<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_30_1731239</id>
	<title>Arrington's CrunchPad Dies</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1259604480000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>adeelarshad82 writes <i>"Michael Arrington announced the <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/30/crunchpad-end/">death of the CrunchPad</a> on Monday morning in a blog post heavily spiced with angst and drama. According to Arrington, the Crunchpad, a 12-inch Web tablet expected to be priced at about $300, was just days away from launch. At the last minute, however, Arrington received an email from Chandra Rathakrishnan, the chief executive of manufacturing partner Fusion Garage, apparently trying to cut Arrington out of the product on the eve of the launch. Fusion Garage, according to Arrington, wanted to market the device itself under its own name; which obviously was the deal breaker. Arrington claims that the company had overcome obstacles at every stage in the business such as deals with Intel, retail launch, securing venture capital and angel investments. Interesting bit is that some were already speculating that the <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2356075,00.asp">Crunchpad was not real</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>adeelarshad82 writes " Michael Arrington announced the death of the CrunchPad on Monday morning in a blog post heavily spiced with angst and drama .
According to Arrington , the Crunchpad , a 12-inch Web tablet expected to be priced at about $ 300 , was just days away from launch .
At the last minute , however , Arrington received an email from Chandra Rathakrishnan , the chief executive of manufacturing partner Fusion Garage , apparently trying to cut Arrington out of the product on the eve of the launch .
Fusion Garage , according to Arrington , wanted to market the device itself under its own name ; which obviously was the deal breaker .
Arrington claims that the company had overcome obstacles at every stage in the business such as deals with Intel , retail launch , securing venture capital and angel investments .
Interesting bit is that some were already speculating that the Crunchpad was not real .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>adeelarshad82 writes "Michael Arrington announced the death of the CrunchPad on Monday morning in a blog post heavily spiced with angst and drama.
According to Arrington, the Crunchpad, a 12-inch Web tablet expected to be priced at about $300, was just days away from launch.
At the last minute, however, Arrington received an email from Chandra Rathakrishnan, the chief executive of manufacturing partner Fusion Garage, apparently trying to cut Arrington out of the product on the eve of the launch.
Fusion Garage, according to Arrington, wanted to market the device itself under its own name; which obviously was the deal breaker.
Arrington claims that the company had overcome obstacles at every stage in the business such as deals with Intel, retail launch, securing venture capital and angel investments.
Interesting bit is that some were already speculating that the Crunchpad was not real.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272924</id>
	<title>He can talk the talk</title>
	<author>mrgreenfur</author>
	<datestamp>1259612100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>He lampoons startups every day and finally tries something on his own and realizes it's harder said than done, what a surprise.

This guy is a dick and always has been; it's kinda nice to hear he's having trouble!</htmltext>
<tokenext>He lampoons startups every day and finally tries something on his own and realizes it 's harder said than done , what a surprise .
This guy is a dick and always has been ; it 's kinda nice to hear he 's having trouble !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He lampoons startups every day and finally tries something on his own and realizes it's harder said than done, what a surprise.
This guy is a dick and always has been; it's kinda nice to hear he's having trouble!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272874</id>
	<title>Its called a shot-gun clause...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259611860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS have a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shotgun\_clause" title="wikipedia.org">shot-gun clause</a> [wikipedia.org] with a hard time limit in any significant partnership agreement. This "co-owned" 50/50 split stuff is BS and is way too likely to go sour.</p><p>If they had a shot-gun clause in their agreement, this would be a simple matter of one party or the other buying full rights and continuing on with the project, no legal system and multi-year drawn out court battles designed to put all the money in lawyers pockets. The issue would be resolved in a matter of days and both parties would essentially be happy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ALWAYS , ALWAYS , ALWAYS have a shot-gun clause [ wikipedia.org ] with a hard time limit in any significant partnership agreement .
This " co-owned " 50/50 split stuff is BS and is way too likely to go sour.If they had a shot-gun clause in their agreement , this would be a simple matter of one party or the other buying full rights and continuing on with the project , no legal system and multi-year drawn out court battles designed to put all the money in lawyers pockets .
The issue would be resolved in a matter of days and both parties would essentially be happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS have a shot-gun clause [wikipedia.org] with a hard time limit in any significant partnership agreement.
This "co-owned" 50/50 split stuff is BS and is way too likely to go sour.If they had a shot-gun clause in their agreement, this would be a simple matter of one party or the other buying full rights and continuing on with the project, no legal system and multi-year drawn out court battles designed to put all the money in lawyers pockets.
The issue would be resolved in a matter of days and both parties would essentially be happy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272632</id>
	<title>Totally moronic approach</title>
	<author>MikeRT</author>
	<datestamp>1259610420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even a geek with full-blown asperger's syndrome could predict how Arrington and his crew would react to this approach to renegotiating the IP rights. If they had been at least moderately smart about it, they would have come forward with some sort of half-serious offer like buying out some of TechCrunch's equity in the IP or agreeing to assume TechCruch's liability for the business side of getting it out there, warranting it, etc. in exchange for a greater cut of the pie.</p><p>This... just comes off as a blatant attempt to stab a partner in the back if this story can be believed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even a geek with full-blown asperger 's syndrome could predict how Arrington and his crew would react to this approach to renegotiating the IP rights .
If they had been at least moderately smart about it , they would have come forward with some sort of half-serious offer like buying out some of TechCrunch 's equity in the IP or agreeing to assume TechCruch 's liability for the business side of getting it out there , warranting it , etc .
in exchange for a greater cut of the pie.This... just comes off as a blatant attempt to stab a partner in the back if this story can be believed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even a geek with full-blown asperger's syndrome could predict how Arrington and his crew would react to this approach to renegotiating the IP rights.
If they had been at least moderately smart about it, they would have come forward with some sort of half-serious offer like buying out some of TechCrunch's equity in the IP or agreeing to assume TechCruch's liability for the business side of getting it out there, warranting it, etc.
in exchange for a greater cut of the pie.This... just comes off as a blatant attempt to stab a partner in the back if this story can be believed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272290</id>
	<title>Days from Launch?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259608680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you write "days from launch", do you mean that there are thousands of boxes of these things sitting in distribution centers, waiting to go to stores?</p><p>Or do you mean they were hoping the printer was going to deliver a new batch of "CrunchPad" decals in a few days, designed to fit over the "Dell" logo on the laptop they were going to use in upcoming demos?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you write " days from launch " , do you mean that there are thousands of boxes of these things sitting in distribution centers , waiting to go to stores ? Or do you mean they were hoping the printer was going to deliver a new batch of " CrunchPad " decals in a few days , designed to fit over the " Dell " logo on the laptop they were going to use in upcoming demos ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you write "days from launch", do you mean that there are thousands of boxes of these things sitting in distribution centers, waiting to go to stores?Or do you mean they were hoping the printer was going to deliver a new batch of "CrunchPad" decals in a few days, designed to fit over the "Dell" logo on the laptop they were going to use in upcoming demos?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273854</id>
	<title>Re:Who Is Doing What?</title>
	<author>tbuskey</author>
	<datestamp>1259572380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Replace CrunchPad with Macintosh and Arrington with Jobs if it helps outline who does what.</p><p>Ok, Jobs probably got into lots more detail, but he's not an engineer or programmer.  Jobs certainly was a major factor in the Mac's design.</p><p>I'd say Arrington is probably similar with the Crunchpad.  He provided 2 prototypes, office space, access to Silicon Valley capital.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Replace CrunchPad with Macintosh and Arrington with Jobs if it helps outline who does what.Ok , Jobs probably got into lots more detail , but he 's not an engineer or programmer .
Jobs certainly was a major factor in the Mac 's design.I 'd say Arrington is probably similar with the Crunchpad .
He provided 2 prototypes , office space , access to Silicon Valley capital .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Replace CrunchPad with Macintosh and Arrington with Jobs if it helps outline who does what.Ok, Jobs probably got into lots more detail, but he's not an engineer or programmer.
Jobs certainly was a major factor in the Mac's design.I'd say Arrington is probably similar with the Crunchpad.
He provided 2 prototypes, office space, access to Silicon Valley capital.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30277066</id>
	<title>Where's the source?</title>
	<author>Len</author>
	<datestamp>1259584620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The CrunchPad was supposed to have open hardware &amp; software, right?<br>It was almost finished and ready for release, right?<br>So where's the hardware design &amp; source code? Or was all that "open" talk just BS meant to get support from the slashcrunch crowd?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The CrunchPad was supposed to have open hardware &amp; software , right ? It was almost finished and ready for release , right ? So where 's the hardware design &amp; source code ?
Or was all that " open " talk just BS meant to get support from the slashcrunch crowd ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The CrunchPad was supposed to have open hardware &amp; software, right?It was almost finished and ready for release, right?So where's the hardware design &amp; source code?
Or was all that "open" talk just BS meant to get support from the slashcrunch crowd?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273644</id>
	<title>Re:Who Is Doing What?</title>
	<author>Brett Buck</author>
	<datestamp>1259571660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm not sure what Arrington is bringing to the party here. He's not an engineer that I know of, but more of a money guy.</p></div> </blockquote><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Uh, try doing this project *without* a money guy, and see how far you get. Then you will know what he is bringing to the party.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I'm an engineer, too, but you have to recognize that to  do something like this requires a lot more than engineering.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Brett</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure what Arrington is bringing to the party here .
He 's not an engineer that I know of , but more of a money guy .
        Uh , try doing this project * without * a money guy , and see how far you get .
Then you will know what he is bringing to the party .
      I 'm an engineer , too , but you have to recognize that to do something like this requires a lot more than engineering .
        Brett</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure what Arrington is bringing to the party here.
He's not an engineer that I know of, but more of a money guy.
        Uh, try doing this project *without* a money guy, and see how far you get.
Then you will know what he is bringing to the party.
      I'm an engineer, too, but you have to recognize that to  do something like this requires a lot more than engineering.
        Brett
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273770</id>
	<title>Re:And nothing of value was lost</title>
	<author>Kozar\_The\_Malignant</author>
	<datestamp>1259572080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>&gt;The only thing missing from this soap opera is that Google/Microsoft/Apple diabolically combined with SMERSH to stop the CrunchPud</i> </p><p>You're on the right track, but in order to be credible, a conspiracy theory <b>must</b> include the Knights Templar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; The only thing missing from this soap opera is that Google/Microsoft/Apple diabolically combined with SMERSH to stop the CrunchPud You 're on the right track , but in order to be credible , a conspiracy theory must include the Knights Templar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> &gt;The only thing missing from this soap opera is that Google/Microsoft/Apple diabolically combined with SMERSH to stop the CrunchPud You're on the right track, but in order to be credible, a conspiracy theory must include the Knights Templar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272426</id>
	<title>CrunchPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259609340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Too busy to RTFA, but is that some kind of toilet-based tablet?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too busy to RTFA , but is that some kind of toilet-based tablet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too busy to RTFA, but is that some kind of toilet-based tablet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272402</id>
	<title>Shareholders...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259609160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...smells like Apple or Microsoft got hold of some of the shareholders or of the CEO.</p><p>Hows that for conspiracy?</p><p>AC</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...smells like Apple or Microsoft got hold of some of the shareholders or of the CEO.Hows that for conspiracy ? AC</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...smells like Apple or Microsoft got hold of some of the shareholders or of the CEO.Hows that for conspiracy?AC</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272164</id>
	<title>Seeing Arrington's rants...</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1259608200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It wouldn't be a surprise if the whole thing was just a hoax. Like the other article says:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Arrington, who is not a journalist (and has never professed to be one), regularly talks to financial guys, with close ties to virtually every major technology company. He's also plugged into these same companies at even higher levels. <b>Oh, and he also invests in companies he writes about. At times, this can make his information incredibly prescient and also highly self-serving.</b> The problem is, no one can tell the difference.</p></div><p>And a few days before launch and dies for such a stupid reason? Please.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would n't be a surprise if the whole thing was just a hoax .
Like the other article says : Arrington , who is not a journalist ( and has never professed to be one ) , regularly talks to financial guys , with close ties to virtually every major technology company .
He 's also plugged into these same companies at even higher levels .
Oh , and he also invests in companies he writes about .
At times , this can make his information incredibly prescient and also highly self-serving .
The problem is , no one can tell the difference.And a few days before launch and dies for such a stupid reason ?
Please .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It wouldn't be a surprise if the whole thing was just a hoax.
Like the other article says:Arrington, who is not a journalist (and has never professed to be one), regularly talks to financial guys, with close ties to virtually every major technology company.
He's also plugged into these same companies at even higher levels.
Oh, and he also invests in companies he writes about.
At times, this can make his information incredibly prescient and also highly self-serving.
The problem is, no one can tell the difference.And a few days before launch and dies for such a stupid reason?
Please.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273862</id>
	<title>Re:Seeing Arrington's rants...</title>
	<author>asackett</author>
	<datestamp>1259572380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I had mod points I'd award a quadrillion of them for:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm guessing you've never started a company.  When you do, you'll find out that a fair number of your friends turn into psychopaths when money is involved.  This is why the best number of partners in any new venture is 1.</p></div><p>I've seen this too many times. For anyone who hans't: If you want to know what a partnership is like, here's what you do: Come up with a great idea, then work yourself nearly to death over 18 months to two years while ignoring your family, friends, and health. When the idea has been made tangible and needs just a few minor tweaks, hand over all of your work to someone you'll never want to see again.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I had mod points I 'd award a quadrillion of them for : I 'm guessing you 've never started a company .
When you do , you 'll find out that a fair number of your friends turn into psychopaths when money is involved .
This is why the best number of partners in any new venture is 1.I 've seen this too many times .
For anyone who hans't : If you want to know what a partnership is like , here 's what you do : Come up with a great idea , then work yourself nearly to death over 18 months to two years while ignoring your family , friends , and health .
When the idea has been made tangible and needs just a few minor tweaks , hand over all of your work to someone you 'll never want to see again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I had mod points I'd award a quadrillion of them for:I'm guessing you've never started a company.
When you do, you'll find out that a fair number of your friends turn into psychopaths when money is involved.
This is why the best number of partners in any new venture is 1.I've seen this too many times.
For anyone who hans't: If you want to know what a partnership is like, here's what you do: Come up with a great idea, then work yourself nearly to death over 18 months to two years while ignoring your family, friends, and health.
When the idea has been made tangible and needs just a few minor tweaks, hand over all of your work to someone you'll never want to see again.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273022</id>
	<title>Re:Who Is Doing What?</title>
	<author>iamhassi</author>
	<datestamp>1259612580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"If all he was providing was "vision" and bloviation and hype via his blog, with maybe a seriously minority share of the capital, then he should STFU."</i>
<br> <br>
As much as I hate Arrington and the "CrunchPad" because <a href="http://computers.shop.ebay.com/PC-Laptops-Netbooks-/177/i.html?Type=Tablet\%2520PC&amp;LH\_BIN=1&amp;LH\_IncludeSIF=1&amp;LH\_Price=250..300@c&amp;Processor\%2520Type=Intel\%2520Pentium\%2520M\%252C\%2520Centrino&amp;\_nkw=tablet\%20pc&amp;\_catref=1&amp;\_dmpt=Laptops\_Nov05&amp;\_fln=1&amp;\_mPrRngCbx=1&amp;\_ssov=1&amp;\_trksid=p3286.c0.m282" title="ebay.com">better $300 Tablet PCs already exist</a> [ebay.com], I would have to disagree with you on this.  Manufacturing a device and getting it to market is one thing, but advertising it is the other side of the coin.  Hell look at the pet rock, <i>anyone</i> could literally make a "pet" rock at home for free, yet <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pet\_Rock" title="wikipedia.org">the idea made the creator a millionaire within 6 months</a> [wikipedia.org], all through advertising and hype.
<br> <br>
I think Arrington was doing his fair share just blogging and creating hype over the product, <a href="http://slashdot.org/index2.pl?fhfilter=crunchpad" title="slashdot.org">he even managed to get it on slashdot 5 times.</a> [slashdot.org]  Announcing that the product is vaporware likely killed his credibility with blogs and fans worldwide, he will never be trusted again when he announces a new product.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" If all he was providing was " vision " and bloviation and hype via his blog , with maybe a seriously minority share of the capital , then he should STFU .
" As much as I hate Arrington and the " CrunchPad " because better $ 300 Tablet PCs already exist [ ebay.com ] , I would have to disagree with you on this .
Manufacturing a device and getting it to market is one thing , but advertising it is the other side of the coin .
Hell look at the pet rock , anyone could literally make a " pet " rock at home for free , yet the idea made the creator a millionaire within 6 months [ wikipedia.org ] , all through advertising and hype .
I think Arrington was doing his fair share just blogging and creating hype over the product , he even managed to get it on slashdot 5 times .
[ slashdot.org ] Announcing that the product is vaporware likely killed his credibility with blogs and fans worldwide , he will never be trusted again when he announces a new product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If all he was providing was "vision" and bloviation and hype via his blog, with maybe a seriously minority share of the capital, then he should STFU.
"
 
As much as I hate Arrington and the "CrunchPad" because better $300 Tablet PCs already exist [ebay.com], I would have to disagree with you on this.
Manufacturing a device and getting it to market is one thing, but advertising it is the other side of the coin.
Hell look at the pet rock, anyone could literally make a "pet" rock at home for free, yet the idea made the creator a millionaire within 6 months [wikipedia.org], all through advertising and hype.
I think Arrington was doing his fair share just blogging and creating hype over the product, he even managed to get it on slashdot 5 times.
[slashdot.org]  Announcing that the product is vaporware likely killed his credibility with blogs and fans worldwide, he will never be trusted again when he announces a new product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30277206</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunate</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1259585340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"What's up with all the Chrome on ARM astroturfing around here...? It's quite obvious, guys."</p><p>Slashdot has turned into Chromedot, a frenzied example of browser appliance worship.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" What 's up with all the Chrome on ARM astroturfing around here... ?
It 's quite obvious , guys .
" Slashdot has turned into Chromedot , a frenzied example of browser appliance worship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"What's up with all the Chrome on ARM astroturfing around here...?
It's quite obvious, guys.
"Slashdot has turned into Chromedot, a frenzied example of browser appliance worship.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30275212</id>
	<title>finally tries something on his own?</title>
	<author>slashmojo</author>
	<datestamp>1259577780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you forgetting Techcrunch (and several related sites) itself? I'd say he already did the startup thing on his own and appears to be doing quite well.</p><p>Also he was co-founder of another startup a few years ago which deadpooled. So he's been there, done that too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you forgetting Techcrunch ( and several related sites ) itself ?
I 'd say he already did the startup thing on his own and appears to be doing quite well.Also he was co-founder of another startup a few years ago which deadpooled .
So he 's been there , done that too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you forgetting Techcrunch (and several related sites) itself?
I'd say he already did the startup thing on his own and appears to be doing quite well.Also he was co-founder of another startup a few years ago which deadpooled.
So he's been there, done that too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272532</id>
	<title>mods on crack (Re:Angst and Drama? Try Hilarity)</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1259609880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This whole thread has been modded Troll. I'm guessing the CEO of Fusion Garage somehow got mod points.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This whole thread has been modded Troll .
I 'm guessing the CEO of Fusion Garage somehow got mod points .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This whole thread has been modded Troll.
I'm guessing the CEO of Fusion Garage somehow got mod points.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272344</id>
	<title>Re:Angst and Drama? Try Hilarity</title>
	<author>Lord Ender</author>
	<datestamp>1259608920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Kindle is actually $260 now, and it has an non-backlit eInk screen with a three-week battery-life. It has always-on, free 3G internet access, and it has accesses to the gigantic Amazon digital book store.</p><p>This thing might have been a cool (concept for a) gadget, but it is certainly not a replacement for the Kindle. The Kindle is aimed at (and is perfect for) people who like to read BOOKS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Kindle is actually $ 260 now , and it has an non-backlit eInk screen with a three-week battery-life .
It has always-on , free 3G internet access , and it has accesses to the gigantic Amazon digital book store.This thing might have been a cool ( concept for a ) gadget , but it is certainly not a replacement for the Kindle .
The Kindle is aimed at ( and is perfect for ) people who like to read BOOKS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Kindle is actually $260 now, and it has an non-backlit eInk screen with a three-week battery-life.
It has always-on, free 3G internet access, and it has accesses to the gigantic Amazon digital book store.This thing might have been a cool (concept for a) gadget, but it is certainly not a replacement for the Kindle.
The Kindle is aimed at (and is perfect for) people who like to read BOOKS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274388</id>
	<title>Good luck with that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259574360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Aside from your snide reply to being asked a very legitimate question...<br> <br>Do you really think anyone cares? Slashdolts always make these claims that they're going to boycott this or refuse to work with some company because of an issue of some sort. In fact these claims have also been the basis of many a fanboi crying that Microsoft is going to fail any day now. I've been hearing that claim every time MS fumbles the ball for 10 years. I still have yet to see you guys get one right.<br> <br>This product is fail, IMHO, from a technology aspect. But the truth of the matter is that I wouldn't care less about the political aspect of the company unless they were skinning animals alive or selling children into the slave trade. If they had a good product I'd put my money down to buy it just like anyone else.<br> <br>Sorry but if you really think you're going to change this kind of thing you need to work on companies that really deserve the beat down first. This, to me, is just one businessman taking advantage of the short sightedness of another businessman. Every society has this happening all the time. And why should I boycott a company because someone else wasn't smart enough to cover themselves?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Aside from your snide reply to being asked a very legitimate question... Do you really think anyone cares ?
Slashdolts always make these claims that they 're going to boycott this or refuse to work with some company because of an issue of some sort .
In fact these claims have also been the basis of many a fanboi crying that Microsoft is going to fail any day now .
I 've been hearing that claim every time MS fumbles the ball for 10 years .
I still have yet to see you guys get one right .
This product is fail , IMHO , from a technology aspect .
But the truth of the matter is that I would n't care less about the political aspect of the company unless they were skinning animals alive or selling children into the slave trade .
If they had a good product I 'd put my money down to buy it just like anyone else .
Sorry but if you really think you 're going to change this kind of thing you need to work on companies that really deserve the beat down first .
This , to me , is just one businessman taking advantage of the short sightedness of another businessman .
Every society has this happening all the time .
And why should I boycott a company because someone else was n't smart enough to cover themselves ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aside from your snide reply to being asked a very legitimate question... Do you really think anyone cares?
Slashdolts always make these claims that they're going to boycott this or refuse to work with some company because of an issue of some sort.
In fact these claims have also been the basis of many a fanboi crying that Microsoft is going to fail any day now.
I've been hearing that claim every time MS fumbles the ball for 10 years.
I still have yet to see you guys get one right.
This product is fail, IMHO, from a technology aspect.
But the truth of the matter is that I wouldn't care less about the political aspect of the company unless they were skinning animals alive or selling children into the slave trade.
If they had a good product I'd put my money down to buy it just like anyone else.
Sorry but if you really think you're going to change this kind of thing you need to work on companies that really deserve the beat down first.
This, to me, is just one businessman taking advantage of the short sightedness of another businessman.
Every society has this happening all the time.
And why should I boycott a company because someone else wasn't smart enough to cover themselves?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272240</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272862</id>
	<title>The device was stable enough for a demo.</title>
	<author>cjjjer</author>
	<datestamp>1259611800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It went hours without crashing.<br> <br>...Good selling point.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It went hours without crashing .
...Good selling point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It went hours without crashing.
...Good selling point.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273198</id>
	<title>this is called "out-sourcing"</title>
	<author>cnkurzke</author>
	<datestamp>1259613480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In other news:<br>Somewhere in an asian bazaar you can now buy the first version of a $299 "CrumblePad" in either pink, lime green or yellow.</p><p>Large volume container shipping will begin in January, and the "Disneay" branded child friendly version with preloaded pirated Disney movies dubbed to chinese is in the works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other news : Somewhere in an asian bazaar you can now buy the first version of a $ 299 " CrumblePad " in either pink , lime green or yellow.Large volume container shipping will begin in January , and the " Disneay " branded child friendly version with preloaded pirated Disney movies dubbed to chinese is in the works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other news:Somewhere in an asian bazaar you can now buy the first version of a $299 "CrumblePad" in either pink, lime green or yellow.Large volume container shipping will begin in January, and the "Disneay" branded child friendly version with preloaded pirated Disney movies dubbed to chinese is in the works.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272784</id>
	<title>News Flash!</title>
	<author>locallyunscene</author>
	<datestamp>1259611440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Interesting bit is that some were already speculating that the Crunchpad was not real."</p></div><p>Internet claims unreleased product is vaporware. Not interesting.
<br> <br>
Quoted link in TFS is referring to googlephone, not crunchpad FWIW.
<br> <br>
Whether these claims of backstabbing to death a product just before release and if it is par for the course as some posters have claimed is what flips my interesting bit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting bit is that some were already speculating that the Crunchpad was not real .
" Internet claims unreleased product is vaporware .
Not interesting .
Quoted link in TFS is referring to googlephone , not crunchpad FWIW .
Whether these claims of backstabbing to death a product just before release and if it is par for the course as some posters have claimed is what flips my interesting bit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting bit is that some were already speculating that the Crunchpad was not real.
"Internet claims unreleased product is vaporware.
Not interesting.
Quoted link in TFS is referring to googlephone, not crunchpad FWIW.
Whether these claims of backstabbing to death a product just before release and if it is par for the course as some posters have claimed is what flips my interesting bit.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272606</id>
	<title>Hire a lawyer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259610360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Airing your dirty laundry on your blog is a sure-fire way to alienate the very people with which you want to reach an agreement. You've no doubt made it harder to resolve your differences amicably, even if Fusion Garage were the ones being dicks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Airing your dirty laundry on your blog is a sure-fire way to alienate the very people with which you want to reach an agreement .
You 've no doubt made it harder to resolve your differences amicably , even if Fusion Garage were the ones being dicks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Airing your dirty laundry on your blog is a sure-fire way to alienate the very people with which you want to reach an agreement.
You've no doubt made it harder to resolve your differences amicably, even if Fusion Garage were the ones being dicks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30275950</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunate</title>
	<author>Traa</author>
	<datestamp>1259580360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wasn't me, but could have been. I wouldn't be astroturfing, I'd be one of the many many engineers actually working on ARM processors. Are we not welcome here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't me , but could have been .
I would n't be astroturfing , I 'd be one of the many many engineers actually working on ARM processors .
Are we not welcome here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't me, but could have been.
I wouldn't be astroturfing, I'd be one of the many many engineers actually working on ARM processors.
Are we not welcome here?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30278210</id>
	<title>If you think this sucks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259592120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would encourage anyone who is upset by these actions to sign the petition "Without Arrington I Wont Buy A CrunchPad" at http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/CrunchPad/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would encourage anyone who is upset by these actions to sign the petition " Without Arrington I Wont Buy A CrunchPad " at http : //www.petitionspot.com/petitions/CrunchPad/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would encourage anyone who is upset by these actions to sign the petition "Without Arrington I Wont Buy A CrunchPad" at http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/CrunchPad/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273712</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunate</title>
	<author>jhol13</author>
	<datestamp>1259571900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why? There are phones which run full Linux (N900, Android,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...), why an earth would someone want to have less powerful OS on a tablet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why ?
There are phones which run full Linux ( N900 , Android , ... ) , why an earth would someone want to have less powerful OS on a tablet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why?
There are phones which run full Linux (N900, Android, ...), why an earth would someone want to have less powerful OS on a tablet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274444</id>
	<title>Re:Who Is Doing What?</title>
	<author>element-o.p.</author>
	<datestamp>1259574540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Vision and (as much as I hate to say it) marketing are indeed valuable parts of developing a product.  Do you think Bill Gates wrote all of the code that made Microsoft what it is?  Maybe in the DOS days, but I seriously doubt that he contributed a significant portion of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source\_lines\_of\_code" title="wikipedia.org">29+ million lines of code in Windows 2000</a> [wikipedia.org]...or even a significant portion of the 4-5 million lines of code in WinNT3.1.  No, Gates was the guy with the vision and the connections.  How about Steve Jobs?  From what I understood, Woz did the heavy lifting back in the day, but Jobs provided the drive, the vision and the marketing that made Apple a household name.
<br> <br>
Like it or not, this is why most of us reading<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. will most likely remain obscure: we can do the heavy lifting, and we may even have the vision, but marketing and advertising are <i>essential</i> if you ever want to have anyone outside of your mom and dad know what you developed in your spare time in the basement.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Vision and ( as much as I hate to say it ) marketing are indeed valuable parts of developing a product .
Do you think Bill Gates wrote all of the code that made Microsoft what it is ?
Maybe in the DOS days , but I seriously doubt that he contributed a significant portion of the 29 + million lines of code in Windows 2000 [ wikipedia.org ] ...or even a significant portion of the 4-5 million lines of code in WinNT3.1 .
No , Gates was the guy with the vision and the connections .
How about Steve Jobs ?
From what I understood , Woz did the heavy lifting back in the day , but Jobs provided the drive , the vision and the marketing that made Apple a household name .
Like it or not , this is why most of us reading / .
will most likely remain obscure : we can do the heavy lifting , and we may even have the vision , but marketing and advertising are essential if you ever want to have anyone outside of your mom and dad know what you developed in your spare time in the basement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Vision and (as much as I hate to say it) marketing are indeed valuable parts of developing a product.
Do you think Bill Gates wrote all of the code that made Microsoft what it is?
Maybe in the DOS days, but I seriously doubt that he contributed a significant portion of the 29+ million lines of code in Windows 2000 [wikipedia.org]...or even a significant portion of the 4-5 million lines of code in WinNT3.1.
No, Gates was the guy with the vision and the connections.
How about Steve Jobs?
From what I understood, Woz did the heavy lifting back in the day, but Jobs provided the drive, the vision and the marketing that made Apple a household name.
Like it or not, this is why most of us reading /.
will most likely remain obscure: we can do the heavy lifting, and we may even have the vision, but marketing and advertising are essential if you ever want to have anyone outside of your mom and dad know what you developed in your spare time in the basement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274256</id>
	<title>Re:Who Is Doing What?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259573880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> I'm not sure what Arrington is bringing to the party here. He's not an engineer that I know of, but more of a money guy. It seems like Fusion Garage was doing all of the heavy lifting on the project. It's not clear how much skin Arrington had in the game. If he was providing serious development capital, he has a point. If all he was providing was "vision" and bloviation and hype via his blog, with maybe a seriously minority share of the capital, then he should STFU.</p></div><p>Replace "Arrington" with "Jobs", and "Fusion Garage" with "Apple" and see how far that goes. </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure what Arrington is bringing to the party here .
He 's not an engineer that I know of , but more of a money guy .
It seems like Fusion Garage was doing all of the heavy lifting on the project .
It 's not clear how much skin Arrington had in the game .
If he was providing serious development capital , he has a point .
If all he was providing was " vision " and bloviation and hype via his blog , with maybe a seriously minority share of the capital , then he should STFU.Replace " Arrington " with " Jobs " , and " Fusion Garage " with " Apple " and see how far that goes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I'm not sure what Arrington is bringing to the party here.
He's not an engineer that I know of, but more of a money guy.
It seems like Fusion Garage was doing all of the heavy lifting on the project.
It's not clear how much skin Arrington had in the game.
If he was providing serious development capital, he has a point.
If all he was providing was "vision" and bloviation and hype via his blog, with maybe a seriously minority share of the capital, then he should STFU.Replace "Arrington" with "Jobs", and "Fusion Garage" with "Apple" and see how far that goes. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870</id>
	<title>Re:Angst and Drama? Try Hilarity</title>
	<author>jfruhlinger</author>
	<datestamp>1259611800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Translation: I'd like to cash in on Arrington's hard work.</p> </div><p>I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here, and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on, but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing?  My understanding is that he mostly said, "I want this thing with these specs at this price, make it happen" and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.</p><p>Arrington is providing (a) his services as a sort of ideal end-user (i.e. if this one tech-savvy guy really, really wants a thing that works exactly like this, there's probably a market for it) and (b) a ready-made market in the shape of his extensive and influential (in tech circles) audience.  The latter indeed took hard work to amass, but he's not the one who actually built the CrunchPad.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Translation : I 'd like to cash in on Arrington 's hard work .
I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here , and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on , but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing ?
My understanding is that he mostly said , " I want this thing with these specs at this price , make it happen " and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.Arrington is providing ( a ) his services as a sort of ideal end-user ( i.e .
if this one tech-savvy guy really , really wants a thing that works exactly like this , there 's probably a market for it ) and ( b ) a ready-made market in the shape of his extensive and influential ( in tech circles ) audience .
The latter indeed took hard work to amass , but he 's not the one who actually built the CrunchPad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Translation: I'd like to cash in on Arrington's hard work.
I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here, and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on, but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing?
My understanding is that he mostly said, "I want this thing with these specs at this price, make it happen" and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.Arrington is providing (a) his services as a sort of ideal end-user (i.e.
if this one tech-savvy guy really, really wants a thing that works exactly like this, there's probably a market for it) and (b) a ready-made market in the shape of his extensive and influential (in tech circles) audience.
The latter indeed took hard work to amass, but he's not the one who actually built the CrunchPad.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30275992</id>
	<title>I have a hard time believing...</title>
	<author>nilbog</author>
	<datestamp>1259580480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a hard time believing that they were days away from launch, and there is not a stockpile of units somewhere with the "crunchpad" branding written all over them.  I could see the deal falling through days before manufacturing begins, but once you actually make the devices it's kinda the point of no return.</p><p>Unless they're just going to hit a bargain bin in some third world country.  But it sounds like Arrington is already too heavily invested if it was indeed days away from launch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a hard time believing that they were days away from launch , and there is not a stockpile of units somewhere with the " crunchpad " branding written all over them .
I could see the deal falling through days before manufacturing begins , but once you actually make the devices it 's kinda the point of no return.Unless they 're just going to hit a bargain bin in some third world country .
But it sounds like Arrington is already too heavily invested if it was indeed days away from launch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a hard time believing that they were days away from launch, and there is not a stockpile of units somewhere with the "crunchpad" branding written all over them.
I could see the deal falling through days before manufacturing begins, but once you actually make the devices it's kinda the point of no return.Unless they're just going to hit a bargain bin in some third world country.
But it sounds like Arrington is already too heavily invested if it was indeed days away from launch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276652</id>
	<title>Re:Who Is Doing What?</title>
	<author>watanabe</author>
	<datestamp>1259582880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I haven't read the contract, but I can tell you exactly what happened:</p><p>Arrington has good idea, promises to market it, and work on it, plus provide a (modicum) of resources. Engineering Company gets involved. Capitalists get involved and put money in. Guaranteed: Arrington's dollars are all soft-dollars, time, energy, shared office space, PR, marketing, etc.</p><p>In the end: it works. Woohoo!</p><p>Now, Money guys look at the project, and they think: "OMG, this looks like it will ship and sell. We're all going to make some money, that's good. Let's review the Cap table to see what we'll be making. Hey, WTF? This Arrington guy negotiated like 35-45\% of this project for himself, and all he's done is write a few articles about it, and pestered Fusion's engineers.. We could have paid like $20k to some PR firm to do that, how did he end up with 40\% of this project?"</p><p>They call the engineering guys and say: "Do we need Arrington?"</p><p>Engineering guys say "Um, to build this project and ship it, we definitely do not need Arrington. Why?"</p><p>Capitalists say: "Because he's worthless, and it would be WRONG to give him the stake he got in the project."</p><p>Engineers say: "... um, ?"</p><p>Capitalists say: "We're going to execute a clawback, drill Arrington down to 8-10\%, and then you and we will get to split the remainder. This isn't being bad, this is being right and moral. He just got too much of the pie up front."</p><p>Engineers say: ".. will you talk to him about it?"</p><p>Capitalists say: "You're the CEO, you talk to him."</p><p>Engineers "<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. Okay. "</p><p>Guess what, it happens ALL THE TIME. There are a number of possible solutions to a situation like this, but usually you need to plan upfront for it, and be ready. I don't think he was ready, which is too bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't read the contract , but I can tell you exactly what happened : Arrington has good idea , promises to market it , and work on it , plus provide a ( modicum ) of resources .
Engineering Company gets involved .
Capitalists get involved and put money in .
Guaranteed : Arrington 's dollars are all soft-dollars , time , energy , shared office space , PR , marketing , etc.In the end : it works .
Woohoo ! Now , Money guys look at the project , and they think : " OMG , this looks like it will ship and sell .
We 're all going to make some money , that 's good .
Let 's review the Cap table to see what we 'll be making .
Hey , WTF ?
This Arrington guy negotiated like 35-45 \ % of this project for himself , and all he 's done is write a few articles about it , and pestered Fusion 's engineers.. We could have paid like $ 20k to some PR firm to do that , how did he end up with 40 \ % of this project ?
" They call the engineering guys and say : " Do we need Arrington ?
" Engineering guys say " Um , to build this project and ship it , we definitely do not need Arrington .
Why ? " Capitalists say : " Because he 's worthless , and it would be WRONG to give him the stake he got in the project .
" Engineers say : " ... um , ?
" Capitalists say : " We 're going to execute a clawback , drill Arrington down to 8-10 \ % , and then you and we will get to split the remainder .
This is n't being bad , this is being right and moral .
He just got too much of the pie up front .
" Engineers say : " .. will you talk to him about it ?
" Capitalists say : " You 're the CEO , you talk to him .
" Engineers " .. Okay. " Guess what , it happens ALL THE TIME .
There are a number of possible solutions to a situation like this , but usually you need to plan upfront for it , and be ready .
I do n't think he was ready , which is too bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't read the contract, but I can tell you exactly what happened:Arrington has good idea, promises to market it, and work on it, plus provide a (modicum) of resources.
Engineering Company gets involved.
Capitalists get involved and put money in.
Guaranteed: Arrington's dollars are all soft-dollars, time, energy, shared office space, PR, marketing, etc.In the end: it works.
Woohoo!Now, Money guys look at the project, and they think: "OMG, this looks like it will ship and sell.
We're all going to make some money, that's good.
Let's review the Cap table to see what we'll be making.
Hey, WTF?
This Arrington guy negotiated like 35-45\% of this project for himself, and all he's done is write a few articles about it, and pestered Fusion's engineers.. We could have paid like $20k to some PR firm to do that, how did he end up with 40\% of this project?
"They call the engineering guys and say: "Do we need Arrington?
"Engineering guys say "Um, to build this project and ship it, we definitely do not need Arrington.
Why?"Capitalists say: "Because he's worthless, and it would be WRONG to give him the stake he got in the project.
"Engineers say: "... um, ?
"Capitalists say: "We're going to execute a clawback, drill Arrington down to 8-10\%, and then you and we will get to split the remainder.
This isn't being bad, this is being right and moral.
He just got too much of the pie up front.
"Engineers say: ".. will you talk to him about it?
"Capitalists say: "You're the CEO, you talk to him.
"Engineers " .. Okay. "Guess what, it happens ALL THE TIME.
There are a number of possible solutions to a situation like this, but usually you need to plan upfront for it, and be ready.
I don't think he was ready, which is too bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274980</id>
	<title>Re:He can talk the talk</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1259576820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This guy is a dick and always has been; it's kinda nice to hear he's having trouble!</p></div><p>Nothing like a little <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schadenfreude" title="wikipedia.org">Schadenfreude</a> [wikipedia.org] to brighten one's day after all...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This guy is a dick and always has been ; it 's kinda nice to hear he 's having trouble ! Nothing like a little Schadenfreude [ wikipedia.org ] to brighten one 's day after all.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This guy is a dick and always has been; it's kinda nice to hear he's having trouble!Nothing like a little Schadenfreude [wikipedia.org] to brighten one's day after all...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604</id>
	<title>Who Is Doing What?</title>
	<author>Kozar\_The\_Malignant</author>
	<datestamp>1259610360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure what Arrington is bringing to the party here.  He's not an engineer that I know of, but more of a money guy.  It seems like Fusion Garage was doing all of the heavy lifting on the project.  It's not clear how much skin Arrington had in the game.  If he was providing serious development capital, he has a point.  If all he was providing was "vision" and bloviation and hype via his blog, with maybe a seriously minority share of the capital, then he should STFU.  There must be some sort of written contract for a venture like this.  Let's see what it says.
</p><p>Personally, I don't feel that the branding of something with "Arrington", "Tech Crunch", or "Crunchpad" brings a lot to the table.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure what Arrington is bringing to the party here .
He 's not an engineer that I know of , but more of a money guy .
It seems like Fusion Garage was doing all of the heavy lifting on the project .
It 's not clear how much skin Arrington had in the game .
If he was providing serious development capital , he has a point .
If all he was providing was " vision " and bloviation and hype via his blog , with maybe a seriously minority share of the capital , then he should STFU .
There must be some sort of written contract for a venture like this .
Let 's see what it says .
Personally , I do n't feel that the branding of something with " Arrington " , " Tech Crunch " , or " Crunchpad " brings a lot to the table .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure what Arrington is bringing to the party here.
He's not an engineer that I know of, but more of a money guy.
It seems like Fusion Garage was doing all of the heavy lifting on the project.
It's not clear how much skin Arrington had in the game.
If he was providing serious development capital, he has a point.
If all he was providing was "vision" and bloviation and hype via his blog, with maybe a seriously minority share of the capital, then he should STFU.
There must be some sort of written contract for a venture like this.
Let's see what it says.
Personally, I don't feel that the branding of something with "Arrington", "Tech Crunch", or "Crunchpad" brings a lot to the table.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273186</id>
	<title>Re:Angst and Drama? Try Hilarity</title>
	<author>Myrv</author>
	<datestamp>1259613420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here, and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on, but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing?  My understanding is that he mostly said, "I want this thing with these specs at this price, make it happen" and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.</p></div><p>Well, to Arrignton's credit he (or the TechCrunch side of things) did build the first <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/19/techcrunch-tablet-update-prototype-b" title="techcrunch.com">  prototype</a> [techcrunch.com].  He also provided office space for Fusion Garage and no doubt was integral in the testing.  There's also a lot of talk about setting up distribution and funding although it's hard to say how much of that was Arringtons doing. Overall I would say Arrington has contributed at least an equal share into the project.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here , and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on , but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing ?
My understanding is that he mostly said , " I want this thing with these specs at this price , make it happen " and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.Well , to Arrignton 's credit he ( or the TechCrunch side of things ) did build the first prototype [ techcrunch.com ] .
He also provided office space for Fusion Garage and no doubt was integral in the testing .
There 's also a lot of talk about setting up distribution and funding although it 's hard to say how much of that was Arringtons doing .
Overall I would say Arrington has contributed at least an equal share into the project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here, and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on, but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing?
My understanding is that he mostly said, "I want this thing with these specs at this price, make it happen" and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.Well, to Arrignton's credit he (or the TechCrunch side of things) did build the first   prototype [techcrunch.com].
He also provided office space for Fusion Garage and no doubt was integral in the testing.
There's also a lot of talk about setting up distribution and funding although it's hard to say how much of that was Arringtons doing.
Overall I would say Arrington has contributed at least an equal share into the project.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272184</id>
	<title>They're right....</title>
	<author>cephalien</author>
	<datestamp>1259608320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It -isn't- real.</p><p>Not until they're actually being produced.</p><p>So yes, this is vaporware (at least for now)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It -is n't- real.Not until they 're actually being produced.So yes , this is vaporware ( at least for now )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It -isn't- real.Not until they're actually being produced.So yes, this is vaporware (at least for now)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160</id>
	<title>Unfortunate</title>
	<author>milas</author>
	<datestamp>1259608200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>
But here's to hoping it relaunches with an ARM processor running Chrome OS! This seems like the perfect application for it, really.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But here 's to hoping it relaunches with an ARM processor running Chrome OS !
This seems like the perfect application for it , really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
But here's to hoping it relaunches with an ARM processor running Chrome OS!
This seems like the perfect application for it, really.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272710</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunate</title>
	<author>jpedlow</author>
	<datestamp>1259611020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sad, I was going to (wanted to) buy one.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(

Although, one running chrome would be pretty B-A<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sad , I was going to ( wanted to ) buy one .
: ( Although , one running chrome would be pretty B-A : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sad, I was going to (wanted to) buy one.
:(

Although, one running chrome would be pretty B-A :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273040</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunate</title>
	<author>TheModelEskimo</author>
	<datestamp>1259612640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's up with all the Chrome on ARM astroturfing around here...? It's quite obvious, guys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's up with all the Chrome on ARM astroturfing around here... ?
It 's quite obvious , guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's up with all the Chrome on ARM astroturfing around here...?
It's quite obvious, guys.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273054</id>
	<title>Re:Hire a lawyer</title>
	<author>analog\_line</author>
	<datestamp>1259612700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I very much doubt that an amicable settlement is desired by either party.</p><p>FusionGarage's shareholders think they can use Michael Arrington's personal investment in the project as leverage to get more ownership of the product.  This situation has apparently been unfolding out of the public eye for at least a couple of weeks, according to Arrington's post.  They're playing hardball, and they figure that they can shove the terms of this new deal down Arrington's throat because he doesn't want the public embarrassment of not getting it done, and not wanting his baby to be stillborn.  I'm sure that those shareholders have done this successfully with a lot of other wide eyed tech entrepreneurs.  The shareholders probably believe that what is likely a minor investment in the grand scheme of things can be risked.  If they lose it all because Arrington decides to call their bluff, they very well may not care.</p><p>Michael Arrington more likely than not went into this in a totally naive manner.  I wouldn't doubt that there are a number of things he did wrong that enabled this situation.  However, that doesn't change the fact that his partners are now attemtpting to blackmail him, probably legally.  They have part ownership of the IP, that means they have a voice.  However, Arrington has that same part ownership.  He also, as the saying goes, buys ink by the gallon.  He has decided that he's willing to shoot the hostage and eat the loss rather than see the people who betrayed his (naive) trust profit.</p><p>As he said, there's going to be lawsuits back and forth on this, and the place this will be resolved is in the court system, probably many years down the line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I very much doubt that an amicable settlement is desired by either party.FusionGarage 's shareholders think they can use Michael Arrington 's personal investment in the project as leverage to get more ownership of the product .
This situation has apparently been unfolding out of the public eye for at least a couple of weeks , according to Arrington 's post .
They 're playing hardball , and they figure that they can shove the terms of this new deal down Arrington 's throat because he does n't want the public embarrassment of not getting it done , and not wanting his baby to be stillborn .
I 'm sure that those shareholders have done this successfully with a lot of other wide eyed tech entrepreneurs .
The shareholders probably believe that what is likely a minor investment in the grand scheme of things can be risked .
If they lose it all because Arrington decides to call their bluff , they very well may not care.Michael Arrington more likely than not went into this in a totally naive manner .
I would n't doubt that there are a number of things he did wrong that enabled this situation .
However , that does n't change the fact that his partners are now attemtpting to blackmail him , probably legally .
They have part ownership of the IP , that means they have a voice .
However , Arrington has that same part ownership .
He also , as the saying goes , buys ink by the gallon .
He has decided that he 's willing to shoot the hostage and eat the loss rather than see the people who betrayed his ( naive ) trust profit.As he said , there 's going to be lawsuits back and forth on this , and the place this will be resolved is in the court system , probably many years down the line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I very much doubt that an amicable settlement is desired by either party.FusionGarage's shareholders think they can use Michael Arrington's personal investment in the project as leverage to get more ownership of the product.
This situation has apparently been unfolding out of the public eye for at least a couple of weeks, according to Arrington's post.
They're playing hardball, and they figure that they can shove the terms of this new deal down Arrington's throat because he doesn't want the public embarrassment of not getting it done, and not wanting his baby to be stillborn.
I'm sure that those shareholders have done this successfully with a lot of other wide eyed tech entrepreneurs.
The shareholders probably believe that what is likely a minor investment in the grand scheme of things can be risked.
If they lose it all because Arrington decides to call their bluff, they very well may not care.Michael Arrington more likely than not went into this in a totally naive manner.
I wouldn't doubt that there are a number of things he did wrong that enabled this situation.
However, that doesn't change the fact that his partners are now attemtpting to blackmail him, probably legally.
They have part ownership of the IP, that means they have a voice.
However, Arrington has that same part ownership.
He also, as the saying goes, buys ink by the gallon.
He has decided that he's willing to shoot the hostage and eat the loss rather than see the people who betrayed his (naive) trust profit.As he said, there's going to be lawsuits back and forth on this, and the place this will be resolved is in the court system, probably many years down the line.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272476</id>
	<title>Re:Seeing Arrington's rants...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259609520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, you can also see a prototype on Fusion Garage's web site.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , you can also see a prototype on Fusion Garage 's web site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, you can also see a prototype on Fusion Garage's web site.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276928</id>
	<title>Re:Angst and Drama? Try Hilarity</title>
	<author>Nithendil</author>
	<datestamp>1259584020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is relatively easy to invent things; it is another matter entirely to get enough people to care about it. I'm sure everyone here has thought up a patentable idea, the difference is the drive to do something with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is relatively easy to invent things ; it is another matter entirely to get enough people to care about it .
I 'm sure everyone here has thought up a patentable idea , the difference is the drive to do something with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is relatively easy to invent things; it is another matter entirely to get enough people to care about it.
I'm sure everyone here has thought up a patentable idea, the difference is the drive to do something with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273126</id>
	<title>Silly Americans</title>
	<author>J4</author>
	<datestamp>1259613060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least the company \_let\_him\_know\_ they were gonna cut him out.<br>There is nothing stopping them from going ahead with production and marketing.<br>As in the music business: if there's a profit, then there's a problem.<br>If the lawyers can't feed it's moot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least the company \ _let \ _him \ _know \ _ they were gon na cut him out.There is nothing stopping them from going ahead with production and marketing.As in the music business : if there 's a profit , then there 's a problem.If the lawyers ca n't feed it 's moot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least the company \_let\_him\_know\_ they were gonna cut him out.There is nothing stopping them from going ahead with production and marketing.As in the music business: if there's a profit, then there's a problem.If the lawyers can't feed it's moot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272626</id>
	<title>Re:Seeing Arrington's rants...</title>
	<author>WaywardGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1259610420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>And a few days before launch and dies for such a stupid reason? Please.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm guessing you've never started a company.  When you do, you'll find out that a fair number of your friends turn into psychopaths when money is involved.  This is why the best number of partners in any new venture is 1.  I got screwed by AMIS in a somewhat similar situation.  We co-developed the Express Array using our technology from cell design to routing.  The first chip came out and worked 8 months after we started this very aggressive project.  The day the chip worked, AMIS basically said "we don't need you anymore.  Fuck off and die now."  For AMIS, the entire project was delayed a year.  It was incredible, unexplainable stupidity.  And yet, it's an entirely common story.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And a few days before launch and dies for such a stupid reason ?
Please.I 'm guessing you 've never started a company .
When you do , you 'll find out that a fair number of your friends turn into psychopaths when money is involved .
This is why the best number of partners in any new venture is 1 .
I got screwed by AMIS in a somewhat similar situation .
We co-developed the Express Array using our technology from cell design to routing .
The first chip came out and worked 8 months after we started this very aggressive project .
The day the chip worked , AMIS basically said " we do n't need you anymore .
Fuck off and die now .
" For AMIS , the entire project was delayed a year .
It was incredible , unexplainable stupidity .
And yet , it 's an entirely common story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And a few days before launch and dies for such a stupid reason?
Please.I'm guessing you've never started a company.
When you do, you'll find out that a fair number of your friends turn into psychopaths when money is involved.
This is why the best number of partners in any new venture is 1.
I got screwed by AMIS in a somewhat similar situation.
We co-developed the Express Array using our technology from cell design to routing.
The first chip came out and worked 8 months after we started this very aggressive project.
The day the chip worked, AMIS basically said "we don't need you anymore.
Fuck off and die now.
"  For AMIS, the entire project was delayed a year.
It was incredible, unexplainable stupidity.
And yet, it's an entirely common story.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30278008</id>
	<title>Arrington pulled a SourceForge</title>
	<author>tlambert</author>
	<datestamp>1259590260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Arrington pulled a SourceForge.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/07/21/we-want-a-dead-simple-web-tablet-help-us-build-it/" title="techcrunch.com">http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/07/21/we-want-a-dead-simple-web-tablet-help-us-build-it/</a> [techcrunch.com]</p><p>He declared a project, didn't put much in beyond the idea for the project, and then expected people to flock to the project and build it for him.  Very much the same way people declare projects on SourceForge, and then expect volunteer programmers to come out of the woodwork and build whatever their pet project happens to be.</p><p>The only difference here is that it involved both hardware and software, and not just software.</p><p>I went to the Internet WayBack Machine and read all of the blogs from Fusion Garage (the actual site is currently down, probably intentionally), and it looks like all of the software was done by them, including the OS, and it looks (from Arrington's blogs) like a lot of the hardware was done by Intel.</p><p>I don't mean to discount the value of vision or publicity, but really, he intended to Open Source everything about the tablet when he declared the project, and I don't really see a lot of value being taken from him in that case, since he wouldn't be building hardware anyway.  The only money would be in margin on the hardware if the software was all out there.  A lot of people have posted similar specifications for what they'd like to see in a tablet computer, and the only difference between them and Arrington is Arrington has a lot of self-publicity and got a startup to bite on the bait to actually build the thing.</p><p>Arrington might have some arguments with regard to industrial design, but the prototype hardware was not built by him, and the software that made that hardware live and breathe was definitely not his.</p><p>I've worked at combo hardware/software startups, and I've worked at software-only startups (including my own), and universally, the hardware in the hardware/software startups was all about minimal COGS and industrial design (being at Apple now, that's pretty much all there is).  The value-add over commodity hardware is that it isn't "cheapest vendor of the part of the day" (so the hardware is reliable and not crap because of constantly retooled assembly lines), and it's the software.  When Apple builds a laptop, it doesn't build hardware, and it doesn't build software, it builds systems.  The people who don't get that and churn out 1.5\%-4\% margin crap do so at their peril.</p><p>My reading of things is that Arrington is no Jonathan Ive, and he's no Steve Jobs when it comes to design of hardware or software.</p><p>Fusion Garage may have taken his idea and run with it.. and they want to cut him in on profits from something, the intrinsic value of which he intended to give away for no profit, but they don't seem to be ripping him off to do it, although they do seem to be leveraging as much as they can to get him to accept a minority role with regard to what he brings to the table (which, per the above, by my reckoning, isn't much; sorry, Arrington).</p><p>As more than one V.C. has told me in the past, the point is not the idea; there are millions of good ideas that go unfunded all the time (I'll point at SourceForge again, where "funding" equates to "provision of manpower necessary to complete a project"); what a V.C. funds is the ability to execute on a vision, no matter whose vision it is, and the team behind that ability to execute on the vision and bring a product to market.  1 in 10 entrepreneurs get funded; 1 in 10 of those fail in the first year.  That's only a 1 in 100 chance of being around after a year.</p><p>Arrington's failure is no less spectacular than anyone else's in that 99 out of 100 failures, he's just made it more public by ranting about it.</p><p>Ironically, the idea may still not be a failure, merely a failure on his part to control the thing which was built on his (and a lot of other peoples similar) idea, if Fusion Garage or someone else simply continues on and executes on it.</p><p>Good luck in your future endeavors, but don't think that by declaring an idea publically that you've built or created anything.</p><p>-- Terry</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Arrington pulled a SourceForge .
        http : //www.techcrunch.com/2008/07/21/we-want-a-dead-simple-web-tablet-help-us-build-it/ [ techcrunch.com ] He declared a project , did n't put much in beyond the idea for the project , and then expected people to flock to the project and build it for him .
Very much the same way people declare projects on SourceForge , and then expect volunteer programmers to come out of the woodwork and build whatever their pet project happens to be.The only difference here is that it involved both hardware and software , and not just software.I went to the Internet WayBack Machine and read all of the blogs from Fusion Garage ( the actual site is currently down , probably intentionally ) , and it looks like all of the software was done by them , including the OS , and it looks ( from Arrington 's blogs ) like a lot of the hardware was done by Intel.I do n't mean to discount the value of vision or publicity , but really , he intended to Open Source everything about the tablet when he declared the project , and I do n't really see a lot of value being taken from him in that case , since he would n't be building hardware anyway .
The only money would be in margin on the hardware if the software was all out there .
A lot of people have posted similar specifications for what they 'd like to see in a tablet computer , and the only difference between them and Arrington is Arrington has a lot of self-publicity and got a startup to bite on the bait to actually build the thing.Arrington might have some arguments with regard to industrial design , but the prototype hardware was not built by him , and the software that made that hardware live and breathe was definitely not his.I 've worked at combo hardware/software startups , and I 've worked at software-only startups ( including my own ) , and universally , the hardware in the hardware/software startups was all about minimal COGS and industrial design ( being at Apple now , that 's pretty much all there is ) .
The value-add over commodity hardware is that it is n't " cheapest vendor of the part of the day " ( so the hardware is reliable and not crap because of constantly retooled assembly lines ) , and it 's the software .
When Apple builds a laptop , it does n't build hardware , and it does n't build software , it builds systems .
The people who do n't get that and churn out 1.5 \ % -4 \ % margin crap do so at their peril.My reading of things is that Arrington is no Jonathan Ive , and he 's no Steve Jobs when it comes to design of hardware or software.Fusion Garage may have taken his idea and run with it.. and they want to cut him in on profits from something , the intrinsic value of which he intended to give away for no profit , but they do n't seem to be ripping him off to do it , although they do seem to be leveraging as much as they can to get him to accept a minority role with regard to what he brings to the table ( which , per the above , by my reckoning , is n't much ; sorry , Arrington ) .As more than one V.C .
has told me in the past , the point is not the idea ; there are millions of good ideas that go unfunded all the time ( I 'll point at SourceForge again , where " funding " equates to " provision of manpower necessary to complete a project " ) ; what a V.C .
funds is the ability to execute on a vision , no matter whose vision it is , and the team behind that ability to execute on the vision and bring a product to market .
1 in 10 entrepreneurs get funded ; 1 in 10 of those fail in the first year .
That 's only a 1 in 100 chance of being around after a year.Arrington 's failure is no less spectacular than anyone else 's in that 99 out of 100 failures , he 's just made it more public by ranting about it.Ironically , the idea may still not be a failure , merely a failure on his part to control the thing which was built on his ( and a lot of other peoples similar ) idea , if Fusion Garage or someone else simply continues on and executes on it.Good luck in your future endeavors , but do n't think that by declaring an idea publically that you 've built or created anything.-- Terry</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Arrington pulled a SourceForge.
        http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/07/21/we-want-a-dead-simple-web-tablet-help-us-build-it/ [techcrunch.com]He declared a project, didn't put much in beyond the idea for the project, and then expected people to flock to the project and build it for him.
Very much the same way people declare projects on SourceForge, and then expect volunteer programmers to come out of the woodwork and build whatever their pet project happens to be.The only difference here is that it involved both hardware and software, and not just software.I went to the Internet WayBack Machine and read all of the blogs from Fusion Garage (the actual site is currently down, probably intentionally), and it looks like all of the software was done by them, including the OS, and it looks (from Arrington's blogs) like a lot of the hardware was done by Intel.I don't mean to discount the value of vision or publicity, but really, he intended to Open Source everything about the tablet when he declared the project, and I don't really see a lot of value being taken from him in that case, since he wouldn't be building hardware anyway.
The only money would be in margin on the hardware if the software was all out there.
A lot of people have posted similar specifications for what they'd like to see in a tablet computer, and the only difference between them and Arrington is Arrington has a lot of self-publicity and got a startup to bite on the bait to actually build the thing.Arrington might have some arguments with regard to industrial design, but the prototype hardware was not built by him, and the software that made that hardware live and breathe was definitely not his.I've worked at combo hardware/software startups, and I've worked at software-only startups (including my own), and universally, the hardware in the hardware/software startups was all about minimal COGS and industrial design (being at Apple now, that's pretty much all there is).
The value-add over commodity hardware is that it isn't "cheapest vendor of the part of the day" (so the hardware is reliable and not crap because of constantly retooled assembly lines), and it's the software.
When Apple builds a laptop, it doesn't build hardware, and it doesn't build software, it builds systems.
The people who don't get that and churn out 1.5\%-4\% margin crap do so at their peril.My reading of things is that Arrington is no Jonathan Ive, and he's no Steve Jobs when it comes to design of hardware or software.Fusion Garage may have taken his idea and run with it.. and they want to cut him in on profits from something, the intrinsic value of which he intended to give away for no profit, but they don't seem to be ripping him off to do it, although they do seem to be leveraging as much as they can to get him to accept a minority role with regard to what he brings to the table (which, per the above, by my reckoning, isn't much; sorry, Arrington).As more than one V.C.
has told me in the past, the point is not the idea; there are millions of good ideas that go unfunded all the time (I'll point at SourceForge again, where "funding" equates to "provision of manpower necessary to complete a project"); what a V.C.
funds is the ability to execute on a vision, no matter whose vision it is, and the team behind that ability to execute on the vision and bring a product to market.
1 in 10 entrepreneurs get funded; 1 in 10 of those fail in the first year.
That's only a 1 in 100 chance of being around after a year.Arrington's failure is no less spectacular than anyone else's in that 99 out of 100 failures, he's just made it more public by ranting about it.Ironically, the idea may still not be a failure, merely a failure on his part to control the thing which was built on his (and a lot of other peoples similar) idea, if Fusion Garage or someone else simply continues on and executes on it.Good luck in your future endeavors, but don't think that by declaring an idea publically that you've built or created anything.-- Terry</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30278658</id>
	<title>Re:Angst and Drama? Try Hilarity</title>
	<author>w0mprat</author>
	<datestamp>1259596260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Translation: I'd like to cash in on Arrington's hard work.</p></div><p>I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here, and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on, but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing?  My understanding is that he mostly said, "I want this thing with these specs at this price, make it happen" and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.</p><p>Arrington is providing (a) his services as a sort of ideal end-user (i.e. if this one tech-savvy guy really, really wants a thing that works exactly like this, there's probably a market for it) and (b) a ready-made market in the shape of his extensive and influential (in tech circles) audience.  The latter indeed took hard work to amass, but he's not the one who actually built the CrunchPad.</p></div><p>Then.. Arrington = Manager  ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Translation : I 'd like to cash in on Arrington 's hard work.I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here , and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on , but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing ?
My understanding is that he mostly said , " I want this thing with these specs at this price , make it happen " and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.Arrington is providing ( a ) his services as a sort of ideal end-user ( i.e .
if this one tech-savvy guy really , really wants a thing that works exactly like this , there 's probably a market for it ) and ( b ) a ready-made market in the shape of his extensive and influential ( in tech circles ) audience .
The latter indeed took hard work to amass , but he 's not the one who actually built the CrunchPad.Then.. Arrington = Manager ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Translation: I'd like to cash in on Arrington's hard work.I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here, and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on, but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing?
My understanding is that he mostly said, "I want this thing with these specs at this price, make it happen" and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.Arrington is providing (a) his services as a sort of ideal end-user (i.e.
if this one tech-savvy guy really, really wants a thing that works exactly like this, there's probably a market for it) and (b) a ready-made market in the shape of his extensive and influential (in tech circles) audience.
The latter indeed took hard work to amass, but he's not the one who actually built the CrunchPad.Then.. Arrington = Manager  ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274450</id>
	<title>Re:Its called a shot-gun clause...</title>
	<author>Archangel Michael</author>
	<datestamp>1259574600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've actually seen one of these clauses invoked in a local business here. The hostile buyout offer was submitted and the guy responding gladly took the terms of the offer, as opportunity to buy out the originator.</p><p>The problem was, the originator of the offer tried to change his mind on the deal, and tried to renegotiate the buy/sell price and sued, to raise the price.</p><p>While the suit was in court, proceeded to try to destroy the business and all the various partnerships that were built up over the course. About halfway through the courts, the second guy realizing the sabotage was starting to work, accepted the "re-negotiated" price, in court.</p><p>That is when the first guy accused the second guy of sabotaging the business and rejected the price, and resorted back to a new lower than original price, whereby the second guy promptly agreed to buy at that price.</p><p>The courts, seeing through the scam at that point sealed the deal at the new lower price, and called the lawyers to draw up the papers at that price.</p><p>It was hell for my friend at the time, but it is kind of funny now. The asshole screwed himself, in what we now refer to as "autoanalcoitus".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've actually seen one of these clauses invoked in a local business here .
The hostile buyout offer was submitted and the guy responding gladly took the terms of the offer , as opportunity to buy out the originator.The problem was , the originator of the offer tried to change his mind on the deal , and tried to renegotiate the buy/sell price and sued , to raise the price.While the suit was in court , proceeded to try to destroy the business and all the various partnerships that were built up over the course .
About halfway through the courts , the second guy realizing the sabotage was starting to work , accepted the " re-negotiated " price , in court.That is when the first guy accused the second guy of sabotaging the business and rejected the price , and resorted back to a new lower than original price , whereby the second guy promptly agreed to buy at that price.The courts , seeing through the scam at that point sealed the deal at the new lower price , and called the lawyers to draw up the papers at that price.It was hell for my friend at the time , but it is kind of funny now .
The asshole screwed himself , in what we now refer to as " autoanalcoitus " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've actually seen one of these clauses invoked in a local business here.
The hostile buyout offer was submitted and the guy responding gladly took the terms of the offer, as opportunity to buy out the originator.The problem was, the originator of the offer tried to change his mind on the deal, and tried to renegotiate the buy/sell price and sued, to raise the price.While the suit was in court, proceeded to try to destroy the business and all the various partnerships that were built up over the course.
About halfway through the courts, the second guy realizing the sabotage was starting to work, accepted the "re-negotiated" price, in court.That is when the first guy accused the second guy of sabotaging the business and rejected the price, and resorted back to a new lower than original price, whereby the second guy promptly agreed to buy at that price.The courts, seeing through the scam at that point sealed the deal at the new lower price, and called the lawyers to draw up the papers at that price.It was hell for my friend at the time, but it is kind of funny now.
The asshole screwed himself, in what we now refer to as "autoanalcoitus".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273004</id>
	<title>Somewhere right now....</title>
	<author>Rude Turnip</author>
	<datestamp>1259612520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Leo LaPorte is laughing his ass off and noting that Karma is a bitch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Leo LaPorte is laughing his ass off and noting that Karma is a bitch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Leo LaPorte is laughing his ass off and noting that Karma is a bitch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272222</id>
	<title>Michael Arrogant Fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259608500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After a lot of bluster from Mr. Arrogant on how easy and possible the development of a tablet computer should be, I couldn't imagine a sweeter and more fitting finish.  Please Score this a 1.  I just had to get it off my chest.  Aaah, feel better now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After a lot of bluster from Mr. Arrogant on how easy and possible the development of a tablet computer should be , I could n't imagine a sweeter and more fitting finish .
Please Score this a 1 .
I just had to get it off my chest .
Aaah , feel better now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After a lot of bluster from Mr. Arrogant on how easy and possible the development of a tablet computer should be, I couldn't imagine a sweeter and more fitting finish.
Please Score this a 1.
I just had to get it off my chest.
Aaah, feel better now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274094</id>
	<title>Re:And nothing of value was lost</title>
	<author>mujadaddy</author>
	<datestamp>1259573220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>&gt;The only thing missing from this soap opera is that Google/Microsoft/Apple diabolically combined with SMERSH to stop the CrunchPud</i> </p><p>You're on the right track, but in order to be credible, a conspiracy theory <b>must</b> include the Knights Templar.</p></div><p>That's just what the Rosicrucians would like you to think!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; The only thing missing from this soap opera is that Google/Microsoft/Apple diabolically combined with SMERSH to stop the CrunchPud You 're on the right track , but in order to be credible , a conspiracy theory must include the Knights Templar.That 's just what the Rosicrucians would like you to think !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> &gt;The only thing missing from this soap opera is that Google/Microsoft/Apple diabolically combined with SMERSH to stop the CrunchPud You're on the right track, but in order to be credible, a conspiracy theory must include the Knights Templar.That's just what the Rosicrucians would like you to think!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274440</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259574540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A battery life measured in days, rather than hours?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A battery life measured in days , rather than hours ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A battery life measured in days, rather than hours?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273008</id>
	<title>"10 Most Brilliant Products of 2009"</title>
	<author>nscheffey</author>
	<datestamp>1259612520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So was the Crunchpad the <a href="http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/upgrade/4332415.html" title="popularmechanics.com" rel="nofollow"> most award winning</a> [popularmechanics.com] vaporware product of all time?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So was the Crunchpad the most award winning [ popularmechanics.com ] vaporware product of all time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So was the Crunchpad the  most award winning [popularmechanics.com] vaporware product of all time?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30275498</id>
	<title>Re:Seeing Arrington's rants...</title>
	<author>Evets</author>
	<datestamp>1259578800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only way to ensure that you will move forward along with a company you started is to ensure that you are not a replaceable asset to the company.  Once big money investors get involved, you can expect that any founders will be pushed out the door unless they have real long term value.  Technical knowledge of an existing invention != value in a lot of cases.  Technical knowledge of a future, more profitable invention might, but even then there must be faith in your ability to complete the task combined with the lack of faith in anybody else to do the same.</p><p>Never go after outside money unless you absolutely have to, and never allow your value to be underestimated.  Easier said than done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only way to ensure that you will move forward along with a company you started is to ensure that you are not a replaceable asset to the company .
Once big money investors get involved , you can expect that any founders will be pushed out the door unless they have real long term value .
Technical knowledge of an existing invention ! = value in a lot of cases .
Technical knowledge of a future , more profitable invention might , but even then there must be faith in your ability to complete the task combined with the lack of faith in anybody else to do the same.Never go after outside money unless you absolutely have to , and never allow your value to be underestimated .
Easier said than done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only way to ensure that you will move forward along with a company you started is to ensure that you are not a replaceable asset to the company.
Once big money investors get involved, you can expect that any founders will be pushed out the door unless they have real long term value.
Technical knowledge of an existing invention != value in a lot of cases.
Technical knowledge of a future, more profitable invention might, but even then there must be faith in your ability to complete the task combined with the lack of faith in anybody else to do the same.Never go after outside money unless you absolutely have to, and never allow your value to be underestimated.
Easier said than done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273834</id>
	<title>Re:Hire a lawyer</title>
	<author>h4rm0ny</author>
	<datestamp>1259572320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><br>
Sometimes it's worth taking some pain yourself in order to punish the other party. It may not be a good short-term strategy, but it can sure as Hell be a good long-term strategy. Feels good, too.
<br> <br>
Love the sig. by the way. Come to think of it, nice nick, also.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes it 's worth taking some pain yourself in order to punish the other party .
It may not be a good short-term strategy , but it can sure as Hell be a good long-term strategy .
Feels good , too .
Love the sig .
by the way .
Come to think of it , nice nick , also .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Sometimes it's worth taking some pain yourself in order to punish the other party.
It may not be a good short-term strategy, but it can sure as Hell be a good long-term strategy.
Feels good, too.
Love the sig.
by the way.
Come to think of it, nice nick, also.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272416</id>
	<title>some of us</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259609280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some of us were highly skeptical of the claims he was making all along. Curious to see that the whole thing died because the contracts apparently <i>forgot</i> to include a clause that his company actually owns the device they're producing (one of the <i>first</i> things any company would 100\% ensure is in there). Fitting end for a guy who seems like such an asshole.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some of us were highly skeptical of the claims he was making all along .
Curious to see that the whole thing died because the contracts apparently forgot to include a clause that his company actually owns the device they 're producing ( one of the first things any company would 100 \ % ensure is in there ) .
Fitting end for a guy who seems like such an asshole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some of us were highly skeptical of the claims he was making all along.
Curious to see that the whole thing died because the contracts apparently forgot to include a clause that his company actually owns the device they're producing (one of the first things any company would 100\% ensure is in there).
Fitting end for a guy who seems like such an asshole.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272686</id>
	<title>Re:Hire a lawyer</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1259610900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It isn't clear(particularly given that Arrington specifically classifies the crunchpad as being "in the deadpool") that he has any real interest in reaching an agreement.<br> <br>

If, for whatever reason, he considers it highly unlikely that they'll be able to come to any agreement useful to him, it wouldn't be totally unexpected for him to attempt to pay the other guy back, and then some, in his own coin. Refuse to budge on any trademark/IP/whatever issues, indefinitely scuttling a release anywhere in the WIPO world, and use his considerable blog-fu to sink whatever is left.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't clear ( particularly given that Arrington specifically classifies the crunchpad as being " in the deadpool " ) that he has any real interest in reaching an agreement .
If , for whatever reason , he considers it highly unlikely that they 'll be able to come to any agreement useful to him , it would n't be totally unexpected for him to attempt to pay the other guy back , and then some , in his own coin .
Refuse to budge on any trademark/IP/whatever issues , indefinitely scuttling a release anywhere in the WIPO world , and use his considerable blog-fu to sink whatever is left .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't clear(particularly given that Arrington specifically classifies the crunchpad as being "in the deadpool") that he has any real interest in reaching an agreement.
If, for whatever reason, he considers it highly unlikely that they'll be able to come to any agreement useful to him, it wouldn't be totally unexpected for him to attempt to pay the other guy back, and then some, in his own coin.
Refuse to budge on any trademark/IP/whatever issues, indefinitely scuttling a release anywhere in the WIPO world, and use his considerable blog-fu to sink whatever is left.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272274</id>
	<title>Didn't die</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259608620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be more accurate to say CrunchPad was miscarried.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be more accurate to say CrunchPad was miscarried .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be more accurate to say CrunchPad was miscarried.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273052</id>
	<title>Re:Angst and Drama? Try Hilarity</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1259612700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here, and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on, but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing? My understanding is that he mostly said, "I want this thing with these specs at this price, make it happen" and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.</p></div><p>This needs to be propped up as a shining example of what will happen to all U.S.A. IP companies in the next century unless they get manufacturing back in the US again.  It's just the start of the rest of the world realizing: "Hey, we're making this stuff; you're just the guys who gave us the ephemeral part." (well, not really, China's realized it for a long time now, but they just make off-branded copies)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here , and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on , but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing ?
My understanding is that he mostly said , " I want this thing with these specs at this price , make it happen " and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.This needs to be propped up as a shining example of what will happen to all U.S.A. IP companies in the next century unless they get manufacturing back in the US again .
It 's just the start of the rest of the world realizing : " Hey , we 're making this stuff ; you 're just the guys who gave us the ephemeral part .
" ( well , not really , China 's realized it for a long time now , but they just make off-branded copies )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no reason to doubt that Arrington is being screwed here, and that he does in fact have intellectual property rights that are being trampled on, but how much hard work did he actually do on this thing?
My understanding is that he mostly said, "I want this thing with these specs at this price, make it happen" and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.This needs to be propped up as a shining example of what will happen to all U.S.A. IP companies in the next century unless they get manufacturing back in the US again.
It's just the start of the rest of the world realizing: "Hey, we're making this stuff; you're just the guys who gave us the ephemeral part.
" (well, not really, China's realized it for a long time now, but they just make off-branded copies)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272488</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunate</title>
	<author>Jaysyn</author>
	<datestamp>1259609580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>^^^ Not a troll ^^^</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>^ ^ ^ Not a troll ^ ^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>^^^ Not a troll ^^^</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272624</id>
	<title>Lesson #1: Might Makes Right</title>
	<author>mpapet</author>
	<datestamp>1259610360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is pretty run-of-the-mill back stabbing in OEM/ODM business.</p><p>1. The manufacturer sees an opportunity with a weak 'partner'<br>2. Screws the partner.<br>3. Profit!</p><p>The thing is 'Fusion Garage' would have screwed him even if they worked a geographic restrictions deal out.  If there was any meaningful market acceptance, any number of bigger OEM's would have taken their lunch in ~24 months.</p><p>Sad it has to go like this, but this very common unless you are an HP/Apple/Dell.  Typical chicken-egg capitalism problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is pretty run-of-the-mill back stabbing in OEM/ODM business.1 .
The manufacturer sees an opportunity with a weak 'partner'2 .
Screws the partner.3 .
Profit ! The thing is 'Fusion Garage ' would have screwed him even if they worked a geographic restrictions deal out .
If there was any meaningful market acceptance , any number of bigger OEM 's would have taken their lunch in ~ 24 months.Sad it has to go like this , but this very common unless you are an HP/Apple/Dell .
Typical chicken-egg capitalism problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is pretty run-of-the-mill back stabbing in OEM/ODM business.1.
The manufacturer sees an opportunity with a weak 'partner'2.
Screws the partner.3.
Profit!The thing is 'Fusion Garage' would have screwed him even if they worked a geographic restrictions deal out.
If there was any meaningful market acceptance, any number of bigger OEM's would have taken their lunch in ~24 months.Sad it has to go like this, but this very common unless you are an HP/Apple/Dell.
Typical chicken-egg capitalism problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30282168</id>
	<title>who cares?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259677380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>isn't that the guy with startup website that only posts about twitter.. and like 40 times a day..  boring.. move on</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is n't that the guy with startup website that only posts about twitter.. and like 40 times a day.. boring.. move on</tokentext>
<sentencetext>isn't that the guy with startup website that only posts about twitter.. and like 40 times a day..  boring.. move on</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274682</id>
	<title>Victory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259575440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't you see? The "shareholders" never had any intention of letting this go to market. This is not about an attempt to steal intellectual property. It's about eliminating competition for similar proprietary technology (Nook, Kindle, Apple's eventual tablet, etc.) The large media players are doing everything they can to reign in the Internet. The ruination of the CrunchPad is a victory for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you see ?
The " shareholders " never had any intention of letting this go to market .
This is not about an attempt to steal intellectual property .
It 's about eliminating competition for similar proprietary technology ( Nook , Kindle , Apple 's eventual tablet , etc .
) The large media players are doing everything they can to reign in the Internet .
The ruination of the CrunchPad is a victory for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you see?
The "shareholders" never had any intention of letting this go to market.
This is not about an attempt to steal intellectual property.
It's about eliminating competition for similar proprietary technology (Nook, Kindle, Apple's eventual tablet, etc.
) The large media players are doing everything they can to reign in the Internet.
The ruination of the CrunchPad is a victory for them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272240</id>
	<title>Arrogant Power Play</title>
	<author>FireIron</author>
	<datestamp>1259608560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would have been a customer for this device, but after this I will not now or ever buy anything under the Fusion Garage brand.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would have been a customer for this device , but after this I will not now or ever buy anything under the Fusion Garage brand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would have been a customer for this device, but after this I will not now or ever buy anything under the Fusion Garage brand.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272380</id>
	<title>principles principles..</title>
	<author>VMaN</author>
	<datestamp>1259609040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if I'll still stick to my principles if the "wrong" company will produce this thing..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if I 'll still stick to my principles if the " wrong " company will produce this thing. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if I'll still stick to my principles if the "wrong" company will produce this thing..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276710</id>
	<title>Re:Seeing Arrington's rants...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259583120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh? And your list of successful solo ventures includes what? And are Google, Microsoft, Apple, HP, Intel etc etc all exceptions to this rule, or evidence that your personal story - no matter how painful - isn't a good basis for giving out bad advice to other people?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh ?
And your list of successful solo ventures includes what ?
And are Google , Microsoft , Apple , HP , Intel etc etc all exceptions to this rule , or evidence that your personal story - no matter how painful - is n't a good basis for giving out bad advice to other people ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh?
And your list of successful solo ventures includes what?
And are Google, Microsoft, Apple, HP, Intel etc etc all exceptions to this rule, or evidence that your personal story - no matter how painful - isn't a good basis for giving out bad advice to other people?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273002</id>
	<title>If you assume, you make an ASS out of U and ME</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259612460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTA: It was about the thrill of building something <b>with a team that had the same vision.</b></p><p>Obviously, Arrington assumed too much about his partner who, along with the partner's shareholders, had a different vision.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FTA : It was about the thrill of building something with a team that had the same vision.Obviously , Arrington assumed too much about his partner who , along with the partner 's shareholders , had a different vision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTA: It was about the thrill of building something with a team that had the same vision.Obviously, Arrington assumed too much about his partner who, along with the partner's shareholders, had a different vision.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274616</id>
	<title>Re:Seeing Arrington's rants...</title>
	<author>bvankuik</author>
	<datestamp>1259575200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Problem is that without partners, you do not have any leverage whatsoever. I am sorry for playing bullshit bingo, but leverage means here that with two partners, you can do more together than each partner separately could have done. Doing everything yourself is a good way to limit yourself or put a weakness in your product (because for instance you know jack shit about electronics which plays a nontrivial role in your product).</p><p>I am a business owner and have run a couple of projects for clients. I do not have any partners but I have the same supplier for over two years. We have a client-supplier relation but even there, you need the combination of rules and understanding. But lately I notice that we will never grow beyond calculating costs for the next project. You need partners for that.</p><p>If that is fine with you, then do it yourself. I know I will. I am just not a team player and way too bone headed and authoritative to play nice with a partner. However that means a big limitation (besides the obvious strengths).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Problem is that without partners , you do not have any leverage whatsoever .
I am sorry for playing bullshit bingo , but leverage means here that with two partners , you can do more together than each partner separately could have done .
Doing everything yourself is a good way to limit yourself or put a weakness in your product ( because for instance you know jack shit about electronics which plays a nontrivial role in your product ) .I am a business owner and have run a couple of projects for clients .
I do not have any partners but I have the same supplier for over two years .
We have a client-supplier relation but even there , you need the combination of rules and understanding .
But lately I notice that we will never grow beyond calculating costs for the next project .
You need partners for that.If that is fine with you , then do it yourself .
I know I will .
I am just not a team player and way too bone headed and authoritative to play nice with a partner .
However that means a big limitation ( besides the obvious strengths ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Problem is that without partners, you do not have any leverage whatsoever.
I am sorry for playing bullshit bingo, but leverage means here that with two partners, you can do more together than each partner separately could have done.
Doing everything yourself is a good way to limit yourself or put a weakness in your product (because for instance you know jack shit about electronics which plays a nontrivial role in your product).I am a business owner and have run a couple of projects for clients.
I do not have any partners but I have the same supplier for over two years.
We have a client-supplier relation but even there, you need the combination of rules and understanding.
But lately I notice that we will never grow beyond calculating costs for the next project.
You need partners for that.If that is fine with you, then do it yourself.
I know I will.
I am just not a team player and way too bone headed and authoritative to play nice with a partner.
However that means a big limitation (besides the obvious strengths).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272680</id>
	<title>And nothing of value was lost</title>
	<author>slyborg</author>
	<datestamp>1259610900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only reason anyone is talking about this is because of Arrington's relentless zeal for self-promotion. I never thought this thing was going to happen, and in regard to keeping Arrington's name in circulation, it was a smashing success. The only thing missing from this soap opera is that Google/Microsoft/Apple diabolically combined with SMERSH to stop the CrunchPud before it could lead to world peace.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only reason anyone is talking about this is because of Arrington 's relentless zeal for self-promotion .
I never thought this thing was going to happen , and in regard to keeping Arrington 's name in circulation , it was a smashing success .
The only thing missing from this soap opera is that Google/Microsoft/Apple diabolically combined with SMERSH to stop the CrunchPud before it could lead to world peace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only reason anyone is talking about this is because of Arrington's relentless zeal for self-promotion.
I never thought this thing was going to happen, and in regard to keeping Arrington's name in circulation, it was a smashing success.
The only thing missing from this soap opera is that Google/Microsoft/Apple diabolically combined with SMERSH to stop the CrunchPud before it could lead to world peace.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30278336</id>
	<title>Re:Who Is Doing What?</title>
	<author>TheMCP</author>
	<datestamp>1259593320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It doesn't matter whether he's just an ideas guy or provided money or whatever. What matters is what the contract he signed with Fusion Garage says about who the intellectual property belongs to. If it says he owns all the IP, then they have to cough it up for him so he can take it to another firm for manufacture. If it says they own the IP, then Arrington can go suck a lemon while Fusion Garage releases hardware. If the contract doesn't specify who owns the IP, then Arrington is an idiot.</p><p>What really pisses me off is that he could have hired Americans to do the design and sourcing and coding, and had a responsible reputable firm do just the manufacture. I even know a large number of the people he'd need, and at least most of them are available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't matter whether he 's just an ideas guy or provided money or whatever .
What matters is what the contract he signed with Fusion Garage says about who the intellectual property belongs to .
If it says he owns all the IP , then they have to cough it up for him so he can take it to another firm for manufacture .
If it says they own the IP , then Arrington can go suck a lemon while Fusion Garage releases hardware .
If the contract does n't specify who owns the IP , then Arrington is an idiot.What really pisses me off is that he could have hired Americans to do the design and sourcing and coding , and had a responsible reputable firm do just the manufacture .
I even know a large number of the people he 'd need , and at least most of them are available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't matter whether he's just an ideas guy or provided money or whatever.
What matters is what the contract he signed with Fusion Garage says about who the intellectual property belongs to.
If it says he owns all the IP, then they have to cough it up for him so he can take it to another firm for manufacture.
If it says they own the IP, then Arrington can go suck a lemon while Fusion Garage releases hardware.
If the contract doesn't specify who owns the IP, then Arrington is an idiot.What really pisses me off is that he could have hired Americans to do the design and sourcing and coding, and had a responsible reputable firm do just the manufacture.
I even know a large number of the people he'd need, and at least most of them are available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276892</id>
	<title>Re:Angst and Drama? Try Hilarity</title>
	<author>Myopic</author>
	<datestamp>1259583900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>how much hard work did he actually do on this thing? My understanding is that he mostly said, "I want this thing with these specs at this price, make it happen" and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.</i></p><p>That sounds a little like Steve Jobs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how much hard work did he actually do on this thing ?
My understanding is that he mostly said , " I want this thing with these specs at this price , make it happen " and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.That sounds a little like Steve Jobs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how much hard work did he actually do on this thing?
My understanding is that he mostly said, "I want this thing with these specs at this price, make it happen" and his manufacturing partner is the one that actually built it.That sounds a little like Steve Jobs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276616</id>
	<title>You use that word</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259582700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do not think you know <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">what it means.</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do not think you know what it means .
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do not think you know what it means.
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166</id>
	<title>Angst and Drama?  Try Hilarity</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1259608200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>

Email from Chandra's shareholder:<p><div class="quote"><p>We still acknowledge that Arrington and TechCrunch bring some value to your business endeavorIf he agrees to our terms, we would have Arrington assume the role of visionary/evangelist/marketing head and Fusion Garage would acquire the rights to use the Crunchpad brand and name. Personally, I don&rsquo;t think the name is all that important but you seem to be somewhat attached to the name.</p></div><p>Translation:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I'd like to cash in on Arrington's hard work.  Does he have some sort of puppeteer's slot in his ass or lower back where we could shove our arm during launches?  Or is he run by remote control?  Does he come with instructions or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... how does this 'Arrington thing' work exactly?  Please toss him the offer of looking like Steve Jobs in the eyes of the public but being my subservient bitch behind the curtains and being forever financially crippled.  If he requests vasaline, we may be able to find some funding somewhere but we're not making any promises.  There are sharks and there are sheep<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p> </div><p>Honestly, I applaud Arrington's levelheaded response.  I believe mine would have consisted of nothing more than "WTF?" and <a href="http://www.27bslash6.com/images/logo\_for\_simon\_edhouse.gif" title="27bslash6.com" rel="nofollow">an image</a> [27bslash6.com].  <br> <br>

Aside from all that, I'm sad because I really was excited to see what came out of this and would have been interested after the price dropped a bit.  I mean, depending on battery life, you'd have to be nuts to get a Kindle over this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Email from Chandra 's shareholder : We still acknowledge that Arrington and TechCrunch bring some value to your business endeavorIf he agrees to our terms , we would have Arrington assume the role of visionary/evangelist/marketing head and Fusion Garage would acquire the rights to use the Crunchpad brand and name .
Personally , I don    t think the name is all that important but you seem to be somewhat attached to the name.Translation : I 'd like to cash in on Arrington 's hard work .
Does he have some sort of puppeteer 's slot in his ass or lower back where we could shove our arm during launches ?
Or is he run by remote control ?
Does he come with instructions or ... how does this 'Arrington thing ' work exactly ?
Please toss him the offer of looking like Steve Jobs in the eyes of the public but being my subservient bitch behind the curtains and being forever financially crippled .
If he requests vasaline , we may be able to find some funding somewhere but we 're not making any promises .
There are sharks and there are sheep ... Honestly , I applaud Arrington 's levelheaded response .
I believe mine would have consisted of nothing more than " WTF ?
" and an image [ 27bslash6.com ] .
Aside from all that , I 'm sad because I really was excited to see what came out of this and would have been interested after the price dropped a bit .
I mean , depending on battery life , you 'd have to be nuts to get a Kindle over this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

Email from Chandra's shareholder:We still acknowledge that Arrington and TechCrunch bring some value to your business endeavorIf he agrees to our terms, we would have Arrington assume the role of visionary/evangelist/marketing head and Fusion Garage would acquire the rights to use the Crunchpad brand and name.
Personally, I don’t think the name is all that important but you seem to be somewhat attached to the name.Translation:I'd like to cash in on Arrington's hard work.
Does he have some sort of puppeteer's slot in his ass or lower back where we could shove our arm during launches?
Or is he run by remote control?
Does he come with instructions or ... how does this 'Arrington thing' work exactly?
Please toss him the offer of looking like Steve Jobs in the eyes of the public but being my subservient bitch behind the curtains and being forever financially crippled.
If he requests vasaline, we may be able to find some funding somewhere but we're not making any promises.
There are sharks and there are sheep ... Honestly, I applaud Arrington's levelheaded response.
I believe mine would have consisted of nothing more than "WTF?
" and an image [27bslash6.com].
Aside from all that, I'm sad because I really was excited to see what came out of this and would have been interested after the price dropped a bit.
I mean, depending on battery life, you'd have to be nuts to get a Kindle over this.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30278658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30275950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30278336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30275212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30275498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272874
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30277206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_1731239_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272166
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272870
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276928
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276892
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30278658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273186
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272290
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30278336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272160
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273040
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276616
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30277206
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30275950
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30275992
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273054
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272626
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274616
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273862
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30276710
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30275498
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274450
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30278008
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30275212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274980
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273770
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274094
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274682
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272380
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272222
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273004
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272402
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273008
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30273126
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_1731239.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30272240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_1731239.30274388
</commentlist>
</conversation>
