<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_26_2238218</id>
	<title>Groklaw Putting Comes v. Microsoft Docs Online</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1261825260000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"PJ of Groklaw is working on putting the <a href="http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2009122612211929">documents from Comes v. Microsoft</a> online, to make them searchable and accessible to everyone.  If you don't remember their history, the plaintiffs got these documents from Microsoft during discovery after fighting the lawyers tooth and nail.  After realizing how embarrassing the documents were to Microsoft, they put them online and later got a very large settlement from Microsoft by agreeing to take their website down.  The web being what it is, these documents had already been mirrored and were later (legally) made available on the Pirate Bay.  Now Groklaw has put them online and is looking for people to help transcribe them, so that documents like the infamous <a href="http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958">Evangelism is War</a> presentation will not be forgotten."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " PJ of Groklaw is working on putting the documents from Comes v. Microsoft online , to make them searchable and accessible to everyone .
If you do n't remember their history , the plaintiffs got these documents from Microsoft during discovery after fighting the lawyers tooth and nail .
After realizing how embarrassing the documents were to Microsoft , they put them online and later got a very large settlement from Microsoft by agreeing to take their website down .
The web being what it is , these documents had already been mirrored and were later ( legally ) made available on the Pirate Bay .
Now Groklaw has put them online and is looking for people to help transcribe them , so that documents like the infamous Evangelism is War presentation will not be forgotten .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "PJ of Groklaw is working on putting the documents from Comes v. Microsoft online, to make them searchable and accessible to everyone.
If you don't remember their history, the plaintiffs got these documents from Microsoft during discovery after fighting the lawyers tooth and nail.
After realizing how embarrassing the documents were to Microsoft, they put them online and later got a very large settlement from Microsoft by agreeing to take their website down.
The web being what it is, these documents had already been mirrored and were later (legally) made available on the Pirate Bay.
Now Groklaw has put them online and is looking for people to help transcribe them, so that documents like the infamous Evangelism is War presentation will not be forgotten.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560878</id>
	<title>Sorry, no.</title>
	<author>symbolset</author>
	<datestamp>1261851240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This behaviour is in Microsoft's DNA from the first dealings with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary\_Kildall" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Gary Kildall</a> [wikipedia.org] to the current <a href="http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090812144154814" title="groklaw.net" rel="nofollow">i4i</a> [groklaw.net] debacle.  It didn't mysteriously originate at the moment that Microsoft turned the corner from logarithmic growth to slow decline in January of 2000.  For that radical course correction we need look no further than the appointment of Steve Ballmer to the helm on that day.
</p><p>Obviously Ballmer isn't responsible for the culture that established these behaviours - he inherited that.  We should just be thankful he's not as good at executing it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This behaviour is in Microsoft 's DNA from the first dealings with Gary Kildall [ wikipedia.org ] to the current i4i [ groklaw.net ] debacle .
It did n't mysteriously originate at the moment that Microsoft turned the corner from logarithmic growth to slow decline in January of 2000 .
For that radical course correction we need look no further than the appointment of Steve Ballmer to the helm on that day .
Obviously Ballmer is n't responsible for the culture that established these behaviours - he inherited that .
We should just be thankful he 's not as good at executing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This behaviour is in Microsoft's DNA from the first dealings with Gary Kildall [wikipedia.org] to the current i4i [groklaw.net] debacle.
It didn't mysteriously originate at the moment that Microsoft turned the corner from logarithmic growth to slow decline in January of 2000.
For that radical course correction we need look no further than the appointment of Steve Ballmer to the helm on that day.
Obviously Ballmer isn't responsible for the culture that established these behaviours - he inherited that.
We should just be thankful he's not as good at executing it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561352</id>
	<title>Re:Not that bad really</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1261945860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What precisely is healthy about stacking panels and planting stories?  I think you've been working for Satan too long.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What precisely is healthy about stacking panels and planting stories ?
I think you 've been working for Satan too long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What precisely is healthy about stacking panels and planting stories?
I think you've been working for Satan too long.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30563450</id>
	<title>Re:Unbiased this will not be.</title>
	<author>Fred\_A</author>
	<datestamp>1261932960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>GL/PJ isn't exactly know for being an unbiased source</p></div><p> As opposed to the "unbiased" generic computing press I suppose ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>GL/PJ is n't exactly know for being an unbiased source As opposed to the " unbiased " generic computing press I suppose ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GL/PJ isn't exactly know for being an unbiased source As opposed to the "unbiased" generic computing press I suppose ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559448</id>
	<title>Not that bad really</title>
	<author>clarkkent09</author>
	<datestamp>1261831080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you read the whole document the bit about stacking "independent" panels and getting favorable "news" stories is the only truly unethical part and even that is regularly done by a lot of companies including Apple in particular. it's just good agressive competition. Or maybe I worked for Oracle for too long<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read the whole document the bit about stacking " independent " panels and getting favorable " news " stories is the only truly unethical part and even that is regularly done by a lot of companies including Apple in particular .
it 's just good agressive competition .
Or maybe I worked for Oracle for too long : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read the whole document the bit about stacking "independent" panels and getting favorable "news" stories is the only truly unethical part and even that is regularly done by a lot of companies including Apple in particular.
it's just good agressive competition.
Or maybe I worked for Oracle for too long :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560336</id>
	<title>Re:The Colossal Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261843740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>when MS had won the OS wars, the browser wars, and since then, what has happened?</p></div> </blockquote><p>They've tried to retain territory. MS's focus was never on computing, it was on commerce. They have never been about making the best software for the market to chose, but rather to make the best software to control the market's choice.  MS's focus hasn't been about computing any more than Germany's 1940 focus was about liberating Europe.</p><p>(Sorry about that. I just couldn't believe we got this far without enacting Godwin in this thread, so I had to.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>when MS had won the OS wars , the browser wars , and since then , what has happened ?
They 've tried to retain territory .
MS 's focus was never on computing , it was on commerce .
They have never been about making the best software for the market to chose , but rather to make the best software to control the market 's choice .
MS 's focus has n't been about computing any more than Germany 's 1940 focus was about liberating Europe .
( Sorry about that .
I just could n't believe we got this far without enacting Godwin in this thread , so I had to .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when MS had won the OS wars, the browser wars, and since then, what has happened?
They've tried to retain territory.
MS's focus was never on computing, it was on commerce.
They have never been about making the best software for the market to chose, but rather to make the best software to control the market's choice.
MS's focus hasn't been about computing any more than Germany's 1940 focus was about liberating Europe.
(Sorry about that.
I just couldn't believe we got this far without enacting Godwin in this thread, so I had to.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288</id>
	<title>Unbiased this will not be.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261829700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rest assured that any information that isn't negative to Microsoft will be posted last if at all.  GL/PJ isn't exactly know for being an unbiased source - she will say/do anything to keep the hits/money coming in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rest assured that any information that is n't negative to Microsoft will be posted last if at all .
GL/PJ is n't exactly know for being an unbiased source - she will say/do anything to keep the hits/money coming in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rest assured that any information that isn't negative to Microsoft will be posted last if at all.
GL/PJ isn't exactly know for being an unbiased source - she will say/do anything to keep the hits/money coming in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562274</id>
	<title>Re:Unbiased this will not be.</title>
	<author>Zontar The Mindless</author>
	<datestamp>1261915500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maureeen O'Gara, is that you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maureeen O'Gara , is that you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maureeen O'Gara, is that you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559948</id>
	<title>Re:Thankful for the Streisand Effect</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1261837560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Caved?</p><p>Microsoft got blackmailed here, since THEY were the ones to cough up the money.  At least according to TFS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Caved ? Microsoft got blackmailed here , since THEY were the ones to cough up the money .
At least according to TFS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Caved?Microsoft got blackmailed here, since THEY were the ones to cough up the money.
At least according to TFS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559432</id>
	<title>Re:Thankful for the Streisand Effect</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261830960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Too bad those people caved, but that need not cost us the ability to know what they wanted so badly to hide."</p><p>Note to potential "cavers":<br>You can certainly sanitize the information you plan to agree to keep secret, give it to reliable third parties, then take the money.</p><p>It isn't honest, but there is no reason to be honest with your enemies. We are past the point of moral obligation to such people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Too bad those people caved , but that need not cost us the ability to know what they wanted so badly to hide .
" Note to potential " cavers " : You can certainly sanitize the information you plan to agree to keep secret , give it to reliable third parties , then take the money.It is n't honest , but there is no reason to be honest with your enemies .
We are past the point of moral obligation to such people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Too bad those people caved, but that need not cost us the ability to know what they wanted so badly to hide.
"Note to potential "cavers":You can certainly sanitize the information you plan to agree to keep secret, give it to reliable third parties, then take the money.It isn't honest, but there is no reason to be honest with your enemies.
We are past the point of moral obligation to such people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560214</id>
	<title>Re:Thankful for the Streisand Effect</title>
	<author>RichardJenkins</author>
	<datestamp>1261841580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Streisand Effect is just an observation that cover-ups make for great gossip, and that gossip can spread rapidly over the Internet, so that the fact that a well known person (or entity) tries to suppress the dissemination of information can achieve greater circulation amongst the population than the information itself would have.</p><p>I doubt the terms of the settlement actually did anything to further the spread of these documents, so there is not need to mention the so-called 'Streisand Effect'. Again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Streisand Effect is just an observation that cover-ups make for great gossip , and that gossip can spread rapidly over the Internet , so that the fact that a well known person ( or entity ) tries to suppress the dissemination of information can achieve greater circulation amongst the population than the information itself would have.I doubt the terms of the settlement actually did anything to further the spread of these documents , so there is not need to mention the so-called 'Streisand Effect' .
Again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Streisand Effect is just an observation that cover-ups make for great gossip, and that gossip can spread rapidly over the Internet, so that the fact that a well known person (or entity) tries to suppress the dissemination of information can achieve greater circulation amongst the population than the information itself would have.I doubt the terms of the settlement actually did anything to further the spread of these documents, so there is not need to mention the so-called 'Streisand Effect'.
Again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30563168</id>
	<title>M$ shortsighted</title>
	<author>garethharris</author>
	<datestamp>1261929720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>M$ is a child of IBM and slew them in true Oedipal fashion. But like many of these comedy/tragedies, there are unintended side effects to their behavior. Just think of the posture M$ could be in now, if they had concentrated on having a worthwhile product instead of screwing everybody with market manipulation an licensing games. Hoist by their own petard, down they go. It is interesting to compare the decline with the ascent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>M $ is a child of IBM and slew them in true Oedipal fashion .
But like many of these comedy/tragedies , there are unintended side effects to their behavior .
Just think of the posture M $ could be in now , if they had concentrated on having a worthwhile product instead of screwing everybody with market manipulation an licensing games .
Hoist by their own petard , down they go .
It is interesting to compare the decline with the ascent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>M$ is a child of IBM and slew them in true Oedipal fashion.
But like many of these comedy/tragedies, there are unintended side effects to their behavior.
Just think of the posture M$ could be in now, if they had concentrated on having a worthwhile product instead of screwing everybody with market manipulation an licensing games.
Hoist by their own petard, down they go.
It is interesting to compare the decline with the ascent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562824</id>
	<title>Re:Unbiased this will not be.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261925160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unbiased you are not.  Clearly you don't understand what Groklaw is all about, and why stuff like this *MUST* be made public.

Groklaw has credibility because it posts truths, uncomfortable or not, and keeps all the shenanigans public.  No wonder the malodorous M$ hate it, as does the crew behind the SCO$cam extortion attempt.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unbiased you are not .
Clearly you do n't understand what Groklaw is all about , and why stuff like this * MUST * be made public .
Groklaw has credibility because it posts truths , uncomfortable or not , and keeps all the shenanigans public .
No wonder the malodorous M $ hate it , as does the crew behind the SCO $ cam extortion attempt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unbiased you are not.
Clearly you don't understand what Groklaw is all about, and why stuff like this *MUST* be made public.
Groklaw has credibility because it posts truths, uncomfortable or not, and keeps all the shenanigans public.
No wonder the malodorous M$ hate it, as does the crew behind the SCO$cam extortion attempt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30645294</id>
	<title>Re:Thankful for the Streisand Effect</title>
	<author>creeront</author>
	<datestamp>1231060380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Violating an NDA is a breach of contract, not a tort. Torts provide remedies for civil wrongs not arising out of contract.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Violating an NDA is a breach of contract , not a tort .
Torts provide remedies for civil wrongs not arising out of contract .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Violating an NDA is a breach of contract, not a tort.
Torts provide remedies for civil wrongs not arising out of contract.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559334</id>
	<title>online communications</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261830120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>is going to be a whole speciality within litigation PR.</htmltext>
<tokenext>is going to be a whole speciality within litigation PR .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is going to be a whole speciality within litigation PR.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560698</id>
	<title>Re:Unbiased this will not be.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261848720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Rest assured that any information that isn't negative to Microsoft will be posted last if at all.</i> </p><p>Don't be silly. Anything not negative to Microsoft has long since been made public by MS's own flacks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rest assured that any information that is n't negative to Microsoft will be posted last if at all .
Do n't be silly .
Anything not negative to Microsoft has long since been made public by MS 's own flacks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rest assured that any information that isn't negative to Microsoft will be posted last if at all.
Don't be silly.
Anything not negative to Microsoft has long since been made public by MS's own flacks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559382</id>
	<title>Re:Unbiased this will not be.</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1261830540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you don't like Groklaw, debunk what is presented there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't like Groklaw , debunk what is presented there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't like Groklaw, debunk what is presented there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562098</id>
	<title>Re:Thankful for the Streisand Effect</title>
	<author>ultranova</author>
	<datestamp>1261912200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It isn't honest, but there is no reason to be honest with your enemies. We are past the point of moral obligation to such people.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Are you saying they're <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair\_Game\_(Scientology)" title="wikipedia.org">Fair Game</a> [wikipedia.org]? Nice role models you have there.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't honest , but there is no reason to be honest with your enemies .
We are past the point of moral obligation to such people .
Are you saying they 're Fair Game [ wikipedia.org ] ?
Nice role models you have there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't honest, but there is no reason to be honest with your enemies.
We are past the point of moral obligation to such people.
Are you saying they're Fair Game [wikipedia.org]?
Nice role models you have there.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30618496</id>
	<title>Re:Not that bad really</title>
	<author>rbanffy</author>
	<datestamp>1230821760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, of course, good aggressive competition is illegal when you use it to extend one monopoly into others.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , of course , good aggressive competition is illegal when you use it to extend one monopoly into others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, of course, good aggressive competition is illegal when you use it to extend one monopoly into others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559902</id>
	<title>Re:Groklaw Putting Comes v. Microsoft Docs Online</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261836840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"Every line of code that is written to our standards is a small victory; every line of code that is written to any other standard, is a small defeat. Total victory, for DRG, is the universal adoption of our standards by developers, as this is an important step towards total victory for Microsoft itself: "A computer on every desk and in every home, running Microsoft software.""</i></p><p>I see now why Miguel de Microsoft and Mono exist now....<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...I wish I was kidding<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Every line of code that is written to our standards is a small victory ; every line of code that is written to any other standard , is a small defeat .
Total victory , for DRG , is the universal adoption of our standards by developers , as this is an important step towards total victory for Microsoft itself : " A computer on every desk and in every home , running Microsoft software .
" " I see now why Miguel de Microsoft and Mono exist now.... ...I wish I was kidding : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Every line of code that is written to our standards is a small victory; every line of code that is written to any other standard, is a small defeat.
Total victory, for DRG, is the universal adoption of our standards by developers, as this is an important step towards total victory for Microsoft itself: "A computer on every desk and in every home, running Microsoft software.
""I see now why Miguel de Microsoft and Mono exist now.... ...I wish I was kidding :(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559500</id>
	<title>B.b.b..but, M$....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261831680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I found the quote in their documentation very telling:</p><p>"No one is forced to adopt our standards at the barrel of a gun. We can only convince, not compel. Those who adopt our standards do so as a rational decision to serve their own ends, whatever those may be."</p><p>But...from everything I read here at<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. M$ does nothing but put guns to the heads of peoples children and forces them to run their software!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I found the quote in their documentation very telling : " No one is forced to adopt our standards at the barrel of a gun .
We can only convince , not compel .
Those who adopt our standards do so as a rational decision to serve their own ends , whatever those may be .
" But...from everything I read here at / .
M $ does nothing but put guns to the heads of peoples children and forces them to run their software !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I found the quote in their documentation very telling:"No one is forced to adopt our standards at the barrel of a gun.
We can only convince, not compel.
Those who adopt our standards do so as a rational decision to serve their own ends, whatever those may be.
"But...from everything I read here at /.
M$ does nothing but put guns to the heads of peoples children and forces them to run their software!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559478</id>
	<title>Talking to one of those who worked on the case...</title>
	<author>pcraven</author>
	<datestamp>1261831320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had one of the people working on the case come talk to my college class. The documents provided to the law office were on paper. The office had an impressive cluster of computers used to do optical code recognition on all the documents so that they could be indexed and searched. There were tons of documents. It was not easy technically, and they worked a lot of hours.</p><p>The person I talked to always hoped someone would take this on. They couldn't give up their work for public domain, but there was a ton of computer history contained in those files.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had one of the people working on the case come talk to my college class .
The documents provided to the law office were on paper .
The office had an impressive cluster of computers used to do optical code recognition on all the documents so that they could be indexed and searched .
There were tons of documents .
It was not easy technically , and they worked a lot of hours.The person I talked to always hoped someone would take this on .
They could n't give up their work for public domain , but there was a ton of computer history contained in those files .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had one of the people working on the case come talk to my college class.
The documents provided to the law office were on paper.
The office had an impressive cluster of computers used to do optical code recognition on all the documents so that they could be indexed and searched.
There were tons of documents.
It was not easy technically, and they worked a lot of hours.The person I talked to always hoped someone would take this on.
They couldn't give up their work for public domain, but there was a ton of computer history contained in those files.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559332</id>
	<title>Re:Unbiased this will not be.</title>
	<author>mevets</author>
	<datestamp>1261830120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I somewhat doubt microsoft fought and bribed to suppress anything complimentary.    I like the way you smear PJ, btw.   Wouldn't PJ's best source of income be getting a microsoft bribe to keep the records obscure?</p><p>Being a shill is bad enough, but is anybody even paying you to post this shit, or is this some sort of public service?   Groglaw is also a sort of public service, but somehow they have credibility.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I somewhat doubt microsoft fought and bribed to suppress anything complimentary .
I like the way you smear PJ , btw .
Would n't PJ 's best source of income be getting a microsoft bribe to keep the records obscure ? Being a shill is bad enough , but is anybody even paying you to post this shit , or is this some sort of public service ?
Groglaw is also a sort of public service , but somehow they have credibility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I somewhat doubt microsoft fought and bribed to suppress anything complimentary.
I like the way you smear PJ, btw.
Wouldn't PJ's best source of income be getting a microsoft bribe to keep the records obscure?Being a shill is bad enough, but is anybody even paying you to post this shit, or is this some sort of public service?
Groglaw is also a sort of public service, but somehow they have credibility.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559504</id>
	<title>Groklaw Putting Comes v. Microsoft Docs Online</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261831800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Our mission is to establish Microsoft's platforms as the de facto standards throughout the computer industry. Our enemies are the vendors of platforms that compete with ours: Netscape, Sun, IBM, Oracle, Lotus, etc. The field of battle is the software industry. Success is measured in shipping applications. Every line of code that is written to our standards is a small victory; every line of code that is written to any other standard, is a small defeat. Total victory, for DRG, is the universal adoption of our standards by developers, as this is an important step towards total victory for Microsoft itself: "A computer on every desk and in every home, running Microsoft software."</p></div></blockquote><p>
This is why I wish the internet would become a development platform for application (GUI driven in this case). If this was the case the platform wars (to borrow Microsoft terminology) would be over and developers would code for the internet. Google, with chrome os etc, seems to be an ally in this, not that they are benevolent benefactors, just that their business aims and the open source community desires align. <br>
What would it take to code in any number of languages (in the way we can now code in javascript) for the web.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our mission is to establish Microsoft 's platforms as the de facto standards throughout the computer industry .
Our enemies are the vendors of platforms that compete with ours : Netscape , Sun , IBM , Oracle , Lotus , etc .
The field of battle is the software industry .
Success is measured in shipping applications .
Every line of code that is written to our standards is a small victory ; every line of code that is written to any other standard , is a small defeat .
Total victory , for DRG , is the universal adoption of our standards by developers , as this is an important step towards total victory for Microsoft itself : " A computer on every desk and in every home , running Microsoft software .
" This is why I wish the internet would become a development platform for application ( GUI driven in this case ) .
If this was the case the platform wars ( to borrow Microsoft terminology ) would be over and developers would code for the internet .
Google , with chrome os etc , seems to be an ally in this , not that they are benevolent benefactors , just that their business aims and the open source community desires align .
What would it take to code in any number of languages ( in the way we can now code in javascript ) for the web .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our mission is to establish Microsoft's platforms as the de facto standards throughout the computer industry.
Our enemies are the vendors of platforms that compete with ours: Netscape, Sun, IBM, Oracle, Lotus, etc.
The field of battle is the software industry.
Success is measured in shipping applications.
Every line of code that is written to our standards is a small victory; every line of code that is written to any other standard, is a small defeat.
Total victory, for DRG, is the universal adoption of our standards by developers, as this is an important step towards total victory for Microsoft itself: "A computer on every desk and in every home, running Microsoft software.
"
This is why I wish the internet would become a development platform for application (GUI driven in this case).
If this was the case the platform wars (to borrow Microsoft terminology) would be over and developers would code for the internet.
Google, with chrome os etc, seems to be an ally in this, not that they are benevolent benefactors, just that their business aims and the open source community desires align.
What would it take to code in any number of languages (in the way we can now code in javascript) for the web.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561326</id>
	<title>Re:Groklaw Putting Comes v. Microsoft Docs Online</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1261945320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If this was the case the platform wars (to borrow Microsoft terminology) would be over and developers would code for the internet.</p> </div><p>And the resulting applications would suck. Developers should develop for the user. "The internet" is not a sentient being, not the end-user of software. So, why would humans want want software developed for the internet? We should want software developed for humans.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this was the case the platform wars ( to borrow Microsoft terminology ) would be over and developers would code for the internet .
And the resulting applications would suck .
Developers should develop for the user .
" The internet " is not a sentient being , not the end-user of software .
So , why would humans want want software developed for the internet ?
We should want software developed for humans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this was the case the platform wars (to borrow Microsoft terminology) would be over and developers would code for the internet.
And the resulting applications would suck.
Developers should develop for the user.
"The internet" is not a sentient being, not the end-user of software.
So, why would humans want want software developed for the internet?
We should want software developed for humans.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559598</id>
	<title>The Colossal Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261832820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is that right around the same time Microsoft started thinking about using its bulk and business practices to achieve marketing ends, is right around the same time its innovation, risk taking, and other admirable traits about the company slacked off.  I mean, yeah, it might have been hurtful to Borland for Microsoft to buy the superior Fox and use it to crush dBase, but at least the market did get a better product.  And it might have been wrong to use Windows money to fund the development of Visual Studio to propel it past Turbo C++, but, again, the consumer got a better product.  Even IE4 was better than Netscape.</p><p>But this email is from 1997, when MS had won the OS wars, the browser wars, and since then, what has happened?  MS has lost its focus on computing entirely.  Folding the Windows NT core into the Windows 95 shell to get first Windows NT 4.0 and then Windows 2000 were the best things the company did, and since then, we've had really not much to write home about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that right around the same time Microsoft started thinking about using its bulk and business practices to achieve marketing ends , is right around the same time its innovation , risk taking , and other admirable traits about the company slacked off .
I mean , yeah , it might have been hurtful to Borland for Microsoft to buy the superior Fox and use it to crush dBase , but at least the market did get a better product .
And it might have been wrong to use Windows money to fund the development of Visual Studio to propel it past Turbo C + + , but , again , the consumer got a better product .
Even IE4 was better than Netscape.But this email is from 1997 , when MS had won the OS wars , the browser wars , and since then , what has happened ?
MS has lost its focus on computing entirely .
Folding the Windows NT core into the Windows 95 shell to get first Windows NT 4.0 and then Windows 2000 were the best things the company did , and since then , we 've had really not much to write home about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that right around the same time Microsoft started thinking about using its bulk and business practices to achieve marketing ends, is right around the same time its innovation, risk taking, and other admirable traits about the company slacked off.
I mean, yeah, it might have been hurtful to Borland for Microsoft to buy the superior Fox and use it to crush dBase, but at least the market did get a better product.
And it might have been wrong to use Windows money to fund the development of Visual Studio to propel it past Turbo C++, but, again, the consumer got a better product.
Even IE4 was better than Netscape.But this email is from 1997, when MS had won the OS wars, the browser wars, and since then, what has happened?
MS has lost its focus on computing entirely.
Folding the Windows NT core into the Windows 95 shell to get first Windows NT 4.0 and then Windows 2000 were the best things the company did, and since then, we've had really not much to write home about.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234</id>
	<title>Thankful for the Streisand Effect</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261829040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>After realizing how embarrassing the documents were to Microsoft, they put them online and later got a very large settlement from Microsoft by agreeing to take their website down.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I'm quite grateful for the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand\_effect" title="wikipedia.org">Streisand Effect</a> [wikipedia.org].  If not for that, then normally someone who sells out or is (legally) bribed like this removes everyone's access to such information.  Too bad those people caved, but that need not cost us the ability to know what they wanted so badly to hide.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>After realizing how embarrassing the documents were to Microsoft , they put them online and later got a very large settlement from Microsoft by agreeing to take their website down .
I 'm quite grateful for the Streisand Effect [ wikipedia.org ] .
If not for that , then normally someone who sells out or is ( legally ) bribed like this removes everyone 's access to such information .
Too bad those people caved , but that need not cost us the ability to know what they wanted so badly to hide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After realizing how embarrassing the documents were to Microsoft, they put them online and later got a very large settlement from Microsoft by agreeing to take their website down.
I'm quite grateful for the Streisand Effect [wikipedia.org].
If not for that, then normally someone who sells out or is (legally) bribed like this removes everyone's access to such information.
Too bad those people caved, but that need not cost us the ability to know what they wanted so badly to hide.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559328</id>
	<title>Re:Unbiased this will not be.</title>
	<author>causality</author>
	<datestamp>1261830060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Rest assured that any information that isn't negative to Microsoft will be posted last if at all.  GL/PJ isn't exactly know for being an unbiased source - she will say/do anything to keep the hits/money coming in.</p></div><p>That's a great balance against the marketing and PR that Microsoft spends a great deal of money producing.  All of their marketing and PR is completely biased, of course.  It would be reasonable to complain about GL being biased the moment Microsoft's marketing fully discloses, <i>with equal emphasis and prominence</i>, all disadvantages and downsides of all of their products in addition to their advantages and benefits.  Until then, such a balance that PJ is providing is a welcome and useful thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Rest assured that any information that is n't negative to Microsoft will be posted last if at all .
GL/PJ is n't exactly know for being an unbiased source - she will say/do anything to keep the hits/money coming in.That 's a great balance against the marketing and PR that Microsoft spends a great deal of money producing .
All of their marketing and PR is completely biased , of course .
It would be reasonable to complain about GL being biased the moment Microsoft 's marketing fully discloses , with equal emphasis and prominence , all disadvantages and downsides of all of their products in addition to their advantages and benefits .
Until then , such a balance that PJ is providing is a welcome and useful thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rest assured that any information that isn't negative to Microsoft will be posted last if at all.
GL/PJ isn't exactly know for being an unbiased source - she will say/do anything to keep the hits/money coming in.That's a great balance against the marketing and PR that Microsoft spends a great deal of money producing.
All of their marketing and PR is completely biased, of course.
It would be reasonable to complain about GL being biased the moment Microsoft's marketing fully discloses, with equal emphasis and prominence, all disadvantages and downsides of all of their products in addition to their advantages and benefits.
Until then, such a balance that PJ is providing is a welcome and useful thing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559738</id>
	<title>Opposition is the only way</title>
	<author>tyroneking</author>
	<datestamp>1261834620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Surely the Evangeline* is War email is pure and simple evidence that they are evil and we should do everything in our power to oppose them. A company as big as that should be scrupulously decent and honest and try to avoid any embarrassment  --- but apparently they no longer feel embarrassed about their own actions --- a bit like a friend of mine who gets high and then acts like a c**ck but really doesn't seem to feel ashamed of his own behaviour --- so he keeps on doing stupid things until I hit him. Facebook are the same; sometimes even Google.<br>In all cases, we-the-people need to beat them back into behaving decently.<br>Boycott Microsoft.<br>Also, boycott Novell (stfu Jono Bacon...)<br>And whilst I like Ubuntu and De Icaza, also boycott Gnome.<br>Not just at home on your crappy home PCs and laptops --- but in the office too.</p><p>(*we are all lost)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Surely the Evangeline * is War email is pure and simple evidence that they are evil and we should do everything in our power to oppose them .
A company as big as that should be scrupulously decent and honest and try to avoid any embarrassment --- but apparently they no longer feel embarrassed about their own actions --- a bit like a friend of mine who gets high and then acts like a c * * ck but really does n't seem to feel ashamed of his own behaviour --- so he keeps on doing stupid things until I hit him .
Facebook are the same ; sometimes even Google.In all cases , we-the-people need to beat them back into behaving decently.Boycott Microsoft.Also , boycott Novell ( stfu Jono Bacon... ) And whilst I like Ubuntu and De Icaza , also boycott Gnome.Not just at home on your crappy home PCs and laptops --- but in the office too .
( * we are all lost )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surely the Evangeline* is War email is pure and simple evidence that they are evil and we should do everything in our power to oppose them.
A company as big as that should be scrupulously decent and honest and try to avoid any embarrassment  --- but apparently they no longer feel embarrassed about their own actions --- a bit like a friend of mine who gets high and then acts like a c**ck but really doesn't seem to feel ashamed of his own behaviour --- so he keeps on doing stupid things until I hit him.
Facebook are the same; sometimes even Google.In all cases, we-the-people need to beat them back into behaving decently.Boycott Microsoft.Also, boycott Novell (stfu Jono Bacon...)And whilst I like Ubuntu and De Icaza, also boycott Gnome.Not just at home on your crappy home PCs and laptops --- but in the office too.
(*we are all lost)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561558</id>
	<title>Re:Thankful for the Streisand Effect</title>
	<author>Mathinker</author>
	<datestamp>1261904940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; This is unwise, especially when Microsoft can afford the best lawyers and you cannot.</p><p>The injustice caused by the imbalance of economic power and the fact that the current legal system <i>amplifies</i> such imbalances (because of the high cost of defending oneself) only emphasizes the GP's point.</p><p>&gt; There are times when you have concerns other than how much you can justify without violating your morality</p><p>Depending on the volume of information involved, it might be trivial to use Tor to reveal it without being exposed to significant risk (assuming that the information is not interesting to the NSA and its ilk). OTOH, it <i>is</i> idiotic to reveal information for which there is even a tenuous legal argument that you, and only you, could have revealed it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; This is unwise , especially when Microsoft can afford the best lawyers and you can not.The injustice caused by the imbalance of economic power and the fact that the current legal system amplifies such imbalances ( because of the high cost of defending oneself ) only emphasizes the GP 's point. &gt; There are times when you have concerns other than how much you can justify without violating your moralityDepending on the volume of information involved , it might be trivial to use Tor to reveal it without being exposed to significant risk ( assuming that the information is not interesting to the NSA and its ilk ) .
OTOH , it is idiotic to reveal information for which there is even a tenuous legal argument that you , and only you , could have revealed it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; This is unwise, especially when Microsoft can afford the best lawyers and you cannot.The injustice caused by the imbalance of economic power and the fact that the current legal system amplifies such imbalances (because of the high cost of defending oneself) only emphasizes the GP's point.&gt; There are times when you have concerns other than how much you can justify without violating your moralityDepending on the volume of information involved, it might be trivial to use Tor to reveal it without being exposed to significant risk (assuming that the information is not interesting to the NSA and its ilk).
OTOH, it is idiotic to reveal information for which there is even a tenuous legal argument that you, and only you, could have revealed it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30563974</id>
	<title>This is old. There are new tactics deployed now.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261938060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This what Microsoft wanted in order of preference:</p><p>1) Everyone use their OS and their applications and have to pay for it, and nobody use the FOSS OS or applications.<br>2) Everyone use their OS and nobody use the FOSS OS or applications.<br>3) Everyone use their OS and (grudgingly) all FOSS developed on their OS too, to stop the rival OS gaining traction at their expense.</p><p>Well vendor lock in and embrace, and extend almost secured them number 1, but they lost out.<br>Same tactics almost got them number 2, but same result there too.<br>They have now deployed their most radical tactic yet. They are 'helping' all FOSS projects to develop on their OS but strangely shunning Linux. We all know why.</p><p>If Linux dies, you can be sure that so will the support for FOSS on Microsoft platform. They love you only while you have a choice. They are in the process of taking that choice away from you....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This what Microsoft wanted in order of preference : 1 ) Everyone use their OS and their applications and have to pay for it , and nobody use the FOSS OS or applications.2 ) Everyone use their OS and nobody use the FOSS OS or applications.3 ) Everyone use their OS and ( grudgingly ) all FOSS developed on their OS too , to stop the rival OS gaining traction at their expense.Well vendor lock in and embrace , and extend almost secured them number 1 , but they lost out.Same tactics almost got them number 2 , but same result there too.They have now deployed their most radical tactic yet .
They are 'helping ' all FOSS projects to develop on their OS but strangely shunning Linux .
We all know why.If Linux dies , you can be sure that so will the support for FOSS on Microsoft platform .
They love you only while you have a choice .
They are in the process of taking that choice away from you... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This what Microsoft wanted in order of preference:1) Everyone use their OS and their applications and have to pay for it, and nobody use the FOSS OS or applications.2) Everyone use their OS and nobody use the FOSS OS or applications.3) Everyone use their OS and (grudgingly) all FOSS developed on their OS too, to stop the rival OS gaining traction at their expense.Well vendor lock in and embrace, and extend almost secured them number 1, but they lost out.Same tactics almost got them number 2, but same result there too.They have now deployed their most radical tactic yet.
They are 'helping' all FOSS projects to develop on their OS but strangely shunning Linux.
We all know why.If Linux dies, you can be sure that so will the support for FOSS on Microsoft platform.
They love you only while you have a choice.
They are in the process of taking that choice away from you....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562256</id>
	<title>Re:Thankful for the Streisand Effect</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261915080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Good old Streisand effect. I just downloaded a copy of the evangelism presentation (oh noes, did I infringe MS's copyright?) and read through it. <b>For some reason, learning that something is censored makes me take a lot of effort to find it and read through it carefully, much more than if nothing happened to it. It's probably partly "if it gets censored, it must be interesting" and partly sticking it to the man.</b> Doesn't matter, whatever gets uploaded is out there and will be forever out there and there's nothing anyone can do to stop that.</p></div><p>Does this extent to learning new languages? US adaptions of books (would be wrong to call them translations) and movies are generally very censored by the publishers and producers. The original books and movies usually deal with matters that are complitely removed from the US adaption (the main excuse is to make the books/movies simpler to read/view with less diversions, because every American publisher seem to think of their readers/viewers as stupid and easily distracted), usually the main themes of the books and movies are altered too. And to make it even worse, the original movies are generally much better made and with good actors, while the americanised movies use subpar, but famous, US actors and directors.</p><p>If the original movie is distributed in US, than large parts of the movie is usually censored. Sometimes for no obvius reason. From resent experience I could give as an example the hilarously funny Swedish movie "Picassos Adventures" were the sketch that make fun of American Gangster  movies (and American English, the movie is fully made in fake languages that make fun of the original languages) are removed. Speaking about Swedish made things: large parts of Pippi Longstocking in the Americanised version is censored or rewritten because it would make children behave unruly. Way to go with a book which main theme is about questioning and stand up against unfair authorities.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good old Streisand effect .
I just downloaded a copy of the evangelism presentation ( oh noes , did I infringe MS 's copyright ?
) and read through it .
For some reason , learning that something is censored makes me take a lot of effort to find it and read through it carefully , much more than if nothing happened to it .
It 's probably partly " if it gets censored , it must be interesting " and partly sticking it to the man .
Does n't matter , whatever gets uploaded is out there and will be forever out there and there 's nothing anyone can do to stop that.Does this extent to learning new languages ?
US adaptions of books ( would be wrong to call them translations ) and movies are generally very censored by the publishers and producers .
The original books and movies usually deal with matters that are complitely removed from the US adaption ( the main excuse is to make the books/movies simpler to read/view with less diversions , because every American publisher seem to think of their readers/viewers as stupid and easily distracted ) , usually the main themes of the books and movies are altered too .
And to make it even worse , the original movies are generally much better made and with good actors , while the americanised movies use subpar , but famous , US actors and directors.If the original movie is distributed in US , than large parts of the movie is usually censored .
Sometimes for no obvius reason .
From resent experience I could give as an example the hilarously funny Swedish movie " Picassos Adventures " were the sketch that make fun of American Gangster movies ( and American English , the movie is fully made in fake languages that make fun of the original languages ) are removed .
Speaking about Swedish made things : large parts of Pippi Longstocking in the Americanised version is censored or rewritten because it would make children behave unruly .
Way to go with a book which main theme is about questioning and stand up against unfair authorities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good old Streisand effect.
I just downloaded a copy of the evangelism presentation (oh noes, did I infringe MS's copyright?
) and read through it.
For some reason, learning that something is censored makes me take a lot of effort to find it and read through it carefully, much more than if nothing happened to it.
It's probably partly "if it gets censored, it must be interesting" and partly sticking it to the man.
Doesn't matter, whatever gets uploaded is out there and will be forever out there and there's nothing anyone can do to stop that.Does this extent to learning new languages?
US adaptions of books (would be wrong to call them translations) and movies are generally very censored by the publishers and producers.
The original books and movies usually deal with matters that are complitely removed from the US adaption (the main excuse is to make the books/movies simpler to read/view with less diversions, because every American publisher seem to think of their readers/viewers as stupid and easily distracted), usually the main themes of the books and movies are altered too.
And to make it even worse, the original movies are generally much better made and with good actors, while the americanised movies use subpar, but famous, US actors and directors.If the original movie is distributed in US, than large parts of the movie is usually censored.
Sometimes for no obvius reason.
From resent experience I could give as an example the hilarously funny Swedish movie "Picassos Adventures" were the sketch that make fun of American Gangster  movies (and American English, the movie is fully made in fake languages that make fun of the original languages) are removed.
Speaking about Swedish made things: large parts of Pippi Longstocking in the Americanised version is censored or rewritten because it would make children behave unruly.
Way to go with a book which main theme is about questioning and stand up against unfair authorities.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560002</id>
	<title>I'll take some of that action</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261838280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there is a PDF of this, I would archive it (cook it to dvd) right away, and wouldn't mind putting it online too.  Why have only one place where microsoft can be outed, when the web can be crawling with their joy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there is a PDF of this , I would archive it ( cook it to dvd ) right away , and would n't mind putting it online too .
Why have only one place where microsoft can be outed , when the web can be crawling with their joy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there is a PDF of this, I would archive it (cook it to dvd) right away, and wouldn't mind putting it online too.
Why have only one place where microsoft can be outed, when the web can be crawling with their joy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559966</id>
	<title>Re:Thankful for the Streisand Effect</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1261837800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good old Streisand effect. I just downloaded a copy of the evangelism presentation (oh noes, did I infringe MS's copyright?) and read through it. For some reason, learning that something is censored makes me take a lot of effort to find it and read through it carefully, much more than if nothing happened to it. It's probably partly "if it gets censored, it must be interesting" and partly sticking it to the man. Doesn't matter, whatever gets uploaded is out there and will be forever out there and there's nothing anyone can do to stop that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good old Streisand effect .
I just downloaded a copy of the evangelism presentation ( oh noes , did I infringe MS 's copyright ?
) and read through it .
For some reason , learning that something is censored makes me take a lot of effort to find it and read through it carefully , much more than if nothing happened to it .
It 's probably partly " if it gets censored , it must be interesting " and partly sticking it to the man .
Does n't matter , whatever gets uploaded is out there and will be forever out there and there 's nothing anyone can do to stop that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good old Streisand effect.
I just downloaded a copy of the evangelism presentation (oh noes, did I infringe MS's copyright?
) and read through it.
For some reason, learning that something is censored makes me take a lot of effort to find it and read through it carefully, much more than if nothing happened to it.
It's probably partly "if it gets censored, it must be interesting" and partly sticking it to the man.
Doesn't matter, whatever gets uploaded is out there and will be forever out there and there's nothing anyone can do to stop that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30564920</id>
	<title>Microsoft is, was, and always will be Evil.</title>
	<author>echtertyp</author>
	<datestamp>1261947480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft == Sauron</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft = = Sauron</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft == Sauron</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560918</id>
	<title>Re:Unbiased this will not be.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261851660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think PJ has got a pretty thick skin, particularly after the SCO scamsters went after her with everything they had.  Some retarded little puke shilling for Microsft ain't a speck of shit on the floor compared to the unholy trinity of Lyons, Enderle and O'Gara.  It's like comparing some Nigerian scammer to Bernie Madoff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think PJ has got a pretty thick skin , particularly after the SCO scamsters went after her with everything they had .
Some retarded little puke shilling for Microsft ai n't a speck of shit on the floor compared to the unholy trinity of Lyons , Enderle and O'Gara .
It 's like comparing some Nigerian scammer to Bernie Madoff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think PJ has got a pretty thick skin, particularly after the SCO scamsters went after her with everything they had.
Some retarded little puke shilling for Microsft ain't a speck of shit on the floor compared to the unholy trinity of Lyons, Enderle and O'Gara.
It's like comparing some Nigerian scammer to Bernie Madoff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560640</id>
	<title>Re:Not that bad really</title>
	<author>aynoknman</author>
	<datestamp>1261847880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Or maybe I worked for Oracle for too long<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div><p>Working for Oracle for any non-zero length of time is too long</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or maybe I worked for Oracle for too long : ) Working for Oracle for any non-zero length of time is too long</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or maybe I worked for Oracle for too long :)Working for Oracle for any non-zero length of time is too long
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559632</id>
	<title>Re:Groklaw Putting Comes v. Microsoft Docs Online</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261833240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right, just what I want: aircraft flight control systems as PHP code on the internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , just what I want : aircraft flight control systems as PHP code on the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, just what I want: aircraft flight control systems as PHP code on the internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561738</id>
	<title>Re:The Colossal Irony</title>
	<author>russryan</author>
	<datestamp>1261906920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll take this to the next level.  15 years ago Microsoft engaged in business practices that were on the borderline (one side or the other) of being ethical. BillG took his 50 BILLION dollars of perhaps ill gotten gains and is now working to wipe out malaria and fund education throughout the 3rd world. Huzzah!  In the end we all win.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll take this to the next level .
15 years ago Microsoft engaged in business practices that were on the borderline ( one side or the other ) of being ethical .
BillG took his 50 BILLION dollars of perhaps ill gotten gains and is now working to wipe out malaria and fund education throughout the 3rd world .
Huzzah ! In the end we all win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll take this to the next level.
15 years ago Microsoft engaged in business practices that were on the borderline (one side or the other) of being ethical.
BillG took his 50 BILLION dollars of perhaps ill gotten gains and is now working to wipe out malaria and fund education throughout the 3rd world.
Huzzah!  In the end we all win.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559876</id>
	<title>Embarrased?</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1261836420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>After realizing how embarrassing the documents were to Microsoft</p></div><p>I find this hard to beleive. After all, they did release Vista.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>After realizing how embarrassing the documents were to MicrosoftI find this hard to beleive .
After all , they did release Vista .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After realizing how embarrassing the documents were to MicrosoftI find this hard to beleive.
After all, they did release Vista.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559852</id>
	<title>Re:Thankful for the Streisand Effect</title>
	<author>causality</author>
	<datestamp>1261836120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Too bad those people caved, but that need not cost us the ability to know what they wanted so badly to hide."</p><p>Note to potential "cavers":
You can certainly sanitize the information you plan to agree to keep secret, give it to reliable third parties, then take the money.</p><p>It isn't honest, but there is no reason to be honest with your enemies. We are past the point of moral obligation to such people.</p></div><p>I don't know why you were modded Troll because what you say is strategically correct.  As Sun Tzu advised, all warfare (physical or PR) is based on deception.  The use of deception against an aggressor whom you have done nothing to provoke is the only legitimate, morally correct usage of it that I recognize.  Whether this case fits that description is the only debatable point.
<br> <br>
Having said that, if you sign a contract stating that you will not disclose information, and you disclose that information, then it's not just dishonest; it's also illegal (or at least, a tort).  This is unwise, especially when Microsoft can afford the best lawyers and you cannot.  There are times when you have concerns other than how much you can justify without violating your morality, and this is probably one of them.  For that reason, I'd strongly advise against actually doing this, making this a bad example of the otherwise sound concepts you mention.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Too bad those people caved , but that need not cost us the ability to know what they wanted so badly to hide .
" Note to potential " cavers " : You can certainly sanitize the information you plan to agree to keep secret , give it to reliable third parties , then take the money.It is n't honest , but there is no reason to be honest with your enemies .
We are past the point of moral obligation to such people.I do n't know why you were modded Troll because what you say is strategically correct .
As Sun Tzu advised , all warfare ( physical or PR ) is based on deception .
The use of deception against an aggressor whom you have done nothing to provoke is the only legitimate , morally correct usage of it that I recognize .
Whether this case fits that description is the only debatable point .
Having said that , if you sign a contract stating that you will not disclose information , and you disclose that information , then it 's not just dishonest ; it 's also illegal ( or at least , a tort ) .
This is unwise , especially when Microsoft can afford the best lawyers and you can not .
There are times when you have concerns other than how much you can justify without violating your morality , and this is probably one of them .
For that reason , I 'd strongly advise against actually doing this , making this a bad example of the otherwise sound concepts you mention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Too bad those people caved, but that need not cost us the ability to know what they wanted so badly to hide.
"Note to potential "cavers":
You can certainly sanitize the information you plan to agree to keep secret, give it to reliable third parties, then take the money.It isn't honest, but there is no reason to be honest with your enemies.
We are past the point of moral obligation to such people.I don't know why you were modded Troll because what you say is strategically correct.
As Sun Tzu advised, all warfare (physical or PR) is based on deception.
The use of deception against an aggressor whom you have done nothing to provoke is the only legitimate, morally correct usage of it that I recognize.
Whether this case fits that description is the only debatable point.
Having said that, if you sign a contract stating that you will not disclose information, and you disclose that information, then it's not just dishonest; it's also illegal (or at least, a tort).
This is unwise, especially when Microsoft can afford the best lawyers and you cannot.
There are times when you have concerns other than how much you can justify without violating your morality, and this is probably one of them.
For that reason, I'd strongly advise against actually doing this, making this a bad example of the otherwise sound concepts you mention.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559432</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560640
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30563450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30645294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30618496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_26_2238218_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_26_2238218.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559738
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_26_2238218.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559478
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_26_2238218.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559500
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_26_2238218.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559632
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_26_2238218.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561738
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560878
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_26_2238218.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30563450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559332
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562824
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_26_2238218.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559966
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559432
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559852
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561558
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30645294
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30562098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_26_2238218.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30560640
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30618496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30561352
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_26_2238218.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_26_2238218.30559334
</commentlist>
</conversation>
