<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_16_2329201</id>
	<title>FCC's New Broadband Plan Prioritizes Competition</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1260971100000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>adeelarshad82 writes <i>"The Federal Communications Commission has released an outline of what might be included in <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2357231,00.asp">its upcoming national broadband plan</a>, and encouraging competition was a top priority. The FCC statement said 'Competition drives innovation and provides consumer choice. Finding ways to better use existing assets, including Universal Service, rights-of-way, spectrum, and others, will be essential to the success of the plan. The limited government funding that is available for broadband would be best used when leveraged with the private sector.' The stimulus plan provided $7.2 billion in broadband grants and $350 million for a broadband mapping program, but also directed the FCC to deliver a national broadband plan to Congress by February 17, 2010."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>adeelarshad82 writes " The Federal Communications Commission has released an outline of what might be included in its upcoming national broadband plan , and encouraging competition was a top priority .
The FCC statement said 'Competition drives innovation and provides consumer choice .
Finding ways to better use existing assets , including Universal Service , rights-of-way , spectrum , and others , will be essential to the success of the plan .
The limited government funding that is available for broadband would be best used when leveraged with the private sector .
' The stimulus plan provided $ 7.2 billion in broadband grants and $ 350 million for a broadband mapping program , but also directed the FCC to deliver a national broadband plan to Congress by February 17 , 2010 .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>adeelarshad82 writes "The Federal Communications Commission has released an outline of what might be included in its upcoming national broadband plan, and encouraging competition was a top priority.
The FCC statement said 'Competition drives innovation and provides consumer choice.
Finding ways to better use existing assets, including Universal Service, rights-of-way, spectrum, and others, will be essential to the success of the plan.
The limited government funding that is available for broadband would be best used when leveraged with the private sector.
' The stimulus plan provided $7.2 billion in broadband grants and $350 million for a broadband mapping program, but also directed the FCC to deliver a national broadband plan to Congress by February 17, 2010.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468024</id>
	<title>Re:Policies can only help competition so far</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259680080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have mod points and was going to mod your post, but I couldn't find the ones that said "idiot" or "silly".</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have mod points and was going to mod your post , but I could n't find the ones that said " idiot " or " silly " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have mod points and was going to mod your post, but I couldn't find the ones that said "idiot" or "silly".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468092</id>
	<title>Re:Policies can only help competition so far</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1259680500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"you are going to end up with only a few companies after the shakeout occurs. "</p><p>Largely because the US has become conditioned to the idea that big companies are good.  Globalization is a "good thing" and we want corporations large enough to compete on a global scale.  "World class" is a benchmark we use to judge companies.</p><p>My telco serves 4 counties, I think - maybe a 5th.  No one has ever heard of it.  But, they are successful, in that they attract investors, and they show a profit every year.  Rates are mostly competitive with the big companies.  Like the big companies, they have a monopoly in their service area.  I've come to like them, because I can talk to real people.  And, if I ever feel the need to talk eyeball to eyeball with a service rep, it's a short drive over to Lewisville from my house.</p><p>You're right, of course, but it sucks, IMHO</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" you are going to end up with only a few companies after the shakeout occurs .
" Largely because the US has become conditioned to the idea that big companies are good .
Globalization is a " good thing " and we want corporations large enough to compete on a global scale .
" World class " is a benchmark we use to judge companies.My telco serves 4 counties , I think - maybe a 5th .
No one has ever heard of it .
But , they are successful , in that they attract investors , and they show a profit every year .
Rates are mostly competitive with the big companies .
Like the big companies , they have a monopoly in their service area .
I 've come to like them , because I can talk to real people .
And , if I ever feel the need to talk eyeball to eyeball with a service rep , it 's a short drive over to Lewisville from my house.You 're right , of course , but it sucks , IMHO</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"you are going to end up with only a few companies after the shakeout occurs.
"Largely because the US has become conditioned to the idea that big companies are good.
Globalization is a "good thing" and we want corporations large enough to compete on a global scale.
"World class" is a benchmark we use to judge companies.My telco serves 4 counties, I think - maybe a 5th.
No one has ever heard of it.
But, they are successful, in that they attract investors, and they show a profit every year.
Rates are mostly competitive with the big companies.
Like the big companies, they have a monopoly in their service area.
I've come to like them, because I can talk to real people.
And, if I ever feel the need to talk eyeball to eyeball with a service rep, it's a short drive over to Lewisville from my house.You're right, of course, but it sucks, IMHO</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468000</id>
	<title>Re:Right.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259680020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Didn't we do this in the 90's, throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders?</p><p>If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.</p></div><p>Whoa, whoa, that sounds like <b>socialism</b>. We'll have none of that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't we do this in the 90 's , throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders ? If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.Whoa , whoa , that sounds like socialism .
We 'll have none of that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't we do this in the 90's, throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders?If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.Whoa, whoa, that sounds like socialism.
We'll have none of that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468380</id>
	<title>Re:no</title>
	<author>etrading76</author>
	<datestamp>1259683020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Hi,Christmas sale, there are exquisite gifts...

Dear Ladies 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]
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]

@@@@@@#####$&amp;^\%@#@</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi,Christmas sale , there are exquisite gifts.. . Dear Ladies 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 ] 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 ] @ @ @ @ @ @ # # # # # $ &amp; ^ \ % @ # @</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Hi,Christmas sale, there are exquisite gifts...

Dear Ladies 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]
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]

@@@@@@#####$&amp;^\%@#@</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468320</id>
	<title>Re:no Christmas sale, free shipping discounts ..</title>
	<author>Edwards1984</author>
	<datestamp>1259682480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.kkshoe.com/" title="kkshoe.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.kkshoe.com/</a> [kkshoe.com]
Hello, dear ladies and gentlemen,
Buy now proposed a "Christmas gift '. A rare

opportunity, what are you waiting for? Quickly move

your mouse bar.
Activities As of December 26
commodity is credit guarantee, you can rest assured of

purchase, kkshoe will provide service for you all,

welcome to
1. sport shoes : Jordan<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,Nike, adidas, Puma, Gucci, LV,

UGG , etc. including women shoes and kids shoes.
2. T-Shirts : BBC T-Shirts, Bape T-Shirts, Armani T-

Shirts, Polo T-Shirts,etc.
3. Hoodies : Bape hoody, hoody, AFF hoody, GGG hoody,

ED hoody<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,etc.
4. Jeans : Levis jeans , Gucci jeans, jeans, Bape jeans

, DG jeans<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,etc.For details, please consult

<a href="http://www.kkshoe.com/" title="kkshoe.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.kkshoe.com/</a> [kkshoe.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.kkshoe.com/ [ kkshoe.com ] Hello , dear ladies and gentlemen , Buy now proposed a " Christmas gift ' .
A rare opportunity , what are you waiting for ?
Quickly move your mouse bar .
Activities As of December 26 commodity is credit guarantee , you can rest assured of purchase , kkshoe will provide service for you all , welcome to 1. sport shoes : Jordan ,Nike , adidas , Puma , Gucci , LV , UGG , etc .
including women shoes and kids shoes .
2. T-Shirts : BBC T-Shirts , Bape T-Shirts , Armani T- Shirts , Polo T-Shirts,etc .
3. Hoodies : Bape hoody , hoody , AFF hoody , GGG hoody , ED hoody ,etc .
4. Jeans : Levis jeans , Gucci jeans , jeans , Bape jeans , DG jeans ,etc.For details , please consult http : //www.kkshoe.com/ [ kkshoe.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.kkshoe.com/ [kkshoe.com]
Hello, dear ladies and gentlemen,
Buy now proposed a "Christmas gift '.
A rare

opportunity, what are you waiting for?
Quickly move

your mouse bar.
Activities As of December 26
commodity is credit guarantee, you can rest assured of

purchase, kkshoe will provide service for you all,

welcome to
1. sport shoes : Jordan ,Nike, adidas, Puma, Gucci, LV,

UGG , etc.
including women shoes and kids shoes.
2. T-Shirts : BBC T-Shirts, Bape T-Shirts, Armani T-

Shirts, Polo T-Shirts,etc.
3. Hoodies : Bape hoody, hoody, AFF hoody, GGG hoody,

ED hoody ,etc.
4. Jeans : Levis jeans , Gucci jeans, jeans, Bape jeans

, DG jeans ,etc.For details, please consult

http://www.kkshoe.com/ [kkshoe.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30472464</id>
	<title>Re:Policies can only help competition so far</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261060020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only way everyone wins is if the government controls the infrastructure and the individual companies just lease it as resellers - that way services to remote areas can be secured and one one or two massive corporations can have an effective monopoly in any area because someone smaller, faster and more efficient can always come along and eat their pie.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only way everyone wins is if the government controls the infrastructure and the individual companies just lease it as resellers - that way services to remote areas can be secured and one one or two massive corporations can have an effective monopoly in any area because someone smaller , faster and more efficient can always come along and eat their pie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only way everyone wins is if the government controls the infrastructure and the individual companies just lease it as resellers - that way services to remote areas can be secured and one one or two massive corporations can have an effective monopoly in any area because someone smaller, faster and more efficient can always come along and eat their pie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850</id>
	<title>Right.</title>
	<author>bmo</author>
	<datestamp>1259679060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't we do this in the 90's, throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders?</p><p>If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.</p><p>--<br>BMO</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't we do this in the 90 's , throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders ? If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.--BMO</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't we do this in the 90's, throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders?If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.--BMO</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468240</id>
	<title>Re:Policies can only help competition so far</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1259681760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or just do what a government is supposed to do - build things like infrastructure, which are too big and expensive to be undertaken efficiently by multiple competing private interests.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or just do what a government is supposed to do - build things like infrastructure , which are too big and expensive to be undertaken efficiently by multiple competing private interests .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or just do what a government is supposed to do - build things like infrastructure, which are too big and expensive to be undertaken efficiently by multiple competing private interests.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468022</id>
	<title>Re:no</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259680080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, tax &amp; spend? What is this 1992-2000 when the government was fiscally responsible?!?!

In the new millenium, the government is all SPEND SPEND SPEND. You best check yo'self!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , tax &amp; spend ?
What is this 1992-2000 when the government was fiscally responsible ? ! ? !
In the new millenium , the government is all SPEND SPEND SPEND .
You best check yo'self !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, tax &amp; spend?
What is this 1992-2000 when the government was fiscally responsible?!?!
In the new millenium, the government is all SPEND SPEND SPEND.
You best check yo'self!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30469202</id>
	<title>Re:According to Public Knowledge, this isn't enoug</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259689680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The president of wha....oh, the publication you're quoting.  Hmmm. Er, ummmm.... yeah, nope.  Not impressed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The president of wha....oh , the publication you 're quoting .
Hmmm. Er , ummmm.... yeah , nope .
Not impressed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The president of wha....oh, the publication you're quoting.
Hmmm. Er, ummmm.... yeah, nope.
Not impressed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30471206</id>
	<title>Re:Right.</title>
	<author>testadicazzo</author>
	<datestamp>1261047420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm annoyed by the mantra:<blockquote><div><p>Competition drives innovation and provides consumer choice. Finding ways to better use existing assets, including Universal Service, rights-of-way, spectrum, and others, will be essential to the success of the plan. The limited government funding that is available for broadband would be best used when leveraged with the private sector.'</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Blech.  Sometimes free markets and competition are the best way to accomplish a social goal.  Sometimes they aren't.  In particular, rural and poor neighbourhoods, which would profit most from broadband and are most poorly served under the current system, and I don't see shovelling money at providers doing much for that goal.  I'd rather see that money used to address the most poorly served areas of the country, and provide some public competition to private provider plans.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm annoyed by the mantra : Competition drives innovation and provides consumer choice .
Finding ways to better use existing assets , including Universal Service , rights-of-way , spectrum , and others , will be essential to the success of the plan .
The limited government funding that is available for broadband would be best used when leveraged with the private sector .
' Blech .
Sometimes free markets and competition are the best way to accomplish a social goal .
Sometimes they are n't .
In particular , rural and poor neighbourhoods , which would profit most from broadband and are most poorly served under the current system , and I do n't see shovelling money at providers doing much for that goal .
I 'd rather see that money used to address the most poorly served areas of the country , and provide some public competition to private provider plans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm annoyed by the mantra:Competition drives innovation and provides consumer choice.
Finding ways to better use existing assets, including Universal Service, rights-of-way, spectrum, and others, will be essential to the success of the plan.
The limited government funding that is available for broadband would be best used when leveraged with the private sector.
'

Blech.
Sometimes free markets and competition are the best way to accomplish a social goal.
Sometimes they aren't.
In particular, rural and poor neighbourhoods, which would profit most from broadband and are most poorly served under the current system, and I don't see shovelling money at providers doing much for that goal.
I'd rather see that money used to address the most poorly served areas of the country, and provide some public competition to private provider plans.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468350</id>
	<title>Re:Right.</title>
	<author>meerling</author>
	<datestamp>1259682840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have to agree, our current crop of company shills have no idea how to actually use the money we (through the government) make available to them unless we give them very specific instructions. Without those instructions, barring any loopholes, they just feather their nests.<br><br>An image of a rabid vulture sitting in a giant pile of down just ran through my mind... Disturbing, yet appropriate...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to agree , our current crop of company shills have no idea how to actually use the money we ( through the government ) make available to them unless we give them very specific instructions .
Without those instructions , barring any loopholes , they just feather their nests.An image of a rabid vulture sitting in a giant pile of down just ran through my mind... Disturbing , yet appropriate.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to agree, our current crop of company shills have no idea how to actually use the money we (through the government) make available to them unless we give them very specific instructions.
Without those instructions, barring any loopholes, they just feather their nests.An image of a rabid vulture sitting in a giant pile of down just ran through my mind... Disturbing, yet appropriate...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30476384</id>
	<title>Oh, Wonderful Private Sector...</title>
	<author>frank\_adrian314159</author>
	<datestamp>1261077960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... is there anything you can't do?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... is there anything you ca n't do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... is there anything you can't do?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468192</id>
	<title>Competitors...?!</title>
	<author>scorpivs</author>
	<datestamp>1259681340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd like to see private individuals -- the everyday people who share their wi-fi with their neighborhood -- included among those qualifying for these government-funded 'subsidies.'
<br> <br>
Oops.
<br> <br>
Fixed that for ya.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to see private individuals -- the everyday people who share their wi-fi with their neighborhood -- included among those qualifying for these government-funded 'subsidies .
' Oops .
Fixed that for ya .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to see private individuals -- the everyday people who share their wi-fi with their neighborhood -- included among those qualifying for these government-funded 'subsidies.
'
 
Oops.
Fixed that for ya.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30474804</id>
	<title>National Broadband Plan</title>
	<author>dwiget001</author>
	<datestamp>1261071240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What we need is a National Broadband Plan.</p><p>We are going to put the U.S. Government in the ISP business to foster competition by those greedy and money grubbing private ISPs.</p><p>The way it works is, the U.S. Government cuts all broadband traffic down to 80 Kbps and then expand the U.S Government broadband bandwidth to 160 Kbps or more.</p><p>ISPs can only offer 160 Kbps or more bandwidth, if their broadband plans meet certain government criteria. However, unlike the current health care reform bill(s) floating around, the ISPs are authorized to A) disconnect anyone even suspected of illegal file sharing or any other reason, as they see fit, B) cut of any and all access to such hate sites as "www.usconstitution.net" and any other sites the current Administration deems "objectionable" and finally, C) dramatically raise prices to help cover the onerous regulation and reporting requirements that result form the National Broadband Plan. The procedures for determining who gets put onto the "No Net List" are classified and by statute are not subject to FOIA laws.</p><p>Oh, and your excise and any other taxes related to accessing the Internat are all being increased 100 percent, across the boards, to help pay for the program. Yeah, we know, sucks to be you, huh?</p><p>Remember, this is helping our children, you money grubbing capitalist pigs!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What we need is a National Broadband Plan.We are going to put the U.S. Government in the ISP business to foster competition by those greedy and money grubbing private ISPs.The way it works is , the U.S. Government cuts all broadband traffic down to 80 Kbps and then expand the U.S Government broadband bandwidth to 160 Kbps or more.ISPs can only offer 160 Kbps or more bandwidth , if their broadband plans meet certain government criteria .
However , unlike the current health care reform bill ( s ) floating around , the ISPs are authorized to A ) disconnect anyone even suspected of illegal file sharing or any other reason , as they see fit , B ) cut of any and all access to such hate sites as " www.usconstitution.net " and any other sites the current Administration deems " objectionable " and finally , C ) dramatically raise prices to help cover the onerous regulation and reporting requirements that result form the National Broadband Plan .
The procedures for determining who gets put onto the " No Net List " are classified and by statute are not subject to FOIA laws.Oh , and your excise and any other taxes related to accessing the Internat are all being increased 100 percent , across the boards , to help pay for the program .
Yeah , we know , sucks to be you , huh ? Remember , this is helping our children , you money grubbing capitalist pigs !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What we need is a National Broadband Plan.We are going to put the U.S. Government in the ISP business to foster competition by those greedy and money grubbing private ISPs.The way it works is, the U.S. Government cuts all broadband traffic down to 80 Kbps and then expand the U.S Government broadband bandwidth to 160 Kbps or more.ISPs can only offer 160 Kbps or more bandwidth, if their broadband plans meet certain government criteria.
However, unlike the current health care reform bill(s) floating around, the ISPs are authorized to A) disconnect anyone even suspected of illegal file sharing or any other reason, as they see fit, B) cut of any and all access to such hate sites as "www.usconstitution.net" and any other sites the current Administration deems "objectionable" and finally, C) dramatically raise prices to help cover the onerous regulation and reporting requirements that result form the National Broadband Plan.
The procedures for determining who gets put onto the "No Net List" are classified and by statute are not subject to FOIA laws.Oh, and your excise and any other taxes related to accessing the Internat are all being increased 100 percent, across the boards, to help pay for the program.
Yeah, we know, sucks to be you, huh?Remember, this is helping our children, you money grubbing capitalist pigs!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30469838</id>
	<title>ta30</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259695080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>lizard - In ot'her as WideOpen, but many find it</htmltext>
<tokenext>lizard - In ot'her as WideOpen , but many find it</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lizard - In ot'her as WideOpen, but many find it</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467858</id>
	<title>How will Leiberman muck this one up?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259679120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously. I'm just waiting on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously .
I 'm just waiting on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.
I'm just waiting on it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467982</id>
	<title>Re:Right.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259679900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Didn't we do this in the 90's, throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders?</p><p>If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.</p><p>--<br>BMO</p></div><p>Oh come on man! We need another financial bubble to get the economy going. What better way than to repeat the 90s. AND, it'll give those of us a chance to miss out on all the quick buck making a second time around because we don't have any connecitons.</p><p>Why do I have this urge to go and walk the streets muttering "bullshit! it's all bullshit!" to myself?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't we do this in the 90 's , throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders ? If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.--BMOOh come on man !
We need another financial bubble to get the economy going .
What better way than to repeat the 90s .
AND , it 'll give those of us a chance to miss out on all the quick buck making a second time around because we do n't have any connecitons.Why do I have this urge to go and walk the streets muttering " bullshit !
it 's all bullshit !
" to myself ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't we do this in the 90's, throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders?If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.--BMOOh come on man!
We need another financial bubble to get the economy going.
What better way than to repeat the 90s.
AND, it'll give those of us a chance to miss out on all the quick buck making a second time around because we don't have any connecitons.Why do I have this urge to go and walk the streets muttering "bullshit!
it's all bullshit!
" to myself?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468032</id>
	<title>Re:Right.</title>
	<author>RobinEggs</author>
	<datestamp>1259680140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Didn't we do this in the 90's?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.</p></div><p>Right...give them more money but this time put *strings* on it.</p><p>How about the kind of strings where we send every board member and executive, of any of these companies at any time since we gave them the money *last time*, a notice that they can install what we've already paid for or face federal fraud charges?</p><p>Seriously, I'm not usually a litigious, pseudo-populist dickwad, but a lawsuit or some criminal charges seem completely reasonable here.</p><p>And for fuck sake don't give them *more* money, unless you're okay with literally *training them*, like suggestible little puppy dogs, to defraud taxpayers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't we do this in the 90 's ?
... If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.Right...give them more money but this time put * strings * on it.How about the kind of strings where we send every board member and executive , of any of these companies at any time since we gave them the money * last time * , a notice that they can install what we 've already paid for or face federal fraud charges ? Seriously , I 'm not usually a litigious , pseudo-populist dickwad , but a lawsuit or some criminal charges seem completely reasonable here.And for fuck sake do n't give them * more * money , unless you 're okay with literally * training them * , like suggestible little puppy dogs , to defraud taxpayers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't we do this in the 90's?
... If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.Right...give them more money but this time put *strings* on it.How about the kind of strings where we send every board member and executive, of any of these companies at any time since we gave them the money *last time*, a notice that they can install what we've already paid for or face federal fraud charges?Seriously, I'm not usually a litigious, pseudo-populist dickwad, but a lawsuit or some criminal charges seem completely reasonable here.And for fuck sake don't give them *more* money, unless you're okay with literally *training them*, like suggestible little puppy dogs, to defraud taxpayers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468654</id>
	<title>Re:Policies can only help competition so far</title>
	<author>DJRumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1259685420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IMO, If they want to truly encourage competition, they need to separate content providers from access providers. That will free up access providers to do what they should be doing best. Competing for business at the lowest rate possible. It would also remove some of the political bullshit and insane antics that new entry's in the market have to go through just to be able to drop a single line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IMO , If they want to truly encourage competition , they need to separate content providers from access providers .
That will free up access providers to do what they should be doing best .
Competing for business at the lowest rate possible .
It would also remove some of the political bullshit and insane antics that new entry 's in the market have to go through just to be able to drop a single line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMO, If they want to truly encourage competition, they need to separate content providers from access providers.
That will free up access providers to do what they should be doing best.
Competing for business at the lowest rate possible.
It would also remove some of the political bullshit and insane antics that new entry's in the market have to go through just to be able to drop a single line.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30470222</id>
	<title>Re:Right.</title>
	<author>Glendale2x</author>
	<datestamp>1261080720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about we just don't give them money this time?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about we just do n't give them money this time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about we just don't give them money this time?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468018</id>
	<title>Re:Right.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259680080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.</p></div><p>To enforce this, we should only give the money out AFTER the conditions are met. They've been proven untrustworthy, so don't give them anything until they give us something first. Also, that way, anyone can do it, not a single company that gets the contract. Whoever satisfies the requirements first gets paid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.To enforce this , we should only give the money out AFTER the conditions are met .
They 've been proven untrustworthy , so do n't give them anything until they give us something first .
Also , that way , anyone can do it , not a single company that gets the contract .
Whoever satisfies the requirements first gets paid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.To enforce this, we should only give the money out AFTER the conditions are met.
They've been proven untrustworthy, so don't give them anything until they give us something first.
Also, that way, anyone can do it, not a single company that gets the contract.
Whoever satisfies the requirements first gets paid.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468806</id>
	<title>Hopeless</title>
	<author>g0dsp33d</author>
	<datestamp>1259686560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I really want this to work out. Unfortunately with the US government, this is an investment opportunity for tube manufacturing and installation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really want this to work out .
Unfortunately with the US government , this is an investment opportunity for tube manufacturing and installation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really want this to work out.
Unfortunately with the US government, this is an investment opportunity for tube manufacturing and installation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468208</id>
	<title>CLECs need lines</title>
	<author>TopSpin</author>
	<datestamp>1259681460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's very simple: open the lines back up to CLECs.  They've been hurt by being shut out for the last decade, but they're still around.  They'd be happy to pick up where they left off and resume reselling lines successfully.</p><p>Dumping money on politically important municipalities for "wireless", or something, isn't competition.  Competing carriers is competition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's very simple : open the lines back up to CLECs .
They 've been hurt by being shut out for the last decade , but they 're still around .
They 'd be happy to pick up where they left off and resume reselling lines successfully.Dumping money on politically important municipalities for " wireless " , or something , is n't competition .
Competing carriers is competition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's very simple: open the lines back up to CLECs.
They've been hurt by being shut out for the last decade, but they're still around.
They'd be happy to pick up where they left off and resume reselling lines successfully.Dumping money on politically important municipalities for "wireless", or something, isn't competition.
Competing carriers is competition.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468104</id>
	<title>According to Public Knowledge, this isn't enough..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259680560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/2821" title="publicknowledge.org">Their president has said,</a> [publicknowledge.org] "Nothing in the outline presented this morning would increase competition. Reforming universal service and supporting municipal networks are worthwhile goals, but they would do nothing to reverse the slide caused by eight years of misbegotten telecommunications policies that have crippled most meaningful broadband competition for consumers. There was no discussion of opening telecommunications networks to competitors. There was no discussion of structural separations of carriers into wholesale and retail components. These are the factors that Harvard&rsquo;s Berkman Center told the FCC in a study a mere two months ago were the reasons other countries have surpassed ours &ndash; they are using policies we discarded."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Their president has said , [ publicknowledge.org ] " Nothing in the outline presented this morning would increase competition .
Reforming universal service and supporting municipal networks are worthwhile goals , but they would do nothing to reverse the slide caused by eight years of misbegotten telecommunications policies that have crippled most meaningful broadband competition for consumers .
There was no discussion of opening telecommunications networks to competitors .
There was no discussion of structural separations of carriers into wholesale and retail components .
These are the factors that Harvard    s Berkman Center told the FCC in a study a mere two months ago were the reasons other countries have surpassed ours    they are using policies we discarded .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their president has said, [publicknowledge.org] "Nothing in the outline presented this morning would increase competition.
Reforming universal service and supporting municipal networks are worthwhile goals, but they would do nothing to reverse the slide caused by eight years of misbegotten telecommunications policies that have crippled most meaningful broadband competition for consumers.
There was no discussion of opening telecommunications networks to competitors.
There was no discussion of structural separations of carriers into wholesale and retail components.
These are the factors that Harvard’s Berkman Center told the FCC in a study a mere two months ago were the reasons other countries have surpassed ours – they are using policies we discarded.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468210</id>
	<title>Gigaom has a better article</title>
	<author>jonsmirl</author>
	<datestamp>1259681460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://gigaom.com/2009/12/16/fcc-takes-on-cable-but-not-carriers-with-national-broadband-plan/" title="gigaom.com">FCC Takes on Cable But Not Carriers With National Broadband Plan</a> [gigaom.com]</p><p>The actual presentation from the meeting is included in the article.</p><p>I am anxiously awaiting for this to be approved: "Mandate a home gateway device. Require MVPDs to provide a small, low-cost device whose functionality is to bridge the proprietary MVPD network elements (conditional access, tuning &amp; reception functions) to common, open standard, widely used in home communications interfaces; enables a retail navigation device to operate on all MVPD platforms."</p><p>I'm hoping that means unencrypted channel streams in-house over Ethernet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FCC Takes on Cable But Not Carriers With National Broadband Plan [ gigaom.com ] The actual presentation from the meeting is included in the article.I am anxiously awaiting for this to be approved : " Mandate a home gateway device .
Require MVPDs to provide a small , low-cost device whose functionality is to bridge the proprietary MVPD network elements ( conditional access , tuning &amp; reception functions ) to common , open standard , widely used in home communications interfaces ; enables a retail navigation device to operate on all MVPD platforms .
" I 'm hoping that means unencrypted channel streams in-house over Ethernet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FCC Takes on Cable But Not Carriers With National Broadband Plan [gigaom.com]The actual presentation from the meeting is included in the article.I am anxiously awaiting for this to be approved: "Mandate a home gateway device.
Require MVPDs to provide a small, low-cost device whose functionality is to bridge the proprietary MVPD network elements (conditional access, tuning &amp; reception functions) to common, open standard, widely used in home communications interfaces; enables a retail navigation device to operate on all MVPD platforms.
"I'm hoping that means unencrypted channel streams in-house over Ethernet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468382</id>
	<title>Re:Right.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259683080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Didn't we do this in the 90's, throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders?</p><p>If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.</p></div><p>Whoa, whoa, that sounds like <b>socialism</b>. We'll have none of that.</p></div><p>Are you local?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't we do this in the 90 's , throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders ? If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.Whoa , whoa , that sounds like socialism .
We 'll have none of that.Are you local ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't we do this in the 90's, throw a lot of money at the providers and all they did was give it out to the shareholders?If we do this there had better be significant strings attached.Whoa, whoa, that sounds like socialism.
We'll have none of that.Are you local?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468000</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896</id>
	<title>Policies can only help competition so far</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259679360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you have an industry with high entry costs due to infrastructure needs, you are going to end up with only a few companies after the shakeout occurs. Therefore, any policy that is designed to enable consumer choice and universal access is only useful to create an environment where competition will briefly flourish before degrading to the same old 2 or 3 dominant companies own the entire market.</p><p>If the government truly wants to encourage competition, they would provide funding to under-performing companies and startups. This would lower the entry costs and provide a balance to the giants who would normally run roughshod over the smaller guys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you have an industry with high entry costs due to infrastructure needs , you are going to end up with only a few companies after the shakeout occurs .
Therefore , any policy that is designed to enable consumer choice and universal access is only useful to create an environment where competition will briefly flourish before degrading to the same old 2 or 3 dominant companies own the entire market.If the government truly wants to encourage competition , they would provide funding to under-performing companies and startups .
This would lower the entry costs and provide a balance to the giants who would normally run roughshod over the smaller guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you have an industry with high entry costs due to infrastructure needs, you are going to end up with only a few companies after the shakeout occurs.
Therefore, any policy that is designed to enable consumer choice and universal access is only useful to create an environment where competition will briefly flourish before degrading to the same old 2 or 3 dominant companies own the entire market.If the government truly wants to encourage competition, they would provide funding to under-performing companies and startups.
This would lower the entry costs and provide a balance to the giants who would normally run roughshod over the smaller guys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468164</id>
	<title>Does this</title>
	<author>jaryd</author>
	<datestamp>1259681100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>remind anyone of a bailout?</htmltext>
<tokenext>remind anyone of a bailout ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>remind anyone of a bailout?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467830</id>
	<title>no</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259679000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All i hear is TAX TAX TAX SPEND SPEND SPEND.  Why should i pay for someone to be hooked up to the internet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All i hear is TAX TAX TAX SPEND SPEND SPEND .
Why should i pay for someone to be hooked up to the internet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All i hear is TAX TAX TAX SPEND SPEND SPEND.
Why should i pay for someone to be hooked up to the internet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30469202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30472464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30470222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30471206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_16_2329201_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_2329201.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468022
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468380
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468320
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_2329201.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30469202
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_2329201.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468000
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30470222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30471206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_2329201.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_2329201.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30467896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30472464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468240
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_16_2329201.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_16_2329201.30468208
</commentlist>
</conversation>
