<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_23_1927248</id>
	<title>Recession Pushes More Workers To Steal Data</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1258971960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes to share the findings of a recent transatlantic survey which suggests that the recession is pushing workers to be a little bit more accommodating when it comes to <a href="http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=8534">sharing, viewing, or stealing sensitive information</a> from the company they work(ed) for.  <i>"Pilfering data has become endemic in our culture as 85\% of people admit they know it's illegal to download corporate information from their employer but almost half couldn't stop themselves taking it with them with the majority admitting it could be useful in the future! [...] The survey entitled 'the global recession and its effect on work ethics,' carried out for a second year by Cyber-Ark &ndash; found that almost half of the respondents 48\% admit that if they were fired tomorrow they would take company information with them and 39\% of people would download company/competitive information if they got wind that their job was at risk. Additionally a quarter of workers said that the recession has meant that they feel less loyal towards their employer."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes to share the findings of a recent transatlantic survey which suggests that the recession is pushing workers to be a little bit more accommodating when it comes to sharing , viewing , or stealing sensitive information from the company they work ( ed ) for .
" Pilfering data has become endemic in our culture as 85 \ % of people admit they know it 's illegal to download corporate information from their employer but almost half could n't stop themselves taking it with them with the majority admitting it could be useful in the future !
[ ... ] The survey entitled 'the global recession and its effect on work ethics, ' carried out for a second year by Cyber-Ark    found that almost half of the respondents 48 \ % admit that if they were fired tomorrow they would take company information with them and 39 \ % of people would download company/competitive information if they got wind that their job was at risk .
Additionally a quarter of workers said that the recession has meant that they feel less loyal towards their employer .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes to share the findings of a recent transatlantic survey which suggests that the recession is pushing workers to be a little bit more accommodating when it comes to sharing, viewing, or stealing sensitive information from the company they work(ed) for.
"Pilfering data has become endemic in our culture as 85\% of people admit they know it's illegal to download corporate information from their employer but almost half couldn't stop themselves taking it with them with the majority admitting it could be useful in the future!
[...] The survey entitled 'the global recession and its effect on work ethics,' carried out for a second year by Cyber-Ark – found that almost half of the respondents 48\% admit that if they were fired tomorrow they would take company information with them and 39\% of people would download company/competitive information if they got wind that their job was at risk.
Additionally a quarter of workers said that the recession has meant that they feel less loyal towards their employer.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30211938</id>
	<title>Re:No $10 million, no deal</title>
	<author>daem0n1x</author>
	<datestamp>1259066640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The corporate culture has been evolving more and more in the sense of a company being a stone-cold sterile organisation with no concern for anyone or anything except for easy and immediate profit.
</p><p>
Most decent people I know that are still employed above 50 are desperate to get an early retirement because they are completely fed up with working in an environment full of backstabbing sociopaths that persecute the most valid and hard-working while rewarding the incompetent that have mastered the art of ass-licking.
</p><p>
They try to disguise it with all sorts of corporate "culture" bullshit but everybody knows the facts. People are disposable and the corporations don't have the slightest bit of loyalty towards their workers. How can they expect to get loyalty back?
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The corporate culture has been evolving more and more in the sense of a company being a stone-cold sterile organisation with no concern for anyone or anything except for easy and immediate profit .
Most decent people I know that are still employed above 50 are desperate to get an early retirement because they are completely fed up with working in an environment full of backstabbing sociopaths that persecute the most valid and hard-working while rewarding the incompetent that have mastered the art of ass-licking .
They try to disguise it with all sorts of corporate " culture " bullshit but everybody knows the facts .
People are disposable and the corporations do n't have the slightest bit of loyalty towards their workers .
How can they expect to get loyalty back ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The corporate culture has been evolving more and more in the sense of a company being a stone-cold sterile organisation with no concern for anyone or anything except for easy and immediate profit.
Most decent people I know that are still employed above 50 are desperate to get an early retirement because they are completely fed up with working in an environment full of backstabbing sociopaths that persecute the most valid and hard-working while rewarding the incompetent that have mastered the art of ass-licking.
They try to disguise it with all sorts of corporate "culture" bullshit but everybody knows the facts.
People are disposable and the corporations don't have the slightest bit of loyalty towards their workers.
How can they expect to get loyalty back?
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30214320</id>
	<title>Re:On Loyalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259080800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Expenses don't show up on balance sheets.  Remember this when your boss says that the employees are the company's greatest assets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Expenses do n't show up on balance sheets .
Remember this when your boss says that the employees are the company 's greatest assets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Expenses don't show up on balance sheets.
Remember this when your boss says that the employees are the company's greatest assets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30214264</id>
	<title>Re:No $10 million, no deal</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1259080620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We have established what you are, madam.  We are now merely haggling over the price.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We have established what you are , madam .
We are now merely haggling over the price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have established what you are, madam.
We are now merely haggling over the price.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30218834</id>
	<title>It ended well for The Count of Monte Cristo and ..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259057940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>... for Sweeney Todd. Good luck with all that!</htmltext>
<tokenext>... for Sweeney Todd .
Good luck with all that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... for Sweeney Todd.
Good luck with all that!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209460</id>
	<title>Re:On Loyalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258989540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had a similar situation at an airline I worked at.  In two years time at the airline, I had already won several corporate awards for money and time saving procedures I implemented.  One of the awards was only given to 10 employees out of just over 100K employees in the company.  After 9/11, cuts were made and due to it being a union represented position (required per the contract), I was one of the newest people and one of the first to go.  I learned two valuable lessons with that layoff.  Unions SUCK ASS and provides no incentive to perform better than your peers and also do not dedicate yourself to a company because the dedication is rarely ever reciprocal.  To stay on topic...  I did not steal any company data, only a LJ4 printer which I still have and use 8 years later<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a similar situation at an airline I worked at .
In two years time at the airline , I had already won several corporate awards for money and time saving procedures I implemented .
One of the awards was only given to 10 employees out of just over 100K employees in the company .
After 9/11 , cuts were made and due to it being a union represented position ( required per the contract ) , I was one of the newest people and one of the first to go .
I learned two valuable lessons with that layoff .
Unions SUCK ASS and provides no incentive to perform better than your peers and also do not dedicate yourself to a company because the dedication is rarely ever reciprocal .
To stay on topic... I did not steal any company data , only a LJ4 printer which I still have and use 8 years later ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a similar situation at an airline I worked at.
In two years time at the airline, I had already won several corporate awards for money and time saving procedures I implemented.
One of the awards was only given to 10 employees out of just over 100K employees in the company.
After 9/11, cuts were made and due to it being a union represented position (required per the contract), I was one of the newest people and one of the first to go.
I learned two valuable lessons with that layoff.
Unions SUCK ASS and provides no incentive to perform better than your peers and also do not dedicate yourself to a company because the dedication is rarely ever reciprocal.
To stay on topic...  I did not steal any company data, only a LJ4 printer which I still have and use 8 years later ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207768</id>
	<title>Re:I owe my employer absolutely nothing</title>
	<author>The\_REAL\_DZA</author>
	<datestamp>1258978080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"[self-righteous pissing and moaning, etc.]...so I've gathered up the passwords to the products we make and have been using them as part of my pitch to the competition."</p></div></blockquote><p>
I'm reminded of what I once heard a lady say on the subject of dating married men: "If he'll do it to them he'll eventually do it to you."  In your case: any company who'll hire someone based on what they can illegally/immorally bring to the table will treat them like the crap they are when what they brought to the table is used up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" [ self-righteous pissing and moaning , etc .
] ...so I 've gathered up the passwords to the products we make and have been using them as part of my pitch to the competition .
" I 'm reminded of what I once heard a lady say on the subject of dating married men : " If he 'll do it to them he 'll eventually do it to you .
" In your case : any company who 'll hire someone based on what they can illegally/immorally bring to the table will treat them like the crap they are when what they brought to the table is used up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"[self-righteous pissing and moaning, etc.
]...so I've gathered up the passwords to the products we make and have been using them as part of my pitch to the competition.
"
I'm reminded of what I once heard a lady say on the subject of dating married men: "If he'll do it to them he'll eventually do it to you.
"  In your case: any company who'll hire someone based on what they can illegally/immorally bring to the table will treat them like the crap they are when what they brought to the table is used up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207690</id>
	<title>We are surprised?</title>
	<author>BenFenner</author>
	<datestamp>1258977720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Humans still decent at survival! News at 11.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Humans still decent at survival !
News at 11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Humans still decent at survival!
News at 11.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207480</id>
	<title>Re:On Loyalty</title>
	<author>future assassin</author>
	<datestamp>1258976880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Then why are you still working there? I got screwed over by my last employer of 7 years and it didn't take me that long to talk to a couple of suppliers that I knew didn't like the company and get them to connect me with other possible employers. A month later I gave my notice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then why are you still working there ?
I got screwed over by my last employer of 7 years and it did n't take me that long to talk to a couple of suppliers that I knew did n't like the company and get them to connect me with other possible employers .
A month later I gave my notice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then why are you still working there?
I got screwed over by my last employer of 7 years and it didn't take me that long to talk to a couple of suppliers that I knew didn't like the company and get them to connect me with other possible employers.
A month later I gave my notice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207406</id>
	<title>Re:On Loyalty</title>
	<author>grim4593</author>
	<datestamp>1258976640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have not received mod points in months so... Parent++;</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have not received mod points in months so... Parent + + ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have not received mod points in months so... Parent++;</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207224</id>
	<title>I'm gonna be rich!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258975920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once my company's competitor learns I know how much Bob from accounting or Joanne from HR make, I'm sure they will shower me with Andrew Jackson's business cards.</p><p>And then I woke up<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once my company 's competitor learns I know how much Bob from accounting or Joanne from HR make , I 'm sure they will shower me with Andrew Jackson 's business cards.And then I woke up : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once my company's competitor learns I know how much Bob from accounting or Joanne from HR make, I'm sure they will shower me with Andrew Jackson's business cards.And then I woke up :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207582</id>
	<title>poor security practices strike again</title>
	<author>wizardforce</author>
	<datestamp>1258977240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What is cause for alarm is the 13\% of savvy pilferers who would take access and password codes as, with this information, they can still get into the network once they&rsquo;ve left the company and continue downloading information and accessing whatever they want or need.</p></div></blockquote><p>If the data is so sensitive, you'd think that a company would bother to change the passwords periodically so employees that have been let go can't get back into the system.  However, security doesn't seem to be a terribly high priority so companies shouldn't be surprised when things like this actually happen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is cause for alarm is the 13 \ % of savvy pilferers who would take access and password codes as , with this information , they can still get into the network once they    ve left the company and continue downloading information and accessing whatever they want or need.If the data is so sensitive , you 'd think that a company would bother to change the passwords periodically so employees that have been let go ca n't get back into the system .
However , security does n't seem to be a terribly high priority so companies should n't be surprised when things like this actually happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is cause for alarm is the 13\% of savvy pilferers who would take access and password codes as, with this information, they can still get into the network once they’ve left the company and continue downloading information and accessing whatever they want or need.If the data is so sensitive, you'd think that a company would bother to change the passwords periodically so employees that have been let go can't get back into the system.
However, security doesn't seem to be a terribly high priority so companies shouldn't be surprised when things like this actually happen.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30211320</id>
	<title>Re:On Loyalty</title>
	<author>mr exploiter</author>
	<datestamp>1259061060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A decent reference in this economy is worth nothing. On the other hand money is money, even if there is a chance you'll loose everything. And that can still happen anyway if you don't get any job for long enough.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A decent reference in this economy is worth nothing .
On the other hand money is money , even if there is a chance you 'll loose everything .
And that can still happen anyway if you do n't get any job for long enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A decent reference in this economy is worth nothing.
On the other hand money is money, even if there is a chance you'll loose everything.
And that can still happen anyway if you don't get any job for long enough.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30213558</id>
	<title>Re:On Society, and Sociopathy</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1259077440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, without the studies and some idea of the methodology, I can't help but be skeptical toward an article about the rise of narcissism in society written by someone who's schelping a book entitled "The Narcissism Epidemic" that they, in fact, co-authored...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , without the studies and some idea of the methodology , I ca n't help but be skeptical toward an article about the rise of narcissism in society written by someone who 's schelping a book entitled " The Narcissism Epidemic " that they , in fact , co-authored.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, without the studies and some idea of the methodology, I can't help but be skeptical toward an article about the rise of narcissism in society written by someone who's schelping a book entitled "The Narcissism Epidemic" that they, in fact, co-authored...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207630</id>
	<title>Re:I'm gonna be rich!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258977480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This principle does work if you're in sales and you're walking out the door with a customer list.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This principle does work if you 're in sales and you 're walking out the door with a customer list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This principle does work if you're in sales and you're walking out the door with a customer list.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30211300</id>
	<title>Re:Survey was of white-collar crooks</title>
	<author>Aceticon</author>
	<datestamp>1259060340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Certainly finance companies in Canary Wharf in London (and also the City) are the kind of place where when they fire you, they call to to come to a meeting to tell you that you're fired after which they escort you down to the lobby where your stuff is packed and waiting for you while your access card has already been revoked.</p><p>I would hardly be surprised if most of the people working around here that have any information worth it (mostly client contacts, I suspect) are keeping copies on the side "just in case".</p><p>Banking in London is very much a cut-throat environment. I suspect the same is true for Wall Street.</p><p>That said, I suspect the actual survey is bogus: people around here wouldn't admit any plans to "steal corporate data if I'm fired" to strangers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Certainly finance companies in Canary Wharf in London ( and also the City ) are the kind of place where when they fire you , they call to to come to a meeting to tell you that you 're fired after which they escort you down to the lobby where your stuff is packed and waiting for you while your access card has already been revoked.I would hardly be surprised if most of the people working around here that have any information worth it ( mostly client contacts , I suspect ) are keeping copies on the side " just in case " .Banking in London is very much a cut-throat environment .
I suspect the same is true for Wall Street.That said , I suspect the actual survey is bogus : people around here would n't admit any plans to " steal corporate data if I 'm fired " to strangers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Certainly finance companies in Canary Wharf in London (and also the City) are the kind of place where when they fire you, they call to to come to a meeting to tell you that you're fired after which they escort you down to the lobby where your stuff is packed and waiting for you while your access card has already been revoked.I would hardly be surprised if most of the people working around here that have any information worth it (mostly client contacts, I suspect) are keeping copies on the side "just in case".Banking in London is very much a cut-throat environment.
I suspect the same is true for Wall Street.That said, I suspect the actual survey is bogus: people around here wouldn't admit any plans to "steal corporate data if I'm fired" to strangers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209874</id>
	<title>Re:On Society, and Sociopathy</title>
	<author>Dysphoric1</author>
	<datestamp>1258993980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups. The alphas, by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas, are viewed as successful -- When sociopaths lead our companies, the employees themselves will, generally speaking, start behaving more sociopathically. It's basic survival.</p></div><p>By coincidence, I was just looking at this: <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-narcissism-epidemic/200905/is-there-epidemic-narcissism-today/" title="psychologytoday.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-narcissism-epidemic/200905/is-there-epidemic-narcissism-today/</a> [psychologytoday.com]</p><p>People literally ARE becoming more and more narcissistic and I believe you are probably right in ascribing it to poor societal role models...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups .
The alphas , by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas , are viewed as successful -- When sociopaths lead our companies , the employees themselves will , generally speaking , start behaving more sociopathically .
It 's basic survival.By coincidence , I was just looking at this : http : //www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-narcissism-epidemic/200905/is-there-epidemic-narcissism-today/ [ psychologytoday.com ] People literally ARE becoming more and more narcissistic and I believe you are probably right in ascribing it to poor societal role models.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups.
The alphas, by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas, are viewed as successful -- When sociopaths lead our companies, the employees themselves will, generally speaking, start behaving more sociopathically.
It's basic survival.By coincidence, I was just looking at this: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-narcissism-epidemic/200905/is-there-epidemic-narcissism-today/ [psychologytoday.com]People literally ARE becoming more and more narcissistic and I believe you are probably right in ascribing it to poor societal role models...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207810</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah right</title>
	<author>NoYob</author>
	<datestamp>1258978260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>...or give them an org chart</i> <p>For many companies, you'd have to give an animated one. God, it seams like every other month, there's a news item of Kodak re-organizing!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...or give them an org chart For many companies , you 'd have to give an animated one .
God , it seams like every other month , there 's a news item of Kodak re-organizing !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...or give them an org chart For many companies, you'd have to give an animated one.
God, it seams like every other month, there's a news item of Kodak re-organizing!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554</id>
	<title>Yeah right</title>
	<author>ximenes</author>
	<datestamp>1258977120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure that some people do try to profit from illicitly obtained information from their past employers; I've heard a few stories here and there about people getting busted. But there is simply no way that 50\% of everyone in the workforce is doing this for a few simple reasons:</p><p>1. Risk - I think everyone is aware that the damage to your career and professional reputation would be catastrophic if you were caught, not to mention the legal ramifications.</p><p>2. Ethics - Yes, people do have them. Maybe not everyone is the pinnacle of ethical behavior, but that doesn't mean every other person you see at the office is just waiting to mug you and steal your wallet in the parking lot.</p><p>3. Nothing to steal - The majority of employees just don't have access to proprietary information that is actually of value outside the company. Sure, I could tell a future employer about my company's HR policies or give them an org chart. That might be very slightly useful, but certainly isn't going to get me hired or land me millions. I could also give them all of the company's internally developed code, but it would be of little use without all of the institutional knowledge, expertise and essentially the entire original company to go along with it.</p><p>4. Employers are liable as well - Take the case of the people who tried to sell some of Coke's trade secrets to Pepsi. They were refused, and Pepsi informed the police. They know that they would be liable for the illegal behavior as well, and want no part of it. Now not every employer operates above board, but it's a risky game to try to sell information to someone who may not even want to buy it.</p><p>So in summary: bullshit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure that some people do try to profit from illicitly obtained information from their past employers ; I 've heard a few stories here and there about people getting busted .
But there is simply no way that 50 \ % of everyone in the workforce is doing this for a few simple reasons : 1 .
Risk - I think everyone is aware that the damage to your career and professional reputation would be catastrophic if you were caught , not to mention the legal ramifications.2 .
Ethics - Yes , people do have them .
Maybe not everyone is the pinnacle of ethical behavior , but that does n't mean every other person you see at the office is just waiting to mug you and steal your wallet in the parking lot.3 .
Nothing to steal - The majority of employees just do n't have access to proprietary information that is actually of value outside the company .
Sure , I could tell a future employer about my company 's HR policies or give them an org chart .
That might be very slightly useful , but certainly is n't going to get me hired or land me millions .
I could also give them all of the company 's internally developed code , but it would be of little use without all of the institutional knowledge , expertise and essentially the entire original company to go along with it.4 .
Employers are liable as well - Take the case of the people who tried to sell some of Coke 's trade secrets to Pepsi .
They were refused , and Pepsi informed the police .
They know that they would be liable for the illegal behavior as well , and want no part of it .
Now not every employer operates above board , but it 's a risky game to try to sell information to someone who may not even want to buy it.So in summary : bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure that some people do try to profit from illicitly obtained information from their past employers; I've heard a few stories here and there about people getting busted.
But there is simply no way that 50\% of everyone in the workforce is doing this for a few simple reasons:1.
Risk - I think everyone is aware that the damage to your career and professional reputation would be catastrophic if you were caught, not to mention the legal ramifications.2.
Ethics - Yes, people do have them.
Maybe not everyone is the pinnacle of ethical behavior, but that doesn't mean every other person you see at the office is just waiting to mug you and steal your wallet in the parking lot.3.
Nothing to steal - The majority of employees just don't have access to proprietary information that is actually of value outside the company.
Sure, I could tell a future employer about my company's HR policies or give them an org chart.
That might be very slightly useful, but certainly isn't going to get me hired or land me millions.
I could also give them all of the company's internally developed code, but it would be of little use without all of the institutional knowledge, expertise and essentially the entire original company to go along with it.4.
Employers are liable as well - Take the case of the people who tried to sell some of Coke's trade secrets to Pepsi.
They were refused, and Pepsi informed the police.
They know that they would be liable for the illegal behavior as well, and want no part of it.
Now not every employer operates above board, but it's a risky game to try to sell information to someone who may not even want to buy it.So in summary: bullshit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208918</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah right</title>
	<author>onesandzeros</author>
	<datestamp>1258984560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; by ximenes (10)</p><p>You're the tenth registered user of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.?  Shiiiit.  I don't think I've seen a UID in the double-digits before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; by ximenes ( 10 ) You 're the tenth registered user of /. ?
Shiiiit. I do n't think I 've seen a UID in the double-digits before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; by ximenes (10)You're the tenth registered user of /.?
Shiiiit.  I don't think I've seen a UID in the double-digits before.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207282</id>
	<title>Does the really...</title>
	<author>sudden.zero</author>
	<datestamp>1258976160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>surprise anyone? I mean come on in this recession anyone will do anything to have a competitive edge at getting the next 6 months worth of work. I don't hesitate to say that this trend started long before the recession and will probably continue long after its end. I know (End what's that)</htmltext>
<tokenext>surprise anyone ?
I mean come on in this recession anyone will do anything to have a competitive edge at getting the next 6 months worth of work .
I do n't hesitate to say that this trend started long before the recession and will probably continue long after its end .
I know ( End what 's that )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>surprise anyone?
I mean come on in this recession anyone will do anything to have a competitive edge at getting the next 6 months worth of work.
I don't hesitate to say that this trend started long before the recession and will probably continue long after its end.
I know (End what's that)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272</id>
	<title>On Loyalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258976100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Additionally a quarter of workers said that the recession has meant that they feel less loyal towards their employer."</p></div><p>I'd be happy to show some loyalty to my employer if they would but return the favor. Instead I'm treated as a simple expense on the accountant's balance sheets; one that's easily gotten rid of. The people who make the decisions are much too far removed from the people who make the product. Hell, I feel more loyalty to my favorite baseball team than I do to the corporation I work for.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Additionally a quarter of workers said that the recession has meant that they feel less loyal towards their employer .
" I 'd be happy to show some loyalty to my employer if they would but return the favor .
Instead I 'm treated as a simple expense on the accountant 's balance sheets ; one that 's easily gotten rid of .
The people who make the decisions are much too far removed from the people who make the product .
Hell , I feel more loyalty to my favorite baseball team than I do to the corporation I work for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Additionally a quarter of workers said that the recession has meant that they feel less loyal towards their employer.
"I'd be happy to show some loyalty to my employer if they would but return the favor.
Instead I'm treated as a simple expense on the accountant's balance sheets; one that's easily gotten rid of.
The people who make the decisions are much too far removed from the people who make the product.
Hell, I feel more loyalty to my favorite baseball team than I do to the corporation I work for.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207210</id>
	<title>Information just wants to be free</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258975860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't steal what's free.</p><p>Open source ftw!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't steal what 's free.Open source ftw !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't steal what's free.Open source ftw!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209958</id>
	<title>Re:On Society, and Sociopathy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258995000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Indeed.  When execs are getting $10 mil bonus packages for burning a company to the ground, when the upper echelons are gutting pension plans by reneging on past promises and contracts and then turn around and pocket the savings for themselves, it should come as no surprise in the least that those of us further down the corporate ladder are taking a similarly opportunistic approach.  </p><p>Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups.  The alphas, by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas, are viewed as successful -- "well, they're doing something right for themselves, guess it'd be smart for me to do the same."  When sociopaths lead our companies, the employees themselves will, generally speaking, start behaving more sociopathically.  It's basic survival.  </p><p>Cheers,</p></div><p>Please leave my employer (SCO) out of this discussion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed .
When execs are getting $ 10 mil bonus packages for burning a company to the ground , when the upper echelons are gutting pension plans by reneging on past promises and contracts and then turn around and pocket the savings for themselves , it should come as no surprise in the least that those of us further down the corporate ladder are taking a similarly opportunistic approach .
Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups .
The alphas , by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas , are viewed as successful -- " well , they 're doing something right for themselves , guess it 'd be smart for me to do the same .
" When sociopaths lead our companies , the employees themselves will , generally speaking , start behaving more sociopathically .
It 's basic survival .
Cheers,Please leave my employer ( SCO ) out of this discussion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed.
When execs are getting $10 mil bonus packages for burning a company to the ground, when the upper echelons are gutting pension plans by reneging on past promises and contracts and then turn around and pocket the savings for themselves, it should come as no surprise in the least that those of us further down the corporate ladder are taking a similarly opportunistic approach.
Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups.
The alphas, by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas, are viewed as successful -- "well, they're doing something right for themselves, guess it'd be smart for me to do the same.
"  When sociopaths lead our companies, the employees themselves will, generally speaking, start behaving more sociopathically.
It's basic survival.
Cheers,Please leave my employer (SCO) out of this discussion.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207172</id>
	<title>but I thought you couldn't steal data</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258975740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>isn't the argument that you're not stealing the music, you're copying it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>is n't the argument that you 're not stealing the music , you 're copying it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>isn't the argument that you're not stealing the music, you're copying it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207552</id>
	<title>Re:On Loyalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258977120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amen to that! After showing my now former employer how I saved them approximately US$350,000 over the last two years by making some very simple &amp; inexpensive changes, they handed me my 5 year milestone award &amp; a layoff notice with nearly the same handshake. I really should have ripped that place off blind, but I didn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen to that !
After showing my now former employer how I saved them approximately US $ 350,000 over the last two years by making some very simple &amp; inexpensive changes , they handed me my 5 year milestone award &amp; a layoff notice with nearly the same handshake .
I really should have ripped that place off blind , but I did n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen to that!
After showing my now former employer how I saved them approximately US$350,000 over the last two years by making some very simple &amp; inexpensive changes, they handed me my 5 year milestone award &amp; a layoff notice with nearly the same handshake.
I really should have ripped that place off blind, but I didn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207426</id>
	<title>So That's How It Works?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258976700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Boss: Here's your paycheck, good job. <br>
Worker: Your data is <i>so</i> safe.  It's like motherfucking Fort Knox up in here. <br>
<i>*one week later*</i> <br>
Boss: You're fired.<br>
Worker: I understand.  Did you know information wants to be free.  Particularly <i>you're</i> information.  I happen to be an excellent consultant on wrangling information, as it is, and would like to offer you my services to stop your information from visiting anonymous FTP servers in Russia and China.  Interested?  <br>
Boss: Here's your paycheck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Boss : Here 's your paycheck , good job .
Worker : Your data is so safe .
It 's like motherfucking Fort Knox up in here .
* one week later * Boss : You 're fired .
Worker : I understand .
Did you know information wants to be free .
Particularly you 're information .
I happen to be an excellent consultant on wrangling information , as it is , and would like to offer you my services to stop your information from visiting anonymous FTP servers in Russia and China .
Interested ? Boss : Here 's your paycheck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Boss: Here's your paycheck, good job.
Worker: Your data is so safe.
It's like motherfucking Fort Knox up in here.
*one week later* 
Boss: You're fired.
Worker: I understand.
Did you know information wants to be free.
Particularly you're information.
I happen to be an excellent consultant on wrangling information, as it is, and would like to offer you my services to stop your information from visiting anonymous FTP servers in Russia and China.
Interested?  
Boss: Here's your paycheck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207848</id>
	<title>Re:On Loyalty</title>
	<author>jellomizer</author>
	<datestamp>1258978380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you feel that the company is treating you bad now... Imagine if they found out that you stole data from them, and used it against them... We had an employee do that.  He is now bankrupt, and in essence lost everything. And we don't feel bad about it.   Oddly enough if you leave your job on good terms even if they lay you off.  Chances are they will at least give you a decent reference.  Vs. a Yes he worked here and that is all I am gonna say.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you feel that the company is treating you bad now... Imagine if they found out that you stole data from them , and used it against them... We had an employee do that .
He is now bankrupt , and in essence lost everything .
And we do n't feel bad about it .
Oddly enough if you leave your job on good terms even if they lay you off .
Chances are they will at least give you a decent reference .
Vs. a Yes he worked here and that is all I am gon na say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you feel that the company is treating you bad now... Imagine if they found out that you stole data from them, and used it against them... We had an employee do that.
He is now bankrupt, and in essence lost everything.
And we don't feel bad about it.
Oddly enough if you leave your job on good terms even if they lay you off.
Chances are they will at least give you a decent reference.
Vs. a Yes he worked here and that is all I am gonna say.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209266</id>
	<title>Re:I owe my employer absolutely nothing</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1258987740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you work "hard and smart" you should not have trouble finding a job. The market is very strange right now. You have to remember that the majority of people in any field are under-competent. It's this majority of workers who are having trouble finding alternate employment. In contrast, I've spoken with many old colleagues and friends over the past year who are BEGGING me to help them find qualified workers. The most recent instance was at my previous employer, who terminated their head network engineer for various reasons, and they are actually unable to fill his position now. Not because there is nobody looking for work, but because all the BEST people are already employed.</p><p>I hate to break it, but if you're looking for work and can't find it, it means you aren't that good. Now, by violating your employer's trust, you are both a poor employee as well as one who can't be trusted. That will get you NOWHERE in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you work " hard and smart " you should not have trouble finding a job .
The market is very strange right now .
You have to remember that the majority of people in any field are under-competent .
It 's this majority of workers who are having trouble finding alternate employment .
In contrast , I 've spoken with many old colleagues and friends over the past year who are BEGGING me to help them find qualified workers .
The most recent instance was at my previous employer , who terminated their head network engineer for various reasons , and they are actually unable to fill his position now .
Not because there is nobody looking for work , but because all the BEST people are already employed.I hate to break it , but if you 're looking for work and ca n't find it , it means you are n't that good .
Now , by violating your employer 's trust , you are both a poor employee as well as one who ca n't be trusted .
That will get you NOWHERE in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you work "hard and smart" you should not have trouble finding a job.
The market is very strange right now.
You have to remember that the majority of people in any field are under-competent.
It's this majority of workers who are having trouble finding alternate employment.
In contrast, I've spoken with many old colleagues and friends over the past year who are BEGGING me to help them find qualified workers.
The most recent instance was at my previous employer, who terminated their head network engineer for various reasons, and they are actually unable to fill his position now.
Not because there is nobody looking for work, but because all the BEST people are already employed.I hate to break it, but if you're looking for work and can't find it, it means you aren't that good.
Now, by violating your employer's trust, you are both a poor employee as well as one who can't be trusted.
That will get you NOWHERE in the future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30214250</id>
	<title>Re:On Loyalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259080620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Expenses go to the Profit and Loss account. Unless they can be moved into an Off Balance sheet structure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Expenses go to the Profit and Loss account .
Unless they can be moved into an Off Balance sheet structure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Expenses go to the Profit and Loss account.
Unless they can be moved into an Off Balance sheet structure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208002</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258979220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>2. Ethics - Yes, people do have them. Maybe not everyone is the pinnacle of ethical behavior, but that doesn't mean every other person you see at the office is just waiting to mug you and steal your wallet in the parking lot.</p></div></blockquote><p>
We all know about the widespread, white-bred abuses going on in wall street. However, do not overlook tech companies which hire lots of gooks, Filipinos, and spics. <br> <br>

First-generation immigrants are not only incompetent, but xenophobic and to hostile those unlike them, especially caucasians (who are genetically and intellectually superior and tend to make the more animalistic employees envious on the basis of being able to speak decent English among other merits). <br> <br>

There should be laws preventing first-generation immigrants from Asian (including the Middle East), Latin, or African countries from working in the United States.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>2 .
Ethics - Yes , people do have them .
Maybe not everyone is the pinnacle of ethical behavior , but that does n't mean every other person you see at the office is just waiting to mug you and steal your wallet in the parking lot .
We all know about the widespread , white-bred abuses going on in wall street .
However , do not overlook tech companies which hire lots of gooks , Filipinos , and spics .
First-generation immigrants are not only incompetent , but xenophobic and to hostile those unlike them , especially caucasians ( who are genetically and intellectually superior and tend to make the more animalistic employees envious on the basis of being able to speak decent English among other merits ) .
There should be laws preventing first-generation immigrants from Asian ( including the Middle East ) , Latin , or African countries from working in the United States .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2.
Ethics - Yes, people do have them.
Maybe not everyone is the pinnacle of ethical behavior, but that doesn't mean every other person you see at the office is just waiting to mug you and steal your wallet in the parking lot.
We all know about the widespread, white-bred abuses going on in wall street.
However, do not overlook tech companies which hire lots of gooks, Filipinos, and spics.
First-generation immigrants are not only incompetent, but xenophobic and to hostile those unlike them, especially caucasians (who are genetically and intellectually superior and tend to make the more animalistic employees envious on the basis of being able to speak decent English among other merits).
There should be laws preventing first-generation immigrants from Asian (including the Middle East), Latin, or African countries from working in the United States.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209896</id>
	<title>Re:No $10 million, no deal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258994280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work for a large company - they would never know anyone took anything. Over half the managers on up are non-technical and see no use in logging most DB transactions or logging the level of detail needed to track down something like that - their theory is, why waste the disk space for something we won't use 99.9\% of the time?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a large company - they would never know anyone took anything .
Over half the managers on up are non-technical and see no use in logging most DB transactions or logging the level of detail needed to track down something like that - their theory is , why waste the disk space for something we wo n't use 99.9 \ % of the time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a large company - they would never know anyone took anything.
Over half the managers on up are non-technical and see no use in logging most DB transactions or logging the level of detail needed to track down something like that - their theory is, why waste the disk space for something we won't use 99.9\% of the time?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30210138</id>
	<title>You are projecting you lazy SOB.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258997580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Some of us like to work for reasons beyond simple money.
</p><p>
Perhaps you made the wrong job choice, my sympathies.
</p><p>
It's never to late to find something you like to do (accepting financial reality.)
</p><p>
Who knows: If you like it you might even be good at it?
</p><p>
Or perhaps you are just fucking lazy.
</p><p>
I would go stir crazy without something useful to do.
</p><p>
If I were independently wealthy I would have to construct a job like activity to keep me busy. Perhaps 'making a small fortune in auto racing'? Bet I would work \_more and harder\_ doing that.
</p><p>
That said I prefer to spend my time 'solving technical puzzles/problems, usually with computers', not playing office politics with a bunch of morons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some of us like to work for reasons beyond simple money .
Perhaps you made the wrong job choice , my sympathies .
It 's never to late to find something you like to do ( accepting financial reality .
) Who knows : If you like it you might even be good at it ?
Or perhaps you are just fucking lazy .
I would go stir crazy without something useful to do .
If I were independently wealthy I would have to construct a job like activity to keep me busy .
Perhaps 'making a small fortune in auto racing ' ?
Bet I would work \ _more and harder \ _ doing that .
That said I prefer to spend my time 'solving technical puzzles/problems , usually with computers ' , not playing office politics with a bunch of morons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Some of us like to work for reasons beyond simple money.
Perhaps you made the wrong job choice, my sympathies.
It's never to late to find something you like to do (accepting financial reality.
)

Who knows: If you like it you might even be good at it?
Or perhaps you are just fucking lazy.
I would go stir crazy without something useful to do.
If I were independently wealthy I would have to construct a job like activity to keep me busy.
Perhaps 'making a small fortune in auto racing'?
Bet I would work \_more and harder\_ doing that.
That said I prefer to spend my time 'solving technical puzzles/problems, usually with computers', not playing office politics with a bunch of morons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207696</id>
	<title>Re:On Loyalty</title>
	<author>snowraver1</author>
	<datestamp>1258977720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I used to be very logal to my employer.<br> <br>Then the recession happened.  They cut extra spending, so no more free lunches.  No more employee outings.  Morale went down.  Next came raises.  Oooh, we can't afford to give you a cost of living increase.  The people accepted it, but morale went down.  After the lunches and the raises were gone, we were told to that about 1/8 of the people in the building would be laid off.  Morale went down.  Then the layoffs happened.  Morale went down.  Then after they laid people off, they told us that there may be more layoffs coming.  Morale went down.  Then they told us that we would be micro-managed.  Morale went down.<br> <br>My employer is still better than most, and things around here are still gloomy...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to be very logal to my employer .
Then the recession happened .
They cut extra spending , so no more free lunches .
No more employee outings .
Morale went down .
Next came raises .
Oooh , we ca n't afford to give you a cost of living increase .
The people accepted it , but morale went down .
After the lunches and the raises were gone , we were told to that about 1/8 of the people in the building would be laid off .
Morale went down .
Then the layoffs happened .
Morale went down .
Then after they laid people off , they told us that there may be more layoffs coming .
Morale went down .
Then they told us that we would be micro-managed .
Morale went down .
My employer is still better than most , and things around here are still gloomy.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to be very logal to my employer.
Then the recession happened.
They cut extra spending, so no more free lunches.
No more employee outings.
Morale went down.
Next came raises.
Oooh, we can't afford to give you a cost of living increase.
The people accepted it, but morale went down.
After the lunches and the raises were gone, we were told to that about 1/8 of the people in the building would be laid off.
Morale went down.
Then the layoffs happened.
Morale went down.
Then after they laid people off, they told us that there may be more layoffs coming.
Morale went down.
Then they told us that we would be micro-managed.
Morale went down.
My employer is still better than most, and things around here are still gloomy...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207604</id>
	<title>Causality error</title>
	<author>The\_REAL\_DZA</author>
	<datestamp>1258977360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Causality error" in that they've mistaken the (observed) effect as a "cause".  The fact is, the "global recession" has merely <i> <b>revealed</b> </i> a decline in workers' "ethics" that was <i> <b>already there</b> </i> and which had been forming for at least the past several decades.  Despite what the talking heads (in both media <i>and</i> the government) are saying, this "economic downturn" is nowhere near as bad as the "Great Depression"; this according to the many "oldsters" I am in frequent conversation with -- my own parents included -- who actually <i>lived through the period</i> rather than merely learning about it from the history books -- and their recollections do <b> <i>not</i> </b> include such a widespread deterioration in the "morals" (their word -- read "ethics") of the population (and yes there were notable exceptions, some accounts of which are a little scary even to modern ears, but by and large people -- at least in this part of the country -- still left their doors unlocked at night; I triple-locked my doors almost religiously during even the much lauded "economic boom time" of just a few years ago!!)

Poverty does not cause crime any more than crime causes poverty (including but not by any means limited to the "victims" of Mr. Madoff -- their poverty was caused by a mixture of greed and stupidity.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Causality error " in that they 've mistaken the ( observed ) effect as a " cause " .
The fact is , the " global recession " has merely revealed a decline in workers ' " ethics " that was already there and which had been forming for at least the past several decades .
Despite what the talking heads ( in both media and the government ) are saying , this " economic downturn " is nowhere near as bad as the " Great Depression " ; this according to the many " oldsters " I am in frequent conversation with -- my own parents included -- who actually lived through the period rather than merely learning about it from the history books -- and their recollections do not include such a widespread deterioration in the " morals " ( their word -- read " ethics " ) of the population ( and yes there were notable exceptions , some accounts of which are a little scary even to modern ears , but by and large people -- at least in this part of the country -- still left their doors unlocked at night ; I triple-locked my doors almost religiously during even the much lauded " economic boom time " of just a few years ago ! !
) Poverty does not cause crime any more than crime causes poverty ( including but not by any means limited to the " victims " of Mr. Madoff -- their poverty was caused by a mixture of greed and stupidity .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Causality error" in that they've mistaken the (observed) effect as a "cause".
The fact is, the "global recession" has merely  revealed  a decline in workers' "ethics" that was  already there  and which had been forming for at least the past several decades.
Despite what the talking heads (in both media and the government) are saying, this "economic downturn" is nowhere near as bad as the "Great Depression"; this according to the many "oldsters" I am in frequent conversation with -- my own parents included -- who actually lived through the period rather than merely learning about it from the history books -- and their recollections do  not  include such a widespread deterioration in the "morals" (their word -- read "ethics") of the population (and yes there were notable exceptions, some accounts of which are a little scary even to modern ears, but by and large people -- at least in this part of the country -- still left their doors unlocked at night; I triple-locked my doors almost religiously during even the much lauded "economic boom time" of just a few years ago!!
)

Poverty does not cause crime any more than crime causes poverty (including but not by any means limited to the "victims" of Mr. Madoff -- their poverty was caused by a mixture of greed and stupidity.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207916</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258978740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree it's not 50\%<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... even if mostly on #1 and #2 alone</p><p>What if the info you find implicates your company in wrongdoings, or helps others call their bluff during negotiations? That's slightly more likely</p><p>Certain competitors might discretely pay a lot of money to make sure that info winds up in the right hands... e.g. a District Attorney, the BSA, or a stock trader</p><p>nice uid</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree it 's not 50 \ % ... even if mostly on # 1 and # 2 aloneWhat if the info you find implicates your company in wrongdoings , or helps others call their bluff during negotiations ?
That 's slightly more likelyCertain competitors might discretely pay a lot of money to make sure that info winds up in the right hands... e.g. a District Attorney , the BSA , or a stock tradernice uid</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree it's not 50\% ... even if mostly on #1 and #2 aloneWhat if the info you find implicates your company in wrongdoings, or helps others call their bluff during negotiations?
That's slightly more likelyCertain competitors might discretely pay a lot of money to make sure that info winds up in the right hands... e.g. a District Attorney, the BSA, or a stock tradernice uid</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208366</id>
	<title>Re:Do they filter by position?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258981080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The IT guys also have a lot more to lose if they're caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
</p><p>
An engineer who stole some piece of information about the product they were designing is one thing..  a future employer may be willing to take the risk,  watching them carefully, imposing restrictions, etc,  esp. in a tight market, after a long enough time, if they were remorseful enough.
</p><p>
The IT guy who got caught stealing and selling the entire customer database, the sales contacts, and basically <b>everything</b> and then selling it...  will never be trusted as an IT guy again.
The latter will most likely have a criminal record now and be unable to hide it.
</p><p>
An Engineer e-mailing a design document out of the company to a competitor is a dismissal offense, plus possibly a lawsuit.

But probably not jail time.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The IT guys also have a lot more to lose if they 're caught with their hands in the cookie jar .
An engineer who stole some piece of information about the product they were designing is one thing.. a future employer may be willing to take the risk , watching them carefully , imposing restrictions , etc , esp .
in a tight market , after a long enough time , if they were remorseful enough .
The IT guy who got caught stealing and selling the entire customer database , the sales contacts , and basically everything and then selling it... will never be trusted as an IT guy again .
The latter will most likely have a criminal record now and be unable to hide it .
An Engineer e-mailing a design document out of the company to a competitor is a dismissal offense , plus possibly a lawsuit .
But probably not jail time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The IT guys also have a lot more to lose if they're caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
An engineer who stole some piece of information about the product they were designing is one thing..  a future employer may be willing to take the risk,  watching them carefully, imposing restrictions, etc,  esp.
in a tight market, after a long enough time, if they were remorseful enough.
The IT guy who got caught stealing and selling the entire customer database, the sales contacts, and basically everything and then selling it...  will never be trusted as an IT guy again.
The latter will most likely have a criminal record now and be unable to hide it.
An Engineer e-mailing a design document out of the company to a competitor is a dismissal offense, plus possibly a lawsuit.
But probably not jail time.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207204</id>
	<title>No $10 million, no deal</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1258975860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unless I make enough money to retire debt free, no deal.</p><p>Most people will get caught and lose their jobs for tiny amounts of money and poor future job prospects</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless I make enough money to retire debt free , no deal.Most people will get caught and lose their jobs for tiny amounts of money and poor future job prospects</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless I make enough money to retire debt free, no deal.Most people will get caught and lose their jobs for tiny amounts of money and poor future job prospects</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207390</id>
	<title>I owe my employer absolutely nothing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258976580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the moment I am looking for a change of job because my employer has basically told me to shut the frak up and "be grateful you have a job" and there will be no advancement for a couple of years. I work hard and smart and I'm sick of being taken advantage of so I've gathered up the passwords to the products we make and have been using them as part of my pitch to the competition. I've also made a copy of my<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.pst file because I'm contemplating a lawsuit against my current employer - but not until I have another job. I used to love my job but they've really pretty much abused me for a couple of years and now are using the global slowdown as an excuse to kick me around some more. No more, I say. I have no desire to hurt the company per se, but I am going to take anything and everything with me that will help me succeed with the competition and perhaps further my legal case. I don't trust "discovery" to discover much of anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the moment I am looking for a change of job because my employer has basically told me to shut the frak up and " be grateful you have a job " and there will be no advancement for a couple of years .
I work hard and smart and I 'm sick of being taken advantage of so I 've gathered up the passwords to the products we make and have been using them as part of my pitch to the competition .
I 've also made a copy of my .pst file because I 'm contemplating a lawsuit against my current employer - but not until I have another job .
I used to love my job but they 've really pretty much abused me for a couple of years and now are using the global slowdown as an excuse to kick me around some more .
No more , I say .
I have no desire to hurt the company per se , but I am going to take anything and everything with me that will help me succeed with the competition and perhaps further my legal case .
I do n't trust " discovery " to discover much of anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the moment I am looking for a change of job because my employer has basically told me to shut the frak up and "be grateful you have a job" and there will be no advancement for a couple of years.
I work hard and smart and I'm sick of being taken advantage of so I've gathered up the passwords to the products we make and have been using them as part of my pitch to the competition.
I've also made a copy of my .pst file because I'm contemplating a lawsuit against my current employer - but not until I have another job.
I used to love my job but they've really pretty much abused me for a couple of years and now are using the global slowdown as an excuse to kick me around some more.
No more, I say.
I have no desire to hurt the company per se, but I am going to take anything and everything with me that will help me succeed with the competition and perhaps further my legal case.
I don't trust "discovery" to discover much of anything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30215376</id>
	<title>Re:Survey was of white-collar crooks</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1259084880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had my own questions about what "stealing information" comprises. For example, is it stealing information, if you take generic libraries, that you wrote, with you? I'm not talking about entire applications, but, if you wrote some useful testing functions, and maybe a shell script that could come in handy, is it "stealing information", to keep a copy for future reference?</p><p>The question in the survey is broad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had my own questions about what " stealing information " comprises .
For example , is it stealing information , if you take generic libraries , that you wrote , with you ?
I 'm not talking about entire applications , but , if you wrote some useful testing functions , and maybe a shell script that could come in handy , is it " stealing information " , to keep a copy for future reference ? The question in the survey is broad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had my own questions about what "stealing information" comprises.
For example, is it stealing information, if you take generic libraries, that you wrote, with you?
I'm not talking about entire applications, but, if you wrote some useful testing functions, and maybe a shell script that could come in handy, is it "stealing information", to keep a copy for future reference?The question in the survey is broad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207612</id>
	<title>Work ethics is a two way street</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258977420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once your employer displays their intentions to sacrifice you for a fistful of dollars, you may feel that sacrificing their interest is also an option.</p><p>If the market is an ideal system, regulated by pure greed, then profit = good. Corporations have no morals, just greed.</p><p>In such an environment, what's wrong with an employee to seek the most profit from the employing corporation? As long as the employee turns positive cashflow post fines and prosecution fees everything should be fine. Even if the corporation goes bankrupt as a result; as long as the perpetrator's balance sheet is OK, collateral damage does not matter.</p><p>Right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once your employer displays their intentions to sacrifice you for a fistful of dollars , you may feel that sacrificing their interest is also an option.If the market is an ideal system , regulated by pure greed , then profit = good .
Corporations have no morals , just greed.In such an environment , what 's wrong with an employee to seek the most profit from the employing corporation ?
As long as the employee turns positive cashflow post fines and prosecution fees everything should be fine .
Even if the corporation goes bankrupt as a result ; as long as the perpetrator 's balance sheet is OK , collateral damage does not matter.Right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once your employer displays their intentions to sacrifice you for a fistful of dollars, you may feel that sacrificing their interest is also an option.If the market is an ideal system, regulated by pure greed, then profit = good.
Corporations have no morals, just greed.In such an environment, what's wrong with an employee to seek the most profit from the employing corporation?
As long as the employee turns positive cashflow post fines and prosecution fees everything should be fine.
Even if the corporation goes bankrupt as a result; as long as the perpetrator's balance sheet is OK, collateral damage does not matter.Right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207218</id>
	<title>kdawson sucks dongs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258975920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I saw kdawson sucking dongs at the local glory hole last night.  Him and Rob "Micropeen" Maldo were also seen jacking off each other's dicks with tweezers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw kdawson sucking dongs at the local glory hole last night .
Him and Rob " Micropeen " Maldo were also seen jacking off each other 's dicks with tweezers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw kdawson sucking dongs at the local glory hole last night.
Him and Rob "Micropeen" Maldo were also seen jacking off each other's dicks with tweezers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207784</id>
	<title>Contact list</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258978140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This number is understandable if it includes people exporting their Outlook contact folder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This number is understandable if it includes people exporting their Outlook contact folder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This number is understandable if it includes people exporting their Outlook contact folder.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207518</id>
	<title>Survey was of white-collar crooks</title>
	<author>tomhudson</author>
	<datestamp>1258977000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The survey asked banksters and Wall Street fraud artists:
FTFA:</p><blockquote><div><p>Carried out amongst 600 office workers in Canary Wharf London and Wall Street New York</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
We already know that Wall Street and Canary Wharf are full of crooks.  I suspect that among that bunch, the 41\% is low - the other 59\% probably lied.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The survey asked banksters and Wall Street fraud artists : FTFA : Carried out amongst 600 office workers in Canary Wharf London and Wall Street New York We already know that Wall Street and Canary Wharf are full of crooks .
I suspect that among that bunch , the 41 \ % is low - the other 59 \ % probably lied .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The survey asked banksters and Wall Street fraud artists:
FTFA:Carried out amongst 600 office workers in Canary Wharf London and Wall Street New York

We already know that Wall Street and Canary Wharf are full of crooks.
I suspect that among that bunch, the 41\% is low - the other 59\% probably lied.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207446</id>
	<title>Do they filter by position?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258976760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because I'm sure the people working IT would have different statistics, given that we generally have ALOT more access to ALOT more information. I can read people's emails, I can look up every work order, I can view everyone's hard drives, browser history, heck, anything leaving the company network gets some log by the proxy.</p><p>I'm sure IT guys could find alot more valuable information, and as such, might be more willing to sell it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because I 'm sure the people working IT would have different statistics , given that we generally have ALOT more access to ALOT more information .
I can read people 's emails , I can look up every work order , I can view everyone 's hard drives , browser history , heck , anything leaving the company network gets some log by the proxy.I 'm sure IT guys could find alot more valuable information , and as such , might be more willing to sell it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because I'm sure the people working IT would have different statistics, given that we generally have ALOT more access to ALOT more information.
I can read people's emails, I can look up every work order, I can view everyone's hard drives, browser history, heck, anything leaving the company network gets some log by the proxy.I'm sure IT guys could find alot more valuable information, and as such, might be more willing to sell it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208618</id>
	<title>Re:poor security practices strike again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258982700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>what exactly do people do with the 'sensitive information' or 'classified data' what do with it?</p><p>What is there a section of Ebay that people don't know about one that classified as "Sensitive Corporate Data" or "Classified"</p><p>Or is there another part of kregg's list no ones about</p><p>Not that i would like to know any of the answers to those questions</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what exactly do people do with the 'sensitive information ' or 'classified data ' what do with it ? What is there a section of Ebay that people do n't know about one that classified as " Sensitive Corporate Data " or " Classified " Or is there another part of kregg 's list no ones aboutNot that i would like to know any of the answers to those questions</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what exactly do people do with the 'sensitive information' or 'classified data' what do with it?What is there a section of Ebay that people don't know about one that classified as "Sensitive Corporate Data" or "Classified"Or is there another part of kregg's list no ones aboutNot that i would like to know any of the answers to those questions</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207582</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207890</id>
	<title>Re:Do they filter by position?</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1258978620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yea, those photos of the boss cross dressing and dancing with a male hooker are worth a mint.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yea , those photos of the boss cross dressing and dancing with a male hooker are worth a mint .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yea, those photos of the boss cross dressing and dancing with a male hooker are worth a mint.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208426</id>
	<title>You say bullshit, I say desperation</title>
	<author>hellfire</author>
	<datestamp>1258981440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You call bullshit, but this survey is about how desperate and scared people are.</p><p>1. Risk - In the industry I work in, even before the Recession, theft of data has always been a huge issue.  No, theft of data is no big deal at your local 7-11, but at businesses with regular customers, it could be a simple matter for a salesrep to snatch it's customer roll and sneak off, start their own company, and take these customers with them.  the survey talked to 600 people in Canary Wharf London and Wall Street New York.  That happens there all the time too.  Risk is not the same across all industries, and we aren't talking about the coke formula, we are talking about orders, customers, item lists, stuff more basic than a super secret soft drink formula.</p><p>2. Canary Wharf, Wall Street... nuff said about ethics there.  In general, I disagree in that, particularly in the states, that a majority of people are that loyal to their employer.  I'm loyal to my employer because they pay me well, and because if I did come up with an idea to steal data, I'd completely botch it since I'm horrible at intrigue, deceit, lying, and anything else you'd need to pull off illicit behavior.  However, I hold no huge ideal that I should be loyal to them just because it's the right thing to do.  They haven't exactly been 100\% loyal to me.  And if there is even a sniff that I might be laid off, I'm not thinking of my company, I'm thinking about me and where my next mortgage payment is coming from.  Layoffs are still rampant in the US, and layoffs do NOT garner loyalty.  My company has had layoffs.</p><p>3. nothing to steal - your answer thinks of only one industry, software.  I work in software and software is protected by patents and copyright in the states, so it's hard to steal because lawyers catch you and sue you.  However, as I've stated, in my industry, our customers worry about data security all the time.  Customer roles, item lists, pricing, all these things give you a competitive advantage if you can find out what they are.  Pricing in business to business transactions is all over the place, it's not one price for all like in retail.  Find out what you are selling to which customers for what prices, then find a way to beat those prices and quietly steal those customers away... and you have a disaster.  You could start investigating who is stealing them, but by the time you find out you've lost a lot of business and it's not economically beneficial to try to sue the guy for damages in general.  You might get something back but you don't want to do that at all, because lawyer fees are a pain and the return on investment isn't like it is at large software or soft drink companies.  You can't patent a price list.</p><p>4. Employers are liable as well - see legal liability under #3.  Also, a lot of these salesreps just go off and found their own companies and take their customers with them, so the company and person taking the liability are one and the same, meaning no more additional liability than before, and the same amount of risk.  What's even worse is that if you lay a salesrep off, you can't steal his brain.  If he just remembers this information in his head, it's not illegal.  You just have to hope to provide better value or try to scare them with a noncompete clause, which these days can be broken easily.</p><p>The US is at 10\% unemployment, and businesses to this day do whatever they can to maintain large executive bonuses while staying in the black, and while Wall Street continues to suck the money from them.  Money is trickling up, not down, and people feel cheated out of jobs and homes.  If they feel cheated, you damn well better believe the employees will cheat back if they think they can get away with it.  The employers who did not do everything they could possibly think of to be loyal to their employees will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You call bullshit , but this survey is about how desperate and scared people are.1 .
Risk - In the industry I work in , even before the Recession , theft of data has always been a huge issue .
No , theft of data is no big deal at your local 7-11 , but at businesses with regular customers , it could be a simple matter for a salesrep to snatch it 's customer roll and sneak off , start their own company , and take these customers with them .
the survey talked to 600 people in Canary Wharf London and Wall Street New York .
That happens there all the time too .
Risk is not the same across all industries , and we are n't talking about the coke formula , we are talking about orders , customers , item lists , stuff more basic than a super secret soft drink formula.2 .
Canary Wharf , Wall Street... nuff said about ethics there .
In general , I disagree in that , particularly in the states , that a majority of people are that loyal to their employer .
I 'm loyal to my employer because they pay me well , and because if I did come up with an idea to steal data , I 'd completely botch it since I 'm horrible at intrigue , deceit , lying , and anything else you 'd need to pull off illicit behavior .
However , I hold no huge ideal that I should be loyal to them just because it 's the right thing to do .
They have n't exactly been 100 \ % loyal to me .
And if there is even a sniff that I might be laid off , I 'm not thinking of my company , I 'm thinking about me and where my next mortgage payment is coming from .
Layoffs are still rampant in the US , and layoffs do NOT garner loyalty .
My company has had layoffs.3 .
nothing to steal - your answer thinks of only one industry , software .
I work in software and software is protected by patents and copyright in the states , so it 's hard to steal because lawyers catch you and sue you .
However , as I 've stated , in my industry , our customers worry about data security all the time .
Customer roles , item lists , pricing , all these things give you a competitive advantage if you can find out what they are .
Pricing in business to business transactions is all over the place , it 's not one price for all like in retail .
Find out what you are selling to which customers for what prices , then find a way to beat those prices and quietly steal those customers away... and you have a disaster .
You could start investigating who is stealing them , but by the time you find out you 've lost a lot of business and it 's not economically beneficial to try to sue the guy for damages in general .
You might get something back but you do n't want to do that at all , because lawyer fees are a pain and the return on investment is n't like it is at large software or soft drink companies .
You ca n't patent a price list.4 .
Employers are liable as well - see legal liability under # 3 .
Also , a lot of these salesreps just go off and found their own companies and take their customers with them , so the company and person taking the liability are one and the same , meaning no more additional liability than before , and the same amount of risk .
What 's even worse is that if you lay a salesrep off , you ca n't steal his brain .
If he just remembers this information in his head , it 's not illegal .
You just have to hope to provide better value or try to scare them with a noncompete clause , which these days can be broken easily.The US is at 10 \ % unemployment , and businesses to this day do whatever they can to maintain large executive bonuses while staying in the black , and while Wall Street continues to suck the money from them .
Money is trickling up , not down , and people feel cheated out of jobs and homes .
If they feel cheated , you damn well better believe the employees will cheat back if they think they can get away with it .
The employers who did not do everything they could possibly think of to be loyal to their employees will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You call bullshit, but this survey is about how desperate and scared people are.1.
Risk - In the industry I work in, even before the Recession, theft of data has always been a huge issue.
No, theft of data is no big deal at your local 7-11, but at businesses with regular customers, it could be a simple matter for a salesrep to snatch it's customer roll and sneak off, start their own company, and take these customers with them.
the survey talked to 600 people in Canary Wharf London and Wall Street New York.
That happens there all the time too.
Risk is not the same across all industries, and we aren't talking about the coke formula, we are talking about orders, customers, item lists, stuff more basic than a super secret soft drink formula.2.
Canary Wharf, Wall Street... nuff said about ethics there.
In general, I disagree in that, particularly in the states, that a majority of people are that loyal to their employer.
I'm loyal to my employer because they pay me well, and because if I did come up with an idea to steal data, I'd completely botch it since I'm horrible at intrigue, deceit, lying, and anything else you'd need to pull off illicit behavior.
However, I hold no huge ideal that I should be loyal to them just because it's the right thing to do.
They haven't exactly been 100\% loyal to me.
And if there is even a sniff that I might be laid off, I'm not thinking of my company, I'm thinking about me and where my next mortgage payment is coming from.
Layoffs are still rampant in the US, and layoffs do NOT garner loyalty.
My company has had layoffs.3.
nothing to steal - your answer thinks of only one industry, software.
I work in software and software is protected by patents and copyright in the states, so it's hard to steal because lawyers catch you and sue you.
However, as I've stated, in my industry, our customers worry about data security all the time.
Customer roles, item lists, pricing, all these things give you a competitive advantage if you can find out what they are.
Pricing in business to business transactions is all over the place, it's not one price for all like in retail.
Find out what you are selling to which customers for what prices, then find a way to beat those prices and quietly steal those customers away... and you have a disaster.
You could start investigating who is stealing them, but by the time you find out you've lost a lot of business and it's not economically beneficial to try to sue the guy for damages in general.
You might get something back but you don't want to do that at all, because lawyer fees are a pain and the return on investment isn't like it is at large software or soft drink companies.
You can't patent a price list.4.
Employers are liable as well - see legal liability under #3.
Also, a lot of these salesreps just go off and found their own companies and take their customers with them, so the company and person taking the liability are one and the same, meaning no more additional liability than before, and the same amount of risk.
What's even worse is that if you lay a salesrep off, you can't steal his brain.
If he just remembers this information in his head, it's not illegal.
You just have to hope to provide better value or try to scare them with a noncompete clause, which these days can be broken easily.The US is at 10\% unemployment, and businesses to this day do whatever they can to maintain large executive bonuses while staying in the black, and while Wall Street continues to suck the money from them.
Money is trickling up, not down, and people feel cheated out of jobs and homes.
If they feel cheated, you damn well better believe the employees will cheat back if they think they can get away with it.
The employers who did not do everything they could possibly think of to be loyal to their employees will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209566</id>
	<title>Re:On Loyalty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258990560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't see the irony in what you just said do you.....</p><p>You screwed over someone who did something you didnt like.</p><p>Just like the employee screwed you over for doing something they didnt like.</p><p>You want some sort of magic double standard that favors employers i see..  Well, good luck with that.  You've just shown your remaining employees what you are capable of.  SO the next time you piss one of them off.  I imagine they will feel no moral problems about fucking your company over just as hard as they can.</p><p>Wanna be an ass.  Expect to be treated shitty.   And that goes for employers and employees in no particular order.</p><p>Yeah!  we totaly nailed that employee who ticked us off!</p><p>Yeah! i totally ruined that company that ticked me off!</p><p>Either they are both right.   Or both wrong.  Which way would you like the world to be?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't see the irony in what you just said do you.....You screwed over someone who did something you didnt like.Just like the employee screwed you over for doing something they didnt like.You want some sort of magic double standard that favors employers i see.. Well , good luck with that .
You 've just shown your remaining employees what you are capable of .
SO the next time you piss one of them off .
I imagine they will feel no moral problems about fucking your company over just as hard as they can.Wan na be an ass .
Expect to be treated shitty .
And that goes for employers and employees in no particular order.Yeah !
we totaly nailed that employee who ticked us off ! Yeah !
i totally ruined that company that ticked me off ! Either they are both right .
Or both wrong .
Which way would you like the world to be ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't see the irony in what you just said do you.....You screwed over someone who did something you didnt like.Just like the employee screwed you over for doing something they didnt like.You want some sort of magic double standard that favors employers i see..  Well, good luck with that.
You've just shown your remaining employees what you are capable of.
SO the next time you piss one of them off.
I imagine they will feel no moral problems about fucking your company over just as hard as they can.Wanna be an ass.
Expect to be treated shitty.
And that goes for employers and employees in no particular order.Yeah!
we totaly nailed that employee who ticked us off!Yeah!
i totally ruined that company that ticked me off!Either they are both right.
Or both wrong.
Which way would you like the world to be?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207412</id>
	<title>On Society, and Sociopathy</title>
	<author>zooblethorpe</author>
	<datestamp>1258976640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed.  When execs are getting $10 mil bonus packages for burning a company to the ground, when the upper echelons are gutting pension plans by reneging on past promises and contracts and then turn around and pocket the savings for themselves, it should come as no surprise in the least that those of us further down the corporate ladder are taking a similarly opportunistic approach.  </p><p>Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups.  The alphas, by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas, are viewed as successful -- "well, they're doing something right for themselves, guess it'd be smart for me to do the same."  When sociopaths lead our companies, the employees themselves will, generally speaking, start behaving more sociopathically.  It's basic survival.  </p><p>Cheers,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed .
When execs are getting $ 10 mil bonus packages for burning a company to the ground , when the upper echelons are gutting pension plans by reneging on past promises and contracts and then turn around and pocket the savings for themselves , it should come as no surprise in the least that those of us further down the corporate ladder are taking a similarly opportunistic approach .
Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups .
The alphas , by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas , are viewed as successful -- " well , they 're doing something right for themselves , guess it 'd be smart for me to do the same .
" When sociopaths lead our companies , the employees themselves will , generally speaking , start behaving more sociopathically .
It 's basic survival .
Cheers,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed.
When execs are getting $10 mil bonus packages for burning a company to the ground, when the upper echelons are gutting pension plans by reneging on past promises and contracts and then turn around and pocket the savings for themselves, it should come as no surprise in the least that those of us further down the corporate ladder are taking a similarly opportunistic approach.
Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups.
The alphas, by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas, are viewed as successful -- "well, they're doing something right for themselves, guess it'd be smart for me to do the same.
"  When sociopaths lead our companies, the employees themselves will, generally speaking, start behaving more sociopathically.
It's basic survival.
Cheers,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207782</id>
	<title>Re:Survey was of white-collar crooks</title>
	<author>tool462</author>
	<datestamp>1258978140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And specifically, if they're talking about business folks, as opposed to the IT guys, for example, then "stealing information" may include things like taking your client rolodex with you.  While this is still ethically questionable, I don't think it's illegal.  If it is, it at least has tacit approval by the entire industry with how pervasive it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And specifically , if they 're talking about business folks , as opposed to the IT guys , for example , then " stealing information " may include things like taking your client rolodex with you .
While this is still ethically questionable , I do n't think it 's illegal .
If it is , it at least has tacit approval by the entire industry with how pervasive it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And specifically, if they're talking about business folks, as opposed to the IT guys, for example, then "stealing information" may include things like taking your client rolodex with you.
While this is still ethically questionable, I don't think it's illegal.
If it is, it at least has tacit approval by the entire industry with how pervasive it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207936</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah right</title>
	<author>RedBear</author>
	<datestamp>1258978860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To add to that, one of the most important things to remember:</p><p>5. There is no way in hell that 50\% of the employed population, even if you're just looking at the corporate office lackey population, are smart enough to even get the idea that they might benefit from copying some sort of corporate business information. Most people are just struggling to make it through every day while getting an acceptable level of work done to avoid getting fired. It is ludicrous to think that one out of every two employees has a access, knowledge and skills to steal any significant amount of company information that would have even the remotest chance of benefiting them personally.</p><p>Now, one in six to one in ten, something in that range would be believable and still should be a trigger for added security levels. After all, it only takes one in a thousand being in the right position at the right time to do damage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To add to that , one of the most important things to remember : 5 .
There is no way in hell that 50 \ % of the employed population , even if you 're just looking at the corporate office lackey population , are smart enough to even get the idea that they might benefit from copying some sort of corporate business information .
Most people are just struggling to make it through every day while getting an acceptable level of work done to avoid getting fired .
It is ludicrous to think that one out of every two employees has a access , knowledge and skills to steal any significant amount of company information that would have even the remotest chance of benefiting them personally.Now , one in six to one in ten , something in that range would be believable and still should be a trigger for added security levels .
After all , it only takes one in a thousand being in the right position at the right time to do damage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To add to that, one of the most important things to remember:5.
There is no way in hell that 50\% of the employed population, even if you're just looking at the corporate office lackey population, are smart enough to even get the idea that they might benefit from copying some sort of corporate business information.
Most people are just struggling to make it through every day while getting an acceptable level of work done to avoid getting fired.
It is ludicrous to think that one out of every two employees has a access, knowledge and skills to steal any significant amount of company information that would have even the remotest chance of benefiting them personally.Now, one in six to one in ten, something in that range would be believable and still should be a trigger for added security levels.
After all, it only takes one in a thousand being in the right position at the right time to do damage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207722</id>
	<title>Re:On Society, and Sociopathy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258977900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups. The alphas, by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas, are viewed as successful -- "well, they're doing something right for themselves, guess it'd be smart for me to do the same." When sociopaths lead our companies, the employees themselves will, generally speaking, start behaving more sociopathically. It's basic survival.</p></div><p>I don't see it like that at all. I think we all want -- and should have -- an easy life with little to no working. And I believe most of us are striking for that in a way or another. Some will save up money so they can be like that in a distant future, others will try to be comfortable and take it easy right now. Both ways have their ups and downs.

</p><p>We're unique, intelligent animals. So I think any social analysis based on how other animals behave will be way too simplistic and perhaps even wrong. There's probably a few correlations here and there, if you take a big population. But we're so complex individuals that saying person X tries to emulate person Y behavior because Y is an alpha-male is very misleading, and probably just wrong.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups .
The alphas , by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas , are viewed as successful -- " well , they 're doing something right for themselves , guess it 'd be smart for me to do the same .
" When sociopaths lead our companies , the employees themselves will , generally speaking , start behaving more sociopathically .
It 's basic survival.I do n't see it like that at all .
I think we all want -- and should have -- an easy life with little to no working .
And I believe most of us are striking for that in a way or another .
Some will save up money so they can be like that in a distant future , others will try to be comfortable and take it easy right now .
Both ways have their ups and downs .
We 're unique , intelligent animals .
So I think any social analysis based on how other animals behave will be way too simplistic and perhaps even wrong .
There 's probably a few correlations here and there , if you take a big population .
But we 're so complex individuals that saying person X tries to emulate person Y behavior because Y is an alpha-male is very misleading , and probably just wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Social mammals tend to emulate the alpha individuals of their groups.
The alphas, by dint of successfully establishing themselves as alphas, are viewed as successful -- "well, they're doing something right for themselves, guess it'd be smart for me to do the same.
" When sociopaths lead our companies, the employees themselves will, generally speaking, start behaving more sociopathically.
It's basic survival.I don't see it like that at all.
I think we all want -- and should have -- an easy life with little to no working.
And I believe most of us are striking for that in a way or another.
Some will save up money so they can be like that in a distant future, others will try to be comfortable and take it easy right now.
Both ways have their ups and downs.
We're unique, intelligent animals.
So I think any social analysis based on how other animals behave will be way too simplistic and perhaps even wrong.
There's probably a few correlations here and there, if you take a big population.
But we're so complex individuals that saying person X tries to emulate person Y behavior because Y is an alpha-male is very misleading, and probably just wrong.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207412</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30214250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207390
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30214264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30215376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30214320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207446
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30218834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207390
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207446
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30210138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207390
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30213558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30211300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30211938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_23_1927248_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30211320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207630
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207426
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208426
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30214264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30211938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209896
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30208618
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207612
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30218834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207768
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207782
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30211300
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30215376
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_23_1927248.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207552
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209958
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209874
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30213558
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207722
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30210138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30214250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30214320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207848
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30209566
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30211320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_23_1927248.30207480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
