<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_16_1635229</id>
	<title>Sam Ramji Answers Your Questions</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1260950400000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>A couple weeks back you <a href="http://interviews.slashdot.org/story/09/11/17/1619205/Ask-Sam-Ramji-About-the-CodePlex-Foundation">asked some questions</a> of new CodePlex Foundation President Sam Ramji.  He has responded and expressed interest in participating in the discussion at some point.  If you have follow up questions feel free to drop them in the discussion so he can address them as he has time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A couple weeks back you asked some questions of new CodePlex Foundation President Sam Ramji .
He has responded and expressed interest in participating in the discussion at some point .
If you have follow up questions feel free to drop them in the discussion so he can address them as he has time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A couple weeks back you asked some questions of new CodePlex Foundation President Sam Ramji.
He has responded and expressed interest in participating in the discussion at some point.
If you have follow up questions feel free to drop them in the discussion so he can address them as he has time.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463318</id>
	<title>Question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259659920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>When did Microsoft stop raping its customers?</htmltext>
<tokenext>When did Microsoft stop raping its customers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When did Microsoft stop raping its customers?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463016</id>
	<title>Err, yeah... love that 'governance' part.</title>
	<author>Penguinisto</author>
	<datestamp>1259658900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...and with community open source projects that need a contribution and governance model and seek corporate contribution.</p></div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...so if there's no corporate angle and Microsoft can't exercise "governance" over it...</p><p>Seriously, do these guys even know WTF they want to do with this thing (aside from using it to shore up<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET and as a cudgel against their competitors)? Because as it stands right now, Why the hell would I (as an individual OR as a corporation) even want to bother? There's too many free and far more popular alternatives out there.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and with community open source projects that need a contribution and governance model and seek corporate contribution .
...so if there 's no corporate angle and Microsoft ca n't exercise " governance " over it...Seriously , do these guys even know WTF they want to do with this thing ( aside from using it to shore up .NET and as a cudgel against their competitors ) ?
Because as it stands right now , Why the hell would I ( as an individual OR as a corporation ) even want to bother ?
There 's too many free and far more popular alternatives out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...and with community open source projects that need a contribution and governance model and seek corporate contribution.
...so if there's no corporate angle and Microsoft can't exercise "governance" over it...Seriously, do these guys even know WTF they want to do with this thing (aside from using it to shore up .NET and as a cudgel against their competitors)?
Because as it stands right now, Why the hell would I (as an individual OR as a corporation) even want to bother?
There's too many free and far more popular alternatives out there.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30476890</id>
	<title>Oh boy!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261079700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"you may want to consider that our directors and advisors include Monty Widenius, Miguel de Icaza..."</p><p>Nuff said.</p><p>I'll trade my ten foot pole in for a half mile force field.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" you may want to consider that our directors and advisors include Monty Widenius , Miguel de Icaza... " Nuff said.I 'll trade my ten foot pole in for a half mile force field .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"you may want to consider that our directors and advisors include Monty Widenius, Miguel de Icaza..."Nuff said.I'll trade my ten foot pole in for a half mile force field.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462956</id>
	<title>Um</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259658720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a question.  Were you born without a soul?  Were you spawned in the Fires of Damnation to be used by the Satan the Microsoft?  I mean, I can't think of another explanation for this stunt other than to muddy the waters and play more havoc with open source.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a question .
Were you born without a soul ?
Were you spawned in the Fires of Damnation to be used by the Satan the Microsoft ?
I mean , I ca n't think of another explanation for this stunt other than to muddy the waters and play more havoc with open source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a question.
Were you born without a soul?
Were you spawned in the Fires of Damnation to be used by the Satan the Microsoft?
I mean, I can't think of another explanation for this stunt other than to muddy the waters and play more havoc with open source.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463564</id>
	<title>Okay...</title>
	<author>Ukab the Great</author>
	<datestamp>1259660760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I realize that we&rsquo;ve successfully confused people (yes, this is a sardonic comment) by using the same name as Microsoft&rsquo;s forge (codeplex.com). I regret the confusion because it has made it a bit harder to explain the Foundation to those who are already aware of the forge. We may revisit the name in future generations of the Board of Directors.</p></div></blockquote><p>This statement doesn't make understanding his organization's relationship to microsoft any less confusing. Can anyone fluent in corporate doublespeak translate?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I realize that we    ve successfully confused people ( yes , this is a sardonic comment ) by using the same name as Microsoft    s forge ( codeplex.com ) .
I regret the confusion because it has made it a bit harder to explain the Foundation to those who are already aware of the forge .
We may revisit the name in future generations of the Board of Directors.This statement does n't make understanding his organization 's relationship to microsoft any less confusing .
Can anyone fluent in corporate doublespeak translate ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I realize that we’ve successfully confused people (yes, this is a sardonic comment) by using the same name as Microsoft’s forge (codeplex.com).
I regret the confusion because it has made it a bit harder to explain the Foundation to those who are already aware of the forge.
We may revisit the name in future generations of the Board of Directors.This statement doesn't make understanding his organization's relationship to microsoft any less confusing.
Can anyone fluent in corporate doublespeak translate?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465304</id>
	<title>Re:what about my question?</title>
	<author>PopeRatzo</author>
	<datestamp>1259666640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those Evil Dead movies <i>rawk</i> though.</p><p>I didn't know he was involved in software too.  He does seem like kind of a dick in this interview however.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those Evil Dead movies rawk though.I did n't know he was involved in software too .
He does seem like kind of a dick in this interview however .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those Evil Dead movies rawk though.I didn't know he was involved in software too.
He does seem like kind of a dick in this interview however.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30468694</id>
	<title>Re:what about my question?</title>
	<author>etrading76</author>
	<datestamp>1259685780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>adies and Gentlemen, Christmas sales, there are exquisite gift, here

are the most fashionable and most noble gift, please come to order.For

details, please consult: <a href="http://www.etradingitems.com/" title="etradingitems.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.etradingitems.com/</a> [etradingitems.com]

 And old customers can also enjoy the gifts sent by my company in a can

also request to our company. Gifts lot,Buy more get the more
Best quality, Best reputation , Best services

Quality is our Dignity; Service is our Lift.

Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35
Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&amp;g) $35
Tshirts (Polo<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,ed hardy,lacoste) $16

<a href="http://www.etradingitems.com/" title="etradingitems.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.etradingitems.com/</a> [etradingitems.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>adies and Gentlemen , Christmas sales , there are exquisite gift , here are the most fashionable and most noble gift , please come to order.For details , please consult : http : //www.etradingitems.com/ [ etradingitems.com ] And old customers can also enjoy the gifts sent by my company in a can also request to our company .
Gifts lot,Buy more get the more Best quality , Best reputation , Best services Quality is our Dignity ; Service is our Lift .
Nike shox ( R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3 ) $ 35 Handbags ( Coach lv fendi d&amp;g ) $ 35 Tshirts ( Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste ) $ 16 http : //www.etradingitems.com/ [ etradingitems.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>adies and Gentlemen, Christmas sales, there are exquisite gift, here

are the most fashionable and most noble gift, please come to order.For

details, please consult: http://www.etradingitems.com/ [etradingitems.com]

 And old customers can also enjoy the gifts sent by my company in a can

also request to our company.
Gifts lot,Buy more get the more
Best quality, Best reputation , Best services

Quality is our Dignity; Service is our Lift.
Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35
Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&amp;g) $35
Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16

http://www.etradingitems.com/ [etradingitems.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30519036</id>
	<title>Re:Why Should I Trust Microsoft?</title>
	<author>KwKSilver</author>
	<datestamp>1261405020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The silence of Ramji's non-reply is deafening.  But then, what <i>could</i> he say?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The silence of Ramji 's non-reply is deafening .
But then , what could he say ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The silence of Ramji's non-reply is deafening.
But then, what could he say?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30468612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462796</id>
	<title>Lame</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259658180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My question wasn't answered.</p><p>Dear Samwise Gamgee:  Why didn't you ever come out to Frodo?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My question was n't answered.Dear Samwise Gamgee : Why did n't you ever come out to Frodo ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My question wasn't answered.Dear Samwise Gamgee:  Why didn't you ever come out to Frodo?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462922</id>
	<title>woo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259658600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>broke my heart at the codeplex, yes you did</p><p>(panic at the codeplex!)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>broke my heart at the codeplex , yes you did ( panic at the codeplex !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>broke my heart at the codeplex, yes you did(panic at the codeplex!
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463258</id>
	<title>Why so cosy with open source... except Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259659740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The answer is that the whole point of Microsoft championing 'open source' is to take away the open source application projects from Linux and so kill the platform. It's working too!</p><p>They would like to have killed all the open source application projects as well but they were too overwhelmed, and for a while they thought that they might sink under the onslaught.</p><p>In desperation they put plan B into action and instead of attempting to kill off the all open source, aimed at the heart of the Linux OS instead. Without Linux on the playing field, Microsoft will be in a position to put the squeeze on the application projects. Won't be so easy to bargain when Windows is the only viable platform for your product. All those government departments which negotiated discounts merely by threatening to move to Linux will have to kiss their discounts goodbye. Independent software projects which compete with Microsoft proprietary products will have to go their own way - without an OS to support them.</p><p>Faint hearts are easily lured away.</p><p>You know it's true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The answer is that the whole point of Microsoft championing 'open source ' is to take away the open source application projects from Linux and so kill the platform .
It 's working too ! They would like to have killed all the open source application projects as well but they were too overwhelmed , and for a while they thought that they might sink under the onslaught.In desperation they put plan B into action and instead of attempting to kill off the all open source , aimed at the heart of the Linux OS instead .
Without Linux on the playing field , Microsoft will be in a position to put the squeeze on the application projects .
Wo n't be so easy to bargain when Windows is the only viable platform for your product .
All those government departments which negotiated discounts merely by threatening to move to Linux will have to kiss their discounts goodbye .
Independent software projects which compete with Microsoft proprietary products will have to go their own way - without an OS to support them.Faint hearts are easily lured away.You know it 's true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The answer is that the whole point of Microsoft championing 'open source' is to take away the open source application projects from Linux and so kill the platform.
It's working too!They would like to have killed all the open source application projects as well but they were too overwhelmed, and for a while they thought that they might sink under the onslaught.In desperation they put plan B into action and instead of attempting to kill off the all open source, aimed at the heart of the Linux OS instead.
Without Linux on the playing field, Microsoft will be in a position to put the squeeze on the application projects.
Won't be so easy to bargain when Windows is the only viable platform for your product.
All those government departments which negotiated discounts merely by threatening to move to Linux will have to kiss their discounts goodbye.
Independent software projects which compete with Microsoft proprietary products will have to go their own way - without an OS to support them.Faint hearts are easily lured away.You know it's true.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463234</id>
	<title>I thought you said Sam RAIMI.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259659680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That would have been a LOT more interesting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would have been a LOT more interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would have been a LOT more interesting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30474182</id>
	<title>This says it all...</title>
	<author>Joey Vegetables</author>
	<datestamp>1261068540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>that we are an open source and not a free software foundation</i> </p><p>For me that tells me everything I need to know.  I value free software for the freedom.  The fact that source is available is only one of the freedoms I would like my software to respect.  There are many others.  That Mr. Ramji understands the difference between "Open" and "Free," and explicitly adopts the former while rejecting the latter, tells me that he and by extension the CodePlex foundation are interested in freedom only for the incidental benefits it might bring, not for its own sake.  Which is fine for Open Source advocates, but not Free Software advocates such as myself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that we are an open source and not a free software foundation For me that tells me everything I need to know .
I value free software for the freedom .
The fact that source is available is only one of the freedoms I would like my software to respect .
There are many others .
That Mr. Ramji understands the difference between " Open " and " Free , " and explicitly adopts the former while rejecting the latter , tells me that he and by extension the CodePlex foundation are interested in freedom only for the incidental benefits it might bring , not for its own sake .
Which is fine for Open Source advocates , but not Free Software advocates such as myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> that we are an open source and not a free software foundation For me that tells me everything I need to know.
I value free software for the freedom.
The fact that source is available is only one of the freedoms I would like my software to respect.
There are many others.
That Mr. Ramji understands the difference between "Open" and "Free," and explicitly adopts the former while rejecting the latter, tells me that he and by extension the CodePlex foundation are interested in freedom only for the incidental benefits it might bring, not for its own sake.
Which is fine for Open Source advocates, but not Free Software advocates such as myself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178</id>
	<title>some history on Sam Ramji please</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1259659500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Something about the article seemed strange to me since I thought this guy had left Microsoft and that he was one of their internal trainees via Microsoft's Linux Lab.  I found articles about his departure from Microsoft in September of this year for a SV startup but this says that he's still with Microsoft. I even found a blog by Hilf, another MS trainee on how to defend against OSS using the MS Linux Lab which talks about Ramji's departure from Microsoft.<br><br>So who has more history on this guy?  And given Microsoft mantra of Windows everywhere and the fact that they don't write software for anything but Windows, "working with OSS" from this guy or any Microsoft exec is their way of saying 'working to diminish OSS in the marketplace'.<br><br>So anything this guy says, as a Microsoft employee, is hogwash and worth less than the electrons used to xmit it. IMO<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>Something about the article seemed strange to me since I thought this guy had left Microsoft and that he was one of their internal trainees via Microsoft 's Linux Lab .
I found articles about his departure from Microsoft in September of this year for a SV startup but this says that he 's still with Microsoft .
I even found a blog by Hilf , another MS trainee on how to defend against OSS using the MS Linux Lab which talks about Ramji 's departure from Microsoft.So who has more history on this guy ?
And given Microsoft mantra of Windows everywhere and the fact that they do n't write software for anything but Windows , " working with OSS " from this guy or any Microsoft exec is their way of saying 'working to diminish OSS in the marketplace'.So anything this guy says , as a Microsoft employee , is hogwash and worth less than the electrons used to xmit it .
IMOLoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Something about the article seemed strange to me since I thought this guy had left Microsoft and that he was one of their internal trainees via Microsoft's Linux Lab.
I found articles about his departure from Microsoft in September of this year for a SV startup but this says that he's still with Microsoft.
I even found a blog by Hilf, another MS trainee on how to defend against OSS using the MS Linux Lab which talks about Ramji's departure from Microsoft.So who has more history on this guy?
And given Microsoft mantra of Windows everywhere and the fact that they don't write software for anything but Windows, "working with OSS" from this guy or any Microsoft exec is their way of saying 'working to diminish OSS in the marketplace'.So anything this guy says, as a Microsoft employee, is hogwash and worth less than the electrons used to xmit it.
IMOLoB</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30467238</id>
	<title>Re:what about my question?</title>
	<author>Erinnys Tisiphone</author>
	<datestamp>1259675220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, at least every geek on the planet simultaneously thought the same thing. This dude really needs to change his name.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , at least every geek on the planet simultaneously thought the same thing .
This dude really needs to change his name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, at least every geek on the planet simultaneously thought the same thing.
This dude really needs to change his name.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30468612</id>
	<title>Why Should I Trust Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259685120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr><i>...what do you say to the inevitable flood of "advocates" who claim Microsoft is doing this sort of thing to subvert FOSS?</i> </p><p> <i>there will always be detractors who have knee-jerk reactions wherever Microsoft and open source are concerned.</i> </p><p>I think that an analogy might help you to understand why we foolish idiots question everything that Microsoft does.  Say that you've been in prison for 20 years and the whole while there's been this guy named "Bob".  From the very start any time someone drops soap in the shower Bob would be there, doing what Bob does best.  In the prison yard it is unusual for a day to pass without Bob shanking someone.</p><p>Time passed and Bob got older.  Shower times weren't as successful as they used to be and the shankings didn't always work out the way that Bob had planned.  One day, during shower time, Bob starts dropping bars of "free" soap on the floor, whilst wearing a weird, creepy grin...</p><p>The amount of trust I place in a person, thing or corporation is almost completely derived from what I know of their history.  I don't extend much trust to people that I have only known a short time, but I don't distrust them either.  The people who I do trust are those that have consistently shown themselves to be trustworthy over a period of time.  Also, I distrust people who have proven themselves to be untrustworthy through their actions.  Here's a small tip of the ice burg that is Microsoft's history:</p><ul>
<li>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,\_extend\_and\_extinguish</li><li>http://catb.org/~esr/halloween/</li><li>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardization\_of\_Office\_Open\_XML</li><li>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD\_code</li><li>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samizdat\_\%28book\%29</li><li>http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2006100801442692</li></ul><p>When people call me an idiot for not implicitly trusting Microsoft it causes me to trust both them and Microsoft even less (if that's possible in the later case).  It makes me think that the person is either an idiot or is playing an angle.</p><p>Instead of resorting to ad-hominem attacks why don't you try explaining to me why I should trust Microsoft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...what do you say to the inevitable flood of " advocates " who claim Microsoft is doing this sort of thing to subvert FOSS ?
there will always be detractors who have knee-jerk reactions wherever Microsoft and open source are concerned .
I think that an analogy might help you to understand why we foolish idiots question everything that Microsoft does .
Say that you 've been in prison for 20 years and the whole while there 's been this guy named " Bob " .
From the very start any time someone drops soap in the shower Bob would be there , doing what Bob does best .
In the prison yard it is unusual for a day to pass without Bob shanking someone.Time passed and Bob got older .
Shower times were n't as successful as they used to be and the shankings did n't always work out the way that Bob had planned .
One day , during shower time , Bob starts dropping bars of " free " soap on the floor , whilst wearing a weird , creepy grin...The amount of trust I place in a person , thing or corporation is almost completely derived from what I know of their history .
I do n't extend much trust to people that I have only known a short time , but I do n't distrust them either .
The people who I do trust are those that have consistently shown themselves to be trustworthy over a period of time .
Also , I distrust people who have proven themselves to be untrustworthy through their actions .
Here 's a small tip of the ice burg that is Microsoft 's history : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace , \ _extend \ _and \ _extinguishhttp : //catb.org/ ~ esr/halloween/http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardization \ _of \ _Office \ _Open \ _XMLhttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD \ _codehttp : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samizdat \ _ \ % 28book \ % 29http : //www.groklaw.net/article.php ? story = 2006100801442692When people call me an idiot for not implicitly trusting Microsoft it causes me to trust both them and Microsoft even less ( if that 's possible in the later case ) .
It makes me think that the person is either an idiot or is playing an angle.Instead of resorting to ad-hominem attacks why do n't you try explaining to me why I should trust Microsoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...what do you say to the inevitable flood of "advocates" who claim Microsoft is doing this sort of thing to subvert FOSS?
there will always be detractors who have knee-jerk reactions wherever Microsoft and open source are concerned.
I think that an analogy might help you to understand why we foolish idiots question everything that Microsoft does.
Say that you've been in prison for 20 years and the whole while there's been this guy named "Bob".
From the very start any time someone drops soap in the shower Bob would be there, doing what Bob does best.
In the prison yard it is unusual for a day to pass without Bob shanking someone.Time passed and Bob got older.
Shower times weren't as successful as they used to be and the shankings didn't always work out the way that Bob had planned.
One day, during shower time, Bob starts dropping bars of "free" soap on the floor, whilst wearing a weird, creepy grin...The amount of trust I place in a person, thing or corporation is almost completely derived from what I know of their history.
I don't extend much trust to people that I have only known a short time, but I don't distrust them either.
The people who I do trust are those that have consistently shown themselves to be trustworthy over a period of time.
Also, I distrust people who have proven themselves to be untrustworthy through their actions.
Here's a small tip of the ice burg that is Microsoft's history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,\_extend\_and\_extinguishhttp://catb.org/~esr/halloween/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardization\_of\_Office\_Open\_XMLhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD\_codehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samizdat\_\%28book\%29http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2006100801442692When people call me an idiot for not implicitly trusting Microsoft it causes me to trust both them and Microsoft even less (if that's possible in the later case).
It makes me think that the person is either an idiot or is playing an angle.Instead of resorting to ad-hominem attacks why don't you try explaining to me why I should trust Microsoft.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465326</id>
	<title>Re:some history on Sam Ramji please</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1259666700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>and the fact that they [Microsoft] don't write software for anything but Windows,</i></p><p>They don't? That's a huge news flash, you should submit it as an article!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and the fact that they [ Microsoft ] do n't write software for anything but Windows,They do n't ?
That 's a huge news flash , you should submit it as an article !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and the fact that they [Microsoft] don't write software for anything but Windows,They don't?
That's a huge news flash, you should submit it as an article!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464736</id>
	<title>wait wait!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259664960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read all that and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>isn't that already the aim of the FSF ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read all that and ...is n't that already the aim of the FSF ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read all that and ...isn't that already the aim of the FSF ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464348</id>
	<title>Re:some history on Sam Ramji please</title>
	<author>Spykk</author>
	<datestamp>1259663760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you read the article</p></div><p>
Good luck with that. Microsoft will be supporting open source before people on Slashdot begin reading the articles. Wait...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read the article Good luck with that .
Microsoft will be supporting open source before people on Slashdot begin reading the articles .
Wait.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read the article
Good luck with that.
Microsoft will be supporting open source before people on Slashdot begin reading the articles.
Wait...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463548</id>
	<title>Fact or fiction?</title>
	<author>dave562</author>
	<datestamp>1259660700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The premise is put forth that the existing legal frameworks surrounding open source projects aren't unified and have been mashed together by individual foundations to serve the needs of their specific projects.  The CodePlex claims to be offering a solid legal foundation that can be freely adapted to any open source product.  The claimed benefit of that is it makes it easier for projects to attract corporate support, presumably because corporations will have a better understanding of what they are getting into.</p><p>My question is, is there really a problem with murky legalesse around open source projects that is scaring off corporations with the inclination to invest resources?</p><p>From reading the Q&amp;A I get the sense that CodePlex is little more than a marketing machine for open source projects.  They provide a legal framework and a showcase to bring open source developers together with corporations who could presumably fund them.  That seems like a good thing.</p><p>What's the other side?  They are only pushing open source code written in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net that runs on the Microsoft platform?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The premise is put forth that the existing legal frameworks surrounding open source projects are n't unified and have been mashed together by individual foundations to serve the needs of their specific projects .
The CodePlex claims to be offering a solid legal foundation that can be freely adapted to any open source product .
The claimed benefit of that is it makes it easier for projects to attract corporate support , presumably because corporations will have a better understanding of what they are getting into.My question is , is there really a problem with murky legalesse around open source projects that is scaring off corporations with the inclination to invest resources ? From reading the Q&amp;A I get the sense that CodePlex is little more than a marketing machine for open source projects .
They provide a legal framework and a showcase to bring open source developers together with corporations who could presumably fund them .
That seems like a good thing.What 's the other side ?
They are only pushing open source code written in .Net that runs on the Microsoft platform ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The premise is put forth that the existing legal frameworks surrounding open source projects aren't unified and have been mashed together by individual foundations to serve the needs of their specific projects.
The CodePlex claims to be offering a solid legal foundation that can be freely adapted to any open source product.
The claimed benefit of that is it makes it easier for projects to attract corporate support, presumably because corporations will have a better understanding of what they are getting into.My question is, is there really a problem with murky legalesse around open source projects that is scaring off corporations with the inclination to invest resources?From reading the Q&amp;A I get the sense that CodePlex is little more than a marketing machine for open source projects.
They provide a legal framework and a showcase to bring open source developers together with corporations who could presumably fund them.
That seems like a good thing.What's the other side?
They are only pushing open source code written in .Net that runs on the Microsoft platform?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30473066</id>
	<title>Peter Parker picked a peck of pickled peppers</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1261064100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can see how a character who was probably subjected to a childhood of harassment about having "picked a peck of pickled peppers" and associated pecker jokes might reasonably turn out emotionally scarred.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see how a character who was probably subjected to a childhood of harassment about having " picked a peck of pickled peppers " and associated pecker jokes might reasonably turn out emotionally scarred .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see how a character who was probably subjected to a childhood of harassment about having "picked a peck of pickled peppers" and associated pecker jokes might reasonably turn out emotionally scarred.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30482598</id>
	<title>Nope, sorry.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261062300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry Sam, I simply don't believe you or trust you. Not after the OOXML thing. Not after... oh, bother, you know the list.</p><p>Once MS starts releasing code under the GPL BEFORE they get caught out (AND usable code, at that) then I MAY start to consider you as an honest player. At this stage it's simply smoke and mirrors.... AGAIN.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry Sam , I simply do n't believe you or trust you .
Not after the OOXML thing .
Not after... oh , bother , you know the list.Once MS starts releasing code under the GPL BEFORE they get caught out ( AND usable code , at that ) then I MAY start to consider you as an honest player .
At this stage it 's simply smoke and mirrors.... AGAIN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry Sam, I simply don't believe you or trust you.
Not after the OOXML thing.
Not after... oh, bother, you know the list.Once MS starts releasing code under the GPL BEFORE they get caught out (AND usable code, at that) then I MAY start to consider you as an honest player.
At this stage it's simply smoke and mirrors.... AGAIN.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463872</id>
	<title>Re:some history on Sam Ramji please</title>
	<author>badboy\_tw2002</author>
	<datestamp>1259662080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Despite your narrow view one can release OSS on non-Linux platforms.  OSS != Linux.  No one, not even Microsoft, can "destroy" linux - its too corporate now and has as much backing as Windows.  This isn't about "driving people away from OSS" - its about "driving people to Windows with OSS".  Or to put it another way, why are you so offended that OSS could exist within the Windows world?  Or OSX for that matter?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Despite your narrow view one can release OSS on non-Linux platforms .
OSS ! = Linux .
No one , not even Microsoft , can " destroy " linux - its too corporate now and has as much backing as Windows .
This is n't about " driving people away from OSS " - its about " driving people to Windows with OSS " .
Or to put it another way , why are you so offended that OSS could exist within the Windows world ?
Or OSX for that matter ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Despite your narrow view one can release OSS on non-Linux platforms.
OSS != Linux.
No one, not even Microsoft, can "destroy" linux - its too corporate now and has as much backing as Windows.
This isn't about "driving people away from OSS" - its about "driving people to Windows with OSS".
Or to put it another way, why are you so offended that OSS could exist within the Windows world?
Or OSX for that matter?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462882</id>
	<title>what about my question?</title>
	<author>shadowrat</author>
	<datestamp>1259658420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why did you make Peter Parker so annoyingly emo in spider-man 3?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why did you make Peter Parker so annoyingly emo in spider-man 3 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why did you make Peter Parker so annoyingly emo in spider-man 3?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464710</id>
	<title>Two quick questions...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259664900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. How do you plan on "reaching out" or "marketing yourselves" to get more than Microsoft-language-based projects?</p><p>2. Isn't a "gallery" like "ASP.Net" a little generic?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
How do you plan on " reaching out " or " marketing yourselves " to get more than Microsoft-language-based projects ? 2 .
Is n't a " gallery " like " ASP.Net " a little generic ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
How do you plan on "reaching out" or "marketing yourselves" to get more than Microsoft-language-based projects?2.
Isn't a "gallery" like "ASP.Net" a little generic?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465630</id>
	<title>Re:To be fair...</title>
	<author>nschubach</author>
	<datestamp>1259667480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Crap, I hit submit then remembered I wanted to touch on this subject as well...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>has Microsoft actually done anything directly to undermine open source -- and, in particular, have they ever done so while appearing to support it?</p></div><p>Yes, the Microsoft licenses,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET "Shared" source (not open source!) move and the elusive OOXML (look, it's open) that had closed/elusive formats included in it.</p><p>In fact, all this pretension that Microsoft thinks is Open Source isn't really open and free.  From what I interpreted above, it's more of the same.  You can look at it, but don't you dare use it without putting your cash on the counter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Crap , I hit submit then remembered I wanted to touch on this subject as well...has Microsoft actually done anything directly to undermine open source -- and , in particular , have they ever done so while appearing to support it ? Yes , the Microsoft licenses , .NET " Shared " source ( not open source !
) move and the elusive OOXML ( look , it 's open ) that had closed/elusive formats included in it.In fact , all this pretension that Microsoft thinks is Open Source is n't really open and free .
From what I interpreted above , it 's more of the same .
You can look at it , but do n't you dare use it without putting your cash on the counter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crap, I hit submit then remembered I wanted to touch on this subject as well...has Microsoft actually done anything directly to undermine open source -- and, in particular, have they ever done so while appearing to support it?Yes, the Microsoft licenses, .NET "Shared" source (not open source!
) move and the elusive OOXML (look, it's open) that had closed/elusive formats included in it.In fact, all this pretension that Microsoft thinks is Open Source isn't really open and free.
From what I interpreted above, it's more of the same.
You can look at it, but don't you dare use it without putting your cash on the counter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30544670</id>
	<title>Re:some history on Sam Ramji please</title>
	<author>Elektroschock</author>
	<datestamp>1261675440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, I see. So Microsoft is behind the attacks against Oracle in the EU. Thank you very much for the confirmation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , I see .
So Microsoft is behind the attacks against Oracle in the EU .
Thank you very much for the confirmation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, I see.
So Microsoft is behind the attacks against Oracle in the EU.
Thank you very much for the confirmation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463450</id>
	<title>The three specific things that the CodePlex...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259660400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The three specific things that the CodePlex Foundation can do are:</p><p>1) Undermine the FSF.</p><p>2) Encourage open source projects to shift from Linux to Microsoft, leaving the former out in the cold.</p><p>3) Keep on yapping on about 'open source' and hope that nobody notices that it does not include support for any form of license which does not facilitate the privatisation of all software contributed to the project.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The three specific things that the CodePlex Foundation can do are : 1 ) Undermine the FSF.2 ) Encourage open source projects to shift from Linux to Microsoft , leaving the former out in the cold.3 ) Keep on yapping on about 'open source ' and hope that nobody notices that it does not include support for any form of license which does not facilitate the privatisation of all software contributed to the project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The three specific things that the CodePlex Foundation can do are:1) Undermine the FSF.2) Encourage open source projects to shift from Linux to Microsoft, leaving the former out in the cold.3) Keep on yapping on about 'open source' and hope that nobody notices that it does not include support for any form of license which does not facilitate the privatisation of all software contributed to the project.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463680</id>
	<title>Re:Lame</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259661180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Read the books, there's no homosexual undertones - it's just strong companionship, something you clearly don't understand.  Real friends would accompany you to Mordor and that kind of adventure creates a special bond, without the romance and lust, but equally meaningful.</p><p>Just because LBGT community have forced their ideals into society, doesn't mean you should infer a relationship that was never implied.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Read the books , there 's no homosexual undertones - it 's just strong companionship , something you clearly do n't understand .
Real friends would accompany you to Mordor and that kind of adventure creates a special bond , without the romance and lust , but equally meaningful.Just because LBGT community have forced their ideals into society , does n't mean you should infer a relationship that was never implied .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Read the books, there's no homosexual undertones - it's just strong companionship, something you clearly don't understand.
Real friends would accompany you to Mordor and that kind of adventure creates a special bond, without the romance and lust, but equally meaningful.Just because LBGT community have forced their ideals into society, doesn't mean you should infer a relationship that was never implied.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462854</id>
	<title>money</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259658360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How much do you earn a year? Is that why you work for Microsoft? If not, how much do you donate to charity?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much do you earn a year ?
Is that why you work for Microsoft ?
If not , how much do you donate to charity ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much do you earn a year?
Is that why you work for Microsoft?
If not, how much do you donate to charity?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463310</id>
	<title>Gallery vs repository...</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1259659920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>By contrast - and this is where the distinction is helpful - a gallery is both a showcase for, and a community of projects. The gallery shows related projects that are in the Foundation, and provides clear information on licensing, code provenance, project team members, and the security escalation path.</i></p><p>So CodePlex is more like Freshmeat than Sourceforge.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By contrast - and this is where the distinction is helpful - a gallery is both a showcase for , and a community of projects .
The gallery shows related projects that are in the Foundation , and provides clear information on licensing , code provenance , project team members , and the security escalation path.So CodePlex is more like Freshmeat than Sourceforge .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By contrast - and this is where the distinction is helpful - a gallery is both a showcase for, and a community of projects.
The gallery shows related projects that are in the Foundation, and provides clear information on licensing, code provenance, project team members, and the security escalation path.So CodePlex is more like Freshmeat than Sourceforge.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465346</id>
	<title>Re:woo</title>
	<author>PopeRatzo</author>
	<datestamp>1259666760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last time I was at the codeplex I saw Drag Me to Hell and it was pretty decent.</p><p>The stuff they're putting on popcorn now and calling "butter" smells like formaldehyde, though.  Seriously.  What the hell IS that stuff?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last time I was at the codeplex I saw Drag Me to Hell and it was pretty decent.The stuff they 're putting on popcorn now and calling " butter " smells like formaldehyde , though .
Seriously. What the hell IS that stuff ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last time I was at the codeplex I saw Drag Me to Hell and it was pretty decent.The stuff they're putting on popcorn now and calling "butter" smells like formaldehyde, though.
Seriously.  What the hell IS that stuff?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462922</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790</id>
	<title>Re:some history on Sam Ramji please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259661660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you read the article you will see that I am not at Microsoft any more.  I left in September to join a new company in Silicon Valley (you can see it here: <a href="http://sonoasystems.com/" title="sonoasystems.com" rel="nofollow">http://sonoasystems.com/</a> [sonoasystems.com] and our service at <a href="http://apigee.com./" title="apigee.com." rel="nofollow">http://apigee.com./</a> [apigee.com.]  The company's product is a Linux-based cloud services controller.<br>
<br>
While at Microsoft I focused on promoting open source, and on building interoperability technologies between Windows and Linux, as well as Eclipse and Firefox support and integration.<br>
<br>
My work at the CodePlex Foundation is on a volunteer/pro bono basis.  To get a better sense of what we are trying to do  you may want to consider that our directors and advisors include Monty Widenius, Miguel de Icaza, Stuart Cohen, Larry Augustin, Bob Gobeille, William Rowe and others whose careers demonstrate a strong commitment to open source.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read the article you will see that I am not at Microsoft any more .
I left in September to join a new company in Silicon Valley ( you can see it here : http : //sonoasystems.com/ [ sonoasystems.com ] and our service at http : //apigee.com./ [ apigee.com .
] The company 's product is a Linux-based cloud services controller .
While at Microsoft I focused on promoting open source , and on building interoperability technologies between Windows and Linux , as well as Eclipse and Firefox support and integration .
My work at the CodePlex Foundation is on a volunteer/pro bono basis .
To get a better sense of what we are trying to do you may want to consider that our directors and advisors include Monty Widenius , Miguel de Icaza , Stuart Cohen , Larry Augustin , Bob Gobeille , William Rowe and others whose careers demonstrate a strong commitment to open source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read the article you will see that I am not at Microsoft any more.
I left in September to join a new company in Silicon Valley (you can see it here: http://sonoasystems.com/ [sonoasystems.com] and our service at http://apigee.com./ [apigee.com.
]  The company's product is a Linux-based cloud services controller.
While at Microsoft I focused on promoting open source, and on building interoperability technologies between Windows and Linux, as well as Eclipse and Firefox support and integration.
My work at the CodePlex Foundation is on a volunteer/pro bono basis.
To get a better sense of what we are trying to do  you may want to consider that our directors and advisors include Monty Widenius, Miguel de Icaza, Stuart Cohen, Larry Augustin, Bob Gobeille, William Rowe and others whose careers demonstrate a strong commitment to open source.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30471722</id>
	<title>Re:some history on Sam Ramji please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261052340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; I am not at Microsoft any more</p><p>This is impossible. You cant quit a corporation, because the ties are too strong. The same way you can't quit an intelligence agency. Your own example is just proving this one more time.</p><p>&gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... whose careers demonstrate a strong commitment to open source</p><p>Wow. So are you trying to hide behind some names that are better known than your one?<br>Maybe you want to claim strong commitment to open source for yourself as well? What widely open source software did you wrote?<br>Commitment to open source is not related to careers. It's about contributing with code and patches that make the open source programs (not products!) better.<br>You seem to look like a clown, but I bet the money you get from Microsoft compensate this minor discomfort.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I am not at Microsoft any moreThis is impossible .
You cant quit a corporation , because the ties are too strong .
The same way you ca n't quit an intelligence agency .
Your own example is just proving this one more time. &gt; ... whose careers demonstrate a strong commitment to open sourceWow .
So are you trying to hide behind some names that are better known than your one ? Maybe you want to claim strong commitment to open source for yourself as well ?
What widely open source software did you wrote ? Commitment to open source is not related to careers .
It 's about contributing with code and patches that make the open source programs ( not products !
) better.You seem to look like a clown , but I bet the money you get from Microsoft compensate this minor discomfort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I am not at Microsoft any moreThis is impossible.
You cant quit a corporation, because the ties are too strong.
The same way you can't quit an intelligence agency.
Your own example is just proving this one more time.&gt; ... whose careers demonstrate a strong commitment to open sourceWow.
So are you trying to hide behind some names that are better known than your one?Maybe you want to claim strong commitment to open source for yourself as well?
What widely open source software did you wrote?Commitment to open source is not related to careers.
It's about contributing with code and patches that make the open source programs (not products!
) better.You seem to look like a clown, but I bet the money you get from Microsoft compensate this minor discomfort.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464284</id>
	<title>CodePlex: how can we take you seriously?</title>
	<author>KWTm</author>
	<datestamp>1259663460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, wait, this looks suspiciously like Microsoft coming in late to duplicate effort and have things done the One Microsoft Way.</p><blockquote><div><p>Q: Why should I care?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... What kinds of things do you foresee doing that will actually facilitate growth or change for the better in the open source community?</p><p>A:<br>Sam: The three specific things that the CodePlex Foundation can do are:</p><p>1) Establish a standard process and set of licenses for contribution to open source projects. No such standard currently exists, which results in duplication of effort across projects and new foundations, and increases anxiety for corporate contributors.</p></div></blockquote><p>Excuuuse me?  Isn't this what the <a href="http://opensource.org/" title="opensource.org">Open Source Initiative</a> [opensource.org] does already?  Of course, not <em>all</em> of the licenses and processes are standardized, because there will always be someone who doesn't agree and wants to do his/her own thing, but what makes Microsoft think they can come in here and be successful in standardizing everything?</p><blockquote><div><p>2) Provide a legal entity for ownership of copyright for specific projects. Many projects have disorganized copyright ownership, which prevents them from relicensing and commercialization.</p></div></blockquote><p>Doesn't the EFF ask you to transfer ownership/copyrights to them so they can take care of copyright issues?</p><blockquote><div><p>3) Popularize a set of best practices established in the industry for sustained corporate contribution to community open source projects. Many corporations are interested in contribution and in open source licensing but lack a codified approach to doing so.</p></div></blockquote><p>I shudder when Microsoft tries to: a) "standardize" something, and b) "popularize" it.</p><p>Incidentally, it's a pity how the CodePlex Foundation just <em>happened</em> to have the same name as Microsoft's forge.  I mean, it's not like Microsoft has teams of lawyers just waiting to pounce on a remote name resemblance so they can sue for trademark issues.  It's not like there are any corporate resources to do a name search just to see if, you know, "&lt;your organization name&gt;.com" has already been taken, where &lt;your organization name&gt; = "codeplex".  I mean, being a small poor non-profit with no big corporate sponsorships from a software giant, they probably used up their meagre funds doing a domain name search for codeplex.org, codeplex.net, codeplex.tv, codeplex.mobi, codeplex.IGotMyOwnTLD, etc.  Maybe they used Bing for the search.</p><p>So, I do get that CodePlex Foundation is more for corporate than homebrew projects.  But I can't help but think that this is more of Microsoft throwing more money at a problem that they are culturally incapable of understanding, hoping that they can grasp and master that market.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , wait , this looks suspiciously like Microsoft coming in late to duplicate effort and have things done the One Microsoft Way.Q : Why should I care ?
... What kinds of things do you foresee doing that will actually facilitate growth or change for the better in the open source community ? A : Sam : The three specific things that the CodePlex Foundation can do are : 1 ) Establish a standard process and set of licenses for contribution to open source projects .
No such standard currently exists , which results in duplication of effort across projects and new foundations , and increases anxiety for corporate contributors.Excuuuse me ?
Is n't this what the Open Source Initiative [ opensource.org ] does already ?
Of course , not all of the licenses and processes are standardized , because there will always be someone who does n't agree and wants to do his/her own thing , but what makes Microsoft think they can come in here and be successful in standardizing everything ? 2 ) Provide a legal entity for ownership of copyright for specific projects .
Many projects have disorganized copyright ownership , which prevents them from relicensing and commercialization.Does n't the EFF ask you to transfer ownership/copyrights to them so they can take care of copyright issues ? 3 ) Popularize a set of best practices established in the industry for sustained corporate contribution to community open source projects .
Many corporations are interested in contribution and in open source licensing but lack a codified approach to doing so.I shudder when Microsoft tries to : a ) " standardize " something , and b ) " popularize " it.Incidentally , it 's a pity how the CodePlex Foundation just happened to have the same name as Microsoft 's forge .
I mean , it 's not like Microsoft has teams of lawyers just waiting to pounce on a remote name resemblance so they can sue for trademark issues .
It 's not like there are any corporate resources to do a name search just to see if , you know , " .com " has already been taken , where = " codeplex " .
I mean , being a small poor non-profit with no big corporate sponsorships from a software giant , they probably used up their meagre funds doing a domain name search for codeplex.org , codeplex.net , codeplex.tv , codeplex.mobi , codeplex.IGotMyOwnTLD , etc .
Maybe they used Bing for the search.So , I do get that CodePlex Foundation is more for corporate than homebrew projects .
But I ca n't help but think that this is more of Microsoft throwing more money at a problem that they are culturally incapable of understanding , hoping that they can grasp and master that market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, wait, this looks suspiciously like Microsoft coming in late to duplicate effort and have things done the One Microsoft Way.Q: Why should I care?
... What kinds of things do you foresee doing that will actually facilitate growth or change for the better in the open source community?A:Sam: The three specific things that the CodePlex Foundation can do are:1) Establish a standard process and set of licenses for contribution to open source projects.
No such standard currently exists, which results in duplication of effort across projects and new foundations, and increases anxiety for corporate contributors.Excuuuse me?
Isn't this what the Open Source Initiative [opensource.org] does already?
Of course, not all of the licenses and processes are standardized, because there will always be someone who doesn't agree and wants to do his/her own thing, but what makes Microsoft think they can come in here and be successful in standardizing everything?2) Provide a legal entity for ownership of copyright for specific projects.
Many projects have disorganized copyright ownership, which prevents them from relicensing and commercialization.Doesn't the EFF ask you to transfer ownership/copyrights to them so they can take care of copyright issues?3) Popularize a set of best practices established in the industry for sustained corporate contribution to community open source projects.
Many corporations are interested in contribution and in open source licensing but lack a codified approach to doing so.I shudder when Microsoft tries to: a) "standardize" something, and b) "popularize" it.Incidentally, it's a pity how the CodePlex Foundation just happened to have the same name as Microsoft's forge.
I mean, it's not like Microsoft has teams of lawyers just waiting to pounce on a remote name resemblance so they can sue for trademark issues.
It's not like there are any corporate resources to do a name search just to see if, you know, ".com" has already been taken, where  = "codeplex".
I mean, being a small poor non-profit with no big corporate sponsorships from a software giant, they probably used up their meagre funds doing a domain name search for codeplex.org, codeplex.net, codeplex.tv, codeplex.mobi, codeplex.IGotMyOwnTLD, etc.
Maybe they used Bing for the search.So, I do get that CodePlex Foundation is more for corporate than homebrew projects.
But I can't help but think that this is more of Microsoft throwing more money at a problem that they are culturally incapable of understanding, hoping that they can grasp and master that market.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465822</id>
	<title>Re:some history on Sam Ramji please</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1259668320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And given Microsoft mantra of Windows everywhere and the fact that they don't write software for anything but Windows</p></div><p>Ever heard of MS Office for Mac? Silverlight?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And given Microsoft mantra of Windows everywhere and the fact that they do n't write software for anything but WindowsEver heard of MS Office for Mac ?
Silverlight ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And given Microsoft mantra of Windows everywhere and the fact that they don't write software for anything but WindowsEver heard of MS Office for Mac?
Silverlight?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463216</id>
	<title>Sorry, go back to the Shire.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259659620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would I have any questions from Sam Gamgee? The books covered the important parts of his life rather thoroughly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would I have any questions from Sam Gamgee ?
The books covered the important parts of his life rather thoroughly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would I have any questions from Sam Gamgee?
The books covered the important parts of his life rather thoroughly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465648</id>
	<title>Re:some history on Sam Ramji please</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1259667600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>excuse me but I just figured that this Codeplex Foundation was a Microsoft project and seeing you are the President... Let me go look at the Board for a minute.... Wow, it sure looks like it is very much a Microsoft org. Here is the public listing for the Codeplex Foundations board members:<br>Sam Ramji, President<br>\_note: there is no corporate affiliation listed\_<br><br>Bill Staples, Vice President<br>Microsoft<br><br>Stephanie Davies Boesch, Secretary &amp; Treasurer<br>Microsoft<br><br>Miguel de Icaza<br>Novell<br><br>D. Britton Johnston<br>Microsoft<br><br>Shaun Bruce Walker<br>DotNetNuke<br><br>Looking at the list, out of six there are 3 current Microsoft employees, you were with Microsoft and their Linux Lab so you're still labeled a Microserf IMO, Miguel has wanted to be a Microsoft employee for years, and Shawn looks to be pretty much tied to Microsoft's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net platform. It kind of looks like this is a Microsoft designed and orchestrated project to me.<br><br>The list of Advisors also lists about 50\% Microsoft employees so this is pretty much a Microsoft project Sam so your position at a company which uses Linux has little value.<br><br>A quick read of your comments in the article made the hair on the back of my neck stand up with your comments about the Codeplex Foundation helping assist businesses with open source software and what really got me was the bit about the organization having ownership of code in the projects. As we've seen with some GPL'ed projects, the owner of the code is still that, the owner of the code and that owner has the legal right to change the license at any time.  So is this really just a place for Microsoft to dump code, say it's "open source" and trick businesses into handing their code over to Microsoft while all the time letting them think it is not a Microsoft game to subvert GPL'ed software. Or better yet, Microsoft implements various GPL'ed projects in MS<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net and uses the Codeplex Foundation to get businesses to work from Microsoft's code instead of any existing GPL'ed project. hmmm, sure makes me wonder what you and the crew are up to here with Micrsoft.<br><br>And Sam, what exactly does this mean? "While I was at Microsoft I focused on helping the company understand the range of options with open source strategies."  specifically this, "understand the range of options with open source strategies".  When one looks at the big picture of how Microsoft views and acts on open standards and open source software under the GPL this seems pretty vague. Was your job at Microsoft to help them understand how to work with open source software outside of the vast number of GPL'ed projects? I suppose that without GNU/Linux Microsoft would probably care very little about the GPL and open source so that has to be part of the game too.<br><br>The Codeplex Foundation looks to be designed to dilute what GPL'ed open source software is to businesses and to actively present them with a carrot of a Microsoft designed and controlled process instead but hiding that fact.<br>Very much like OASIS was cause for MS Office Open XML and all that taking over of the ISO committees etc. Not stuff to give a warm fuzzy about trusting Microsoft or any of their projects. IMO<br><br>LoB</htmltext>
<tokenext>excuse me but I just figured that this Codeplex Foundation was a Microsoft project and seeing you are the President... Let me go look at the Board for a minute.... Wow , it sure looks like it is very much a Microsoft org .
Here is the public listing for the Codeplex Foundations board members : Sam Ramji , President \ _note : there is no corporate affiliation listed \ _Bill Staples , Vice PresidentMicrosoftStephanie Davies Boesch , Secretary &amp; TreasurerMicrosoftMiguel de IcazaNovellD .
Britton JohnstonMicrosoftShaun Bruce WalkerDotNetNukeLooking at the list , out of six there are 3 current Microsoft employees , you were with Microsoft and their Linux Lab so you 're still labeled a Microserf IMO , Miguel has wanted to be a Microsoft employee for years , and Shawn looks to be pretty much tied to Microsoft 's .Net platform .
It kind of looks like this is a Microsoft designed and orchestrated project to me.The list of Advisors also lists about 50 \ % Microsoft employees so this is pretty much a Microsoft project Sam so your position at a company which uses Linux has little value.A quick read of your comments in the article made the hair on the back of my neck stand up with your comments about the Codeplex Foundation helping assist businesses with open source software and what really got me was the bit about the organization having ownership of code in the projects .
As we 've seen with some GPL'ed projects , the owner of the code is still that , the owner of the code and that owner has the legal right to change the license at any time .
So is this really just a place for Microsoft to dump code , say it 's " open source " and trick businesses into handing their code over to Microsoft while all the time letting them think it is not a Microsoft game to subvert GPL'ed software .
Or better yet , Microsoft implements various GPL'ed projects in MS .Net and uses the Codeplex Foundation to get businesses to work from Microsoft 's code instead of any existing GPL'ed project .
hmmm , sure makes me wonder what you and the crew are up to here with Micrsoft.And Sam , what exactly does this mean ?
" While I was at Microsoft I focused on helping the company understand the range of options with open source strategies .
" specifically this , " understand the range of options with open source strategies " .
When one looks at the big picture of how Microsoft views and acts on open standards and open source software under the GPL this seems pretty vague .
Was your job at Microsoft to help them understand how to work with open source software outside of the vast number of GPL'ed projects ?
I suppose that without GNU/Linux Microsoft would probably care very little about the GPL and open source so that has to be part of the game too.The Codeplex Foundation looks to be designed to dilute what GPL'ed open source software is to businesses and to actively present them with a carrot of a Microsoft designed and controlled process instead but hiding that fact.Very much like OASIS was cause for MS Office Open XML and all that taking over of the ISO committees etc .
Not stuff to give a warm fuzzy about trusting Microsoft or any of their projects .
IMOLoB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>excuse me but I just figured that this Codeplex Foundation was a Microsoft project and seeing you are the President... Let me go look at the Board for a minute.... Wow, it sure looks like it is very much a Microsoft org.
Here is the public listing for the Codeplex Foundations board members:Sam Ramji, President\_note: there is no corporate affiliation listed\_Bill Staples, Vice PresidentMicrosoftStephanie Davies Boesch, Secretary &amp; TreasurerMicrosoftMiguel de IcazaNovellD.
Britton JohnstonMicrosoftShaun Bruce WalkerDotNetNukeLooking at the list, out of six there are 3 current Microsoft employees, you were with Microsoft and their Linux Lab so you're still labeled a Microserf IMO, Miguel has wanted to be a Microsoft employee for years, and Shawn looks to be pretty much tied to Microsoft's .Net platform.
It kind of looks like this is a Microsoft designed and orchestrated project to me.The list of Advisors also lists about 50\% Microsoft employees so this is pretty much a Microsoft project Sam so your position at a company which uses Linux has little value.A quick read of your comments in the article made the hair on the back of my neck stand up with your comments about the Codeplex Foundation helping assist businesses with open source software and what really got me was the bit about the organization having ownership of code in the projects.
As we've seen with some GPL'ed projects, the owner of the code is still that, the owner of the code and that owner has the legal right to change the license at any time.
So is this really just a place for Microsoft to dump code, say it's "open source" and trick businesses into handing their code over to Microsoft while all the time letting them think it is not a Microsoft game to subvert GPL'ed software.
Or better yet, Microsoft implements various GPL'ed projects in MS .Net and uses the Codeplex Foundation to get businesses to work from Microsoft's code instead of any existing GPL'ed project.
hmmm, sure makes me wonder what you and the crew are up to here with Micrsoft.And Sam, what exactly does this mean?
"While I was at Microsoft I focused on helping the company understand the range of options with open source strategies.
"  specifically this, "understand the range of options with open source strategies".
When one looks at the big picture of how Microsoft views and acts on open standards and open source software under the GPL this seems pretty vague.
Was your job at Microsoft to help them understand how to work with open source software outside of the vast number of GPL'ed projects?
I suppose that without GNU/Linux Microsoft would probably care very little about the GPL and open source so that has to be part of the game too.The Codeplex Foundation looks to be designed to dilute what GPL'ed open source software is to businesses and to actively present them with a carrot of a Microsoft designed and controlled process instead but hiding that fact.Very much like OASIS was cause for MS Office Open XML and all that taking over of the ISO committees etc.
Not stuff to give a warm fuzzy about trusting Microsoft or any of their projects.
IMOLoB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464586</id>
	<title>Re:Okay...</title>
	<author>grcumb</author>
	<datestamp>1259664480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>I realize that we&rsquo;ve successfully confused people (yes, this is a sardonic comment) by using the same name as Microsoft&rsquo;s forge (codeplex.com). I regret the confusion because it has made it a bit harder to explain the Foundation to those who are already aware of the forge. We may revisit the name in future generations of the Board of Directors.</p></div></blockquote><p>This statement doesn't make understanding his organization's relationship to microsoft any less confusing. Can anyone fluent in corporate doublespeak translate?</p></div><p>"<em>Everyone is confused about who we are and what we're doing because we named ourselves after a Microsoft service that looks similar to this, but is different in subtle and important ways. The name is not going to be changed by this board of directors.</em> </p><p>Or, if you prefer, the Evil Conspiracy version:</p><p>"<em>We deliberately obfuscated our nature and purpose by choosing a name identical to an existing Microsoft service. It's kind of like when we supported the sock-puppet Open Document Alliance and used them to sow confusion during the run-up to the ISO vote on our so-called standard. Except in this case, we use (watch carefully, here) the CodePlex <strong>Foundation</strong> to build a reputation that rubs off on software stored in Microsoft's Codeplex <strong>repository</strong>. We build the credibility, and Microsoft publishes its own software through its service, utters the magic word 'Codeplex' and gets a pass. Given that causing confusion and dissension in the FOSS world is our goal, we don't see any particular reason to change the name to something distinctly different.</em>"</p><p> <strong>NOTE:</strong> I actually lean more toward the first translation, but the second was <em>way</em> more fun to write. 8^)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I realize that we    ve successfully confused people ( yes , this is a sardonic comment ) by using the same name as Microsoft    s forge ( codeplex.com ) .
I regret the confusion because it has made it a bit harder to explain the Foundation to those who are already aware of the forge .
We may revisit the name in future generations of the Board of Directors.This statement does n't make understanding his organization 's relationship to microsoft any less confusing .
Can anyone fluent in corporate doublespeak translate ?
" Everyone is confused about who we are and what we 're doing because we named ourselves after a Microsoft service that looks similar to this , but is different in subtle and important ways .
The name is not going to be changed by this board of directors .
Or , if you prefer , the Evil Conspiracy version : " We deliberately obfuscated our nature and purpose by choosing a name identical to an existing Microsoft service .
It 's kind of like when we supported the sock-puppet Open Document Alliance and used them to sow confusion during the run-up to the ISO vote on our so-called standard .
Except in this case , we use ( watch carefully , here ) the CodePlex Foundation to build a reputation that rubs off on software stored in Microsoft 's Codeplex repository .
We build the credibility , and Microsoft publishes its own software through its service , utters the magic word 'Codeplex ' and gets a pass .
Given that causing confusion and dissension in the FOSS world is our goal , we do n't see any particular reason to change the name to something distinctly different .
" NOTE : I actually lean more toward the first translation , but the second was way more fun to write .
8 ^ )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I realize that we’ve successfully confused people (yes, this is a sardonic comment) by using the same name as Microsoft’s forge (codeplex.com).
I regret the confusion because it has made it a bit harder to explain the Foundation to those who are already aware of the forge.
We may revisit the name in future generations of the Board of Directors.This statement doesn't make understanding his organization's relationship to microsoft any less confusing.
Can anyone fluent in corporate doublespeak translate?
"Everyone is confused about who we are and what we're doing because we named ourselves after a Microsoft service that looks similar to this, but is different in subtle and important ways.
The name is not going to be changed by this board of directors.
Or, if you prefer, the Evil Conspiracy version:"We deliberately obfuscated our nature and purpose by choosing a name identical to an existing Microsoft service.
It's kind of like when we supported the sock-puppet Open Document Alliance and used them to sow confusion during the run-up to the ISO vote on our so-called standard.
Except in this case, we use (watch carefully, here) the CodePlex Foundation to build a reputation that rubs off on software stored in Microsoft's Codeplex repository.
We build the credibility, and Microsoft publishes its own software through its service, utters the magic word 'Codeplex' and gets a pass.
Given that causing confusion and dissension in the FOSS world is our goal, we don't see any particular reason to change the name to something distinctly different.
" NOTE: I actually lean more toward the first translation, but the second was way more fun to write.
8^)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464194</id>
	<title>Re:Um</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259663160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>those of us involved in the Foundation see it as our personal calling to make a positive impact on the industry</p></div><p>A "positive impact" for who?  - Oh yeah, MS... unfortunately MS believes that in order for something to have  a positive impact for them, it must have a negative impact for everyone else.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>We [...] decided to use a different model, based on museums</p></div><p>.. because we're history &lt;zing&gt;</p><p>This stuff just writes itself... gotta wonder if he did this intentionally.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>those of us involved in the Foundation see it as our personal calling to make a positive impact on the industryA " positive impact " for who ?
- Oh yeah , MS... unfortunately MS believes that in order for something to have a positive impact for them , it must have a negative impact for everyone else.We [ ... ] decided to use a different model , based on museums.. because we 're history This stuff just writes itself... got ta wonder if he did this intentionally .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>those of us involved in the Foundation see it as our personal calling to make a positive impact on the industryA "positive impact" for who?
- Oh yeah, MS... unfortunately MS believes that in order for something to have  a positive impact for them, it must have a negative impact for everyone else.We [...] decided to use a different model, based on museums.. because we're history This stuff just writes itself... gotta wonder if he did this intentionally.
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465152</id>
	<title>To be fair...</title>
	<author>SanityInAnarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1259666280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Isn't this what the Open Source Initiative [opensource.org] does already?</p></div><p>My understanding is that the OSI tries to declare whether a particular license counts as "open source" or not. They do track redundant licenses.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Doesn't the EFF ask you to transfer ownership/copyrights to them so they can take care of copyright issues?</p></div><p>Indeed, and many projects ask you to transfer copyrights to them to allow them to change license at will. This is a reasonably fair deal -- it means your code gets accepted, and if the license allows it, you can always create your own fork just before they change licenses. But it also means that the community can decide if/when to go GPL3, for example. Setting "any future version" is putting too much faith in the FSF, I think, but if you don't do that and do allow people to contribute while retaining copyright, you end up with a situation like the Linux kernel, which will likely be forever GPLv2.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I shudder when Microsoft tries to: a) "standardize" something, and b) "popularize" it.</p></div><p>This appears to at least be trying to be an independent organization. And you also didn't address that #3 is an important point, though one that I don't think you really need an organization to make:</p><p>There should be a standard set of best practices for how corporations should participate in open source. We've seen it done wrong so many times before.</p><p>For example -- remember when IBM ported Linux to their mainframe platform? They did so behind closed doors, only releasing the code to the community when it was done. Aside from potentially being a bitch to merge, this was really cruel to the community which had been trying to do the same thing independently. On the other hand, "release early, release often" doesn't really need an organization to tell you to do that.</p><p>The one way I can see this really working is if the organization were to provide corporate-y things, like training and seminars, for executives and developers at companies who want to participate in open source, and don't want to look like assholes doing it.</p><p>Now, the unfortunate thing is that Steve Ballmer continues to make truly retarded statements about open source (GPL = virus! Linux violates our patents!) on a fairly regular basis. Fortunately, Microsoft doesn't seem to be following his example. For all the paranoia about things like mono -- the fact that it <i>might</i> have submarine patents from Microsoft -- has any ever been justified? Since SCO died, has Microsoft actually done anything directly to undermine open source -- and, in particular, have they ever done so <i>while appearing to support it?</i></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't this what the Open Source Initiative [ opensource.org ] does already ? My understanding is that the OSI tries to declare whether a particular license counts as " open source " or not .
They do track redundant licenses.Does n't the EFF ask you to transfer ownership/copyrights to them so they can take care of copyright issues ? Indeed , and many projects ask you to transfer copyrights to them to allow them to change license at will .
This is a reasonably fair deal -- it means your code gets accepted , and if the license allows it , you can always create your own fork just before they change licenses .
But it also means that the community can decide if/when to go GPL3 , for example .
Setting " any future version " is putting too much faith in the FSF , I think , but if you do n't do that and do allow people to contribute while retaining copyright , you end up with a situation like the Linux kernel , which will likely be forever GPLv2.I shudder when Microsoft tries to : a ) " standardize " something , and b ) " popularize " it.This appears to at least be trying to be an independent organization .
And you also did n't address that # 3 is an important point , though one that I do n't think you really need an organization to make : There should be a standard set of best practices for how corporations should participate in open source .
We 've seen it done wrong so many times before.For example -- remember when IBM ported Linux to their mainframe platform ?
They did so behind closed doors , only releasing the code to the community when it was done .
Aside from potentially being a bitch to merge , this was really cruel to the community which had been trying to do the same thing independently .
On the other hand , " release early , release often " does n't really need an organization to tell you to do that.The one way I can see this really working is if the organization were to provide corporate-y things , like training and seminars , for executives and developers at companies who want to participate in open source , and do n't want to look like assholes doing it.Now , the unfortunate thing is that Steve Ballmer continues to make truly retarded statements about open source ( GPL = virus !
Linux violates our patents !
) on a fairly regular basis .
Fortunately , Microsoft does n't seem to be following his example .
For all the paranoia about things like mono -- the fact that it might have submarine patents from Microsoft -- has any ever been justified ?
Since SCO died , has Microsoft actually done anything directly to undermine open source -- and , in particular , have they ever done so while appearing to support it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't this what the Open Source Initiative [opensource.org] does already?My understanding is that the OSI tries to declare whether a particular license counts as "open source" or not.
They do track redundant licenses.Doesn't the EFF ask you to transfer ownership/copyrights to them so they can take care of copyright issues?Indeed, and many projects ask you to transfer copyrights to them to allow them to change license at will.
This is a reasonably fair deal -- it means your code gets accepted, and if the license allows it, you can always create your own fork just before they change licenses.
But it also means that the community can decide if/when to go GPL3, for example.
Setting "any future version" is putting too much faith in the FSF, I think, but if you don't do that and do allow people to contribute while retaining copyright, you end up with a situation like the Linux kernel, which will likely be forever GPLv2.I shudder when Microsoft tries to: a) "standardize" something, and b) "popularize" it.This appears to at least be trying to be an independent organization.
And you also didn't address that #3 is an important point, though one that I don't think you really need an organization to make:There should be a standard set of best practices for how corporations should participate in open source.
We've seen it done wrong so many times before.For example -- remember when IBM ported Linux to their mainframe platform?
They did so behind closed doors, only releasing the code to the community when it was done.
Aside from potentially being a bitch to merge, this was really cruel to the community which had been trying to do the same thing independently.
On the other hand, "release early, release often" doesn't really need an organization to tell you to do that.The one way I can see this really working is if the organization were to provide corporate-y things, like training and seminars, for executives and developers at companies who want to participate in open source, and don't want to look like assholes doing it.Now, the unfortunate thing is that Steve Ballmer continues to make truly retarded statements about open source (GPL = virus!
Linux violates our patents!
) on a fairly regular basis.
Fortunately, Microsoft doesn't seem to be following his example.
For all the paranoia about things like mono -- the fact that it might have submarine patents from Microsoft -- has any ever been justified?
Since SCO died, has Microsoft actually done anything directly to undermine open source -- and, in particular, have they ever done so while appearing to support it?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464170</id>
	<title>Re:some history on Sam Ramji please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259663040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you read the article</p> </div><p>Couple of questions:</p><p>Are you new here?<br>What is this article you speak of?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read the article Couple of questions : Are you new here ? What is this article you speak of ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read the article Couple of questions:Are you new here?What is this article you speak of?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30544700</id>
	<title>Re:The three specific things that the CodePlex...</title>
	<author>Elektroschock</author>
	<datestamp>1261675620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> 1) Undermine the FSF.</i></p><p>LOL</p><p>It is all more about a me-too placebo. So when you get asked, what do you do in terms of open source, you get this Ramji guy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Undermine the FSF.LOLIt is all more about a me-too placebo .
So when you get asked , what do you do in terms of open source , you get this Ramji guy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 1) Undermine the FSF.LOLIt is all more about a me-too placebo.
So when you get asked, what do you do in terms of open source, you get this Ramji guy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30469694</id>
	<title>What a crock</title>
	<author>Whuffo</author>
	<datestamp>1259693880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The history of software development is littered with the corpses of companies that trusted Microsoft to honor a license. Remember Stacker? Remember Netscape? They learned the hard way about doing deals with the devil in Redmond.<p>
Forget the double-talk and corporate happy speak. What Microsoft intends for Open Source is not something that will benefit anyone but Microsoft. Remember "embrace, extend, extinguish?" They're talking like they've embraced open source and now they're starting to "extend" it. They're fighting a different sort of enemy than they have before - but they can't do anything other than fight - it's their corporate culture. </p><p>
Microsoft is a sworn enemy of open source software - and no matter what they or their sock puppets say, this is not going to change. Microsoft sees open source as being the biggest threat to their continued growth and they'll attack with everything they've got - that they can plausibly get away with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The history of software development is littered with the corpses of companies that trusted Microsoft to honor a license .
Remember Stacker ?
Remember Netscape ?
They learned the hard way about doing deals with the devil in Redmond .
Forget the double-talk and corporate happy speak .
What Microsoft intends for Open Source is not something that will benefit anyone but Microsoft .
Remember " embrace , extend , extinguish ?
" They 're talking like they 've embraced open source and now they 're starting to " extend " it .
They 're fighting a different sort of enemy than they have before - but they ca n't do anything other than fight - it 's their corporate culture .
Microsoft is a sworn enemy of open source software - and no matter what they or their sock puppets say , this is not going to change .
Microsoft sees open source as being the biggest threat to their continued growth and they 'll attack with everything they 've got - that they can plausibly get away with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The history of software development is littered with the corpses of companies that trusted Microsoft to honor a license.
Remember Stacker?
Remember Netscape?
They learned the hard way about doing deals with the devil in Redmond.
Forget the double-talk and corporate happy speak.
What Microsoft intends for Open Source is not something that will benefit anyone but Microsoft.
Remember "embrace, extend, extinguish?
" They're talking like they've embraced open source and now they're starting to "extend" it.
They're fighting a different sort of enemy than they have before - but they can't do anything other than fight - it's their corporate culture.
Microsoft is a sworn enemy of open source software - and no matter what they or their sock puppets say, this is not going to change.
Microsoft sees open source as being the biggest threat to their continued growth and they'll attack with everything they've got - that they can plausibly get away with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30471722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30467238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30544670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30473066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30519036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30468612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30544700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30468694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_1635229_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30476890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463790
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30544670
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464170
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30471722
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465648
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464348
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30476890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463258
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465346
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463318
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30544700
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464194
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463016
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465152
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465630
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463680
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30463564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464586
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30468612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30519036
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30464736
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_1635229.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30462882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30473066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30467238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30468694
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_1635229.30465304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
