<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_04_157249</id>
	<title>SORBS Blocklist Reportedly Sold For $451K</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1257351960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.classhelper.org/" rel="nofollow">palegray.net</a> writes <i>"<a href="http://www.sorbs.net/">SORBS</a>, a well-known email blocklist provider, has reportedly been <a href="http://jedsmith.org/?p=90">sold for $451k</a>. Early reports indicate an acquisition by <a href="http://www.gfi.com/">GFI</a>, a company specializing in various communications services. In recent years, SORBS has been the target of frequent accusations of <a href="http://jedsmith.org/?p=3">mismanagement and poor conduct</a>, leading many to wonder if this turn in events might signal a chance for improved behavior. Citing lack of ISP support, the blocklist released statements earlier this year that they would be shuttering their operation."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>palegray.net writes " SORBS , a well-known email blocklist provider , has reportedly been sold for $ 451k .
Early reports indicate an acquisition by GFI , a company specializing in various communications services .
In recent years , SORBS has been the target of frequent accusations of mismanagement and poor conduct , leading many to wonder if this turn in events might signal a chance for improved behavior .
Citing lack of ISP support , the blocklist released statements earlier this year that they would be shuttering their operation .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>palegray.net writes "SORBS, a well-known email blocklist provider, has reportedly been sold for $451k.
Early reports indicate an acquisition by GFI, a company specializing in various communications services.
In recent years, SORBS has been the target of frequent accusations of mismanagement and poor conduct, leading many to wonder if this turn in events might signal a chance for improved behavior.
Citing lack of ISP support, the blocklist released statements earlier this year that they would be shuttering their operation.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987048</id>
	<title>Re:I *Stopped* using SORBS and SPAM *decreased*.</title>
	<author>LodCrappo</author>
	<datestamp>1256988840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>are you suggesting it would not have gone down if you had continued using sorbs?  i don't get it.  how can you get less spam by blocking less IPs, regardless of whether those IPs are spammers or not?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>are you suggesting it would not have gone down if you had continued using sorbs ?
i do n't get it .
how can you get less spam by blocking less IPs , regardless of whether those IPs are spammers or not ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are you suggesting it would not have gone down if you had continued using sorbs?
i don't get it.
how can you get less spam by blocking less IPs, regardless of whether those IPs are spammers or not?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29986942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29989054</id>
	<title>SORBS--What a joke it became.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256997720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I got brand new IP's from ARIN which are still SORBS listed. I requested removal months ago and no reply.</p><p>I guess the transition of man to woman (owner of sorbs) Michael I mean Michelle Sullivan will finally commence. lol</p><p>Its good to hear someone who knows how to run a business is taking over..goodluck GFI!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got brand new IP 's from ARIN which are still SORBS listed .
I requested removal months ago and no reply.I guess the transition of man to woman ( owner of sorbs ) Michael I mean Michelle Sullivan will finally commence .
lolIts good to hear someone who knows how to run a business is taking over..goodluck GFI !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got brand new IP's from ARIN which are still SORBS listed.
I requested removal months ago and no reply.I guess the transition of man to woman (owner of sorbs) Michael I mean Michelle Sullivan will finally commence.
lolIts good to hear someone who knows how to run a business is taking over..goodluck GFI!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29996234</id>
	<title>Re:Too bad</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1257443400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap. Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things, its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam.</p></div></blockquote><p>It was helpful in detecting email and, based on the lunatic who was running it's particular whims, probably included a healthy dose of legitimate servers that, through no fault of their own, were somehow associated in some convoluted way with IP blocks where spam probably originated at some point anywhere in the last decade or so.</p><p>If I just randomly shoot people on the street, or even better, shoot everyone where leather jackets, I'm sure I'll take out some bad guys, but I'll take out a lot of innocent people as well.  If that's your measure of success, then fine.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap .
Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things , its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam.It was helpful in detecting email and , based on the lunatic who was running it 's particular whims , probably included a healthy dose of legitimate servers that , through no fault of their own , were somehow associated in some convoluted way with IP blocks where spam probably originated at some point anywhere in the last decade or so.If I just randomly shoot people on the street , or even better , shoot everyone where leather jackets , I 'm sure I 'll take out some bad guys , but I 'll take out a lot of innocent people as well .
If that 's your measure of success , then fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap.
Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things, its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam.It was helpful in detecting email and, based on the lunatic who was running it's particular whims, probably included a healthy dose of legitimate servers that, through no fault of their own, were somehow associated in some convoluted way with IP blocks where spam probably originated at some point anywhere in the last decade or so.If I just randomly shoot people on the street, or even better, shoot everyone where leather jackets, I'm sure I'll take out some bad guys, but I'll take out a lot of innocent people as well.
If that's your measure of success, then fine.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.30002078</id>
	<title>WTF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257429600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HOW THE FUCK CAN HIS SHITTY LIST OF IP ADDRESSES BE WORTH HALF A MILLION DOLLARS?</p><p>AND HOW DARE GFI REWARD THIS FUCKING FAGGOT FOR HIS CAMPNESS, INEPTITUDE, AND PISS POOR ATTITUDE DEALING WITH USERS.</p><p>FUCK THE WORLD IS ALL WRONG WHEN LOWLIFE FAGGOTS LIKE SULLIVAN ARE GIVEN HALF A MILLION BUCKS.</p><p>Matthew/Michelle, FUCK YOU. I really hope you get aids<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) Really.</p><p>Also, fuck you, slashdot posting filter.<br>aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<br>aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<br>aaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<br>aaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaa<br>aa aaaaa  aaa  aa  aaa aaaaaaaaa<br>aaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaaaa aaaa<br>aaaa aaaaa aaaaaaaaaa aaaa<br>aaa aaaaa  aaaaaa aa a aaaaaaa<br>aaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa   aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HOW THE FUCK CAN HIS SHITTY LIST OF IP ADDRESSES BE WORTH HALF A MILLION DOLLARS ? AND HOW DARE GFI REWARD THIS FUCKING FAGGOT FOR HIS CAMPNESS , INEPTITUDE , AND PISS POOR ATTITUDE DEALING WITH USERS.FUCK THE WORLD IS ALL WRONG WHEN LOWLIFE FAGGOTS LIKE SULLIVAN ARE GIVEN HALF A MILLION BUCKS.Matthew/Michelle , FUCK YOU .
I really hope you get aids : ) Really.Also , fuck you , slashdot posting filter.aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaa aaaaa aaa aa aaa aaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaa aaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaa aaaaa aaaaaa aa a aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HOW THE FUCK CAN HIS SHITTY LIST OF IP ADDRESSES BE WORTH HALF A MILLION DOLLARS?AND HOW DARE GFI REWARD THIS FUCKING FAGGOT FOR HIS CAMPNESS, INEPTITUDE, AND PISS POOR ATTITUDE DEALING WITH USERS.FUCK THE WORLD IS ALL WRONG WHEN LOWLIFE FAGGOTS LIKE SULLIVAN ARE GIVEN HALF A MILLION BUCKS.Matthew/Michelle, FUCK YOU.
I really hope you get aids :) Really.Also, fuck you, slashdot posting filter.aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaa aaaaa  aaa  aa  aaa aaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaa aaaa aaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaa aaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaa aaaaa  aaaaaa aa a aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa   aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985548</id>
	<title>Re:Is this good or bad?</title>
	<author>dasmoo</author>
	<datestamp>1256983560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Send spam, be punished? Doesn't really sound that bad to me. If you were worth your salt as an IT guy you would've had your ISP change your IP address though. I've dealt with SORBS in getting a range of IP addresses removed before, it took two weeks. During that time we routed all outbound mail through a different IP address. You're going to have trouble with blacklists because they have to be annoying to be effective.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Send spam , be punished ?
Does n't really sound that bad to me .
If you were worth your salt as an IT guy you would 've had your ISP change your IP address though .
I 've dealt with SORBS in getting a range of IP addresses removed before , it took two weeks .
During that time we routed all outbound mail through a different IP address .
You 're going to have trouble with blacklists because they have to be annoying to be effective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Send spam, be punished?
Doesn't really sound that bad to me.
If you were worth your salt as an IT guy you would've had your ISP change your IP address though.
I've dealt with SORBS in getting a range of IP addresses removed before, it took two weeks.
During that time we routed all outbound mail through a different IP address.
You're going to have trouble with blacklists because they have to be annoying to be effective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29981086</id>
	<title>Re:Shuttering their operation?</title>
	<author>hardwarefreak</author>
	<datestamp>1257013680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shuttering -</p><p>1.  closing the shutters on the windows of a building (old term, most don't have shutters in 2009)<br>2.  nailing wooden panels over the windows and doors of a condemned building to keep people out<br>3.  nailing wooden panels over the windows and doors of a foreclosed building to preserve resale value of the structure (i.e. prevent vandalism)</p><p>The term, in the context used, is perfectly applicable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shuttering -1. closing the shutters on the windows of a building ( old term , most do n't have shutters in 2009 ) 2. nailing wooden panels over the windows and doors of a condemned building to keep people out3 .
nailing wooden panels over the windows and doors of a foreclosed building to preserve resale value of the structure ( i.e .
prevent vandalism ) The term , in the context used , is perfectly applicable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shuttering -1.  closing the shutters on the windows of a building (old term, most don't have shutters in 2009)2.  nailing wooden panels over the windows and doors of a condemned building to keep people out3.
nailing wooden panels over the windows and doors of a foreclosed building to preserve resale value of the structure (i.e.
prevent vandalism)The term, in the context used, is perfectly applicable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29986964</id>
	<title>Re:Too bad</title>
	<author>Cramer</author>
	<datestamp>1256988480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lemme guess, there answer was "spamtrap"?  For which they will give zero evidence and demand payment to get removed. (That's extortion, btw.  But since "we never touch the money" it's not illegal.)  All it takes is ONE MESSAGE, <b>EVER</b>, to land in the spamtrap list; listings never expire, and you have to make a "donation" to get delisted. Most interesting is the number of charities refusing to be associated with the SORBS extortion racket.</p><p>While I doubt there was much intentional (mis)listings, there certainly were a number of listing made as a strong-arm tactic. ('spam friendly XXX' falls in that bucket.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lem me guess , there answer was " spamtrap " ?
For which they will give zero evidence and demand payment to get removed .
( That 's extortion , btw .
But since " we never touch the money " it 's not illegal .
) All it takes is ONE MESSAGE , EVER , to land in the spamtrap list ; listings never expire , and you have to make a " donation " to get delisted .
Most interesting is the number of charities refusing to be associated with the SORBS extortion racket.While I doubt there was much intentional ( mis ) listings , there certainly were a number of listing made as a strong-arm tactic .
( 'spam friendly XXX ' falls in that bucket .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lemme guess, there answer was "spamtrap"?
For which they will give zero evidence and demand payment to get removed.
(That's extortion, btw.
But since "we never touch the money" it's not illegal.
)  All it takes is ONE MESSAGE, EVER, to land in the spamtrap list; listings never expire, and you have to make a "donation" to get delisted.
Most interesting is the number of charities refusing to be associated with the SORBS extortion racket.While I doubt there was much intentional (mis)listings, there certainly were a number of listing made as a strong-arm tactic.
('spam friendly XXX' falls in that bucket.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29981894</id>
	<title>Traditional route</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1257016140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, will they go the traditional route and block<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/0 when they shut down?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , will they go the traditional route and block /0 when they shut down ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, will they go the traditional route and block /0 when they shut down?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980904</id>
	<title>$451k for what excactly?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257013200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having seen the state of the codebase that SORBS was running on a few years ago I have to wonder what value GFI will be getting for their $451k.</p><p>Few years back SORBS was running on some very poor perl which was being patched &amp; rewritten to keep the service running as the demand continued to grow. I don't believe there is much value in the code or the stack of donated servers that SORBS was running on. Since the partner and customer relationships with SORBS has disintergrated what value is GFI getting from this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having seen the state of the codebase that SORBS was running on a few years ago I have to wonder what value GFI will be getting for their $ 451k.Few years back SORBS was running on some very poor perl which was being patched &amp; rewritten to keep the service running as the demand continued to grow .
I do n't believe there is much value in the code or the stack of donated servers that SORBS was running on .
Since the partner and customer relationships with SORBS has disintergrated what value is GFI getting from this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having seen the state of the codebase that SORBS was running on a few years ago I have to wonder what value GFI will be getting for their $451k.Few years back SORBS was running on some very poor perl which was being patched &amp; rewritten to keep the service running as the demand continued to grow.
I don't believe there is much value in the code or the stack of donated servers that SORBS was running on.
Since the partner and customer relationships with SORBS has disintergrated what value is GFI getting from this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29986374</id>
	<title>Re:I did not like my interaction with SORBS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256986080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It could be worse. Some person you wanted to email might use SPEWS, and you'd have to sacrifice your goat's virginity on some newsgroup lists to get yourself taken off of this secretive, standards-free, star chamber of a blacklist. Check out http://joejared.cc/spews-faq.htm, not merely for a third-party FAQ, but to display the level of the group's maturity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It could be worse .
Some person you wanted to email might use SPEWS , and you 'd have to sacrifice your goat 's virginity on some newsgroup lists to get yourself taken off of this secretive , standards-free , star chamber of a blacklist .
Check out http : //joejared.cc/spews-faq.htm , not merely for a third-party FAQ , but to display the level of the group 's maturity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It could be worse.
Some person you wanted to email might use SPEWS, and you'd have to sacrifice your goat's virginity on some newsgroup lists to get yourself taken off of this secretive, standards-free, star chamber of a blacklist.
Check out http://joejared.cc/spews-faq.htm, not merely for a third-party FAQ, but to display the level of the group's maturity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29983746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985848</id>
	<title>Re:I did not like my interaction with SORBS</title>
	<author>dasmoo</author>
	<datestamp>1256984400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You had a bad experience, ipso facto everyone should stop using a service that works. That's bullshit. Spam is far worse than losing one or two emails because someone's IT guy didn't have the balls to tell his boss to keep the two ISP connections running concurrently while they tested everything. Then you complain about the user not receiving the mail? The best thing about a DNSBL is that you don't receive the mail, reducing bandwidth, reducing cost. Also, you couldn't have just forwarded all mail through your ISP? Why are you guys all so sour when you get listed on a blacklist for a few days, there are workarounds for you, but not many for the spammers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You had a bad experience , ipso facto everyone should stop using a service that works .
That 's bullshit .
Spam is far worse than losing one or two emails because someone 's IT guy did n't have the balls to tell his boss to keep the two ISP connections running concurrently while they tested everything .
Then you complain about the user not receiving the mail ?
The best thing about a DNSBL is that you do n't receive the mail , reducing bandwidth , reducing cost .
Also , you could n't have just forwarded all mail through your ISP ?
Why are you guys all so sour when you get listed on a blacklist for a few days , there are workarounds for you , but not many for the spammers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You had a bad experience, ipso facto everyone should stop using a service that works.
That's bullshit.
Spam is far worse than losing one or two emails because someone's IT guy didn't have the balls to tell his boss to keep the two ISP connections running concurrently while they tested everything.
Then you complain about the user not receiving the mail?
The best thing about a DNSBL is that you don't receive the mail, reducing bandwidth, reducing cost.
Also, you couldn't have just forwarded all mail through your ISP?
Why are you guys all so sour when you get listed on a blacklist for a few days, there are workarounds for you, but not many for the spammers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29983746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29981704</id>
	<title>Too bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257015540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was hoping that extortion factory would shut down for good. Hopefully the new owners will run it like professionals instead of petulant a$$holes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was hoping that extortion factory would shut down for good .
Hopefully the new owners will run it like professionals instead of petulant a $ $ holes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was hoping that extortion factory would shut down for good.
Hopefully the new owners will run it like professionals instead of petulant a$$holes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29981266</id>
	<title>Re:Too bad</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1257014280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap. Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things, its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam.</p></div><p>So is unplugging your mailserver.  It'd get roughly the same number of false positives, except without the malice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap .
Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things , its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam.So is unplugging your mailserver .
It 'd get roughly the same number of false positives , except without the malice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap.
Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things, its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam.So is unplugging your mailserver.
It'd get roughly the same number of false positives, except without the malice.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980940</id>
	<title>Re:Too bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257013320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bad rap? Like putting in blacklist entire ISPs because a single customer had a trojan? Or whole hosting companies (a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/19 range) because one client from a single IP got an intrusion? A lot simply stopped trying to get delisted by them, and not sure how much people trust in what they say anyway, just too much false positives and no easy/fast way to get out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bad rap ?
Like putting in blacklist entire ISPs because a single customer had a trojan ?
Or whole hosting companies ( a /19 range ) because one client from a single IP got an intrusion ?
A lot simply stopped trying to get delisted by them , and not sure how much people trust in what they say anyway , just too much false positives and no easy/fast way to get out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bad rap?
Like putting in blacklist entire ISPs because a single customer had a trojan?
Or whole hosting companies (a /19 range) because one client from a single IP got an intrusion?
A lot simply stopped trying to get delisted by them, and not sure how much people trust in what they say anyway, just too much false positives and no easy/fast way to get out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980344</id>
	<title>GFI - oh god no</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257011400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GFI - Oh great. Ask any ex employee how much of a complete joke GFI are...  Im wondering where they got the cash as the balance books are seriously bad</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GFI - Oh great .
Ask any ex employee how much of a complete joke GFI are... Im wondering where they got the cash as the balance books are seriously bad</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GFI - Oh great.
Ask any ex employee how much of a complete joke GFI are...  Im wondering where they got the cash as the balance books are seriously bad</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29981060</id>
	<title>Shutting down</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1257013620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hope that the "shutdown" means that answer everything as NOT blacklisted for the people/devices that surelly will still use them for a while (not sure how will be interpreted to not be able to connect to the service), not the opposite that happened with others blacklists in the past.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hope that the " shutdown " means that answer everything as NOT blacklisted for the people/devices that surelly will still use them for a while ( not sure how will be interpreted to not be able to connect to the service ) , not the opposite that happened with others blacklists in the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hope that the "shutdown" means that answer everything as NOT blacklisted for the people/devices that surelly will still use them for a while (not sure how will be interpreted to not be able to connect to the service), not the opposite that happened with others blacklists in the past.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29982872</id>
	<title>Oh my...they overpaid by about $450,999.99</title>
	<author>Ritz\_Just\_Ritz</author>
	<datestamp>1257018780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know of ANY serious ISP that pays any attention to SORBS and it's been that way for a few years.  Whoever cashed that $451k check had better squirrel that money away quickly before the unwitting buyer tries to claw it back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know of ANY serious ISP that pays any attention to SORBS and it 's been that way for a few years .
Whoever cashed that $ 451k check had better squirrel that money away quickly before the unwitting buyer tries to claw it back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know of ANY serious ISP that pays any attention to SORBS and it's been that way for a few years.
Whoever cashed that $451k check had better squirrel that money away quickly before the unwitting buyer tries to claw it back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146</id>
	<title>Too bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257010800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap. Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things, its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam.</p><p>GFI is a good company - but I am betting the list will no longer be free to use. Everything they sell is licenced on a "per mailbox" structure, and as such I imagine the list will be implemented into their anti-spam products. There may also be a nominal fee (per box) to use the list with other spam filters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap .
Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things , its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam.GFI is a good company - but I am betting the list will no longer be free to use .
Everything they sell is licenced on a " per mailbox " structure , and as such I imagine the list will be implemented into their anti-spam products .
There may also be a nominal fee ( per box ) to use the list with other spam filters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap.
Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things, its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam.GFI is a good company - but I am betting the list will no longer be free to use.
Everything they sell is licenced on a "per mailbox" structure, and as such I imagine the list will be implemented into their anti-spam products.
There may also be a nominal fee (per box) to use the list with other spam filters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985706</id>
	<title>Re:Too bad - not!</title>
	<author>billstewart</author>
	<datestamp>1256983980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's unfortunate that SORBS <i>deserved<i> the bad rap they got, but they were quite effective at false-positive mis-detection of legitimate emails as spam, unlike lists such as Spamhaus, and quite unwilling to remove addresses that had been tagged as spam or as part of variously large blocks of ISPs that had had some spammers use them.</i></i></p><p><i><i>There are legitimate uses for a rabid-overkill list, such as directing mail from those IP addresses to a check-more-carefully server if you've got a multi-tier multi-server spam-blocking environment anyway, or perhaps adding a bit of weight to your Spamassassin weights, but they weren't a list you could depend on if you wanted to actually receive all your non-spam mail.</i></i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's unfortunate that SORBS deserved the bad rap they got , but they were quite effective at false-positive mis-detection of legitimate emails as spam , unlike lists such as Spamhaus , and quite unwilling to remove addresses that had been tagged as spam or as part of variously large blocks of ISPs that had had some spammers use them.There are legitimate uses for a rabid-overkill list , such as directing mail from those IP addresses to a check-more-carefully server if you 've got a multi-tier multi-server spam-blocking environment anyway , or perhaps adding a bit of weight to your Spamassassin weights , but they were n't a list you could depend on if you wanted to actually receive all your non-spam mail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's unfortunate that SORBS deserved the bad rap they got, but they were quite effective at false-positive mis-detection of legitimate emails as spam, unlike lists such as Spamhaus, and quite unwilling to remove addresses that had been tagged as spam or as part of variously large blocks of ISPs that had had some spammers use them.There are legitimate uses for a rabid-overkill list, such as directing mail from those IP addresses to a check-more-carefully server if you've got a multi-tier multi-server spam-blocking environment anyway, or perhaps adding a bit of weight to your Spamassassin weights, but they weren't a list you could depend on if you wanted to actually receive all your non-spam mail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29983448</id>
	<title>Re:Too bad</title>
	<author>TPS Report</author>
	<datestamp>1257020280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap. Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things, its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam.</b> </p></div><p>Spoken like someone who's never had to deal with them in any capacity. SORBS was an arrogant list that was out of touch with reality and the problems administrators face. SORBS made far too many arbitrary decisions (like blocking netblocks because they LOOKED dynamic - without bothering to check) and caused real harm and damage to millions of people. They were an embarrassment compared to real lists like Zen/SpamHaus, SpamCop, etc who remained professional and logical and actually had policies and procedures to determine how they handled situations.

SORBS felt and acted like a college-run side project. It was by no means professional. They even asked for (mandatory) donations to de-list. What the hell! They were a joke and any real admin stopped using them many years ago in favor of real solutions (DCC/Razor, real anti-spam lists, etc). Anyone who continued to use them was just doing themselves, their customers, and everyone else a disservice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap .
Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things , its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam .
Spoken like someone who 's never had to deal with them in any capacity .
SORBS was an arrogant list that was out of touch with reality and the problems administrators face .
SORBS made far too many arbitrary decisions ( like blocking netblocks because they LOOKED dynamic - without bothering to check ) and caused real harm and damage to millions of people .
They were an embarrassment compared to real lists like Zen/SpamHaus , SpamCop , etc who remained professional and logical and actually had policies and procedures to determine how they handled situations .
SORBS felt and acted like a college-run side project .
It was by no means professional .
They even asked for ( mandatory ) donations to de-list .
What the hell !
They were a joke and any real admin stopped using them many years ago in favor of real solutions ( DCC/Razor , real anti-spam lists , etc ) .
Anyone who continued to use them was just doing themselves , their customers , and everyone else a disservice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> It is unfortunate that SORBS has gotten a bad rap.
Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things, its list was still helpful in detecting and removing spam.
Spoken like someone who's never had to deal with them in any capacity.
SORBS was an arrogant list that was out of touch with reality and the problems administrators face.
SORBS made far too many arbitrary decisions (like blocking netblocks because they LOOKED dynamic - without bothering to check) and caused real harm and damage to millions of people.
They were an embarrassment compared to real lists like Zen/SpamHaus, SpamCop, etc who remained professional and logical and actually had policies and procedures to determine how they handled situations.
SORBS felt and acted like a college-run side project.
It was by no means professional.
They even asked for (mandatory) donations to de-list.
What the hell!
They were a joke and any real admin stopped using them many years ago in favor of real solutions (DCC/Razor, real anti-spam lists, etc).
Anyone who continued to use them was just doing themselves, their customers, and everyone else a disservice.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29982750</id>
	<title>I hope they all die in a fire</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257018420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope they all die in a fire along with anyone they love. These people are dirt; WORSE THAN THE SPAMMERS. They lie, exhort, disrupt and laugh with glee at the collateral damage they cause. May they rot in hell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope they all die in a fire along with anyone they love .
These people are dirt ; WORSE THAN THE SPAMMERS .
They lie , exhort , disrupt and laugh with glee at the collateral damage they cause .
May they rot in hell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope they all die in a fire along with anyone they love.
These people are dirt; WORSE THAN THE SPAMMERS.
They lie, exhort, disrupt and laugh with glee at the collateral damage they cause.
May they rot in hell.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29990704</id>
	<title>Re:Too bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257008880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or getting your mail server blacklisted, because they let their boss/friend forward any mail to an override spam/ham address, regardless of whether that person had opted in to a mailing list.  Yes, this happened to us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or getting your mail server blacklisted , because they let their boss/friend forward any mail to an override spam/ham address , regardless of whether that person had opted in to a mailing list .
Yes , this happened to us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or getting your mail server blacklisted, because they let their boss/friend forward any mail to an override spam/ham address, regardless of whether that person had opted in to a mailing list.
Yes, this happened to us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29983746</id>
	<title>I did not like my interaction with SORBS</title>
	<author>GoNINzo</author>
	<datestamp>1257021180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was one of the people that had a very bad experience with SORBS.</p><p>My company got a new ISP with an external block.  I'm sure at some point that block had been used as a dynamic range.  I had not set a PTR record (because the IP of the mail server changed at the last second), my PTR and A record for that mail server were not set to 12 hours (seriously, who does that?), and I was banned on the SORBS list.  I had an SPF record, you could obviously see that I'm part of a legitimate organization, and it would have taken maybe 2 minutes of work for an physical admin to realize that this was a mistake.</p><p>It took two support tickets with SORBS, 5 calls to my ISP, and around 10 days to get off the list.  In the meantime, we could not contact certain people using it.  And what's worse is that the only solution that the admin of SORBS had was to get everyone to stop using the SORBS list.  I think that the TTL requirements are the worst part of their solution.</p><p>In my opinion, an unattended, automated black list is worse than the problem of too much spam.  You are blocking valid mails, and because you are blocking it at the IP level, the end user doesn't even see it show up in their spam bucket many times.  If SORBS had a single admin, checking their email once a day, they could easily filter out some of these issues.</p><p>I encouraged several anti-spam vendors to stop using their services for this reason, through the different companies that we interact with.  There are several other blacklists that do their job well, there is no need to use an unattended blacklist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was one of the people that had a very bad experience with SORBS.My company got a new ISP with an external block .
I 'm sure at some point that block had been used as a dynamic range .
I had not set a PTR record ( because the IP of the mail server changed at the last second ) , my PTR and A record for that mail server were not set to 12 hours ( seriously , who does that ?
) , and I was banned on the SORBS list .
I had an SPF record , you could obviously see that I 'm part of a legitimate organization , and it would have taken maybe 2 minutes of work for an physical admin to realize that this was a mistake.It took two support tickets with SORBS , 5 calls to my ISP , and around 10 days to get off the list .
In the meantime , we could not contact certain people using it .
And what 's worse is that the only solution that the admin of SORBS had was to get everyone to stop using the SORBS list .
I think that the TTL requirements are the worst part of their solution.In my opinion , an unattended , automated black list is worse than the problem of too much spam .
You are blocking valid mails , and because you are blocking it at the IP level , the end user does n't even see it show up in their spam bucket many times .
If SORBS had a single admin , checking their email once a day , they could easily filter out some of these issues.I encouraged several anti-spam vendors to stop using their services for this reason , through the different companies that we interact with .
There are several other blacklists that do their job well , there is no need to use an unattended blacklist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was one of the people that had a very bad experience with SORBS.My company got a new ISP with an external block.
I'm sure at some point that block had been used as a dynamic range.
I had not set a PTR record (because the IP of the mail server changed at the last second), my PTR and A record for that mail server were not set to 12 hours (seriously, who does that?
), and I was banned on the SORBS list.
I had an SPF record, you could obviously see that I'm part of a legitimate organization, and it would have taken maybe 2 minutes of work for an physical admin to realize that this was a mistake.It took two support tickets with SORBS, 5 calls to my ISP, and around 10 days to get off the list.
In the meantime, we could not contact certain people using it.
And what's worse is that the only solution that the admin of SORBS had was to get everyone to stop using the SORBS list.
I think that the TTL requirements are the worst part of their solution.In my opinion, an unattended, automated black list is worse than the problem of too much spam.
You are blocking valid mails, and because you are blocking it at the IP level, the end user doesn't even see it show up in their spam bucket many times.
If SORBS had a single admin, checking their email once a day, they could easily filter out some of these issues.I encouraged several anti-spam vendors to stop using their services for this reason, through the different companies that we interact with.
There are several other blacklists that do their job well, there is no need to use an unattended blacklist.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980716</id>
	<title>GFI is probably not going to be an improvement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257012540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I came to my current employer, they were using GFI Mail Security for mail scanning.  I don't know if the issue was Windows or GFI, but the Windows admin said "I have 3 gateways... I should be able to have at least one running on any day."</p><p>Yeah, OMG was my reaction too.  I replaced them with two gateways running postfix+amavis-new etc., and never had to look at them again other than updates in the last 5 years.  And spam filtering is about 10,000 times better now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I came to my current employer , they were using GFI Mail Security for mail scanning .
I do n't know if the issue was Windows or GFI , but the Windows admin said " I have 3 gateways... I should be able to have at least one running on any day .
" Yeah , OMG was my reaction too .
I replaced them with two gateways running postfix + amavis-new etc. , and never had to look at them again other than updates in the last 5 years .
And spam filtering is about 10,000 times better now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I came to my current employer, they were using GFI Mail Security for mail scanning.
I don't know if the issue was Windows or GFI, but the Windows admin said "I have 3 gateways... I should be able to have at least one running on any day.
"Yeah, OMG was my reaction too.
I replaced them with two gateways running postfix+amavis-new etc., and never had to look at them again other than updates in the last 5 years.
And spam filtering is about 10,000 times better now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980080</id>
	<title>Whoa!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257010620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And changed gender in the process<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And changed gender in the process : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And changed gender in the process :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987570</id>
	<title>Re:has it</title>
	<author>WuphonsReach</author>
	<datestamp>1256990700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're confusing RBLs (which are based on a DNS lookup of the IP address) and "suppression lists" which are lists of email addresses that have unsubscribed.<br>
<br>
The latter is best implemented as a one-way hash (usually md5) so that the resulting list can't be used for other mailings.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're confusing RBLs ( which are based on a DNS lookup of the IP address ) and " suppression lists " which are lists of email addresses that have unsubscribed .
The latter is best implemented as a one-way hash ( usually md5 ) so that the resulting list ca n't be used for other mailings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're confusing RBLs (which are based on a DNS lookup of the IP address) and "suppression lists" which are lists of email addresses that have unsubscribed.
The latter is best implemented as a one-way hash (usually md5) so that the resulting list can't be used for other mailings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29986824</id>
	<title>Deep Six?</title>
	<author>SpeedyG5</author>
	<datestamp>1256987760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hope they bought it to deep six it. There is just no use for it other than to let it die. Course thats expensive but could be a huge chunk of advertising dollars.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope they bought it to deep six it .
There is just no use for it other than to let it die .
Course thats expensive but could be a huge chunk of advertising dollars .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope they bought it to deep six it.
There is just no use for it other than to let it die.
Course thats expensive but could be a huge chunk of advertising dollars.
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980854</id>
	<title>Shuttering their operation?</title>
	<author>hackel</author>
	<datestamp>1257013080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't tell if this is a typo or an actual term someone might use.  I suppose shuttering the operation would simply mean concealing it from the public?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't tell if this is a typo or an actual term someone might use .
I suppose shuttering the operation would simply mean concealing it from the public ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't tell if this is a typo or an actual term someone might use.
I suppose shuttering the operation would simply mean concealing it from the public?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987734</id>
	<title>Re:I did not like my interaction with SORBS</title>
	<author>Cramer</author>
	<datestamp>1256991240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A GREAT MANY people can tell the same story.  SORBS was half-automated.  Getting on any of their lists was simple -- a SINGLE email is all it takes.  Getting off the list is not automated in ANY way.  It takes a human being -- and by all accounts, there was only ever one human -- to remove you.  The removal process was never speedy and usually involved a ransom in the form of a donation to an ever dwindling number of charities. (no respectable charity would have anything to do with this crap.)</p><p>The internet is a constantly changing landscape.  SORBS was always a stick in the mud refusing to face the realities of the changing landscape.  Spammers move around.  Address space gets reassigned.  A single email is not a valid reason to blacklist an address for ever more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A GREAT MANY people can tell the same story .
SORBS was half-automated .
Getting on any of their lists was simple -- a SINGLE email is all it takes .
Getting off the list is not automated in ANY way .
It takes a human being -- and by all accounts , there was only ever one human -- to remove you .
The removal process was never speedy and usually involved a ransom in the form of a donation to an ever dwindling number of charities .
( no respectable charity would have anything to do with this crap .
) The internet is a constantly changing landscape .
SORBS was always a stick in the mud refusing to face the realities of the changing landscape .
Spammers move around .
Address space gets reassigned .
A single email is not a valid reason to blacklist an address for ever more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A GREAT MANY people can tell the same story.
SORBS was half-automated.
Getting on any of their lists was simple -- a SINGLE email is all it takes.
Getting off the list is not automated in ANY way.
It takes a human being -- and by all accounts, there was only ever one human -- to remove you.
The removal process was never speedy and usually involved a ransom in the form of a donation to an ever dwindling number of charities.
(no respectable charity would have anything to do with this crap.
)The internet is a constantly changing landscape.
SORBS was always a stick in the mud refusing to face the realities of the changing landscape.
Spammers move around.
Address space gets reassigned.
A single email is not a valid reason to blacklist an address for ever more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987934</id>
	<title>Who uses SORBS anyways?</title>
	<author>gweihir</author>
	<datestamp>1256992140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not me. There are far better ones out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not me .
There are far better ones out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not me.
There are far better ones out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987434</id>
	<title>Re:$451k for what excactly?</title>
	<author>Cramer</author>
	<datestamp>1256990160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The servers, software, database, "reputation", etc.  Basically, an anti-spam operation on wheels. ('tho I don't recommend rolling fully loaded racks around.  A fully loaded 43U rack can weigh nearly a ton.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The servers , software , database , " reputation " , etc .
Basically , an anti-spam operation on wheels .
( 'tho I do n't recommend rolling fully loaded racks around .
A fully loaded 43U rack can weigh nearly a ton .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The servers, software, database, "reputation", etc.
Basically, an anti-spam operation on wheels.
('tho I don't recommend rolling fully loaded racks around.
A fully loaded 43U rack can weigh nearly a ton.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980934</id>
	<title>Re:Too bad</title>
	<author>thijsh</author>
	<datestamp>1257013320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>[quote]Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things[/quote]
SORBS administrators (or other participants) plagued anyone who is just kindly informing about their list.
In my experience they are unco&#246;perative, arrogant and some are even sadist BOFH kind of people why get their biggest kick out of tormenting people with problems.
When my host in the US was added together with a huge IP range as 'spam friendly subnet' I informed what I should do, and if the listing was legitimate if should move away to show my anti-spam support. They just enjoyed ridiculing and outright insulting the people who come for help...
At one point they even blocked my university mail servers in Amsterdam for some random reason (relay maybe), but that only lasted for a few days because of pressure I guess...<br> <br>

I long theorized that the crappy SORBS listings were intentional and these administrators just love to add random ranges of IPs to the list to laugh their ass off when they mess around with the hordes of mailserver admins that come looking for help.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ quote ] Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things [ /quote ] SORBS administrators ( or other participants ) plagued anyone who is just kindly informing about their list .
In my experience they are unco   perative , arrogant and some are even sadist BOFH kind of people why get their biggest kick out of tormenting people with problems .
When my host in the US was added together with a huge IP range as 'spam friendly subnet ' I informed what I should do , and if the listing was legitimate if should move away to show my anti-spam support .
They just enjoyed ridiculing and outright insulting the people who come for help.. . At one point they even blocked my university mail servers in Amsterdam for some random reason ( relay maybe ) , but that only lasted for a few days because of pressure I guess.. . I long theorized that the crappy SORBS listings were intentional and these administrators just love to add random ranges of IPs to the list to laugh their ass off when they mess around with the hordes of mailserver admins that come looking for help .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[quote]Although it has been plagued on the administrative side of things[/quote]
SORBS administrators (or other participants) plagued anyone who is just kindly informing about their list.
In my experience they are uncoöperative, arrogant and some are even sadist BOFH kind of people why get their biggest kick out of tormenting people with problems.
When my host in the US was added together with a huge IP range as 'spam friendly subnet' I informed what I should do, and if the listing was legitimate if should move away to show my anti-spam support.
They just enjoyed ridiculing and outright insulting the people who come for help...
At one point they even blocked my university mail servers in Amsterdam for some random reason (relay maybe), but that only lasted for a few days because of pressure I guess... 

I long theorized that the crappy SORBS listings were intentional and these administrators just love to add random ranges of IPs to the list to laugh their ass off when they mess around with the hordes of mailserver admins that come looking for help.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29984268</id>
	<title>The necessary observation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256979660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The problem is that it seems a lot of people still use this list, because I know several of our vendors and customers were having trouble getting our email during this time.</p></div><p>That is free markets at work. Company selling it's services to other companies. The results are excellent as companies always choose the best provider, right?</p><p>Now, just imagine the mess if our healthcare system worked like that... Oh. Yeah.</p><p>I felt this comment was necessary after having seen so many "And this people should be in charge of our healthcare??" comments every time the government screws something up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that it seems a lot of people still use this list , because I know several of our vendors and customers were having trouble getting our email during this time.That is free markets at work .
Company selling it 's services to other companies .
The results are excellent as companies always choose the best provider , right ? Now , just imagine the mess if our healthcare system worked like that... Oh. Yeah.I felt this comment was necessary after having seen so many " And this people should be in charge of our healthcare ? ?
" comments every time the government screws something up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that it seems a lot of people still use this list, because I know several of our vendors and customers were having trouble getting our email during this time.That is free markets at work.
Company selling it's services to other companies.
The results are excellent as companies always choose the best provider, right?Now, just imagine the mess if our healthcare system worked like that... Oh. Yeah.I felt this comment was necessary after having seen so many "And this people should be in charge of our healthcare??
" comments every time the government screws something up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980274</id>
	<title>has it</title>
	<author>spongman</author>
	<datestamp>1257011160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>blocklists should be one-way hashes. the user's email address should never even be sent over the wire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>blocklists should be one-way hashes .
the user 's email address should never even be sent over the wire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>blocklists should be one-way hashes.
the user's email address should never even be sent over the wire.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29996188</id>
	<title>Re:Why put up with that?</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1257443160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's largely because most people who administrate mail servers are completely and utter idiots.  I've had conversations with mail admins who clearly don't even understand how SMTP works.</p><p>Blacklists are bad... bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad.  Yes, there are better behaved blacklists than SORBS, but they're all bad because filtering relies ultimately on the sensibility of these administrating the filter.</p><p>I'm running no filters and just greylisting and I get spam maybe once every few days.  The only legit mail your going to be filtering out is from old or misconfigured mailservers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's largely because most people who administrate mail servers are completely and utter idiots .
I 've had conversations with mail admins who clearly do n't even understand how SMTP works.Blacklists are bad... bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad .
Yes , there are better behaved blacklists than SORBS , but they 're all bad because filtering relies ultimately on the sensibility of these administrating the filter.I 'm running no filters and just greylisting and I get spam maybe once every few days .
The only legit mail your going to be filtering out is from old or misconfigured mailservers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's largely because most people who administrate mail servers are completely and utter idiots.
I've had conversations with mail admins who clearly don't even understand how SMTP works.Blacklists are bad... bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad.
Yes, there are better behaved blacklists than SORBS, but they're all bad because filtering relies ultimately on the sensibility of these administrating the filter.I'm running no filters and just greylisting and I get spam maybe once every few days.
The only legit mail your going to be filtering out is from old or misconfigured mailservers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29982614</id>
	<title>Re:Too bad</title>
	<author>NoNsense</author>
	<datestamp>1257018060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's been poorly run for a long, long time.  As an administrator who occasionally had a customer who was blocked by their fault system, I can tell you they have less then a good attitude.  Joey, if you ready this, you can suck my nuts.  At least Matti will help you if you need it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's been poorly run for a long , long time .
As an administrator who occasionally had a customer who was blocked by their fault system , I can tell you they have less then a good attitude .
Joey , if you ready this , you can suck my nuts .
At least Matti will help you if you need it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's been poorly run for a long, long time.
As an administrator who occasionally had a customer who was blocked by their fault system, I can tell you they have less then a good attitude.
Joey, if you ready this, you can suck my nuts.
At least Matti will help you if you need it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980494</id>
	<title>Is this good or bad?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257011820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is one hell of a donation.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)  I sure hope they fix the removal process. I have been struggling for weeks now to get some netblocks removed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is one hell of a donation .
: ) I sure hope they fix the removal process .
I have been struggling for weeks now to get some netblocks removed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is one hell of a donation.
:)  I sure hope they fix the removal process.
I have been struggling for weeks now to get some netblocks removed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29982586</id>
	<title>th`2is is goatsex</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257018000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">milestones, tteling</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>milestones , tteling [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>milestones, tteling [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980446</id>
	<title>you bleeping amateurs.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257011700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right before signing, you should have said, you know what, let's make it <b>$419k</b>.  You guys just never miss an opportunity do you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right before signing , you should have said , you know what , let 's make it $ 419k .
You guys just never miss an opportunity do you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right before signing, you should have said, you know what, let's make it $419k.
You guys just never miss an opportunity do you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29979878</id>
	<title>Heee heee</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257010080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>First pos</htmltext>
<tokenext>First pos</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First pos</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29982058</id>
	<title>c\_$um</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257016620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that FrreBSD is</htmltext>
<tokenext>that FrreBSD is</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that FrreBSD is</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980954</id>
	<title>Re:Is this good or bad?</title>
	<author>cptsexy</author>
	<datestamp>1257013380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It took me about 6 months.  I took over as the lead IT guy for a company who had their own Win Small Business server, but didn't have in house people to manage it.  The initial setup wasn't done correctly and thus Sorbs had them blacklisted (along with several others I might add).  I found and fixed the issues within my first week and then followed their process for removal and six months later finally got an email that I had been removed and things started working.  The problem is that it seems a lot of people still use this list, because I know several of our vendors and customers were having trouble getting our email during this time.  You can't expect that a business can wait 6 months to be removed.  How is it fair for my company, who hired an incorporated company to set up their small business server, to have to pay SORBS bullshit fine?  Esp when I've talked to other administrators who have paid it and still had to wait a bit.  As far as I'm concerned SORBS is a confederacy of douchenozzles, and I for one wish they would have gone the way of geocities.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It took me about 6 months .
I took over as the lead IT guy for a company who had their own Win Small Business server , but did n't have in house people to manage it .
The initial setup was n't done correctly and thus Sorbs had them blacklisted ( along with several others I might add ) .
I found and fixed the issues within my first week and then followed their process for removal and six months later finally got an email that I had been removed and things started working .
The problem is that it seems a lot of people still use this list , because I know several of our vendors and customers were having trouble getting our email during this time .
You ca n't expect that a business can wait 6 months to be removed .
How is it fair for my company , who hired an incorporated company to set up their small business server , to have to pay SORBS bullshit fine ?
Esp when I 've talked to other administrators who have paid it and still had to wait a bit .
As far as I 'm concerned SORBS is a confederacy of douchenozzles , and I for one wish they would have gone the way of geocities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It took me about 6 months.
I took over as the lead IT guy for a company who had their own Win Small Business server, but didn't have in house people to manage it.
The initial setup wasn't done correctly and thus Sorbs had them blacklisted (along with several others I might add).
I found and fixed the issues within my first week and then followed their process for removal and six months later finally got an email that I had been removed and things started working.
The problem is that it seems a lot of people still use this list, because I know several of our vendors and customers were having trouble getting our email during this time.
You can't expect that a business can wait 6 months to be removed.
How is it fair for my company, who hired an incorporated company to set up their small business server, to have to pay SORBS bullshit fine?
Esp when I've talked to other administrators who have paid it and still had to wait a bit.
As far as I'm concerned SORBS is a confederacy of douchenozzles, and I for one wish they would have gone the way of geocities.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980086</id>
	<title>Why put up with that?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257010620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In recent years, SORBS has been the target of frequent accusations of mismanagement and poor conduct, leading many to wonder if this turn in events might signal a chance for improved behavior.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Honestly, that wouldn't make me wonder if SORBS will improve its behavior after an acquisition.  No.  That would have made me find another blocklist provider a long time ago.  Shady/questionable behavior like that goes on only because it's so thoroughly tolerated and often actively supported.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In recent years , SORBS has been the target of frequent accusations of mismanagement and poor conduct , leading many to wonder if this turn in events might signal a chance for improved behavior .
Honestly , that would n't make me wonder if SORBS will improve its behavior after an acquisition .
No. That would have made me find another blocklist provider a long time ago .
Shady/questionable behavior like that goes on only because it 's so thoroughly tolerated and often actively supported .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In recent years, SORBS has been the target of frequent accusations of mismanagement and poor conduct, leading many to wonder if this turn in events might signal a chance for improved behavior.
Honestly, that wouldn't make me wonder if SORBS will improve its behavior after an acquisition.
No.  That would have made me find another blocklist provider a long time ago.
Shady/questionable behavior like that goes on only because it's so thoroughly tolerated and often actively supported.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987070</id>
	<title>Re:I did not like my interaction with SORBS</title>
	<author>GoNINzo</author>
	<datestamp>1256988960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the other poster explained my position perfectly well, he gets the issue.  The fact that I could get delisted within 10 days is pretty impressive for being listed there, it's normally months.  And that's only because my ISP had problems with them before because the guy blocked<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/20's from them on a regular and repeated basis, it looks like mostly virus related.</p><p>And both ISPs were running at the same time, but you can only send mail out one direction.   Am I supposed to short circuit our entire operations across our network just because we cannot send mail?  It wasn't even something we even noticed for two days.  You can't relay your mail through your ISP for a large company either.</p><p>So, ask yourself, which is worse, extra spam in your mailbox, or a valuable mail from a business partner to you getting dropped with no notice to you.  Because if you honestly think it's the first thing, then just block 0.0.0.0/0 already and then you won't get any spam.  But make sure to give them a bunch of things to fill out to make it look like you'll get right on reading their mail!</p><p>In the future, just make sure to check your new mail server IP against the blacklists beforehand.  And when he says 'TTL of 12 hours', just do it already and don't argue how DNS is supposed to work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the other poster explained my position perfectly well , he gets the issue .
The fact that I could get delisted within 10 days is pretty impressive for being listed there , it 's normally months .
And that 's only because my ISP had problems with them before because the guy blocked /20 's from them on a regular and repeated basis , it looks like mostly virus related.And both ISPs were running at the same time , but you can only send mail out one direction .
Am I supposed to short circuit our entire operations across our network just because we can not send mail ?
It was n't even something we even noticed for two days .
You ca n't relay your mail through your ISP for a large company either.So , ask yourself , which is worse , extra spam in your mailbox , or a valuable mail from a business partner to you getting dropped with no notice to you .
Because if you honestly think it 's the first thing , then just block 0.0.0.0/0 already and then you wo n't get any spam .
But make sure to give them a bunch of things to fill out to make it look like you 'll get right on reading their mail ! In the future , just make sure to check your new mail server IP against the blacklists beforehand .
And when he says 'TTL of 12 hours ' , just do it already and do n't argue how DNS is supposed to work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the other poster explained my position perfectly well, he gets the issue.
The fact that I could get delisted within 10 days is pretty impressive for being listed there, it's normally months.
And that's only because my ISP had problems with them before because the guy blocked /20's from them on a regular and repeated basis, it looks like mostly virus related.And both ISPs were running at the same time, but you can only send mail out one direction.
Am I supposed to short circuit our entire operations across our network just because we cannot send mail?
It wasn't even something we even noticed for two days.
You can't relay your mail through your ISP for a large company either.So, ask yourself, which is worse, extra spam in your mailbox, or a valuable mail from a business partner to you getting dropped with no notice to you.
Because if you honestly think it's the first thing, then just block 0.0.0.0/0 already and then you won't get any spam.
But make sure to give them a bunch of things to fill out to make it look like you'll get right on reading their mail!In the future, just make sure to check your new mail server IP against the blacklists beforehand.
And when he says 'TTL of 12 hours', just do it already and don't argue how DNS is supposed to work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29991162</id>
	<title>Interesting blog from the former owner ...</title>
	<author>ZeekWatson</author>
	<datestamp>1257012840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.myspace.com/michelle\_i\_sullivan" title="myspace.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.myspace.com/michelle\_i\_sullivan</a> [myspace.com]</p><p>"I'm 40 year old transsexual girl<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..."</p><p>I'm not making this up!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.myspace.com/michelle \ _i \ _sullivan [ myspace.com ] " I 'm 40 year old transsexual girl ... " I 'm not making this up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.myspace.com/michelle\_i\_sullivan [myspace.com]"I'm 40 year old transsexual girl ..."I'm not making this up!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29979984</id>
	<title>hoo hooo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257010320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>eat spam!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>eat spam !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eat spam!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29979878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980294</id>
	<title>$451k? That sounds almost... reasonable?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257011220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is refreshing to see a remotely known company to get sold for under $10E8.</p><p>I mean honestly, could anyone of you imagine Google paying less than millions of dollars for anything at all?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is refreshing to see a remotely known company to get sold for under $ 10E8.I mean honestly , could anyone of you imagine Google paying less than millions of dollars for anything at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is refreshing to see a remotely known company to get sold for under $10E8.I mean honestly, could anyone of you imagine Google paying less than millions of dollars for anything at all?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29986942</id>
	<title>I *Stopped* using SORBS and SPAM *decreased*.</title>
	<author>my\_left\_nut</author>
	<datestamp>1256988360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd stopped using SORBS awhile back, after numerous instances of it flagging real email as spam. Since then, the amount of UCE that I've been receiving since has actually *gone down*. Go figure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd stopped using SORBS awhile back , after numerous instances of it flagging real email as spam .
Since then , the amount of UCE that I 've been receiving since has actually * gone down * .
Go figure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd stopped using SORBS awhile back, after numerous instances of it flagging real email as spam.
Since then, the amount of UCE that I've been receiving since has actually *gone down*.
Go figure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29990704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29982614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29979984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29979878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29986964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29984268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29983448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29996234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29996188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29983746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29986374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29983746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29981086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29983746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29986942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_04_157249_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29981266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29983746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29986374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985848
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987070
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987734
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980954
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29984268
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985548
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29981704
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29981060
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29979878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29979984
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29986942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29987048
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29996188
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980344
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29981266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29983448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29996234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29985706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29982614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980940
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29990704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980934
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29986964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29981086
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_04_157249.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_04_157249.29980446
</commentlist>
</conversation>
