<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_01_1648223</id>
	<title>Spammer Lance Atkinson Fined $16 Million</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1259686620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Nashville Guy writes <i>"According to Australia's <em>The Age</em>, 'A New Zealand man living in Queensland and believed to be behind the world's largest spam operation, has been <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/technology/security/email-superspammer-fined-16m-20091201-k1sc.html">ordered to pay more than $16 million</a> for running the illegal enterprise. Lance Atkinson, 26, originally from Christchurch, was living in Pelican Waters on the Sunshine Coast when the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) had his assets frozen last year. ... The FTC found Atkinson and American Jody Smith were at the centre of the world's largest internet spam operation, dubbed 'AffKing,' having recruited spammers from around the world.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nashville Guy writes " According to Australia 's The Age , 'A New Zealand man living in Queensland and believed to be behind the world 's largest spam operation , has been ordered to pay more than $ 16 million for running the illegal enterprise .
Lance Atkinson , 26 , originally from Christchurch , was living in Pelican Waters on the Sunshine Coast when the US Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) had his assets frozen last year .
... The FTC found Atkinson and American Jody Smith were at the centre of the world 's largest internet spam operation , dubbed 'AffKing, ' having recruited spammers from around the world .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nashville Guy writes "According to Australia's The Age, 'A New Zealand man living in Queensland and believed to be behind the world's largest spam operation, has been ordered to pay more than $16 million for running the illegal enterprise.
Lance Atkinson, 26, originally from Christchurch, was living in Pelican Waters on the Sunshine Coast when the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) had his assets frozen last year.
... The FTC found Atkinson and American Jody Smith were at the centre of the world's largest internet spam operation, dubbed 'AffKing,' having recruited spammers from around the world.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287402</id>
	<title>Re:Additionally</title>
	<author>Zarf\_is\_with\_you</author>
	<datestamp>1259699520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><br>Dear Sir's,<br><br>Sorry about the Spam let me make it up to you,  I have arranged a special offer to make up for his wrong doing on my part,  the chance to purchase some magic beans from a guy named Jack at $49.95*  **<br><br>* shipped from India,  Your credit card will be charged in Kazakhstan,  an official receipt and warranty will be issued from Nigeria,  please allow 4-6 months for shipping.  Not responsible for Beans that fail to Grow or Grow out of Control.<br><br>**Free Shipping for the first 500 people that respond because you know we can't do this all day.<br>--<br>Death by Unga Bunga!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear Sir 's,Sorry about the Spam let me make it up to you , I have arranged a special offer to make up for his wrong doing on my part , the chance to purchase some magic beans from a guy named Jack at $ 49.95 * * * * shipped from India , Your credit card will be charged in Kazakhstan , an official receipt and warranty will be issued from Nigeria , please allow 4-6 months for shipping .
Not responsible for Beans that fail to Grow or Grow out of Control .
* * Free Shipping for the first 500 people that respond because you know we ca n't do this all day.--Death by Unga Bunga !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear Sir's,Sorry about the Spam let me make it up to you,  I have arranged a special offer to make up for his wrong doing on my part,  the chance to purchase some magic beans from a guy named Jack at $49.95*  *** shipped from India,  Your credit card will be charged in Kazakhstan,  an official receipt and warranty will be issued from Nigeria,  please allow 4-6 months for shipping.
Not responsible for Beans that fail to Grow or Grow out of Control.
**Free Shipping for the first 500 people that respond because you know we can't do this all day.--Death by Unga Bunga!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30291076</id>
	<title>A sad day for Internet freedom...</title>
	<author>AlexLibman</author>
	<datestamp>1259671800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem of spam had a number of very simple technological solutions.  Instead the government had to get involved...</p><p>Whenever a problem is solved through the initiation of force, the collective mob grows stronger and the individual grows weaker...</p><p>Unsolicited e-mails today, doubleplusungoodthinkmails tomorrow!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem of spam had a number of very simple technological solutions .
Instead the government had to get involved...Whenever a problem is solved through the initiation of force , the collective mob grows stronger and the individual grows weaker...Unsolicited e-mails today , doubleplusungoodthinkmails tomorrow !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem of spam had a number of very simple technological solutions.
Instead the government had to get involved...Whenever a problem is solved through the initiation of force, the collective mob grows stronger and the individual grows weaker...Unsolicited e-mails today, doubleplusungoodthinkmails tomorrow!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287688</id>
	<title>More importantly...</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1259700540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does he actually have 16 million dollars? Because if he doesn't wtf is the point in any of this? To send a message? What message that apparently they are retarded? Message received, over and out.</p><p>Quit pissing about and fine him 16 Billi... no Quardrillion dollars, that'll teach'em!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does he actually have 16 million dollars ?
Because if he does n't wtf is the point in any of this ?
To send a message ?
What message that apparently they are retarded ?
Message received , over and out.Quit pissing about and fine him 16 Billi... no Quardrillion dollars , that 'll teach'em !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does he actually have 16 million dollars?
Because if he doesn't wtf is the point in any of this?
To send a message?
What message that apparently they are retarded?
Message received, over and out.Quit pissing about and fine him 16 Billi... no Quardrillion dollars, that'll teach'em!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285766</id>
	<title>New Zealand Finally Gets With The Program?</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1259693940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>For a while, the likes of Leo Kuvayev and his cronies were taking advantage of the lax laws in New Zealand and purchasing their spamming (and spamvertised) domains there.  It took quite some time to get the New Zealanders to distance themselves from the profit of those crimes, now it is encouraging to see they are taking a more active anti-spam stance.<br> <br>
Its too bad that in the end this all won't be worth squat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For a while , the likes of Leo Kuvayev and his cronies were taking advantage of the lax laws in New Zealand and purchasing their spamming ( and spamvertised ) domains there .
It took quite some time to get the New Zealanders to distance themselves from the profit of those crimes , now it is encouraging to see they are taking a more active anti-spam stance .
Its too bad that in the end this all wo n't be worth squat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a while, the likes of Leo Kuvayev and his cronies were taking advantage of the lax laws in New Zealand and purchasing their spamming (and spamvertised) domains there.
It took quite some time to get the New Zealanders to distance themselves from the profit of those crimes, now it is encouraging to see they are taking a more active anti-spam stance.
Its too bad that in the end this all won't be worth squat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286820</id>
	<title>FYI</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259697480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Queensland is in Australia, not New Zealand, he formerly lived in N.Z. and like most NZers in trouble with the law, moved to Australia. Australia does have a extradition treaty with the U.S.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Queensland is in Australia , not New Zealand , he formerly lived in N.Z .
and like most NZers in trouble with the law , moved to Australia .
Australia does have a extradition treaty with the U.S .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Queensland is in Australia, not New Zealand, he formerly lived in N.Z.
and like most NZers in trouble with the law, moved to Australia.
Australia does have a extradition treaty with the U.S.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288466</id>
	<title>Re:Quick question</title>
	<author>jez9999</author>
	<datestamp>1259660400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>5 minutes of US DoD operational costs?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>5 minutes of US DoD operational costs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>5 minutes of US DoD operational costs?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286600</id>
	<title>Re:Completely the WRONG tactic</title>
	<author>Archangel Michael</author>
	<datestamp>1259696880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spam is not an economic problem, it is a social problem. However the solution isn't economic or social. The solution is socialogical; it is threat of pain and/or death.</p><p>The risk/reward structure is so far out of whack that there is no disincentive affecting the choice.</p><p>As previously mentioned, 250,000 unlawful computer access felonies is huge number, and that is what we should be looking at. Nothing short of public flogging/caning/torture or even execution will stop the asshats from being asshats.</p><p>That removes or at lease reduces the economic incentive by introducing life threatening consequences. And anyone willing to risk that, deserves exactly what they get.</p><p>People who oppose Corporal or Capital Punishment don't understand its purpose. It is supposed to be a deterrent. It doesn't always succeed in every case, but nothing does.</p><p>Stupid should hurt. If you cane the bastard this time, the next guy will consider that as a consequence, and think twice. As long as there is no real consequence (fake fines that will never be applied aren't a consequence), then there is no deterrence.</p><p>As for the responders to spam, stupid should hurt as well. I suggest that the Government setup fake blue pill shops all over the place, and bilk the stupid people out of as much money as they can, and pay for the new Healthcare system with stupid people's money, and not mine.</p><p>Just enroll the idiots in the latest "free sample" scam (Enzyte) crap we see all the time. At least then, the money will go to something more useful (subject to debate), and we'll have all the money we need to do "HealthCare" right!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/sarcasm</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spam is not an economic problem , it is a social problem .
However the solution is n't economic or social .
The solution is socialogical ; it is threat of pain and/or death.The risk/reward structure is so far out of whack that there is no disincentive affecting the choice.As previously mentioned , 250,000 unlawful computer access felonies is huge number , and that is what we should be looking at .
Nothing short of public flogging/caning/torture or even execution will stop the asshats from being asshats.That removes or at lease reduces the economic incentive by introducing life threatening consequences .
And anyone willing to risk that , deserves exactly what they get.People who oppose Corporal or Capital Punishment do n't understand its purpose .
It is supposed to be a deterrent .
It does n't always succeed in every case , but nothing does.Stupid should hurt .
If you cane the bastard this time , the next guy will consider that as a consequence , and think twice .
As long as there is no real consequence ( fake fines that will never be applied are n't a consequence ) , then there is no deterrence.As for the responders to spam , stupid should hurt as well .
I suggest that the Government setup fake blue pill shops all over the place , and bilk the stupid people out of as much money as they can , and pay for the new Healthcare system with stupid people 's money , and not mine.Just enroll the idiots in the latest " free sample " scam ( Enzyte ) crap we see all the time .
At least then , the money will go to something more useful ( subject to debate ) , and we 'll have all the money we need to do " HealthCare " right !
/sarcasm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spam is not an economic problem, it is a social problem.
However the solution isn't economic or social.
The solution is socialogical; it is threat of pain and/or death.The risk/reward structure is so far out of whack that there is no disincentive affecting the choice.As previously mentioned, 250,000 unlawful computer access felonies is huge number, and that is what we should be looking at.
Nothing short of public flogging/caning/torture or even execution will stop the asshats from being asshats.That removes or at lease reduces the economic incentive by introducing life threatening consequences.
And anyone willing to risk that, deserves exactly what they get.People who oppose Corporal or Capital Punishment don't understand its purpose.
It is supposed to be a deterrent.
It doesn't always succeed in every case, but nothing does.Stupid should hurt.
If you cane the bastard this time, the next guy will consider that as a consequence, and think twice.
As long as there is no real consequence (fake fines that will never be applied aren't a consequence), then there is no deterrence.As for the responders to spam, stupid should hurt as well.
I suggest that the Government setup fake blue pill shops all over the place, and bilk the stupid people out of as much money as they can, and pay for the new Healthcare system with stupid people's money, and not mine.Just enroll the idiots in the latest "free sample" scam (Enzyte) crap we see all the time.
At least then, the money will go to something more useful (subject to debate), and we'll have all the money we need to do "HealthCare" right!
/sarcasm</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438</id>
	<title>Damn moronic 'anti-spam' laws.</title>
	<author>DavidTC</author>
	<datestamp>1259692740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to the original <a href="http://www.spamhaus.org/rokso/evidence.lasso?rokso\_id=ROK8387" title="spamhaus.org">documentation</a> [spamhaus.org], 'In early 2008, a security company identified one
botnet -- which it dubbed "Mega-D" -- that sent sparn promoting Affking's VPXL and King
Replica products as the worst botnet in the world, accounting for 32\% of all spam.'</p><p>
The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega-D\_botnet" title="wikipedia.org">Mega-D</a> [wikipedia.org] botnet consisted at least <a href="http://news.softpedia.com/news/Mega-D-Spam-Botnet-Suffers-Severe-Blow-126594.shtml" title="softpedia.com">264,784</a> [softpedia.com] computers.</p><p>
That's 264,784 <b>UNAUTHORIZED COMPUTER ACCESS FELONIES</b>.</p><p>
Why the <b>FUCK</b> are we 'fining' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies? We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality!</p><p>
Anti-spam laws are nonsense. Forget the damn anti-spam laws. Lock them up for the felonies they're committing. Extradition would be a lot easier, too. (Of course, we could just find a few hundred IPs this guy hijacked in Australia, turn them over, and have him locked up there his entire life, instead.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the original documentation [ spamhaus.org ] , 'In early 2008 , a security company identified one botnet -- which it dubbed " Mega-D " -- that sent sparn promoting Affking 's VPXL and King Replica products as the worst botnet in the world , accounting for 32 \ % of all spam .
' The Mega-D [ wikipedia.org ] botnet consisted at least 264,784 [ softpedia.com ] computers .
That 's 264,784 UNAUTHORIZED COMPUTER ACCESS FELONIES .
Why the FUCK are we 'fining ' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies ?
We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality !
Anti-spam laws are nonsense .
Forget the damn anti-spam laws .
Lock them up for the felonies they 're committing .
Extradition would be a lot easier , too .
( Of course , we could just find a few hundred IPs this guy hijacked in Australia , turn them over , and have him locked up there his entire life , instead .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the original documentation [spamhaus.org], 'In early 2008, a security company identified one
botnet -- which it dubbed "Mega-D" -- that sent sparn promoting Affking's VPXL and King
Replica products as the worst botnet in the world, accounting for 32\% of all spam.
'
The Mega-D [wikipedia.org] botnet consisted at least 264,784 [softpedia.com] computers.
That's 264,784 UNAUTHORIZED COMPUTER ACCESS FELONIES.
Why the FUCK are we 'fining' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies?
We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality!
Anti-spam laws are nonsense.
Forget the damn anti-spam laws.
Lock them up for the felonies they're committing.
Extradition would be a lot easier, too.
(Of course, we could just find a few hundred IPs this guy hijacked in Australia, turn them over, and have him locked up there his entire life, instead.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286714</id>
	<title>Cell with Roman Polanski?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259697180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If we extradite him, could we possibly put him in a cell with Roman Polanski and put him in a little gingham dress?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If we extradite him , could we possibly put him in a cell with Roman Polanski and put him in a little gingham dress ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we extradite him, could we possibly put him in a cell with Roman Polanski and put him in a little gingham dress?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30291390</id>
	<title>Re:FYI</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259673360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>New Zealanders enjoy visa-less entry into Australia. The Australian authorities have the right to revoke a specific NZers entry if they fail to meet character requirements.</p><p>I suggest the Australian authorities to examine this persons actions and determine whether he meets the character requirement necessary to remain in Australia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>New Zealanders enjoy visa-less entry into Australia .
The Australian authorities have the right to revoke a specific NZers entry if they fail to meet character requirements.I suggest the Australian authorities to examine this persons actions and determine whether he meets the character requirement necessary to remain in Australia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New Zealanders enjoy visa-less entry into Australia.
The Australian authorities have the right to revoke a specific NZers entry if they fail to meet character requirements.I suggest the Australian authorities to examine this persons actions and determine whether he meets the character requirement necessary to remain in Australia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286820</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285012</id>
	<title>No sympathy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259690760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He was totally affking for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He was totally affking for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He was totally affking for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284932</id>
	<title>just data</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259690400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Advertisement wants to be free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Advertisement wants to be free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Advertisement wants to be free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30292878</id>
	<title>Re:New Zealand Finally Gets With The Program?</title>
	<author>Kalriath</author>
	<datestamp>1259683020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the fuck are you talking about?  Buying domains has nothing to do with the spam - and it's up to the registrars if they want to take on the responsibility for domains purchased from them not being used for spam.  Laws don't change that one bit - in fact you could go ahead and buy 155,000 domains from GoDaddy tomorrow and spam content on them... would you be talking about the USAs lax laws then?  No?  Surprise!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the fuck are you talking about ?
Buying domains has nothing to do with the spam - and it 's up to the registrars if they want to take on the responsibility for domains purchased from them not being used for spam .
Laws do n't change that one bit - in fact you could go ahead and buy 155,000 domains from GoDaddy tomorrow and spam content on them... would you be talking about the USAs lax laws then ?
No ? Surprise !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the fuck are you talking about?
Buying domains has nothing to do with the spam - and it's up to the registrars if they want to take on the responsibility for domains purchased from them not being used for spam.
Laws don't change that one bit - in fact you could go ahead and buy 155,000 domains from GoDaddy tomorrow and spam content on them... would you be talking about the USAs lax laws then?
No?  Surprise!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286594</id>
	<title>Re:Completely the WRONG tactic</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1259696880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spam may be an economic problem, but it has political complications.  The credit card industry, which btw has a VERY powerful lobby, makes a tidy profit on credit card purchases from spammed products.</p><p>We should not just let spammers get away with it though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spam may be an economic problem , but it has political complications .
The credit card industry , which btw has a VERY powerful lobby , makes a tidy profit on credit card purchases from spammed products.We should not just let spammers get away with it though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spam may be an economic problem, but it has political complications.
The credit card industry, which btw has a VERY powerful lobby, makes a tidy profit on credit card purchases from spammed products.We should not just let spammers get away with it though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30294954</id>
	<title>Re:Damn moronic 'anti-spam' laws.</title>
	<author>rastoboy29</author>
	<datestamp>1259575020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>And we're extraditing an Englishman who embarrassingly hacked some government websites looking for UFO's.<br><br>Madness.</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>And we 're extraditing an Englishman who embarrassingly hacked some government websites looking for UFO 's.Madness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And we're extraditing an Englishman who embarrassingly hacked some government websites looking for UFO's.Madness.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286982</id>
	<title>Re:Damn moronic 'anti-spam' laws.</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1259698080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did he actually commit unauthorized access? Wouldn&rsquo;t that depend on whether he created the botnet, or merely rented it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did he actually commit unauthorized access ?
Wouldn    t that depend on whether he created the botnet , or merely rented it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did he actually commit unauthorized access?
Wouldn’t that depend on whether he created the botnet, or merely rented it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285088</id>
	<title>shame</title>
	<author>frooties</author>
	<datestamp>1259691120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is he the man responsible for the larger penis advertisements because if so that sucks, I've just saved up all my money to join... guess I'll have to buy viagra!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is he the man responsible for the larger penis advertisements because if so that sucks , I 've just saved up all my money to join... guess I 'll have to buy viagra !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is he the man responsible for the larger penis advertisements because if so that sucks, I've just saved up all my money to join... guess I'll have to buy viagra!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287704</id>
	<title>Re:Completely the WRONG tactic</title>
	<author>DavidTC</author>
	<datestamp>1259700660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, yes, but mugging is also an economic problem. Something like three quarters of all crimes are economically based.</p><p>
I don't really see what that has to do with anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , yes , but mugging is also an economic problem .
Something like three quarters of all crimes are economically based .
I do n't really see what that has to do with anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, yes, but mugging is also an economic problem.
Something like three quarters of all crimes are economically based.
I don't really see what that has to do with anything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288118</id>
	<title>Re:Damn moronic 'anti-spam' laws.</title>
	<author>DavidTC</author>
	<datestamp>1259658960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That would just makes it <b>conspiracy</b> to commit unauthorized computer access.</p><p>
But not 'creating' the botnet doesn't help. If he used the network to send out spam, or for any reason, that was unauthorized access.</p><p>
If you watch someone break into a computer (and know they broke in) and they step away from the keyboard and let you use it, tada, you just <b>also</b> committed unauthorized computer access.</p><p>
In the older days, oddly enough, there was actually a legal defense here. Worms would leap from computer to computer, installing port forwarding software that other people could use 'without realizing' such proxies were installed without permission.</p><p>
But as this became a big business, it stopped working that way, and it turned into botnets that connect back to some central hub, or some decentralized control structure, but the point is, the only people who could get in were the <b>creators</b> of the botnet and people who those creators granted access.</p><p>
Ergo, everyone who uses a botnet is using it knowing fully what's going on, as opposed to the legal loophole 'I thought J. Random User's computer was just running a public access proxy'.</p><p>
Granted, in <b>theory</b> the spammer could have 'leased access' to a botnet he thought was legal, but a) such legal botnets for sending mail do not actually exist, so it's hard to assert he thought he was purchasing a product that isn't real, and b) that's what search warrants are for...I'm sure at some point the prosecution will be able to prove he knew what was going on.</p><p>
And then, even if he didn't send any commands directly to botnet, if he paid someone to send commands to a botnet that he knew was illegal, it was conspiracy to commit such access. You can't pay people to commit felonies for you and walk away free!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would just makes it conspiracy to commit unauthorized computer access .
But not 'creating ' the botnet does n't help .
If he used the network to send out spam , or for any reason , that was unauthorized access .
If you watch someone break into a computer ( and know they broke in ) and they step away from the keyboard and let you use it , tada , you just also committed unauthorized computer access .
In the older days , oddly enough , there was actually a legal defense here .
Worms would leap from computer to computer , installing port forwarding software that other people could use 'without realizing ' such proxies were installed without permission .
But as this became a big business , it stopped working that way , and it turned into botnets that connect back to some central hub , or some decentralized control structure , but the point is , the only people who could get in were the creators of the botnet and people who those creators granted access .
Ergo , everyone who uses a botnet is using it knowing fully what 's going on , as opposed to the legal loophole 'I thought J. Random User 's computer was just running a public access proxy' .
Granted , in theory the spammer could have 'leased access ' to a botnet he thought was legal , but a ) such legal botnets for sending mail do not actually exist , so it 's hard to assert he thought he was purchasing a product that is n't real , and b ) that 's what search warrants are for...I 'm sure at some point the prosecution will be able to prove he knew what was going on .
And then , even if he did n't send any commands directly to botnet , if he paid someone to send commands to a botnet that he knew was illegal , it was conspiracy to commit such access .
You ca n't pay people to commit felonies for you and walk away free !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would just makes it conspiracy to commit unauthorized computer access.
But not 'creating' the botnet doesn't help.
If he used the network to send out spam, or for any reason, that was unauthorized access.
If you watch someone break into a computer (and know they broke in) and they step away from the keyboard and let you use it, tada, you just also committed unauthorized computer access.
In the older days, oddly enough, there was actually a legal defense here.
Worms would leap from computer to computer, installing port forwarding software that other people could use 'without realizing' such proxies were installed without permission.
But as this became a big business, it stopped working that way, and it turned into botnets that connect back to some central hub, or some decentralized control structure, but the point is, the only people who could get in were the creators of the botnet and people who those creators granted access.
Ergo, everyone who uses a botnet is using it knowing fully what's going on, as opposed to the legal loophole 'I thought J. Random User's computer was just running a public access proxy'.
Granted, in theory the spammer could have 'leased access' to a botnet he thought was legal, but a) such legal botnets for sending mail do not actually exist, so it's hard to assert he thought he was purchasing a product that isn't real, and b) that's what search warrants are for...I'm sure at some point the prosecution will be able to prove he knew what was going on.
And then, even if he didn't send any commands directly to botnet, if he paid someone to send commands to a botnet that he knew was illegal, it was conspiracy to commit such access.
You can't pay people to commit felonies for you and walk away free!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287272</id>
	<title>Re:And Yet He Won't Pay a Penny</title>
	<author>Interoperable</author>
	<datestamp>1259698980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can extraditions be requested for an offense that only carries a fine?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can extraditions be requested for an offense that only carries a fine ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can extraditions be requested for an offense that only carries a fine?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285034</id>
	<title>Re:And Yet He Won't Pay a Penny</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1259690880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, according to that article, Atkinson&rsquo;s assets weren&rsquo;t frozen (contrary to what the summary says).</p><p>Jody Smith, his accomplice in the US, was the one whose assets were frozen. Smith has pleaded guilty to &ldquo;conspiracy to traffic counterfeit goods&rdquo; and is to be sentenced here in the US this month (December).</p><p>However, I still have hopes for Lance Atkinson seeing justice... his brother, Shane, had already been fined $122,000 in a separate case <em>by a New Zealand court</em> (Lance&rsquo;s conviction was made by a US court, which has no jurisdiction in New Zealand &ndash; so he&rsquo;d have to be extradited, unless he foolishly decided to come here for some reason). I imagine if Lance could be similarly tried in a New Zealand court, he&rsquo;d be required to pay whatever they demanded.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , according to that article , Atkinson    s assets weren    t frozen ( contrary to what the summary says ) .Jody Smith , his accomplice in the US , was the one whose assets were frozen .
Smith has pleaded guilty to    conspiracy to traffic counterfeit goods    and is to be sentenced here in the US this month ( December ) .However , I still have hopes for Lance Atkinson seeing justice... his brother , Shane , had already been fined $ 122,000 in a separate case by a New Zealand court ( Lance    s conviction was made by a US court , which has no jurisdiction in New Zealand    so he    d have to be extradited , unless he foolishly decided to come here for some reason ) .
I imagine if Lance could be similarly tried in a New Zealand court , he    d be required to pay whatever they demanded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, according to that article, Atkinson’s assets weren’t frozen (contrary to what the summary says).Jody Smith, his accomplice in the US, was the one whose assets were frozen.
Smith has pleaded guilty to “conspiracy to traffic counterfeit goods” and is to be sentenced here in the US this month (December).However, I still have hopes for Lance Atkinson seeing justice... his brother, Shane, had already been fined $122,000 in a separate case by a New Zealand court (Lance’s conviction was made by a US court, which has no jurisdiction in New Zealand – so he’d have to be extradited, unless he foolishly decided to come here for some reason).
I imagine if Lance could be similarly tried in a New Zealand court, he’d be required to pay whatever they demanded.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288832</id>
	<title>Absolute Right to Freedom of Speech?  NO.</title>
	<author>MarkvW</author>
	<datestamp>1259661720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are limitations that must be applied to freedom of speech in a civilized society and the limitation of abusive spam speech is one.</p><p>This ought to establish that free speech is not an absolute right--it is a right that must be limited in some circumstances.  The scope and manner of those limitations on free speech are a good indicator of the basic freedom and health of that society imposing them.</p><p>I hate abusive spammers and I favor the limitation of their freedom to speak to me with abusive spam that I do not want to receive!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are limitations that must be applied to freedom of speech in a civilized society and the limitation of abusive spam speech is one.This ought to establish that free speech is not an absolute right--it is a right that must be limited in some circumstances .
The scope and manner of those limitations on free speech are a good indicator of the basic freedom and health of that society imposing them.I hate abusive spammers and I favor the limitation of their freedom to speak to me with abusive spam that I do not want to receive !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are limitations that must be applied to freedom of speech in a civilized society and the limitation of abusive spam speech is one.This ought to establish that free speech is not an absolute right--it is a right that must be limited in some circumstances.
The scope and manner of those limitations on free speech are a good indicator of the basic freedom and health of that society imposing them.I hate abusive spammers and I favor the limitation of their freedom to speak to me with abusive spam that I do not want to receive!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285010</id>
	<title>Additionally</title>
	<author>Rik Sweeney</author>
	<datestamp>1259690760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He was also told to apologise to everyone he'd sent spam to.</p><p>Foolishly, the court allowed him to send these apologies via email.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He was also told to apologise to everyone he 'd sent spam to.Foolishly , the court allowed him to send these apologies via email .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He was also told to apologise to everyone he'd sent spam to.Foolishly, the court allowed him to send these apologies via email.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30297550</id>
	<title>Be like him, Just Get Us The Money  !</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259597940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't care of they get him on U.S. soil or not - just get the dang money, and distribute $1,000.00 of it to every American who is online, to help pay for our lost time and money in dealing with spam, spam-filters, white lists, black lists, lost legitimate emails due to the above mentioned spam filters, the aggravation of not being able to use port 25 anymore... it's a long list.</p><p>And $ 1,000.00 each is probably letting him off easy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care of they get him on U.S. soil or not - just get the dang money , and distribute $ 1,000.00 of it to every American who is online , to help pay for our lost time and money in dealing with spam , spam-filters , white lists , black lists , lost legitimate emails due to the above mentioned spam filters , the aggravation of not being able to use port 25 anymore... it 's a long list.And $ 1,000.00 each is probably letting him off easy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care of they get him on U.S. soil or not - just get the dang money, and distribute $1,000.00 of it to every American who is online, to help pay for our lost time and money in dealing with spam, spam-filters, white lists, black lists, lost legitimate emails due to the above mentioned spam filters, the aggravation of not being able to use port 25 anymore... it's a long list.And $ 1,000.00 each is probably letting him off easy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287782</id>
	<title>Re:Who cares, get the people who send me junk mail</title>
	<author>Bigbutt</author>
	<datestamp>1259700900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's ok. You're also paying for SPAM. From ISP costs on down to the people who are scammed out of their life savings and go bankrupt (raising rates) or can't afford to take care of themselves so we do.</p><p>[John]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's ok. You 're also paying for SPAM .
From ISP costs on down to the people who are scammed out of their life savings and go bankrupt ( raising rates ) or ca n't afford to take care of themselves so we do .
[ John ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's ok. You're also paying for SPAM.
From ISP costs on down to the people who are scammed out of their life savings and go bankrupt (raising rates) or can't afford to take care of themselves so we do.
[John]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286336</id>
	<title>Re:Completely the WRONG tactic</title>
	<author>JoshuaZ</author>
	<datestamp>1259695920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Spam is at its heart an economic problem, but that doesn't mean that it can't be solved using other tactics as well as economic ones. For any far reaching problem in society,  the use of many different strategies together has potential to do a better job than any single one. Most responses to proposed anti-spam solutions fail to see that the solutions should occur not in an isolated form  but together with other solutions. Thus for example, the standard copy and pasted anti-spam response checklist on Slashdot is always used as if the proposed technique is being touted as a magic bullet. In that regard, spam is a bit like cancer. It is quite silly to claim that we will ever have a single cure for cancer, because cancer is a complicated set of diseases with multiple causes. But a series of different responses (such as chemotherapy, surgery and radiation) used appropriate together can do a pretty decent job in most cases. Thus, cancer is no longer a death sentence. The spam problem should be targetd the same way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Spam is at its heart an economic problem , but that does n't mean that it ca n't be solved using other tactics as well as economic ones .
For any far reaching problem in society , the use of many different strategies together has potential to do a better job than any single one .
Most responses to proposed anti-spam solutions fail to see that the solutions should occur not in an isolated form but together with other solutions .
Thus for example , the standard copy and pasted anti-spam response checklist on Slashdot is always used as if the proposed technique is being touted as a magic bullet .
In that regard , spam is a bit like cancer .
It is quite silly to claim that we will ever have a single cure for cancer , because cancer is a complicated set of diseases with multiple causes .
But a series of different responses ( such as chemotherapy , surgery and radiation ) used appropriate together can do a pretty decent job in most cases .
Thus , cancer is no longer a death sentence .
The spam problem should be targetd the same way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spam is at its heart an economic problem, but that doesn't mean that it can't be solved using other tactics as well as economic ones.
For any far reaching problem in society,  the use of many different strategies together has potential to do a better job than any single one.
Most responses to proposed anti-spam solutions fail to see that the solutions should occur not in an isolated form  but together with other solutions.
Thus for example, the standard copy and pasted anti-spam response checklist on Slashdot is always used as if the proposed technique is being touted as a magic bullet.
In that regard, spam is a bit like cancer.
It is quite silly to claim that we will ever have a single cure for cancer, because cancer is a complicated set of diseases with multiple causes.
But a series of different responses (such as chemotherapy, surgery and radiation) used appropriate together can do a pretty decent job in most cases.
Thus, cancer is no longer a death sentence.
The spam problem should be targetd the same way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286172</id>
	<title>Effective</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259695380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now that they've cut the head off the Hydra, life should be good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that they 've cut the head off the Hydra , life should be good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that they've cut the head off the Hydra, life should be good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287094</id>
	<title>Re:Who cares, get the people who send me junk mail</title>
	<author>joeyblades</author>
	<datestamp>1259698440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can generally opt out of most junk mail (http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs4-junk.htm). Trying to opt out of spam typically gets you more spam.</p><p>And you're confused if you think you don't pay for spam. You pay for your internet service. Some of this cost is for bandwidth consumed by spam, some is for storage of spam, some is for spam blocking, etc.. I've seen estimates that suggests that 20\%-30\% of your internet costs are for spam... even if it never makes it into your inbox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can generally opt out of most junk mail ( http : //www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs4-junk.htm ) .
Trying to opt out of spam typically gets you more spam.And you 're confused if you think you do n't pay for spam .
You pay for your internet service .
Some of this cost is for bandwidth consumed by spam , some is for storage of spam , some is for spam blocking , etc.. I 've seen estimates that suggests that 20 \ % -30 \ % of your internet costs are for spam... even if it never makes it into your inbox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can generally opt out of most junk mail (http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs4-junk.htm).
Trying to opt out of spam typically gets you more spam.And you're confused if you think you don't pay for spam.
You pay for your internet service.
Some of this cost is for bandwidth consumed by spam, some is for storage of spam, some is for spam blocking, etc.. I've seen estimates that suggests that 20\%-30\% of your internet costs are for spam... even if it never makes it into your inbox.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286448</id>
	<title>Use the botnet to send a Nigerian 'hit' spam</title>
	<author>schwit1</author>
	<datestamp>1259696280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure some idiot will think it's real, all you need is one. Offer $5M for his head in a box.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure some idiot will think it 's real , all you need is one .
Offer $ 5M for his head in a box .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure some idiot will think it's real, all you need is one.
Offer $5M for his head in a box.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286050</id>
	<title>Re:Damn moronic 'anti-spam' laws.</title>
	<author>Trailrunner7</author>
	<datestamp>1259694960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>According to the original <a href="http://www.spamhaus.org/rokso/evidence.lasso?rokso\_id=ROK8387" title="spamhaus.org">documentation</a> [spamhaus.org], 'In early 2008, a security company identified one
botnet -- which it dubbed "Mega-D" -- that sent sparn promoting Affking's VPXL and King
Replica products as the worst botnet in the world, accounting for 32\% of all spam.'</p><p>
The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega-D\_botnet" title="wikipedia.org">Mega-D</a> [wikipedia.org] botnet consisted at least <a href="http://news.softpedia.com/news/Mega-D-Spam-Botnet-Suffers-Severe-Blow-126594.shtml" title="softpedia.com">264,784</a> [softpedia.com] computers.</p><p>
That's 264,784 <b>UNAUTHORIZED COMPUTER ACCESS FELONIES</b>.</p><p>
Why the <b>FUCK</b> are we 'fining' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies? We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality!</p><p>
Anti-spam laws are nonsense. Forget the damn anti-spam laws. Lock them up for the felonies they're committing. Extradition would be a lot easier, too. (Of course, we could just find a few hundred IPs this guy hijacked in Australia, turn them over, and have him locked up there his entire life, instead.)</p></div><p>The laws are completely useless and always have been. They were passed to make consumers think that government is doing something. But the extradition and prosecution is a lot harder than it sounds, even when the criminal is in a friendly country like Australia. It takes forever and costs a lot of money, so the law enforcement agencies pass.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the original documentation [ spamhaus.org ] , 'In early 2008 , a security company identified one botnet -- which it dubbed " Mega-D " -- that sent sparn promoting Affking 's VPXL and King Replica products as the worst botnet in the world , accounting for 32 \ % of all spam .
' The Mega-D [ wikipedia.org ] botnet consisted at least 264,784 [ softpedia.com ] computers .
That 's 264,784 UNAUTHORIZED COMPUTER ACCESS FELONIES .
Why the FUCK are we 'fining ' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies ?
We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality !
Anti-spam laws are nonsense .
Forget the damn anti-spam laws .
Lock them up for the felonies they 're committing .
Extradition would be a lot easier , too .
( Of course , we could just find a few hundred IPs this guy hijacked in Australia , turn them over , and have him locked up there his entire life , instead .
) The laws are completely useless and always have been .
They were passed to make consumers think that government is doing something .
But the extradition and prosecution is a lot harder than it sounds , even when the criminal is in a friendly country like Australia .
It takes forever and costs a lot of money , so the law enforcement agencies pass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the original documentation [spamhaus.org], 'In early 2008, a security company identified one
botnet -- which it dubbed "Mega-D" -- that sent sparn promoting Affking's VPXL and King
Replica products as the worst botnet in the world, accounting for 32\% of all spam.
'
The Mega-D [wikipedia.org] botnet consisted at least 264,784 [softpedia.com] computers.
That's 264,784 UNAUTHORIZED COMPUTER ACCESS FELONIES.
Why the FUCK are we 'fining' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies?
We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality!
Anti-spam laws are nonsense.
Forget the damn anti-spam laws.
Lock them up for the felonies they're committing.
Extradition would be a lot easier, too.
(Of course, we could just find a few hundred IPs this guy hijacked in Australia, turn them over, and have him locked up there his entire life, instead.
)The laws are completely useless and always have been.
They were passed to make consumers think that government is doing something.
But the extradition and prosecution is a lot harder than it sounds, even when the criminal is in a friendly country like Australia.
It takes forever and costs a lot of money, so the law enforcement agencies pass.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30292410</id>
	<title>Re:Damn moronic 'anti-spam' laws.</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1259679420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why the FUCK are we 'fining' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies? We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality!</p></div></blockquote><p>

Because jailing people cost money, yes you could make him pay for his own imprisonment with that fine but if you do that what money would be left over for jailing pot smokers and fighting pointless wars.<br> <br>

My question is why hasn't Australia arrested and <b>at least</b> fined this guy. If Senator Conjob put half the effort he put into the internet censorship scheme into nailing this guy we wouldn't be having the conversation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why the FUCK are we 'fining ' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies ?
We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality !
Because jailing people cost money , yes you could make him pay for his own imprisonment with that fine but if you do that what money would be left over for jailing pot smokers and fighting pointless wars .
My question is why has n't Australia arrested and at least fined this guy .
If Senator Conjob put half the effort he put into the internet censorship scheme into nailing this guy we would n't be having the conversation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why the FUCK are we 'fining' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies?
We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality!
Because jailing people cost money, yes you could make him pay for his own imprisonment with that fine but if you do that what money would be left over for jailing pot smokers and fighting pointless wars.
My question is why hasn't Australia arrested and at least fined this guy.
If Senator Conjob put half the effort he put into the internet censorship scheme into nailing this guy we wouldn't be having the conversation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906</id>
	<title>Completely the WRONG tactic</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1259694360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>So you suggest:<p><div class="quote"><p>Lock them up for the felonies they're committing. Extradition would be a lot easier, too. (Of course, we could just find a few hundred IPs this guy hijacked in Australia, turn them over, and have him locked up there his entire life, instead.)</p></div><p>
Although as you have rightly noted extradition is extremely difficult, especially when you consider some of the countries where spammers are currently hiding.<br> <br>
However, that is all moot because no amount of law enforcement, threats, or even executions will stop the spammers.  And why is that, you might ask?  Because <b>no law enforcement tactic addresses the underlying problem that drives spam</b>.  For every spammer kidnapped, thrown in jail, murdered, etc... there are many, many, more waiting to take his place.  Even more so, there are many people who want his money.<br> <br>
In short, <b>spam is an economic problem.</b>  If you really give a damn about the problem, and want to do something more than just make yourself feel better, you would pay attention to the economics that drive spam.  Spammers didn't choose their profession to piss you off - they did it to make money.  If you want to stop spam, do something about the profits and the problem will go away on its own.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you suggest : Lock them up for the felonies they 're committing .
Extradition would be a lot easier , too .
( Of course , we could just find a few hundred IPs this guy hijacked in Australia , turn them over , and have him locked up there his entire life , instead .
) Although as you have rightly noted extradition is extremely difficult , especially when you consider some of the countries where spammers are currently hiding .
However , that is all moot because no amount of law enforcement , threats , or even executions will stop the spammers .
And why is that , you might ask ?
Because no law enforcement tactic addresses the underlying problem that drives spam .
For every spammer kidnapped , thrown in jail , murdered , etc... there are many , many , more waiting to take his place .
Even more so , there are many people who want his money .
In short , spam is an economic problem .
If you really give a damn about the problem , and want to do something more than just make yourself feel better , you would pay attention to the economics that drive spam .
Spammers did n't choose their profession to piss you off - they did it to make money .
If you want to stop spam , do something about the profits and the problem will go away on its own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you suggest:Lock them up for the felonies they're committing.
Extradition would be a lot easier, too.
(Of course, we could just find a few hundred IPs this guy hijacked in Australia, turn them over, and have him locked up there his entire life, instead.
)
Although as you have rightly noted extradition is extremely difficult, especially when you consider some of the countries where spammers are currently hiding.
However, that is all moot because no amount of law enforcement, threats, or even executions will stop the spammers.
And why is that, you might ask?
Because no law enforcement tactic addresses the underlying problem that drives spam.
For every spammer kidnapped, thrown in jail, murdered, etc... there are many, many, more waiting to take his place.
Even more so, there are many people who want his money.
In short, spam is an economic problem.
If you really give a damn about the problem, and want to do something more than just make yourself feel better, you would pay attention to the economics that drive spam.
Spammers didn't choose their profession to piss you off - they did it to make money.
If you want to stop spam, do something about the profits and the problem will go away on its own.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288532</id>
	<title>Re:No, it's not an economic problem</title>
	<author>DavidTC</author>
	<datestamp>1259660640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are 100 correct.</p><p>
Antispam laws were useful in exactly one way: They require 'legit' spam to be identifiable. That in and of itself was completely pointless in solving the problem.</p><p>
What it did accomplish, though, was to make it where we could find 'legit' companies, and either get their ISP to cut them off, or get their ISP's ISP to cut their ISP off, etc.</p><p>
So, ironically, laws that were asserted would make some forms of spamming legal have entirely resulted in 'legit' spam going away.</p><p>
A lot of people still think it's 1998 and spamming is still some quasilegal thing going on, which results in <b>completely moronic</b> discussions here about free speech and CAN-SPAM.</p><p>
Those people need to be hit with a cluebat. So here it is:<br> <b>PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE COMMENTING ON SPAMMING OR YOU ARE WRONG</b>:</p><p>
Almost no spam, whatsoever, is legal. And it has nothing to do with spamming laws.</p><p>
It is because almost every single spam, 99\% of the stuff actually defined as unsolicited bulk email (And not things people signed up for and and forget, or newsletters people didn't opt out of when giving their email.) is 100\%, absolutely, unquestionable illegal, sent via an illegally hijacked computer, thus committing a felony.</p><p>
<b>PERIOD</b>.</p><p>
This isn't subject to debate, this isn't some esoteric debate about UCE vs. UBE, or free speech, or opt-out vs. opt-in vs. confirmed out-in. Almost every single message, 99.99999\% of the spam out there, as part of the sending process, including committing a felony that has nothing to do with 'spamming'. A felony, I might add, that is almost certainly a felony in any random jurisdiction anywhere in the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are 100 correct .
Antispam laws were useful in exactly one way : They require 'legit ' spam to be identifiable .
That in and of itself was completely pointless in solving the problem .
What it did accomplish , though , was to make it where we could find 'legit ' companies , and either get their ISP to cut them off , or get their ISP 's ISP to cut their ISP off , etc .
So , ironically , laws that were asserted would make some forms of spamming legal have entirely resulted in 'legit ' spam going away .
A lot of people still think it 's 1998 and spamming is still some quasilegal thing going on , which results in completely moronic discussions here about free speech and CAN-SPAM .
Those people need to be hit with a cluebat .
So here it is : PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE COMMENTING ON SPAMMING OR YOU ARE WRONG : Almost no spam , whatsoever , is legal .
And it has nothing to do with spamming laws .
It is because almost every single spam , 99 \ % of the stuff actually defined as unsolicited bulk email ( And not things people signed up for and and forget , or newsletters people did n't opt out of when giving their email .
) is 100 \ % , absolutely , unquestionable illegal , sent via an illegally hijacked computer , thus committing a felony .
PERIOD . This is n't subject to debate , this is n't some esoteric debate about UCE vs. UBE , or free speech , or opt-out vs. opt-in vs. confirmed out-in .
Almost every single message , 99.99999 \ % of the spam out there , as part of the sending process , including committing a felony that has nothing to do with 'spamming' .
A felony , I might add , that is almost certainly a felony in any random jurisdiction anywhere in the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are 100 correct.
Antispam laws were useful in exactly one way: They require 'legit' spam to be identifiable.
That in and of itself was completely pointless in solving the problem.
What it did accomplish, though, was to make it where we could find 'legit' companies, and either get their ISP to cut them off, or get their ISP's ISP to cut their ISP off, etc.
So, ironically, laws that were asserted would make some forms of spamming legal have entirely resulted in 'legit' spam going away.
A lot of people still think it's 1998 and spamming is still some quasilegal thing going on, which results in completely moronic discussions here about free speech and CAN-SPAM.
Those people need to be hit with a cluebat.
So here it is: PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE COMMENTING ON SPAMMING OR YOU ARE WRONG:
Almost no spam, whatsoever, is legal.
And it has nothing to do with spamming laws.
It is because almost every single spam, 99\% of the stuff actually defined as unsolicited bulk email (And not things people signed up for and and forget, or newsletters people didn't opt out of when giving their email.
) is 100\%, absolutely, unquestionable illegal, sent via an illegally hijacked computer, thus committing a felony.
PERIOD.
This isn't subject to debate, this isn't some esoteric debate about UCE vs. UBE, or free speech, or opt-out vs. opt-in vs. confirmed out-in.
Almost every single message, 99.99999\% of the spam out there, as part of the sending process, including committing a felony that has nothing to do with 'spamming'.
A felony, I might add, that is almost certainly a felony in any random jurisdiction anywhere in the world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285630</id>
	<title>A fine?  Seriously?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259693460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the fuck is a fine going to do?  You think the kingpin of the LARGEST SPAM OPERATION IN THE WORLD doesn't have $16 million lying around?  He'll pay the fine and go back to making more than that a week.</p><p>All we're doing is teaching spammers that, even if we do find out who they are and successfully convict them, they'll still just get a slap on the wrist.  Put the fucker in jail and let him rot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the fuck is a fine going to do ?
You think the kingpin of the LARGEST SPAM OPERATION IN THE WORLD does n't have $ 16 million lying around ?
He 'll pay the fine and go back to making more than that a week.All we 're doing is teaching spammers that , even if we do find out who they are and successfully convict them , they 'll still just get a slap on the wrist .
Put the fucker in jail and let him rot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the fuck is a fine going to do?
You think the kingpin of the LARGEST SPAM OPERATION IN THE WORLD doesn't have $16 million lying around?
He'll pay the fine and go back to making more than that a week.All we're doing is teaching spammers that, even if we do find out who they are and successfully convict them, they'll still just get a slap on the wrist.
Put the fucker in jail and let him rot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287234</id>
	<title>RecycleDirect</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1259698800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The USPS should offer RecycleDirect service.  With RecycleDirect, you specify which classes of mail are automatically forwarded to the regional mixed paper recycling center nearest the sender.  RecycleDirect mail will be diverted at the first sorting post office directly to the recycling center.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The USPS should offer RecycleDirect service .
With RecycleDirect , you specify which classes of mail are automatically forwarded to the regional mixed paper recycling center nearest the sender .
RecycleDirect mail will be diverted at the first sorting post office directly to the recycling center .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The USPS should offer RecycleDirect service.
With RecycleDirect, you specify which classes of mail are automatically forwarded to the regional mixed paper recycling center nearest the sender.
RecycleDirect mail will be diverted at the first sorting post office directly to the recycling center.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286408</id>
	<title>but</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1259696160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but saddam gassed his own computers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but saddam gassed his own computers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but saddam gassed his own computers</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285346</id>
	<title>Re:And Yet He Won't Pay a Penny</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1259692320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... so he&rsquo;d have to be extradited, unless he foolishly decided to come here for some reason</p></div><p>Oh, that's easy. Just send him an email claiming to be from a former New Zealand prince and ambassador to the US, who has $1 million locked up in a US bank account which can't be accessed unless someone travels to the US to make the withdrawal on his behalf.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... so he    d have to be extradited , unless he foolishly decided to come here for some reasonOh , that 's easy .
Just send him an email claiming to be from a former New Zealand prince and ambassador to the US , who has $ 1 million locked up in a US bank account which ca n't be accessed unless someone travels to the US to make the withdrawal on his behalf .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... so he’d have to be extradited, unless he foolishly decided to come here for some reasonOh, that's easy.
Just send him an email claiming to be from a former New Zealand prince and ambassador to the US, who has $1 million locked up in a US bank account which can't be accessed unless someone travels to the US to make the withdrawal on his behalf.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286676</id>
	<title>Who cares, get the people who send me junk mail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259697120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do I really care about SPAM?<br>Not nearly as much as I do junk mail.<br>Why?  I pay for my junk mail.<br>It is delivered for next to nothing by the United States Postal Service.<br>I pay taxes therefor I am actually paying for the delivery of this garbage.<br>They are just like spam, they try to look legitimate to trick you into opening them.<br>Also, they are more hazardous to the environment than spam.<br>I get NetFlix.  If I don't have a new netflix due in the mail I don't get my mail.  Why... because ALL of it is garbage.<br>I pay all my bills online.  My car payment, everything.  It is all garbage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do I really care about SPAM ? Not nearly as much as I do junk mail.Why ?
I pay for my junk mail.It is delivered for next to nothing by the United States Postal Service.I pay taxes therefor I am actually paying for the delivery of this garbage.They are just like spam , they try to look legitimate to trick you into opening them.Also , they are more hazardous to the environment than spam.I get NetFlix .
If I do n't have a new netflix due in the mail I do n't get my mail .
Why... because ALL of it is garbage.I pay all my bills online .
My car payment , everything .
It is all garbage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do I really care about SPAM?Not nearly as much as I do junk mail.Why?
I pay for my junk mail.It is delivered for next to nothing by the United States Postal Service.I pay taxes therefor I am actually paying for the delivery of this garbage.They are just like spam, they try to look legitimate to trick you into opening them.Also, they are more hazardous to the environment than spam.I get NetFlix.
If I don't have a new netflix due in the mail I don't get my mail.
Why... because ALL of it is garbage.I pay all my bills online.
My car payment, everything.
It is all garbage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30290254</id>
	<title>Re:And Yet He Won't Pay a Penny</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259667960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would kick in $200 (of the $1200 it would take) for a plane trip to a marketing seminar in Canada... assuming it went via LAX.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would kick in $ 200 ( of the $ 1200 it would take ) for a plane trip to a marketing seminar in Canada... assuming it went via LAX .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would kick in $200 (of the $1200 it would take) for a plane trip to a marketing seminar in Canada... assuming it went via LAX.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288072</id>
	<title>Re:Damn moronic 'anti-spam' laws.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259658780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Did he actually commit unauthorized access? Wouldn&rsquo;t that depend on whether he created the botnet, or merely rented it?</p></div><p>Even if he just rented it he's illegally accessing the system, he's just not the first one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did he actually commit unauthorized access ?
Wouldn    t that depend on whether he created the botnet , or merely rented it ? Even if he just rented it he 's illegally accessing the system , he 's just not the first one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did he actually commit unauthorized access?
Wouldn’t that depend on whether he created the botnet, or merely rented it?Even if he just rented it he's illegally accessing the system, he's just not the first one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285110</id>
	<title>Re:Additionally</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259691240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Hello, this is Homer Simpson aka Happy Dude! The court has ordered me to call every person in town to apologize for my telemarketing scam. I'm sorry. If you can find it in your heart to forgive me, send one dollar to: Sorry Dude, 742 Evergreen Terrace, Springfield. You have the power!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Hello , this is Homer Simpson aka Happy Dude !
The court has ordered me to call every person in town to apologize for my telemarketing scam .
I 'm sorry .
If you can find it in your heart to forgive me , send one dollar to : Sorry Dude , 742 Evergreen Terrace , Springfield .
You have the power !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Hello, this is Homer Simpson aka Happy Dude!
The court has ordered me to call every person in town to apologize for my telemarketing scam.
I'm sorry.
If you can find it in your heart to forgive me, send one dollar to: Sorry Dude, 742 Evergreen Terrace, Springfield.
You have the power!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287522</id>
	<title>No, it's not an economic problem</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1259699940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
<i>spam is an economic problem</i>
</p><p>
No, it's not.  Not since all the ways to do it without committing felonies were stopped.  Spamming today is organized crime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>spam is an economic problem No , it 's not .
Not since all the ways to do it without committing felonies were stopped .
Spamming today is organized crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
spam is an economic problem

No, it's not.
Not since all the ways to do it without committing felonies were stopped.
Spamming today is organized crime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285636</id>
	<title>Quick question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259693520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where exactly does the 16 million go? Does the federal government get it simply because they have to jurisdiction to make said case? Shouldn't it go to the people who were actually subject to the damages caused by the spam?</p><p>Wait, who am I kidding...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where exactly does the 16 million go ?
Does the federal government get it simply because they have to jurisdiction to make said case ?
Should n't it go to the people who were actually subject to the damages caused by the spam ? Wait , who am I kidding.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where exactly does the 16 million go?
Does the federal government get it simply because they have to jurisdiction to make said case?
Shouldn't it go to the people who were actually subject to the damages caused by the spam?Wait, who am I kidding...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286552</id>
	<title>Re:Damn moronic 'anti-spam' laws.</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1259696640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why aren't we?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...that's a good question actually, and I think I might have a few answers.</p><p>Spammers will always have safe harbor in countries that hate the US...countries that might actually be happy to let the spammers do the dirty work of flipping the bird to the americans for them.</p><p>Also, all the advertisers pushing their products by spam obviously are profiting or they wouldn't be using spam as a medium of advertising.</p><p>Not to mention that exchange fees net the credit card co's a handsome profit...and they also have a powerful lobby machine, at least one good enough to push through their pet changes to the bankruptcy laws.</p><p>ISPs that sign pink contracts can profit handsomely from spammers as well.</p><p>So there's quite a few people with a vested interest in the deluge of spam continuing, some of which can quite effectively hold enforcement actions hostage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are n't we ?
...that 's a good question actually , and I think I might have a few answers.Spammers will always have safe harbor in countries that hate the US...countries that might actually be happy to let the spammers do the dirty work of flipping the bird to the americans for them.Also , all the advertisers pushing their products by spam obviously are profiting or they would n't be using spam as a medium of advertising.Not to mention that exchange fees net the credit card co 's a handsome profit...and they also have a powerful lobby machine , at least one good enough to push through their pet changes to the bankruptcy laws.ISPs that sign pink contracts can profit handsomely from spammers as well.So there 's quite a few people with a vested interest in the deluge of spam continuing , some of which can quite effectively hold enforcement actions hostage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why aren't we?
...that's a good question actually, and I think I might have a few answers.Spammers will always have safe harbor in countries that hate the US...countries that might actually be happy to let the spammers do the dirty work of flipping the bird to the americans for them.Also, all the advertisers pushing their products by spam obviously are profiting or they wouldn't be using spam as a medium of advertising.Not to mention that exchange fees net the credit card co's a handsome profit...and they also have a powerful lobby machine, at least one good enough to push through their pet changes to the bankruptcy laws.ISPs that sign pink contracts can profit handsomely from spammers as well.So there's quite a few people with a vested interest in the deluge of spam continuing, some of which can quite effectively hold enforcement actions hostage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286200</id>
	<title>Re:Completely the WRONG tactic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259695500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spam is an idiot problem... if we had people that were smarter *about* using computers, we wouldn't have people buying crap, clicking on links, etc... If people didn't click links or buy stuff through spam messages,  spammers wouldn't make money doing it and PRESTO they'd stop (or at least be in greatly reduced numbers.</p><p>By properly educating people on the use of computers and that no, every email that comes to you is from someone you know/trust/want to care about, we will be able to get rid of the reason for spam.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spam is an idiot problem... if we had people that were smarter * about * using computers , we would n't have people buying crap , clicking on links , etc... If people did n't click links or buy stuff through spam messages , spammers would n't make money doing it and PRESTO they 'd stop ( or at least be in greatly reduced numbers.By properly educating people on the use of computers and that no , every email that comes to you is from someone you know/trust/want to care about , we will be able to get rid of the reason for spam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spam is an idiot problem... if we had people that were smarter *about* using computers, we wouldn't have people buying crap, clicking on links, etc... If people didn't click links or buy stuff through spam messages,  spammers wouldn't make money doing it and PRESTO they'd stop (or at least be in greatly reduced numbers.By properly educating people on the use of computers and that no, every email that comes to you is from someone you know/trust/want to care about, we will be able to get rid of the reason for spam.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284912</id>
	<title>what was that???</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259690340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry I almost missed the post due to the spam</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry I almost missed the post due to the spam</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry I almost missed the post due to the spam</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287764</id>
	<title>Re:Damn moronic 'anti-spam' laws.</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1259700840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>That's 264,784 UNAUTHORIZED COMPUTER ACCESS FELONIES.</i></p><p><i>Why the FUCK are we 'fining' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies? We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality!</i></p><p>One word: XCP. Far worse than spammers pwning your PC, but nobody spent a day in jail over it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's 264,784 UNAUTHORIZED COMPUTER ACCESS FELONIES.Why the FUCK are we 'fining ' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies ?
We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality ! One word : XCP .
Far worse than spammers pwning your PC , but nobody spent a day in jail over it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's 264,784 UNAUTHORIZED COMPUTER ACCESS FELONIES.Why the FUCK are we 'fining' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies?
We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality!One word: XCP.
Far worse than spammers pwning your PC, but nobody spent a day in jail over it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287164</id>
	<title>Sell, Sell, Sell</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259698620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since their advertising is ending. Sell your Viagra and Cialis stock today. And what about that poor guy in South Africa with all that Bank money. Who will help him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since their advertising is ending .
Sell your Viagra and Cialis stock today .
And what about that poor guy in South Africa with all that Bank money .
Who will help him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since their advertising is ending.
Sell your Viagra and Cialis stock today.
And what about that poor guy in South Africa with all that Bank money.
Who will help him.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285868</id>
	<title>Re:Damn moronic 'anti-spam' laws.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259694240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lets face it Australia is a prison colony anyway, so by definition he is already doing time<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets face it Australia is a prison colony anyway , so by definition he is already doing time : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets face it Australia is a prison colony anyway, so by definition he is already doing time :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285658</id>
	<title>Re:And Yet He Won't Pay a Penny</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259693580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>&ndash; so he&rsquo;d have to be extradited, unless he foolishly decided to come here for some reason</p></div><p>Dude LOVES In N Out burger.  I don't know if you've ever had it, but 16 million is a small price to taste In N Out again.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>   so he    d have to be extradited , unless he foolishly decided to come here for some reasonDude LOVES In N Out burger .
I do n't know if you 've ever had it , but 16 million is a small price to taste In N Out again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>– so he’d have to be extradited, unless he foolishly decided to come here for some reasonDude LOVES In N Out burger.
I don't know if you've ever had it, but 16 million is a small price to taste In N Out again.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288256</id>
	<title>Your data are incorrect</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1259659560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I pay for my junk mail.<br>It is delivered for next to nothing by the United States Postal Service.<br>I pay taxes therefor I am actually paying for the delivery of this garbage.<br></i></p><p>Actually you don't. The USPS is self-supporting. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United\_States\_Postal\_Service" title="wikipedia.org">Since its reorganization into an independent organization, the USPS has become self-sufficient and has not received taxpayer-dollars since the early 1980s</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I pay for my junk mail.It is delivered for next to nothing by the United States Postal Service.I pay taxes therefor I am actually paying for the delivery of this garbage.Actually you do n't .
The USPS is self-supporting .
Since its reorganization into an independent organization , the USPS has become self-sufficient and has not received taxpayer-dollars since the early 1980s [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I pay for my junk mail.It is delivered for next to nothing by the United States Postal Service.I pay taxes therefor I am actually paying for the delivery of this garbage.Actually you don't.
The USPS is self-supporting.
Since its reorganization into an independent organization, the USPS has become self-sufficient and has not received taxpayer-dollars since the early 1980s [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908</id>
	<title>And Yet He Won't Pay a Penny</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259690340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>

The <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8388737.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">BBC coverage</a> [bbc.co.uk] correctly notes:<p><div class="quote"><p>Mr Atkinson will only have to pay his part of the $15.15m fine <b>if he enters the US.</b></p> </div><p>I guess all we can do is pray for extradition?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The BBC coverage [ bbc.co.uk ] correctly notes : Mr Atkinson will only have to pay his part of the $ 15.15m fine if he enters the US .
I guess all we can do is pray for extradition ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

The BBC coverage [bbc.co.uk] correctly notes:Mr Atkinson will only have to pay his part of the $15.15m fine if he enters the US.
I guess all we can do is pray for extradition?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287596</id>
	<title>Re:Damn moronic 'anti-spam' laws.</title>
	<author>Interoperable</author>
	<datestamp>1259700120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd say an appropriate punishment would be community service. We could make him write GPL'd code for a distributed computing project dedicated to advancing various scientific goals. On one hand, he's clearly had experience with distributed computing. On the other hand: </p><p>Dear freind;</p><p>Warm salutations and delicious felicitations to you. I am a Nigerian proffesor trying to solve caancer. If you can help I will transfer $1M to you on complting the project. Please send me your IP aderres and open ports 11-61234 on you firewall if you want the moeny. it is very urgent tha you you do not hesitate or i may not be able to pay you the money. If are intrsted send me your bank account information and I will email you the executabel.</p><p>Heartfelt sympathies and salivating wiahes, Lance Atkinson.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say an appropriate punishment would be community service .
We could make him write GPL 'd code for a distributed computing project dedicated to advancing various scientific goals .
On one hand , he 's clearly had experience with distributed computing .
On the other hand : Dear freind ; Warm salutations and delicious felicitations to you .
I am a Nigerian proffesor trying to solve caancer .
If you can help I will transfer $ 1M to you on complting the project .
Please send me your IP aderres and open ports 11-61234 on you firewall if you want the moeny .
it is very urgent tha you you do not hesitate or i may not be able to pay you the money .
If are intrsted send me your bank account information and I will email you the executabel.Heartfelt sympathies and salivating wiahes , Lance Atkinson .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say an appropriate punishment would be community service.
We could make him write GPL'd code for a distributed computing project dedicated to advancing various scientific goals.
On one hand, he's clearly had experience with distributed computing.
On the other hand: Dear freind;Warm salutations and delicious felicitations to you.
I am a Nigerian proffesor trying to solve caancer.
If you can help I will transfer $1M to you on complting the project.
Please send me your IP aderres and open ports 11-61234 on you firewall if you want the moeny.
it is very urgent tha you you do not hesitate or i may not be able to pay you the money.
If are intrsted send me your bank account information and I will email you the executabel.Heartfelt sympathies and salivating wiahes, Lance Atkinson.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287814</id>
	<title>Re:Completely the WRONG tactic</title>
	<author>DavidTC</author>
	<datestamp>1259701020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We don't need capital punishment, or other such things.</p><p>
We just need to enforce the laws exactly as they stand. It's something like a <b>minimum</b> of six months in prison for each access, so in practice spammers would end up in prison for <b>thousands</b> of years.</p><p>
Of course, parole and good behavior would mean they could get out in 200-300 years...we're not heartless.</p><p>
That the risk/reward structure is so far out of wack is very puzzling. You think some state DA would have a lot of fun arresting one of these guys and charging (and convicting them) of the thousands of unauthorized access made in that state.</p><p>
Can you imagine the ads they would run for reelection based on their conviction ratio? 'On average, DA in this state have a 80\% conviction rate of about 300 felonies. I managed to convict people of 99.92\% of the 3000 felony charges I bought. And I did it with the same budget. Reelect me in 2010...'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We do n't need capital punishment , or other such things .
We just need to enforce the laws exactly as they stand .
It 's something like a minimum of six months in prison for each access , so in practice spammers would end up in prison for thousands of years .
Of course , parole and good behavior would mean they could get out in 200-300 years...we 're not heartless .
That the risk/reward structure is so far out of wack is very puzzling .
You think some state DA would have a lot of fun arresting one of these guys and charging ( and convicting them ) of the thousands of unauthorized access made in that state .
Can you imagine the ads they would run for reelection based on their conviction ratio ?
'On average , DA in this state have a 80 \ % conviction rate of about 300 felonies .
I managed to convict people of 99.92 \ % of the 3000 felony charges I bought .
And I did it with the same budget .
Reelect me in 2010...'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We don't need capital punishment, or other such things.
We just need to enforce the laws exactly as they stand.
It's something like a minimum of six months in prison for each access, so in practice spammers would end up in prison for thousands of years.
Of course, parole and good behavior would mean they could get out in 200-300 years...we're not heartless.
That the risk/reward structure is so far out of wack is very puzzling.
You think some state DA would have a lot of fun arresting one of these guys and charging (and convicting them) of the thousands of unauthorized access made in that state.
Can you imagine the ads they would run for reelection based on their conviction ratio?
'On average, DA in this state have a 80\% conviction rate of about 300 felonies.
I managed to convict people of 99.92\% of the 3000 felony charges I bought.
And I did it with the same budget.
Reelect me in 2010...'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30294336</id>
	<title>Re:And Yet He Won't Pay a Penny</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259696700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>InAionGold.com Provides 24*7 Hours Aion Gold Online Store and excellent customer Aion online gold service For fast,safe Aion Gold,Cheap Aion Gold.Just order as best Aion Gold items as you want in our shop.Enjoy Aion time!<a href="http://www.gold4power.com/" title="gold4power.com" rel="nofollow"> <strong>cheap wow gold</strong> </a> [gold4power.com] Karadzic <a href="http://www.wowgoldone.com/" title="wowgoldone.com" rel="nofollow"> <strong>cheap wow gold</strong> </a> [wowgoldone.com]has refused to  <a href="http://www.aion4gold.com/" title="aion4gold.com" rel="nofollow"> <strong>aion gold</strong> </a> [aion4gold.com] appear in court
<a href="http://www.metin2sale.com/" title="metin2sale.com" rel="nofollow"> <strong>metin2 yang</strong> </a> [metin2sale.com] today,
<a href="http://www.aion4gold.com/" title="aion4gold.com" rel="nofollow"> <strong>aion4gold</strong> </a> [aion4gold.com] will face life  <a href="http://www.cheapaion.com/" title="cheapaion.com" rel="nofollow"> <strong>Aion Kina</strong> </a> [cheapaion.com] in good <a href="http://www.cheapaion.com/" title="cheapaion.com" rel="nofollow"> <strong>Aion Gold</strong> </a> [cheapaion.com] mood if convicted <a href="http://www.vipaiongold.com/" title="vipaiongold.com" rel="nofollow"> <strong>aion gold</strong> </a> [vipaiongold.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>InAionGold.com Provides 24 * 7 Hours Aion Gold Online Store and excellent customer Aion online gold service For fast,safe Aion Gold,Cheap Aion Gold.Just order as best Aion Gold items as you want in our shop.Enjoy Aion time !
cheap wow gold [ gold4power.com ] Karadzic cheap wow gold [ wowgoldone.com ] has refused to aion gold [ aion4gold.com ] appear in court metin2 yang [ metin2sale.com ] today , aion4gold [ aion4gold.com ] will face life Aion Kina [ cheapaion.com ] in good Aion Gold [ cheapaion.com ] mood if convicted aion gold [ vipaiongold.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>InAionGold.com Provides 24*7 Hours Aion Gold Online Store and excellent customer Aion online gold service For fast,safe Aion Gold,Cheap Aion Gold.Just order as best Aion Gold items as you want in our shop.Enjoy Aion time!
cheap wow gold  [gold4power.com] Karadzic  cheap wow gold  [wowgoldone.com]has refused to   aion gold  [aion4gold.com] appear in court
 metin2 yang  [metin2sale.com] today,
 aion4gold  [aion4gold.com] will face life   Aion Kina  [cheapaion.com] in good  Aion Gold  [cheapaion.com] mood if convicted  aion gold  [vipaiongold.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287114</id>
	<title>PLUs 2,1 TROLL)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259698440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>sho0t the lOudest</htmltext>
<tokenext>sho0t the lOudest</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sho0t the lOudest</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288386</id>
	<title>Say Hi to Peter. Message from a Kiwi</title>
	<author>Master Moose</author>
	<datestamp>1259660040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and like most NZers in trouble with the law, moved to Australia. Australia does have a extradition treaty with the U.S.</p><p>Oh, so you know Peter then. Say hi to him for me please will you</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and like most NZers in trouble with the law , moved to Australia .
Australia does have a extradition treaty with the U.S.Oh , so you know Peter then .
Say hi to him for me please will you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and like most NZers in trouble with the law, moved to Australia.
Australia does have a extradition treaty with the U.S.Oh, so you know Peter then.
Say hi to him for me please will you</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286820</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30290254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30291390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288118
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30292410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30294336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30292878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285766
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30294954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_01_1648223_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_1648223.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285110
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_1648223.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288466
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_1648223.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_1648223.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287234
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_1648223.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30292878
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_1648223.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30291390
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_1648223.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287688
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30294336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285034
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30290254
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285346
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_1648223.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285088
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_1648223.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30284932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_1648223.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288832
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_01_1648223.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286982
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288118
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285906
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286594
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286336
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286600
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287814
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286200
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287522
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30288532
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30287704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30292410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30294954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30286552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_01_1648223.30285868
</commentlist>
</conversation>
