = 438,000 life hours .
On the other hand , even a year or two of Wallace 's normal behavior causes the rest of society to lose far more time .
We should consider a death penalty for serious spammers or possibly a long sentence where he is kept far away from any computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a certain point where we need to consider the death penalty for this sort of thing.
Sure, we normally only use the death penalty for heinous crimes, but from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society.
If Wallace is taken out and shot he'll lose about 365*50*24= 438,000 life hours.
On the other hand, even a year or two of Wallace's normal behavior causes the rest of society to lose far more time.
We should consider a death penalty for serious spammers or possibly a long sentence where he is kept far away from any computer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927097</id>
	<title>Re:How is Facebook going to distribute...</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1256931600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt; How is Facebook going to distribute...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the money to the users who suffered damage?</p><p>coupons with no monetary value... and no non-monetary value.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; How is Facebook going to distribute... ... the money to the users who suffered damage ? coupons with no monetary value... and no non-monetary value .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; How is Facebook going to distribute... ... the money to the users who suffered damage?coupons with no monetary value... and no non-monetary value.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927029</id>
	<title>What's in a name?</title>
	<author>clyde\_cadiddlehopper</author>
	<datestamp>1256931360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Wallace and his company Smartbot.net"  Sort of like naming your firm "Ruthless Swindlers, Inc."</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Wallace and his company Smartbot.net " Sort of like naming your firm " Ruthless Swindlers , Inc. "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Wallace and his company Smartbot.net"  Sort of like naming your firm "Ruthless Swindlers, Inc."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926333</id>
	<title>celebrate your kike pride!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256928420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/10/28/new.and.emergent.jews/index.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/10/28/new.and.emergent.jews/index.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/10/28/new.and.emergent.jews/index.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929875</id>
	<title>Re:How is Facebook going to distribute...</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1256903760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Facebook users want compensation then they can file a class-action suit, Facebook itself doesn't really have a responsibility to file a class-action suit for it's users, Facebook is able to go after him with bigger guns in criminal court.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Facebook users want compensation then they can file a class-action suit , Facebook itself does n't really have a responsibility to file a class-action suit for it 's users , Facebook is able to go after him with bigger guns in criminal court .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Facebook users want compensation then they can file a class-action suit, Facebook itself doesn't really have a responsibility to file a class-action suit for it's users, Facebook is able to go after him with bigger guns in criminal court.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927205</id>
	<title>Re:How is Facebook going to distribute...</title>
	<author>omnichad</author>
	<datestamp>1256932140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They can't do that.  They've finally found a business model!  Suing people that bother their users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They ca n't do that .
They 've finally found a business model !
Suing people that bother their users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They can't do that.
They've finally found a business model!
Suing people that bother their users.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926577</id>
	<title>Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1256929380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there's a warrant for his arrest why don't they nab him and extradite him?</p><p>Surely the US Marshals can't be THAT clueless...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there 's a warrant for his arrest why do n't they nab him and extradite him ? Surely the US Marshals ca n't be THAT clueless.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there's a warrant for his arrest why don't they nab him and extradite him?Surely the US Marshals can't be THAT clueless...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928393</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>BlackSnake112</author>
	<datestamp>1256894580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd say he should be the one to power computers. Make him be the one on the bicycle powering the prison computers. He he stops or goes too slow, let the other prisoners deal with him. I wonder how long he could keep on peddling.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say he should be the one to power computers .
Make him be the one on the bicycle powering the prison computers .
He he stops or goes too slow , let the other prisoners deal with him .
I wonder how long he could keep on peddling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say he should be the one to power computers.
Make him be the one on the bicycle powering the prison computers.
He he stops or goes too slow, let the other prisoners deal with him.
I wonder how long he could keep on peddling.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929371</id>
	<title>Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256900280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Nothing is wrong. Myspace, Facebook etc. offer massive amounts of data for spooks wanting to spy on people who are politically active, who have friends who are politically active, who travel to certain places, who have certain religion, who have friends with H1N1, etc. These "social websites" are more influential in singling out individuals than you'd think. The "spam settlements" are merely a way to transfer support funds to ensure the automated OSINT/HUMINT continues. </p><p>Of course everything I said is wrong. Please move along!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing is wrong .
Myspace , Facebook etc .
offer massive amounts of data for spooks wanting to spy on people who are politically active , who have friends who are politically active , who travel to certain places , who have certain religion , who have friends with H1N1 , etc .
These " social websites " are more influential in singling out individuals than you 'd think .
The " spam settlements " are merely a way to transfer support funds to ensure the automated OSINT/HUMINT continues .
Of course everything I said is wrong .
Please move along !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Nothing is wrong.
Myspace, Facebook etc.
offer massive amounts of data for spooks wanting to spy on people who are politically active, who have friends who are politically active, who travel to certain places, who have certain religion, who have friends with H1N1, etc.
These "social websites" are more influential in singling out individuals than you'd think.
The "spam settlements" are merely a way to transfer support funds to ensure the automated OSINT/HUMINT continues.
Of course everything I said is wrong.
Please move along!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29931185</id>
	<title>Re:Idea!</title>
	<author>Prof.Phreak</author>
	<datestamp>1256913000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wonder if they'll consider this judgement as an asset on their books...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wonder if they 'll consider this judgement as an asset on their books.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wonder if they'll consider this judgement as an asset on their books...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926395</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926981</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>drdrgivemethenews</author>
	<datestamp>1256931120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Back in the bad old days, a few days in the stocks would have done it.  Spectators threw stuff.  If you were lucky enough to get out alive, you possibly didn't have eyes anymore, and for sure would be an expert on the taste of various species' feces.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in the bad old days , a few days in the stocks would have done it .
Spectators threw stuff .
If you were lucky enough to get out alive , you possibly did n't have eyes anymore , and for sure would be an expert on the taste of various species ' feces .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in the bad old days, a few days in the stocks would have done it.
Spectators threw stuff.
If you were lucky enough to get out alive, you possibly didn't have eyes anymore, and for sure would be an expert on the taste of various species' feces.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926417</id>
	<title>Good ol' Spamford</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256928720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sweet merciful crap, is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanford\_Wallace" title="wikipedia.org">Spamford Wallace</a> [wikipedia.org] still around?  We were stabbing voodoo dolls with his picture on them more than ten years ago.  His C.V. reads like list of things that are wrong with the Internet.  If there were ever someone that the world would be a better place without, it's this guy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sweet merciful crap , is Spamford Wallace [ wikipedia.org ] still around ?
We were stabbing voodoo dolls with his picture on them more than ten years ago .
His C.V. reads like list of things that are wrong with the Internet .
If there were ever someone that the world would be a better place without , it 's this guy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sweet merciful crap, is Spamford Wallace [wikipedia.org] still around?
We were stabbing voodoo dolls with his picture on them more than ten years ago.
His C.V. reads like list of things that are wrong with the Internet.
If there were ever someone that the world would be a better place without, it's this guy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929401</id>
	<title>Re:This sounds like a fantastic business model...</title>
	<author>Vegeta99</author>
	<datestamp>1256900460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, there's definitely a ????? step in there. If he's facing a <i>criminal contempt</i> charge, he might go to jail. Then he ain't payin' nobody.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , there 's definitely a ? ? ? ? ?
step in there .
If he 's facing a criminal contempt charge , he might go to jail .
Then he ai n't payin ' nobody .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, there's definitely a ?????
step in there.
If he's facing a criminal contempt charge, he might go to jail.
Then he ain't payin' nobody.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926783</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567</id>
	<title>How is Facebook going to distribute...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256929380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>... the money to the users who suffered damage?</htmltext>
<tokenext>... the money to the users who suffered damage ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... the money to the users who suffered damage?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928383</id>
	<title>Re:Are you for real?</title>
	<author>Urza9814</author>
	<datestamp>1256894520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Add to that list that it's more expensive to kill someone than to give them life in prison. From a utilitarian perspective, unless the person has a high risk of somehow escaping or continuing their crimes from inside prison, the death penalty really makes no sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Add to that list that it 's more expensive to kill someone than to give them life in prison .
From a utilitarian perspective , unless the person has a high risk of somehow escaping or continuing their crimes from inside prison , the death penalty really makes no sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Add to that list that it's more expensive to kill someone than to give them life in prison.
From a utilitarian perspective, unless the person has a high risk of somehow escaping or continuing their crimes from inside prison, the death penalty really makes no sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929009</id>
	<title>Re:Are you for real?</title>
	<author>winthrop</author>
	<datestamp>1256897640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You'd might as well use a voodoo doll, it would be just as effective and far less expensive.</p></div><p>Been tried.  Apparently it doesn't work: <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1425321&amp;cid=29926417" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1425321&amp;cid=29926417</a> [slashdot.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'd might as well use a voodoo doll , it would be just as effective and far less expensive.Been tried .
Apparently it does n't work : http : //yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1425321&amp;cid = 29926417 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'd might as well use a voodoo doll, it would be just as effective and far less expensive.Been tried.
Apparently it doesn't work: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1425321&amp;cid=29926417 [slashdot.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928495</id>
	<title>Spamford Wallace talks to the judge</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256895000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Judge: Mr. Wallace, we find you guilty on all charges, you should be ashamed of yourself.<br>Mr. Wallace: Ma'am, I'm sorry. I am a product of my surroundings. The internet is a dirty place.<br>Judge: Mr. Wallace, we need to make sure they you can never commit another atrocious crime like this ever again. Bailiff, whack his pee-pee.</p><p>Double points if you can name the movie this came from.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Judge : Mr. Wallace , we find you guilty on all charges , you should be ashamed of yourself.Mr .
Wallace : Ma'am , I 'm sorry .
I am a product of my surroundings .
The internet is a dirty place.Judge : Mr. Wallace , we need to make sure they you can never commit another atrocious crime like this ever again .
Bailiff , whack his pee-pee.Double points if you can name the movie this came from .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Judge: Mr. Wallace, we find you guilty on all charges, you should be ashamed of yourself.Mr.
Wallace: Ma'am, I'm sorry.
I am a product of my surroundings.
The internet is a dirty place.Judge: Mr. Wallace, we need to make sure they you can never commit another atrocious crime like this ever again.
Bailiff, whack his pee-pee.Double points if you can name the movie this came from.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927705</id>
	<title>Re:Stupid Name</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1256934480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it's such a weak law (and probably intentionally so) that it means that you can spam with impunity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's such a weak law ( and probably intentionally so ) that it means that you can spam with impunity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's such a weak law (and probably intentionally so) that it means that you can spam with impunity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928941</id>
	<title>Re:This sounds like a fantastic business model...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256897280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>woh woh woh... you're business model is seriously flawed, where is your ????</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>woh woh woh... you 're business model is seriously flawed , where is your ? ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>woh woh woh... you're business model is seriously flawed, where is your ???
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926783</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927059</id>
	<title>Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>eh2o</author>
	<datestamp>1256931480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spammer makes profit from facebook users.  Facebook (+lawyers) make profit from spammer.  Is this a new business model?  Why isn't this a class-action lawsuit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spammer makes profit from facebook users .
Facebook ( + lawyers ) make profit from spammer .
Is this a new business model ?
Why is n't this a class-action lawsuit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spammer makes profit from facebook users.
Facebook (+lawyers) make profit from spammer.
Is this a new business model?
Why isn't this a class-action lawsuit?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926961</id>
	<title>Wrong "Method and Process" for stopping spammers</title>
	<author>PolygamousRanchKid </author>
	<datestamp>1256931060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We were stabbing voodoo dolls with his picture on them more than ten years ago.</p></div><p>Obviously, stabbing the voodoo dolls had no effect.
</p><p>I would suggest that the Court anoint its forearm with Tabasco, and fist Mr. Wallace.
</p><p> . . . and I do mean him, and not the voodoo doll.  Then, he might get the message.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We were stabbing voodoo dolls with his picture on them more than ten years ago.Obviously , stabbing the voodoo dolls had no effect .
I would suggest that the Court anoint its forearm with Tabasco , and fist Mr. Wallace . .
. .
and I do mean him , and not the voodoo doll .
Then , he might get the message .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We were stabbing voodoo dolls with his picture on them more than ten years ago.Obviously, stabbing the voodoo dolls had no effect.
I would suggest that the Court anoint its forearm with Tabasco, and fist Mr. Wallace.
 .
. .
and I do mean him, and not the voodoo doll.
Then, he might get the message.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926679</id>
	<title>No facebook profile?</title>
	<author>funehmon</author>
	<datestamp>1256929800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>NO!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>NO ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NO!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927223</id>
	<title>This is why death penality is appropriate</title>
	<author>Lead Butthead</author>
	<datestamp>1256932260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The man is clearly a sociopath that does not give a flying f\_ck about what he done to others. There's no cure for people like that, and the only benefit they can provide for the planet is as fertilizer. If our legal system pursued spammer with the same vigor as copyright violators, we would've rid them some time ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The man is clearly a sociopath that does not give a flying f \ _ck about what he done to others .
There 's no cure for people like that , and the only benefit they can provide for the planet is as fertilizer .
If our legal system pursued spammer with the same vigor as copyright violators , we would 've rid them some time ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The man is clearly a sociopath that does not give a flying f\_ck about what he done to others.
There's no cure for people like that, and the only benefit they can provide for the planet is as fertilizer.
If our legal system pursued spammer with the same vigor as copyright violators, we would've rid them some time ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927035</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>DiademBedfordshire</author>
	<datestamp>1256931360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A tad over zealous, don't you think? Spam is a business and as such we need to hit it were it hurts. If we stop the flow of money to spammers we effectively stop the spammers. Teach every person you know how to spot spam, how to avoid it, how to not click it and the simple restraint of not signing up for every god damn "Free" offer. I am generally spam, virus, and malware free because I assume I'm not the one millionth visitor to EVERY site I go to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A tad over zealous , do n't you think ?
Spam is a business and as such we need to hit it were it hurts .
If we stop the flow of money to spammers we effectively stop the spammers .
Teach every person you know how to spot spam , how to avoid it , how to not click it and the simple restraint of not signing up for every god damn " Free " offer .
I am generally spam , virus , and malware free because I assume I 'm not the one millionth visitor to EVERY site I go to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A tad over zealous, don't you think?
Spam is a business and as such we need to hit it were it hurts.
If we stop the flow of money to spammers we effectively stop the spammers.
Teach every person you know how to spot spam, how to avoid it, how to not click it and the simple restraint of not signing up for every god damn "Free" offer.
I am generally spam, virus, and malware free because I assume I'm not the one millionth visitor to EVERY site I go to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</id>
	<title>A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1256928420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's wrong with this picture? <br> <br>

2004-10-08 FTC files suit against Wallace to stop infecting computers with spyware that promised to remove the problem for $30.<br>
2006-03-22 FTC files suit against Wallace--Wallace and co-defendants fined for over $5 million.<br>
2008-01-26 MySpace awarded $230 million from Wallace in LA. <br>
2009-10-29 (Yesterday) Facebook awarded $711 million from Wallace.  <br> <br>

If you say seven hundred million and jail time is too much, I say it isn't enough.  A warning didn't stop him, five million didn't stop him, two hundred million didn't stop him and I'm sure seven hundred million won't stop him.  Throw the book at him and lock him up--this is definition CAN-SPAM Act.  And he's a heavy repeat offender, it's not like this guy was blindsided with a surprise ruling.  Spam is too kind of a label for this guy, I would hit him for extortion and identity theft on massive scales in addition to CAN-SPAM.  <br> <br>

How he continued to operate with a two hundred million dollar loss a year and a half ago is beyond me.  Is he just declaring bankruptcy (like he did back <a href="http://www.insidefacebook.com/2009/06/12/spam-king-sanford-wallace-files-for-bankruptcy-as-judge-rules-facebooks-lawsuit-can-proceed/" title="insidefacebook.com">June '09</a> [insidefacebook.com]), rolling over and doing it again?  Or avoiding states where there's a warrant for his arrest or what?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's wrong with this picture ?
2004-10-08 FTC files suit against Wallace to stop infecting computers with spyware that promised to remove the problem for $ 30 .
2006-03-22 FTC files suit against Wallace--Wallace and co-defendants fined for over $ 5 million .
2008-01-26 MySpace awarded $ 230 million from Wallace in LA .
2009-10-29 ( Yesterday ) Facebook awarded $ 711 million from Wallace .
If you say seven hundred million and jail time is too much , I say it is n't enough .
A warning did n't stop him , five million did n't stop him , two hundred million did n't stop him and I 'm sure seven hundred million wo n't stop him .
Throw the book at him and lock him up--this is definition CAN-SPAM Act .
And he 's a heavy repeat offender , it 's not like this guy was blindsided with a surprise ruling .
Spam is too kind of a label for this guy , I would hit him for extortion and identity theft on massive scales in addition to CAN-SPAM .
How he continued to operate with a two hundred million dollar loss a year and a half ago is beyond me .
Is he just declaring bankruptcy ( like he did back June '09 [ insidefacebook.com ] ) , rolling over and doing it again ?
Or avoiding states where there 's a warrant for his arrest or what ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's wrong with this picture?
2004-10-08 FTC files suit against Wallace to stop infecting computers with spyware that promised to remove the problem for $30.
2006-03-22 FTC files suit against Wallace--Wallace and co-defendants fined for over $5 million.
2008-01-26 MySpace awarded $230 million from Wallace in LA.
2009-10-29 (Yesterday) Facebook awarded $711 million from Wallace.
If you say seven hundred million and jail time is too much, I say it isn't enough.
A warning didn't stop him, five million didn't stop him, two hundred million didn't stop him and I'm sure seven hundred million won't stop him.
Throw the book at him and lock him up--this is definition CAN-SPAM Act.
And he's a heavy repeat offender, it's not like this guy was blindsided with a surprise ruling.
Spam is too kind of a label for this guy, I would hit him for extortion and identity theft on massive scales in addition to CAN-SPAM.
How he continued to operate with a two hundred million dollar loss a year and a half ago is beyond me.
Is he just declaring bankruptcy (like he did back June '09 [insidefacebook.com]), rolling over and doing it again?
Or avoiding states where there's a warrant for his arrest or what?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927527</id>
	<title>Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>morgauxo</author>
	<datestamp>1256933700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmm...
<br> <br>
I hate spam.  I'd love to see all the spammers burn as much as anyone but...
<br> <br>
Is the damage he has caused really worth $946 million?  I'm sure somebody paid the $30 but there couldn't be THAT many.  How much monetary value is there on having to clean a spam cluttered inbox?  This reminds me of the RIAA and MPAA's methods of justifying their big money lawsuits against individuals.  "No, a few songs are not worth 10s of thousands of dollars but we need big damages to discourage piracy."
<br> <br>
Can we have it both ways?  I don't really think so.  This kind of ruling is dangerous because it validates using the same heavy handed tactics against the people we do like.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm.. . I hate spam .
I 'd love to see all the spammers burn as much as anyone but.. . Is the damage he has caused really worth $ 946 million ?
I 'm sure somebody paid the $ 30 but there could n't be THAT many .
How much monetary value is there on having to clean a spam cluttered inbox ?
This reminds me of the RIAA and MPAA 's methods of justifying their big money lawsuits against individuals .
" No , a few songs are not worth 10s of thousands of dollars but we need big damages to discourage piracy .
" Can we have it both ways ?
I do n't really think so .
This kind of ruling is dangerous because it validates using the same heavy handed tactics against the people we do like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm...
 
I hate spam.
I'd love to see all the spammers burn as much as anyone but...
 
Is the damage he has caused really worth $946 million?
I'm sure somebody paid the $30 but there couldn't be THAT many.
How much monetary value is there on having to clean a spam cluttered inbox?
This reminds me of the RIAA and MPAA's methods of justifying their big money lawsuits against individuals.
"No, a few songs are not worth 10s of thousands of dollars but we need big damages to discourage piracy.
"
 
Can we have it both ways?
I don't really think so.
This kind of ruling is dangerous because it validates using the same heavy handed tactics against the people we do like.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926691</id>
	<title>Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>Penguinisto</author>
	<datestamp>1256929860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) They'd have to actually find him first (odds are good that all but the first cases were done with him <i>in absentia</i>).</p><p>2) Good luck collecting.</p><p>3) this may sound a bit trollish, but a thought occurred to me: as of right now, Spamford Wallace likely owes enough money to buy a brand new ballistic missile submarine. No one will ever see so much as a dime from him. So... why did they even bother? It's similar to the RIAA and Jammie Thomas - there comes a point where it becomes less of a statement and more of a parody. Trust me, I have zero sympathy for the son of a bitch, but do we have to make a mockery of our own legal system just to make a point?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) They 'd have to actually find him first ( odds are good that all but the first cases were done with him in absentia ) .2 ) Good luck collecting.3 ) this may sound a bit trollish , but a thought occurred to me : as of right now , Spamford Wallace likely owes enough money to buy a brand new ballistic missile submarine .
No one will ever see so much as a dime from him .
So... why did they even bother ?
It 's similar to the RIAA and Jammie Thomas - there comes a point where it becomes less of a statement and more of a parody .
Trust me , I have zero sympathy for the son of a bitch , but do we have to make a mockery of our own legal system just to make a point ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) They'd have to actually find him first (odds are good that all but the first cases were done with him in absentia).2) Good luck collecting.3) this may sound a bit trollish, but a thought occurred to me: as of right now, Spamford Wallace likely owes enough money to buy a brand new ballistic missile submarine.
No one will ever see so much as a dime from him.
So... why did they even bother?
It's similar to the RIAA and Jammie Thomas - there comes a point where it becomes less of a statement and more of a parody.
Trust me, I have zero sympathy for the son of a bitch, but do we have to make a mockery of our own legal system just to make a point?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929479</id>
	<title>Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256901120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If he's already willfully breaking laws, to make a buck,  how likely is it that he didn't launder the money earned from his douche-baggery, or stash it somewhere untouchable, so he was able to keep his payouts, after declaring bankruptcy to avoid paying the consequences of his illegal, unethical, and immoral actions. just kill the bugger and get it over with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If he 's already willfully breaking laws , to make a buck , how likely is it that he did n't launder the money earned from his douche-baggery , or stash it somewhere untouchable , so he was able to keep his payouts , after declaring bankruptcy to avoid paying the consequences of his illegal , unethical , and immoral actions .
just kill the bugger and get it over with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If he's already willfully breaking laws, to make a buck,  how likely is it that he didn't launder the money earned from his douche-baggery, or stash it somewhere untouchable, so he was able to keep his payouts, after declaring bankruptcy to avoid paying the consequences of his illegal, unethical, and immoral actions.
just kill the bugger and get it over with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926617</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381</id>
	<title>Stupid Name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256928600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does anyone else find it ironic that the "<b>Can</b>-Spam Act" is meant to stop people from spamming, specifically from the false and misleading type?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone else find it ironic that the " Can-Spam Act " is meant to stop people from spamming , specifically from the false and misleading type ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone else find it ironic that the "Can-Spam Act" is meant to stop people from spamming, specifically from the false and misleading type?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926785</id>
	<title>Facebook business model unveiled!</title>
	<author>Lazy Jones</author>
	<datestamp>1256930220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nobody expected it, I guess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody expected it , I guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody expected it, I guess.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928891</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256896980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I live in a country without death penalty, but support the death penalty.</p><p>The only argument against the death penalty for me is that people make mistakes and if you put an innocent man in prison, you can release him 10 years later and say "sorry" while you can't do that to someone who is dead. But this is not a problem with the death penalty, it's a problem with the whole system (punishing someone for a crime he did not commit is wrong).</p><p>As for the costs - this is stupid - a bullet (or rope or a few kWh of electricity) cannot cost more than feeding the criminal for 30 years. Also, the family of the people the criminal killed might do that for free and even bring their own tools.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in a country without death penalty , but support the death penalty.The only argument against the death penalty for me is that people make mistakes and if you put an innocent man in prison , you can release him 10 years later and say " sorry " while you ca n't do that to someone who is dead .
But this is not a problem with the death penalty , it 's a problem with the whole system ( punishing someone for a crime he did not commit is wrong ) .As for the costs - this is stupid - a bullet ( or rope or a few kWh of electricity ) can not cost more than feeding the criminal for 30 years .
Also , the family of the people the criminal killed might do that for free and even bring their own tools .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in a country without death penalty, but support the death penalty.The only argument against the death penalty for me is that people make mistakes and if you put an innocent man in prison, you can release him 10 years later and say "sorry" while you can't do that to someone who is dead.
But this is not a problem with the death penalty, it's a problem with the whole system (punishing someone for a crime he did not commit is wrong).As for the costs - this is stupid - a bullet (or rope or a few kWh of electricity) cannot cost more than feeding the criminal for 30 years.
Also, the family of the people the criminal killed might do that for free and even bring their own tools.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927245</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256932380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be serious for a moment, why has this jackass not been completely prohibited from using the internet?  Judges have already told him that he can no longer use Myspace or Facebook - why not just bite the bullet and tell him that he cannot use the internet at all?</p><p>Considering his track record in junk faxes as well, I'd probably suggest disallowing him use of any communication service whatsoever.  If he still wants to "spam," he can do it in person where his "potential customer" can easily respond... preferably by a swift kick to the balls.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be serious for a moment , why has this jackass not been completely prohibited from using the internet ?
Judges have already told him that he can no longer use Myspace or Facebook - why not just bite the bullet and tell him that he can not use the internet at all ? Considering his track record in junk faxes as well , I 'd probably suggest disallowing him use of any communication service whatsoever .
If he still wants to " spam , " he can do it in person where his " potential customer " can easily respond... preferably by a swift kick to the balls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be serious for a moment, why has this jackass not been completely prohibited from using the internet?
Judges have already told him that he can no longer use Myspace or Facebook - why not just bite the bullet and tell him that he cannot use the internet at all?Considering his track record in junk faxes as well, I'd probably suggest disallowing him use of any communication service whatsoever.
If he still wants to "spam," he can do it in person where his "potential customer" can easily respond... preferably by a swift kick to the balls.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928519</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>BlackSnake112</author>
	<datestamp>1256895120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How could putting someone to death (that is assuming that the person is put to death within a year) cost less then keeping them in jail for the rest of their lives?</p><p>One year jail time+method of execution has to cost less the care and feeding of said person for the rest of their lives.</p><p>If you have the death penalty, use it. If the criminals know, that if they do something that society can and will kill them for it, we might have less crime. The biggest issue is the criminals know that they have years (if not decades) on death row before their day come up. In the mean time they can take law classes to figure out ways to keep their date of execution from arriving. I am sorry but if you are on death row (or have life in prison) you should not be allowed to take classes at all. You did a crime, you lost your rights, you should just sit there with nothing and think about your crime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How could putting someone to death ( that is assuming that the person is put to death within a year ) cost less then keeping them in jail for the rest of their lives ? One year jail time + method of execution has to cost less the care and feeding of said person for the rest of their lives.If you have the death penalty , use it .
If the criminals know , that if they do something that society can and will kill them for it , we might have less crime .
The biggest issue is the criminals know that they have years ( if not decades ) on death row before their day come up .
In the mean time they can take law classes to figure out ways to keep their date of execution from arriving .
I am sorry but if you are on death row ( or have life in prison ) you should not be allowed to take classes at all .
You did a crime , you lost your rights , you should just sit there with nothing and think about your crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How could putting someone to death (that is assuming that the person is put to death within a year) cost less then keeping them in jail for the rest of their lives?One year jail time+method of execution has to cost less the care and feeding of said person for the rest of their lives.If you have the death penalty, use it.
If the criminals know, that if they do something that society can and will kill them for it, we might have less crime.
The biggest issue is the criminals know that they have years (if not decades) on death row before their day come up.
In the mean time they can take law classes to figure out ways to keep their date of execution from arriving.
I am sorry but if you are on death row (or have life in prison) you should not be allowed to take classes at all.
You did a crime, you lost your rights, you should just sit there with nothing and think about your crime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29931415</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1256915400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <em>If Wallace is taken out and shot he'll lose about 365*50*24= 438,000 life hours. On the other hand, even a year or two of Wallace's normal behavior causes the rest of society to lose far more time.</em> </p><p>We're losing time, but we're not dying. Wallace can lose his 438,000 hours behind bars. I seriously don't know what's with some geeks who seem to get so upset about antisocial behavior on the Internet that they seriously suggest things like the death penalty for non-violent offenses. Honestly, this kind of attitude is terrifying and something other (normal) people really need to be aware of and actively speak out against.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Wallace is taken out and shot he 'll lose about 365 * 50 * 24 = 438,000 life hours .
On the other hand , even a year or two of Wallace 's normal behavior causes the rest of society to lose far more time .
We 're losing time , but we 're not dying .
Wallace can lose his 438,000 hours behind bars .
I seriously do n't know what 's with some geeks who seem to get so upset about antisocial behavior on the Internet that they seriously suggest things like the death penalty for non-violent offenses .
Honestly , this kind of attitude is terrifying and something other ( normal ) people really need to be aware of and actively speak out against .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If Wallace is taken out and shot he'll lose about 365*50*24= 438,000 life hours.
On the other hand, even a year or two of Wallace's normal behavior causes the rest of society to lose far more time.
We're losing time, but we're not dying.
Wallace can lose his 438,000 hours behind bars.
I seriously don't know what's with some geeks who seem to get so upset about antisocial behavior on the Internet that they seriously suggest things like the death penalty for non-violent offenses.
Honestly, this kind of attitude is terrifying and something other (normal) people really need to be aware of and actively speak out against.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927697</id>
	<title>Re:Good ol' Spamford</title>
	<author>mitgib</author>
	<datestamp>1256934420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>First off, I have no love for spammers, but to wish death upon them?  Don't you think wishing death upon another human being is a bit extreme for anything other then capitol offenses?  I'm sure you are smart enough to tweak your<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.procmailrc file.</htmltext>
<tokenext>First off , I have no love for spammers , but to wish death upon them ?
Do n't you think wishing death upon another human being is a bit extreme for anything other then capitol offenses ?
I 'm sure you are smart enough to tweak your .procmailrc file .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First off, I have no love for spammers, but to wish death upon them?
Don't you think wishing death upon another human being is a bit extreme for anything other then capitol offenses?
I'm sure you are smart enough to tweak your .procmailrc file.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927001</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256931180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Statements like this make me VERY VERY happy I live in a country where there is no death penalty.</p><p>Not only is the death penalty a barbaric practice but it also costs more than simply locking people up  ( <a href="http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty" title="deathpenaltyinfo.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty</a> [deathpenaltyinfo.org] )</p><p>Though I wouldn't put it passed a population that watches steel buildings fall at the speed of gravity, and declare it a product of fire not demolition?????? Then go on a killing spree for oil and defense contracts.</p><p>The laws of the United State of America, INC apparently trump the laws of physics and the sovereignty of the rest of the world.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Statements like this make me VERY VERY happy I live in a country where there is no death penalty.Not only is the death penalty a barbaric practice but it also costs more than simply locking people up ( http : //www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty [ deathpenaltyinfo.org ] ) Though I would n't put it passed a population that watches steel buildings fall at the speed of gravity , and declare it a product of fire not demolition ? ? ? ? ? ?
Then go on a killing spree for oil and defense contracts.The laws of the United State of America , INC apparently trump the laws of physics and the sovereignty of the rest of the world .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Statements like this make me VERY VERY happy I live in a country where there is no death penalty.Not only is the death penalty a barbaric practice but it also costs more than simply locking people up  ( http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty [deathpenaltyinfo.org] )Though I wouldn't put it passed a population that watches steel buildings fall at the speed of gravity, and declare it a product of fire not demolition??????
Then go on a killing spree for oil and defense contracts.The laws of the United State of America, INC apparently trump the laws of physics and the sovereignty of the rest of the world.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29934275</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>cheros</author>
	<datestamp>1257001920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm more in favour of hanging, just not by the neck<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>On the (only slightly) more serious side, I wonder what would be an appropriate punishment.  Making the guy go through 30 commercials before he can collect his food, go to the toilet or go to bed?  Barring him from ever receiving soap on a rope so he'll always have to collect it off the floor in the showers?</p><p>No idea, but I feel that locking up will probably not be that effective.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm more in favour of hanging , just not by the neck : - ) On the ( only slightly ) more serious side , I wonder what would be an appropriate punishment .
Making the guy go through 30 commercials before he can collect his food , go to the toilet or go to bed ?
Barring him from ever receiving soap on a rope so he 'll always have to collect it off the floor in the showers ? No idea , but I feel that locking up will probably not be that effective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm more in favour of hanging, just not by the neck :-)On the (only slightly) more serious side, I wonder what would be an appropriate punishment.
Making the guy go through 30 commercials before he can collect his food, go to the toilet or go to bed?
Barring him from ever receiving soap on a rope so he'll always have to collect it off the floor in the showers?No idea, but I feel that locking up will probably not be that effective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926465</id>
	<title>SANFORD Wallace?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256928960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now, that's a name I've not heard in a long time. A long time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , that 's a name I 've not heard in a long time .
A long time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, that's a name I've not heard in a long time.
A long time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928887</id>
	<title>Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256896980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope he gets buttraped in prison, gets aids, and dies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope he gets buttraped in prison , gets aids , and dies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope he gets buttraped in prison, gets aids, and dies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927361</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1256933040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Spam is a business and as such we need to hit it were it hurts. If we stop the flow of money to spammers we effectively stop the spammers</p></div><p>
It seems there is an echo here...<br> <br>I've been <a href="http://slashdot.org/~damn\_registrars/journal/215137" title="slashdot.org">saying that about spammers for some time</a> [slashdot.org].  That, however, doesn't change the fact that you will still have people yearning for blood over the matter - even though it would be a useless guesture.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Spam is a business and as such we need to hit it were it hurts .
If we stop the flow of money to spammers we effectively stop the spammers It seems there is an echo here... I 've been saying that about spammers for some time [ slashdot.org ] .
That , however , does n't change the fact that you will still have people yearning for blood over the matter - even though it would be a useless guesture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spam is a business and as such we need to hit it were it hurts.
If we stop the flow of money to spammers we effectively stop the spammers
It seems there is an echo here... I've been saying that about spammers for some time [slashdot.org].
That, however, doesn't change the fact that you will still have people yearning for blood over the matter - even though it would be a useless guesture.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927035</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927375</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256933100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i cannot believe this got modded interesting. It's spam for god's sake. No one died. Some people may have had some full inboxes or some irritating email.</p><p>You dicks</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i can not believe this got modded interesting .
It 's spam for god 's sake .
No one died .
Some people may have had some full inboxes or some irritating email.You dicks</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i cannot believe this got modded interesting.
It's spam for god's sake.
No one died.
Some people may have had some full inboxes or some irritating email.You dicks</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29933085</id>
	<title>DIY</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256985480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The facebook invites includes text that reads:</p><p>If you do not wish to receive this type of email from Facebook in the future, please click here to unsubscribe.</p><p>Was that so hard?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The facebook invites includes text that reads : If you do not wish to receive this type of email from Facebook in the future , please click here to unsubscribe.Was that so hard ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The facebook invites includes text that reads:If you do not wish to receive this type of email from Facebook in the future, please click here to unsubscribe.Was that so hard?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926989</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926783</id>
	<title>This sounds like a fantastic business model...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256930220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) Start Web 2.0 web site utilizing every buzzword you can find<br>2) Desparately woo users until you get large enough to matter<br>3) Sit down a year or more later to desperately figure out a revenue model<br>4) Provide Spammers a way to proliferate<br>5) Sue them!<br>6) PROFIT$$$$$$$</p><p>Not only that, but this also avoids the usual problem in Slashdot business plans in that there is no question marks in either steps 3 or 4.</p><p>Anyone got a good idea?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Start Web 2.0 web site utilizing every buzzword you can find2 ) Desparately woo users until you get large enough to matter3 ) Sit down a year or more later to desperately figure out a revenue model4 ) Provide Spammers a way to proliferate5 ) Sue them ! 6 ) PROFIT $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Not only that , but this also avoids the usual problem in Slashdot business plans in that there is no question marks in either steps 3 or 4.Anyone got a good idea ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Start Web 2.0 web site utilizing every buzzword you can find2) Desparately woo users until you get large enough to matter3) Sit down a year or more later to desperately figure out a revenue model4) Provide Spammers a way to proliferate5) Sue them!6) PROFIT$$$$$$$Not only that, but this also avoids the usual problem in Slashdot business plans in that there is no question marks in either steps 3 or 4.Anyone got a good idea?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927519</id>
	<title>Re:Facebook for Grand Nagus. Re:A Time Line</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1256933700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LOL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LOL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOL</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926919</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29931877</id>
	<title>Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>FlyHelicopters</author>
	<datestamp>1256919840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To get the point across to people like this, you have to take them out back and shoot them in the head.</p><p>

It is the only way to stop them; putting them in jail is a waste of money.  They won't change their ways.  If we as a society have decided we do not want this behavior, removing him from the gene pool is the only option.</p><p>

Shame we lack the courage to do that.</p><p>

(note: this does not mean I don't want him to have his due process, he deserves that.  If he has had it, then off with his head)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To get the point across to people like this , you have to take them out back and shoot them in the head .
It is the only way to stop them ; putting them in jail is a waste of money .
They wo n't change their ways .
If we as a society have decided we do not want this behavior , removing him from the gene pool is the only option .
Shame we lack the courage to do that .
( note : this does not mean I do n't want him to have his due process , he deserves that .
If he has had it , then off with his head )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To get the point across to people like this, you have to take them out back and shoot them in the head.
It is the only way to stop them; putting them in jail is a waste of money.
They won't change their ways.
If we as a society have decided we do not want this behavior, removing him from the gene pool is the only option.
Shame we lack the courage to do that.
(note: this does not mean I don't want him to have his due process, he deserves that.
If he has had it, then off with his head)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29934079</id>
	<title>Re:Are you for real?</title>
	<author>Spamalope</author>
	<datestamp>1257000360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We start something like a dead pool with a bounty for spammers. The top 30 list of rokso spammers are put in a drawing. The pot money is used to by a hitman for the winner. We don't have to kill them all, just make being a top sender an eventual death sentence. It would be far cheaper than the bandwidth and manpower expenses we pay now.
<br> <br>
Mafia anti-spam anyone?<p><div class="quote"><p>There are multiple reasons that any sensible person can quickly come up with as to why this would be a useless guesture:</p><ul> <li>There are too many spammers to kill them all (or even make a dent in the spam volume by trying)</li><li>Spammers are stateless, and will just flee to countries where spam laws don't exist - where they can continue to make money through spamming</li><li>There is too much money in spam to prevent people from going into it just because there is a remote chance of facing criminal charges in one country for it</li></ul></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We start something like a dead pool with a bounty for spammers .
The top 30 list of rokso spammers are put in a drawing .
The pot money is used to by a hitman for the winner .
We do n't have to kill them all , just make being a top sender an eventual death sentence .
It would be far cheaper than the bandwidth and manpower expenses we pay now .
Mafia anti-spam anyone ? There are multiple reasons that any sensible person can quickly come up with as to why this would be a useless guesture : There are too many spammers to kill them all ( or even make a dent in the spam volume by trying ) Spammers are stateless , and will just flee to countries where spam laws do n't exist - where they can continue to make money through spammingThere is too much money in spam to prevent people from going into it just because there is a remote chance of facing criminal charges in one country for it</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We start something like a dead pool with a bounty for spammers.
The top 30 list of rokso spammers are put in a drawing.
The pot money is used to by a hitman for the winner.
We don't have to kill them all, just make being a top sender an eventual death sentence.
It would be far cheaper than the bandwidth and manpower expenses we pay now.
Mafia anti-spam anyone?There are multiple reasons that any sensible person can quickly come up with as to why this would be a useless guesture: There are too many spammers to kill them all (or even make a dent in the spam volume by trying)Spammers are stateless, and will just flee to countries where spam laws don't exist - where they can continue to make money through spammingThere is too much money in spam to prevent people from going into it just because there is a remote chance of facing criminal charges in one country for it
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927023</id>
	<title>Don't hold your breath...</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1256931360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>... waiting to see a collection on that.  Most likely he won't pay a dime of that fine.  There is no reason to expect otherwise.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... waiting to see a collection on that .
Most likely he wo n't pay a dime of that fine .
There is no reason to expect otherwise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... waiting to see a collection on that.
Most likely he won't pay a dime of that fine.
There is no reason to expect otherwise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926701</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>scubamage</author>
	<datestamp>1256929860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We could sell the body to hormel, and they could use it to make a canned meat product!</htmltext>
<tokenext>We could sell the body to hormel , and they could use it to make a canned meat product !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We could sell the body to hormel, and they could use it to make a canned meat product!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29932603</id>
	<title>Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256931780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sanford is easy to find. I see him every week at the poker room in the Hard Rock Casino in vegas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sanford is easy to find .
I see him every week at the poker room in the Hard Rock Casino in vegas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sanford is easy to find.
I see him every week at the poker room in the Hard Rock Casino in vegas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927045</id>
	<title>Will you take a check?</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1256931480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just let them know where to send a check for <b>zero dollars and zero cents</b> to, and whom to bill for the postage.  There is no reasonable chance of them collecting money from the spammer, so there won't be any money to distribute, either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just let them know where to send a check for zero dollars and zero cents to , and whom to bill for the postage .
There is no reasonable chance of them collecting money from the spammer , so there wo n't be any money to distribute , either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just let them know where to send a check for zero dollars and zero cents to, and whom to bill for the postage.
There is no reasonable chance of them collecting money from the spammer, so there won't be any money to distribute, either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927671</id>
	<title>A few notes about Wallace</title>
	<author>efalk</author>
	<datestamp>1256934300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wallace is the guy that invented mass email spam.  If his ISP had shut him down on day 1, the world might be a different place today.  Spam exists because ISPs tolerate it.</p><p>It is almost unheard of for a plaintiff to collect money from a spammer.  They're either broke, or they've successfully hidden their money. The $711M judgment is purely symbolic.  Facebook knows full well that they'll never collect a dime.</p><p>I agree that jail time is the only solution.  Wallace is the recidivist's recidivist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wallace is the guy that invented mass email spam .
If his ISP had shut him down on day 1 , the world might be a different place today .
Spam exists because ISPs tolerate it.It is almost unheard of for a plaintiff to collect money from a spammer .
They 're either broke , or they 've successfully hidden their money .
The $ 711M judgment is purely symbolic .
Facebook knows full well that they 'll never collect a dime.I agree that jail time is the only solution .
Wallace is the recidivist 's recidivist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wallace is the guy that invented mass email spam.
If his ISP had shut him down on day 1, the world might be a different place today.
Spam exists because ISPs tolerate it.It is almost unheard of for a plaintiff to collect money from a spammer.
They're either broke, or they've successfully hidden their money.
The $711M judgment is purely symbolic.
Facebook knows full well that they'll never collect a dime.I agree that jail time is the only solution.
Wallace is the recidivist's recidivist.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928375</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1256894460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, you asked for it.</p><p>Your post advocates a</p><p>( ) technical (x) legislative ( ) market-based (x) vigilante</p><p>approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)</p><p>( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses<br>( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected<br>(x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money<br>( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks<br>( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it<br>( ) Users of email will not put up with it<br>( ) Microsoft will not put up with it<br>( ) The police will not put up with it<br>( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers<br>( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once<br>( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers<br>( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists<br>(x) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business</p><p>Specifically, your plan fails to account for</p><p>(x) Laws expressly prohibiting it<br>( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email<br>( ) Open relays in foreign countries<br>( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses<br>(x) Asshats<br>(x) Jurisdictional problems<br>( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes<br>( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money<br>( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP<br>( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack<br>( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email<br>( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes<br>( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches<br>( ) Extreme profitability of spam<br>(x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft<br>(x) Technically illiterate politicians<br>( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers<br>( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves<br>( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering<br>( ) Outlook</p><p>and the following philosophical objections may also apply:</p><p>(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever<br>been shown practical<br>( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable<br>( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation<br>( ) Blacklists suck<br>( ) Whitelists suck<br>( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored<br>( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud<br>( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks<br>( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually<br>( ) Sending email should be free<br>( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?<br>( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses<br>(x) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem<br>( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome<br>( ) I don't want the government reading my email<br>(x) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough</p><p>Furthermore, this is what I think about you:</p><p>( ) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.<br>(x) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.<br>(x) Nice try, asshole! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your<br>house down!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , you asked for it.Your post advocates a ( ) technical ( x ) legislative ( ) market-based ( x ) vigilanteapproach to fighting spam .
Your idea will not work .
Here is why it wo n't work .
( One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea , and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed .
) ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected ( x ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we 'll be stuck with it ( ) Users of email will not put up with it ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it ( ) The police will not put up with it ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers ( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once ( ) Many email users can not afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) Spammers do n't care about invalid addresses in their lists ( x ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else 's career or businessSpecifically , your plan fails to account for ( x ) Laws expressly prohibiting it ( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email ( ) Open relays in foreign countries ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses ( x ) Asshats ( x ) Jurisdictional problems ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email ( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches ( ) Extreme profitability of spam ( x ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft ( x ) Technically illiterate politicians ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers ( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering ( ) Outlookand the following philosophical objections may also apply : ( x ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with , yet none have everbeen shown practical ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation ( ) Blacklists suck ( ) Whitelists suck ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually ( ) Sending email should be free ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers ?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses ( x ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome ( ) I do n't want the government reading my email ( x ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enoughFurthermore , this is what I think about you : ( ) Sorry dude , but I do n't think it would work .
( x ) This is a stupid idea , and you 're a stupid person for suggesting it .
( x ) Nice try , asshole !
I 'm going to find out where you live and burn yourhouse down !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, you asked for it.Your post advocates a( ) technical (x) legislative ( ) market-based (x) vigilanteapproach to fighting spam.
Your idea will not work.
Here is why it won't work.
(One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.
)( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected(x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it( ) Users of email will not put up with it( ) Microsoft will not put up with it( ) The police will not put up with it( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists(x) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or businessSpecifically, your plan fails to account for(x) Laws expressly prohibiting it( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email( ) Open relays in foreign countries( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses(x) Asshats(x) Jurisdictional problems( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches( ) Extreme profitability of spam(x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft(x) Technically illiterate politicians( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering( ) Outlookand the following philosophical objections may also apply:(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have everbeen shown practical( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation( ) Blacklists suck( ) Whitelists suck( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually( ) Sending email should be free( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses(x) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome( ) I don't want the government reading my email(x) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enoughFurthermore, this is what I think about you:( ) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
(x) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
(x) Nice try, asshole!
I'm going to find out where you live and burn yourhouse down!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926509</id>
	<title>Re:Stupid Name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256929140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wrong homonym, genius. Can spam, as in put spam in a can. It's the only bit of legislation I'm aware of with a nickname that's actually clever and punny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wrong homonym , genius .
Can spam , as in put spam in a can .
It 's the only bit of legislation I 'm aware of with a nickname that 's actually clever and punny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wrong homonym, genius.
Can spam, as in put spam in a can.
It's the only bit of legislation I'm aware of with a nickname that's actually clever and punny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926617</id>
	<title>Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256929560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You notice that there's a billion dollars in risk here?</p><p>Sounds to me like there is considerable incentive to be an epic scale douchebag of the internet.  You'd think he'd be a gajillionaire, right?</p><p>Except...</p><p>"As of October 2003, he is working as a DJ in Las Vegas, making weekly appearances at OPM nightclub (name changed to 'Poetry Nightclub' October 5, 2007) in Caesars Palace Forum Shops on the Las Vegas Strip. Wallace performs under the name DJ MasterWeb.[8]"</p><p>"Wallace filed for bankruptcy in June, 2009. On 2009-10-29, a Northern California District Court Judge awarded Facebook $711M in damages.[12]. Although unlikely to collect due to his bankruptcy, the presiding judge in the case also recommended Criminal Contempt charges against Wallace, who may face jail time as a result." -wiki</p><p>So uh, it's not like he's ridonculously wealthy as a result of being a sleezebag?  What gives???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You notice that there 's a billion dollars in risk here ? Sounds to me like there is considerable incentive to be an epic scale douchebag of the internet .
You 'd think he 'd be a gajillionaire , right ? Except... " As of October 2003 , he is working as a DJ in Las Vegas , making weekly appearances at OPM nightclub ( name changed to 'Poetry Nightclub ' October 5 , 2007 ) in Caesars Palace Forum Shops on the Las Vegas Strip .
Wallace performs under the name DJ MasterWeb .
[ 8 ] " " Wallace filed for bankruptcy in June , 2009 .
On 2009-10-29 , a Northern California District Court Judge awarded Facebook $ 711M in damages. [ 12 ] .
Although unlikely to collect due to his bankruptcy , the presiding judge in the case also recommended Criminal Contempt charges against Wallace , who may face jail time as a result .
" -wikiSo uh , it 's not like he 's ridonculously wealthy as a result of being a sleezebag ?
What gives ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You notice that there's a billion dollars in risk here?Sounds to me like there is considerable incentive to be an epic scale douchebag of the internet.
You'd think he'd be a gajillionaire, right?Except..."As of October 2003, he is working as a DJ in Las Vegas, making weekly appearances at OPM nightclub (name changed to 'Poetry Nightclub' October 5, 2007) in Caesars Palace Forum Shops on the Las Vegas Strip.
Wallace performs under the name DJ MasterWeb.
[8]""Wallace filed for bankruptcy in June, 2009.
On 2009-10-29, a Northern California District Court Judge awarded Facebook $711M in damages.[12].
Although unlikely to collect due to his bankruptcy, the presiding judge in the case also recommended Criminal Contempt charges against Wallace, who may face jail time as a result.
" -wikiSo uh, it's not like he's ridonculously wealthy as a result of being a sleezebag?
What gives??
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928719</id>
	<title>this web 2.0 thing...</title>
	<author>mathfeel</author>
	<datestamp>1256896260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does this make facebook profitable now?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this make facebook profitable now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this make facebook profitable now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926943</id>
	<title>... and why should they?</title>
	<author>phorm</author>
	<datestamp>1256930940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the users wanted momentary damages, they should have formed/joined litigation or a class action against Wallace themselves.</p><p>That aside, you don't get money for criminal charges, so it's not always about the cash. Having facebook actually go after guy - hopefully enough to get contempt charges and have him thrown in the slammer - will hopefully help deter him from further victims, and give a similar "moral victory" to those that were wronged.</p><p>If somebody did something to screw me out of $100, it might not be worth it for me alone to sue for damages in court. However it would likely still put a smile on my face if $BIGCORP managed to wipe them out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the users wanted momentary damages , they should have formed/joined litigation or a class action against Wallace themselves.That aside , you do n't get money for criminal charges , so it 's not always about the cash .
Having facebook actually go after guy - hopefully enough to get contempt charges and have him thrown in the slammer - will hopefully help deter him from further victims , and give a similar " moral victory " to those that were wronged.If somebody did something to screw me out of $ 100 , it might not be worth it for me alone to sue for damages in court .
However it would likely still put a smile on my face if $ BIGCORP managed to wipe them out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the users wanted momentary damages, they should have formed/joined litigation or a class action against Wallace themselves.That aside, you don't get money for criminal charges, so it's not always about the cash.
Having facebook actually go after guy - hopefully enough to get contempt charges and have him thrown in the slammer - will hopefully help deter him from further victims, and give a similar "moral victory" to those that were wronged.If somebody did something to screw me out of $100, it might not be worth it for me alone to sue for damages in court.
However it would likely still put a smile on my face if $BIGCORP managed to wipe them out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927077</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1256931540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt; There's a certain point where we need to consider the death penalty for this sort of thing. Sure, we normally only use the death penalty for heinous crimes, but from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society. If Wallace is taken out and shot he'll lose about 365*50*24= 438,000 life hours.</p><p>so... watch out for your 15 minutes of fame lest people consider you wasting their time?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; There 's a certain point where we need to consider the death penalty for this sort of thing .
Sure , we normally only use the death penalty for heinous crimes , but from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society .
If Wallace is taken out and shot he 'll lose about 365 * 50 * 24 = 438,000 life hours.so... watch out for your 15 minutes of fame lest people consider you wasting their time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; There's a certain point where we need to consider the death penalty for this sort of thing.
Sure, we normally only use the death penalty for heinous crimes, but from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society.
If Wallace is taken out and shot he'll lose about 365*50*24= 438,000 life hours.so... watch out for your 15 minutes of fame lest people consider you wasting their time?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926733</id>
	<title>Re:Stupid Name</title>
	<author>Scrameustache</author>
	<datestamp>1256929980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Does anyone else find it ironic that the "<b>Can</b>-Spam Act" is meant to stop people from spamming</p></div><p>Yes, it's ironic, in this context it's meant as "to put it in a can", you know, like the meat Spam.</p><p>And this guy is going to go spend time in a metal box, so it seems fitting.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone else find it ironic that the " Can-Spam Act " is meant to stop people from spammingYes , it 's ironic , in this context it 's meant as " to put it in a can " , you know , like the meat Spam.And this guy is going to go spend time in a metal box , so it seems fitting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone else find it ironic that the "Can-Spam Act" is meant to stop people from spammingYes, it's ironic, in this context it's meant as "to put it in a can", you know, like the meat Spam.And this guy is going to go spend time in a metal box, so it seems fitting.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926971</id>
	<title>Re:How is Facebook going to distribute...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256931060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ha, ha, ha, hah.</p><p> <i>Hint: they probably aren't.</i> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ha , ha , ha , hah .
Hint : they probably are n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ha, ha, ha, hah.
Hint: they probably aren't. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929835</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1256903460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>steel buildings fall at the speed of gravity</p></div><p>Does gravity not act on steel buildings in other countries?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>steel buildings fall at the speed of gravityDoes gravity not act on steel buildings in other countries ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>steel buildings fall at the speed of gravityDoes gravity not act on steel buildings in other countries?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928805</id>
	<title>Re:A Time Line of Sanford Wallace</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1256896680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many of those judgements has he actually paid?</p><p>Methinks that since the judgements are just at a civil level he isn't exactly in a position to be FORCED to pay up.</p><p>As for bankruptcy, his conduct was willful and malicious...which means any *sane* judge should refuse to discharge such debts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many of those judgements has he actually paid ? Methinks that since the judgements are just at a civil level he is n't exactly in a position to be FORCED to pay up.As for bankruptcy , his conduct was willful and malicious...which means any * sane * judge should refuse to discharge such debts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many of those judgements has he actually paid?Methinks that since the judgements are just at a civil level he isn't exactly in a position to be FORCED to pay up.As for bankruptcy, his conduct was willful and malicious...which means any *sane* judge should refuse to discharge such debts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928177</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256893500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chinese water torture. One drop of water per spam occurrence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese water torture .
One drop of water per spam occurrence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese water torture.
One drop of water per spam occurrence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926649</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139</id>
	<title>Are you for real?</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1256931840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There's a certain point where we need to consider the death penalty for this sort of thing.</p></div><p>
Are you trying to actually accomplish something or are you just trying to make yourself feel better?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society</p></div><p>
OK, we'll go for the latter (much) more so than the former.<br> <br>
There are multiple reasons that any sensible person can quickly come up with as to why this would be a useless guesture:</p><ul> <li>There are too many spammers to kill them all (or even make a dent in the spam volume by trying)</li><li>Spammers are stateless, and will just flee to countries where spam laws don't exist - where they can continue to make money through spamming</li><li>There is too much money in spam to prevent people from going into it just because there is a remote chance of facing criminal charges in one country for it</li></ul><p>
And thats just getting started...<br> <br>
You'd might as well use a voodoo doll, it would be just as effective and far less expensive.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a certain point where we need to consider the death penalty for this sort of thing .
Are you trying to actually accomplish something or are you just trying to make yourself feel better ? from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society OK , we 'll go for the latter ( much ) more so than the former .
There are multiple reasons that any sensible person can quickly come up with as to why this would be a useless guesture : There are too many spammers to kill them all ( or even make a dent in the spam volume by trying ) Spammers are stateless , and will just flee to countries where spam laws do n't exist - where they can continue to make money through spammingThere is too much money in spam to prevent people from going into it just because there is a remote chance of facing criminal charges in one country for it And thats just getting started.. . You 'd might as well use a voodoo doll , it would be just as effective and far less expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a certain point where we need to consider the death penalty for this sort of thing.
Are you trying to actually accomplish something or are you just trying to make yourself feel better?from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society
OK, we'll go for the latter (much) more so than the former.
There are multiple reasons that any sensible person can quickly come up with as to why this would be a useless guesture: There are too many spammers to kill them all (or even make a dent in the spam volume by trying)Spammers are stateless, and will just flee to countries where spam laws don't exist - where they can continue to make money through spammingThere is too much money in spam to prevent people from going into it just because there is a remote chance of facing criminal charges in one country for it
And thats just getting started... 
You'd might as well use a voodoo doll, it would be just as effective and far less expensive.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926989</id>
	<title>Stop the invites</title>
	<author>adosch</author>
	<datestamp>1256931180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now if only people would stop 'spamming' me with their Facebook invites...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now if only people would stop 'spamming ' me with their Facebook invites.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now if only people would stop 'spamming' me with their Facebook invites...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29939743</id>
	<title>Re:Good ol' Spamford</title>
	<author>arth1</author>
	<datestamp>1257015120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, whoever wrote in the subtitle of this post "yet-another-spam-king" must be new.  Sanford "Spamford" Wallace is <i>the original</i> spam king, active back in the mid 90's.</p><p>Ironically, about a decade ago he claimed he had seen the light and was now all against spam.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , whoever wrote in the subtitle of this post " yet-another-spam-king " must be new .
Sanford " Spamford " Wallace is the original spam king , active back in the mid 90 's.Ironically , about a decade ago he claimed he had seen the light and was now all against spam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, whoever wrote in the subtitle of this post "yet-another-spam-king" must be new.
Sanford "Spamford" Wallace is the original spam king, active back in the mid 90's.Ironically, about a decade ago he claimed he had seen the light and was now all against spam.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926919</id>
	<title>Facebook for Grand Nagus. Re:A Time Line</title>
	<author>Forge</author>
	<datestamp>1256930880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unwritten Rule of Acquisition #317-: " If you are a big bully, go beet up on someone who annoys the hell out of everyone else.  It's highly profitable in direct Latinum and customer willingness to give you more Latinum."
<br> <br>
Facebook should be appointed Grand Nagus for coming up with such a lucrative idea.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unwritten Rule of Acquisition # 317- : " If you are a big bully , go beet up on someone who annoys the hell out of everyone else .
It 's highly profitable in direct Latinum and customer willingness to give you more Latinum .
" Facebook should be appointed Grand Nagus for coming up with such a lucrative idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unwritten Rule of Acquisition #317-: " If you are a big bully, go beet up on someone who annoys the hell out of everyone else.
It's highly profitable in direct Latinum and customer willingness to give you more Latinum.
"
 
Facebook should be appointed Grand Nagus for coming up with such a lucrative idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926395</id>
	<title>Idea!</title>
	<author>gcnaddict</author>
	<datestamp>1256928660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Facebook should just use this as their business model.<br> <br>I mean hey, if the money ever actually does come in, it's perfectly viable given how often people spam Facebook users.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Facebook should just use this as their business model .
I mean hey , if the money ever actually does come in , it 's perfectly viable given how often people spam Facebook users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Facebook should just use this as their business model.
I mean hey, if the money ever actually does come in, it's perfectly viable given how often people spam Facebook users.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927197</id>
	<title>Facebook is now the government?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256932140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the summary:</p><blockquote><div><p>Facebook also has a criminal contempt case on Wallace</p></div></blockquote><p>I thought criminal cases were always "The State v. \_\_\_" or another government agency.  I have a hard time believing that Facebook has a criminal case against the guy.</p><p>Is there a lawyer in the house (or at least someone who plays lawyer on Slashdot)?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the summary : Facebook also has a criminal contempt case on WallaceI thought criminal cases were always " The State v. \ _ \ _ \ _ " or another government agency .
I have a hard time believing that Facebook has a criminal case against the guy.Is there a lawyer in the house ( or at least someone who plays lawyer on Slashdot ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the summary:Facebook also has a criminal contempt case on WallaceI thought criminal cases were always "The State v. \_\_\_" or another government agency.
I have a hard time believing that Facebook has a criminal case against the guy.Is there a lawyer in the house (or at least someone who plays lawyer on Slashdot)?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929801</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1256903220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sure, we normally only use the death penalty for heinous crimes, but from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society. If Wallace is taken out and shot he'll lose about 365*50*24= 438,000 life hours. On the other hand, even a year or two of Wallace's normal behavior causes the rest of society to lose far more time. We should consider a death penalty</p></div><p>Chairman Mao, is that you?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , we normally only use the death penalty for heinous crimes , but from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society .
If Wallace is taken out and shot he 'll lose about 365 * 50 * 24 = 438,000 life hours .
On the other hand , even a year or two of Wallace 's normal behavior causes the rest of society to lose far more time .
We should consider a death penaltyChairman Mao , is that you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, we normally only use the death penalty for heinous crimes, but from a utilitarian perspective it is quite clear that people like Sanford Wallace are doing far more damage to society.
If Wallace is taken out and shot he'll lose about 365*50*24= 438,000 life hours.
On the other hand, even a year or two of Wallace's normal behavior causes the rest of society to lose far more time.
We should consider a death penaltyChairman Mao, is that you?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926965</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256931060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/\%22Repent,\_Harlequin!\%22\_Said\_the\_Ticktockman" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Repent, Herlequin!</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Repent , Herlequin !
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Repent, Herlequin!
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926513</id>
	<title>Re:Stupid Name</title>
	<author>TimeElf1</author>
	<datestamp>1256929140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think they were trying to invoke an image of a trash<b>can</b> but had a epic fail moment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think they were trying to invoke an image of a trashcan but had a epic fail moment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think they were trying to invoke an image of a trashcan but had a epic fail moment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929161</id>
	<title>Re:SANFORD Wallace?</title>
	<author>Timosch</author>
	<datestamp>1256898600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought he had been hung, drawn and quartered. Oh wait, nevermind, that was William Wallace.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought he had been hung , drawn and quartered .
Oh wait , nevermind , that was William Wallace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought he had been hung, drawn and quartered.
Oh wait, nevermind, that was William Wallace.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926527</id>
	<title>Re:Stupid Name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256929140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the name was intended to be humorous, alluding to sealing Spam(the Hormel product) into a container (a can).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the name was intended to be humorous , alluding to sealing Spam ( the Hormel product ) into a container ( a can ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the name was intended to be humorous, alluding to sealing Spam(the Hormel product) into a container (a can).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926425</id>
	<title>Nice</title>
	<author>mosb1000</author>
	<datestamp>1256928780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's good to see a corporation winning a $700,000,000 against an individual once in a while.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's good to see a corporation winning a $ 700,000,000 against an individual once in a while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's good to see a corporation winning a $700,000,000 against an individual once in a while.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926503</id>
	<title>Re:Stupid Name</title>
	<author>pz</author>
	<datestamp>1256929080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Does anyone else find it ironic that the "<b>Can</b>-Spam Act" is meant to stop people from spamming, specifically from the false and misleading type?</p></div><p>I believe the intent was to have the first word in CAN-SPAM be a verb, with the meaning of "can" being, "to throw in the trash."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone else find it ironic that the " Can-Spam Act " is meant to stop people from spamming , specifically from the false and misleading type ? I believe the intent was to have the first word in CAN-SPAM be a verb , with the meaning of " can " being , " to throw in the trash .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone else find it ironic that the "Can-Spam Act" is meant to stop people from spamming, specifically from the false and misleading type?I believe the intent was to have the first word in CAN-SPAM be a verb, with the meaning of "can" being, "to throw in the trash.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29930305</id>
	<title>Re:Are you for real?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256906280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There are too many spammers to kill them all</p></div><p>Oh, I think killing one spammer would decrease the number of them quite significantly.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are too many spammers to kill them allOh , I think killing one spammer would decrease the number of them quite significantly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are too many spammers to kill them allOh, I think killing one spammer would decrease the number of them quite significantly.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926385</id>
	<title>Free Viagra!</title>
	<author>jornak</author>
	<datestamp>1256928600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why can't -I- sue people for emailing me mindless spam?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ca n't -I- sue people for emailing me mindless spam ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why can't -I- sue people for emailing me mindless spam?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926649</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>AJWM</author>
	<datestamp>1256929680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And an appropriate execution method might be death by ten thousand paper cuts.  Or just leave him naked in mosquito country at the start of the season.  I mean, it's not like any <i>one</i> cut or bite is that serious....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And an appropriate execution method might be death by ten thousand paper cuts .
Or just leave him naked in mosquito country at the start of the season .
I mean , it 's not like any one cut or bite is that serious... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And an appropriate execution method might be death by ten thousand paper cuts.
Or just leave him naked in mosquito country at the start of the season.
I mean, it's not like any one cut or bite is that serious....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29932205</id>
	<title>Re:Are you for real?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256924400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Are you trying to actually accomplish something or are you just trying to make yourself feel better?"</p><p>A little of both.  Actually, I have an idea to recover the $700 million: sell tickets at $100 each for people to have an opportunity to hit him in the face with a pipe.  I'll bet there would be about a million people willing to pay, and you would save on costs associated with the death penalty because after a few hundred tickets he'd be dead.  Cheaper than chemicals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Are you trying to actually accomplish something or are you just trying to make yourself feel better ?
" A little of both .
Actually , I have an idea to recover the $ 700 million : sell tickets at $ 100 each for people to have an opportunity to hit him in the face with a pipe .
I 'll bet there would be about a million people willing to pay , and you would save on costs associated with the death penalty because after a few hundred tickets he 'd be dead .
Cheaper than chemicals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Are you trying to actually accomplish something or are you just trying to make yourself feel better?
"A little of both.
Actually, I have an idea to recover the $700 million: sell tickets at $100 each for people to have an opportunity to hit him in the face with a pipe.
I'll bet there would be about a million people willing to pay, and you would save on costs associated with the death penalty because after a few hundred tickets he'd be dead.
Cheaper than chemicals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928547</id>
	<title>Re:Time for the death penalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256895240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bleeding heart conservatives...</p><p>Look, when I die, it's likely to be a horrible ordeal. Have you ever seen anyone in the last stages of Alsheimer's or cancer? You're going to die in a car wreck or other accident, of some terrible disease. Very few are as lucky as my late ex-mother in law, who just stopped in mid sentence like a robot whose battery was yanked out.</p><p>We're all under a sentence of death, and most of us are sentenced to death by torture. And we have no idea when it will happen. You might live to be 110, or you may keel over ten minutes from now.</p><p>The man condemned by other men to die, on the other hand, know exactly when they're going to die. They have a chance to make their peace with any creator they happen to believe in. Then they are painlessly and without muss or fuss humanely put to sleep like a beloved pet.</p><p>I'd rather they die naturally, in prison, when their time comes, letting them think about the horror they have wreaked on people.</p><p>You capital punishment advocates are far too kind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bleeding heart conservatives...Look , when I die , it 's likely to be a horrible ordeal .
Have you ever seen anyone in the last stages of Alsheimer 's or cancer ?
You 're going to die in a car wreck or other accident , of some terrible disease .
Very few are as lucky as my late ex-mother in law , who just stopped in mid sentence like a robot whose battery was yanked out.We 're all under a sentence of death , and most of us are sentenced to death by torture .
And we have no idea when it will happen .
You might live to be 110 , or you may keel over ten minutes from now.The man condemned by other men to die , on the other hand , know exactly when they 're going to die .
They have a chance to make their peace with any creator they happen to believe in .
Then they are painlessly and without muss or fuss humanely put to sleep like a beloved pet.I 'd rather they die naturally , in prison , when their time comes , letting them think about the horror they have wreaked on people.You capital punishment advocates are far too kind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bleeding heart conservatives...Look, when I die, it's likely to be a horrible ordeal.
Have you ever seen anyone in the last stages of Alsheimer's or cancer?
You're going to die in a car wreck or other accident, of some terrible disease.
Very few are as lucky as my late ex-mother in law, who just stopped in mid sentence like a robot whose battery was yanked out.We're all under a sentence of death, and most of us are sentenced to death by torture.
And we have no idea when it will happen.
You might live to be 110, or you may keel over ten minutes from now.The man condemned by other men to die, on the other hand, know exactly when they're going to die.
They have a chance to make their peace with any creator they happen to believe in.
Then they are painlessly and without muss or fuss humanely put to sleep like a beloved pet.I'd rather they die naturally, in prison, when their time comes, letting them think about the horror they have wreaked on people.You capital punishment advocates are far too kind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928327</id>
	<title>Re:SANFORD Wallace?</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1256894220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That sounds like an admission to being Wallace, to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That sounds like an admission to being Wallace , to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That sounds like an admission to being Wallace, to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926465</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29933085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926989
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926943
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29939743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926649
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29931185
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929835
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929875
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927245
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29934079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29931877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927361
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927035
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926617
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29932603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929401
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29932205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927097
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29934275
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929009
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926577
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928383
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29930305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29931415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928941
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926987
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_30_1713258_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926779
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927197
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926385
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927671
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926465
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928327
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929161
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926783
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929401
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928941
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926785
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926987
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29934275
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927139
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929009
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29934079
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29930305
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29932205
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928383
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927001
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928891
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929835
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927035
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927361
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926701
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929801
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926649
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928177
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927245
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926965
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29931415
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926395
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29931185
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926417
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29939743
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927697
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926961
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926425
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926989
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29933085
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926503
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927705
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926527
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926513
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926617
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929479
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926919
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927823
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926577
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927223
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928805
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29931877
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926691
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29932603
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29928495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927527
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927059
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929371
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927205
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926943
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927097
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926971
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927045
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29926779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29929875
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_30_1713258.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_30_1713258.29927029
</commentlist>
</conversation>
