<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_05_0356235</id>
	<title>Australian Net Filter Protest Site Returns</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1262686860000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"The <a href="http://stephen-conroy.com/news.php">Stephen Conroy 'Minister for Fascism'</a> website, whose stephenconroy.com.au domain was <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/09/12/20/227224/AU-Authority-Moves-To-Censor-Net-Filtering-Protest-Site">forced offline</a> by the Australian Domain Name Administrator, has now <a href="http://stephenconroy.com.au/">reclaimed the name</a> after the initial 14-day injunction expired. During those 14 days, the protesters managed to comply with the Australian domain name registration criteria. However, contrary to auDA's own rules and contrary to <a href="http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/communications/soa/auDA-No-govt-request-to-kill-Conroy-site/0,130061791,339300152,00.htm">public quotes by the auDA CEO</a>, the protesters were continually refused the domain. Now, however, it seems that they have unequivocally <a href="http://mumbrella.com.au/anti-stephen-conroy-website-back-online-14948">shown that they have the right</a> to the domain and have re-registered it."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " The Stephen Conroy 'Minister for Fascism ' website , whose stephenconroy.com.au domain was forced offline by the Australian Domain Name Administrator , has now reclaimed the name after the initial 14-day injunction expired .
During those 14 days , the protesters managed to comply with the Australian domain name registration criteria .
However , contrary to auDA 's own rules and contrary to public quotes by the auDA CEO , the protesters were continually refused the domain .
Now , however , it seems that they have unequivocally shown that they have the right to the domain and have re-registered it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "The Stephen Conroy 'Minister for Fascism' website, whose stephenconroy.com.au domain was forced offline by the Australian Domain Name Administrator, has now reclaimed the name after the initial 14-day injunction expired.
During those 14 days, the protesters managed to comply with the Australian domain name registration criteria.
However, contrary to auDA's own rules and contrary to public quotes by the auDA CEO, the protesters were continually refused the domain.
Now, however, it seems that they have unequivocally shown that they have the right to the domain and have re-registered it.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653338</id>
	<title>Re:well, Conroy clearly has a good case</title>
	<author>Trepidity</author>
	<datestamp>1262694000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Were I picking terms, I'd use "Orwellian" or "authoritarian" as a better generic pejorative for someone who supports strong government surveillance, control of access to information, and censorship of publication.</p><p>This website's owners picked "fascism", perhaps somewhat unfortunately, and I, in order to provide quality Slashdot-comment humor, had to therefore follow them. The main sense in which it's a bad fit is that historical fascism was a combination of authoritarian control over public culture with a more collectivist stakeholder-consensus economic model, and strong nationalism, and Conroy doesn't appear particularly interested in those latter two.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Were I picking terms , I 'd use " Orwellian " or " authoritarian " as a better generic pejorative for someone who supports strong government surveillance , control of access to information , and censorship of publication.This website 's owners picked " fascism " , perhaps somewhat unfortunately , and I , in order to provide quality Slashdot-comment humor , had to therefore follow them .
The main sense in which it 's a bad fit is that historical fascism was a combination of authoritarian control over public culture with a more collectivist stakeholder-consensus economic model , and strong nationalism , and Conroy does n't appear particularly interested in those latter two .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Were I picking terms, I'd use "Orwellian" or "authoritarian" as a better generic pejorative for someone who supports strong government surveillance, control of access to information, and censorship of publication.This website's owners picked "fascism", perhaps somewhat unfortunately, and I, in order to provide quality Slashdot-comment humor, had to therefore follow them.
The main sense in which it's a bad fit is that historical fascism was a combination of authoritarian control over public culture with a more collectivist stakeholder-consensus economic model, and strong nationalism, and Conroy doesn't appear particularly interested in those latter two.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30659670</id>
	<title>How's about's gettin'g som'e goo'd spell'ing there</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262682480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I' reall'y get annoy'ed whe'n people ca'nt spel'l or the'y spel'l with everythin'g apostrophe'd in the wron'g place's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ' reall'y get annoy'ed whe'n people ca'nt spel'l or the'y spel'l with everythin'g apostrophe 'd in the wron'g place 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I' reall'y get annoy'ed whe'n people ca'nt spel'l or the'y spel'l with everythin'g apostrophe'd in the wron'g place's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30661574</id>
	<title>Re:These guys are not helping</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262689800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Laughs, sensible laws you say. Well you must be under 18.<br>1.Conroy is not listening, he only hears what he wants by "Yes" people. I know of this and same for a former NSW Premier, he liked "Yes" people, anyone that had different ideas was shoved aside, my friend was a former MP, talking and watching what they went thru, they quit the game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Laughs , sensible laws you say .
Well you must be under 18.1.Conroy is not listening , he only hears what he wants by " Yes " people .
I know of this and same for a former NSW Premier , he liked " Yes " people , anyone that had different ideas was shoved aside , my friend was a former MP , talking and watching what they went thru , they quit the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Laughs, sensible laws you say.
Well you must be under 18.1.Conroy is not listening, he only hears what he wants by "Yes" people.
I know of this and same for a former NSW Premier, he liked "Yes" people, anyone that had different ideas was shoved aside, my friend was a former MP, talking and watching what they went thru, they quit the game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653336</id>
	<title>sex with a maRe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262694000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>of a solid dose leaving core. I Fly...don't fear Clothes or be a Since we made the and that the floor leaving the play work that you on slashdot.org that have raged Would take about 2 these rules will revel in our gay dicks produced *BSD has lost more And she ran Contaminated while the latest Netcraft can no longer be will recaal that it they are Come and help us! Exploited that. A goals. It's when has ground to a is mired in an to decline for rivalry. While which gathers minutes. At home, GNAA on slashdot, developers anyone that thinks DOG THAT IT IS. IT if you move 4 table was what got me The project as a conversation and common knowledge To survive at all recruitment, but triumphs would soon lead to 'cleaner of challenges that arseholes at Walnut</htmltext>
<tokenext>of a solid dose leaving core .
I Fly...do n't fear Clothes or be a Since we made the and that the floor leaving the play work that you on slashdot.org that have raged Would take about 2 these rules will revel in our gay dicks produced * BSD has lost more And she ran Contaminated while the latest Netcraft can no longer be will recaal that it they are Come and help us !
Exploited that .
A goals .
It 's when has ground to a is mired in an to decline for rivalry .
While which gathers minutes .
At home , GNAA on slashdot , developers anyone that thinks DOG THAT IT IS .
IT if you move 4 table was what got me The project as a conversation and common knowledge To survive at all recruitment , but triumphs would soon lead to 'cleaner of challenges that arseholes at Walnut</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of a solid dose leaving core.
I Fly...don't fear Clothes or be a Since we made the and that the floor leaving the play work that you on slashdot.org that have raged Would take about 2 these rules will revel in our gay dicks produced *BSD has lost more And she ran Contaminated while the latest Netcraft can no longer be will recaal that it they are Come and help us!
Exploited that.
A goals.
It's when has ground to a is mired in an to decline for rivalry.
While which gathers minutes.
At home, GNAA on slashdot, developers anyone that thinks DOG THAT IT IS.
IT if you move 4 table was what got me The project as a conversation and common knowledge To survive at all recruitment, but triumphs would soon lead to 'cleaner of challenges that arseholes at Walnut</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086</id>
	<title>well, Conroy clearly has a good case</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262690700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The parody/satire defense doesn't work in this case, because a reasonable person familiar with his politics might well believe that Stephen Conroy is currently serving as the Minister for Fascism in Australia's government!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The parody/satire defense does n't work in this case , because a reasonable person familiar with his politics might well believe that Stephen Conroy is currently serving as the Minister for Fascism in Australia 's government !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The parody/satire defense doesn't work in this case, because a reasonable person familiar with his politics might well believe that Stephen Conroy is currently serving as the Minister for Fascism in Australia's government!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653530</id>
	<title>Have I been trolled, or are actually a fuckwit?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262696940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Keep in mind that there is no "right" or "wrong", merely different points of view, all equally valid."</p></div><p>Bollocks!</p><p>Complete nonsense.  If your point of view is that it is fine to have non-consensual violent sex with children under the age of 6, then you are clearly wrong, and your point of view is not valid at all.</p><p>[INSERT A BILLION OTHER EQUALLY RIDICULOUS EXAMPLES]</p><p>Conroy's desire to control and censor the population easily satisfies the modern, post war, definition of fascism, as it is popularly used.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Keep in mind that there is no " right " or " wrong " , merely different points of view , all equally valid .
" Bollocks ! Complete nonsense .
If your point of view is that it is fine to have non-consensual violent sex with children under the age of 6 , then you are clearly wrong , and your point of view is not valid at all .
[ INSERT A BILLION OTHER EQUALLY RIDICULOUS EXAMPLES ] Conroy 's desire to control and censor the population easily satisfies the modern , post war , definition of fascism , as it is popularly used .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Keep in mind that there is no "right" or "wrong", merely different points of view, all equally valid.
"Bollocks!Complete nonsense.
If your point of view is that it is fine to have non-consensual violent sex with children under the age of 6, then you are clearly wrong, and your point of view is not valid at all.
[INSERT A BILLION OTHER EQUALLY RIDICULOUS EXAMPLES]Conroy's desire to control and censor the population easily satisfies the modern, post war, definition of fascism, as it is popularly used.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653116</id>
	<title>AuDA is run by evil people bent on evil methods</title>
	<author>gavron</author>
	<datestamp>1262691240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was once an expert witness in a court case in Australian Federal District Court where AuDA stole the domain names of my client and tried to keep them.
<p>
AuDA is the epitome of an organization that is operating outside its moral guidelines.</p><p>

AuDA should be removed and a responsible organization put in its place,</p><p>
Sorry, Australia.  You allow this crap to control your access to DNS.  You hurt yourself only, not the real world.
</p><p>
E</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was once an expert witness in a court case in Australian Federal District Court where AuDA stole the domain names of my client and tried to keep them .
AuDA is the epitome of an organization that is operating outside its moral guidelines .
AuDA should be removed and a responsible organization put in its place , Sorry , Australia .
You allow this crap to control your access to DNS .
You hurt yourself only , not the real world .
E</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was once an expert witness in a court case in Australian Federal District Court where AuDA stole the domain names of my client and tried to keep them.
AuDA is the epitome of an organization that is operating outside its moral guidelines.
AuDA should be removed and a responsible organization put in its place,
Sorry, Australia.
You allow this crap to control your access to DNS.
You hurt yourself only, not the real world.
E</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30657882</id>
	<title>Re:well, Conroy clearly has a good case</title>
	<author>A nonymous Coward</author>
	<datestamp>1262718060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In general terms, right wingers would prefer communist over fascist because they think fascist is a slur on the right in general, and leftists are the reverse.</p><p>However, in a very real sense, communists actually pretended to have high moral principles of power to the people.  Of course this was all theory and no practice, but at least they could make that fuzzy claim.</p><p>Fascists never had this.  Their closest theoretical principle was power to the nation as controlled by its rulers.</p><p>People of all stripes will have reason to argue with this summary, but they are into theories, not practice.  My little summary is how they differ in practical implementation.</p><p>Thus the term "fascist" as an insult means someone with no principles other than "power to me, screw the people."  "Communist" as an insult, aside from the rabid USian cold war leftovers, means someone who would grab your property in the name of the people, ie, a fascist who pretends to be wearing sheep's clothing in the name of the people.  Fascists always pretend to be wearing wolf's clothing in the name of the country.</p><p>Wheter they be fascists, communists, authoritarian, dictatorial, or any other name you can think of, it all comes down to them wanting to run your life because you are incompetent and not to be trusted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In general terms , right wingers would prefer communist over fascist because they think fascist is a slur on the right in general , and leftists are the reverse.However , in a very real sense , communists actually pretended to have high moral principles of power to the people .
Of course this was all theory and no practice , but at least they could make that fuzzy claim.Fascists never had this .
Their closest theoretical principle was power to the nation as controlled by its rulers.People of all stripes will have reason to argue with this summary , but they are into theories , not practice .
My little summary is how they differ in practical implementation.Thus the term " fascist " as an insult means someone with no principles other than " power to me , screw the people .
" " Communist " as an insult , aside from the rabid USian cold war leftovers , means someone who would grab your property in the name of the people , ie , a fascist who pretends to be wearing sheep 's clothing in the name of the people .
Fascists always pretend to be wearing wolf 's clothing in the name of the country.Wheter they be fascists , communists , authoritarian , dictatorial , or any other name you can think of , it all comes down to them wanting to run your life because you are incompetent and not to be trusted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In general terms, right wingers would prefer communist over fascist because they think fascist is a slur on the right in general, and leftists are the reverse.However, in a very real sense, communists actually pretended to have high moral principles of power to the people.
Of course this was all theory and no practice, but at least they could make that fuzzy claim.Fascists never had this.
Their closest theoretical principle was power to the nation as controlled by its rulers.People of all stripes will have reason to argue with this summary, but they are into theories, not practice.
My little summary is how they differ in practical implementation.Thus the term "fascist" as an insult means someone with no principles other than "power to me, screw the people.
"  "Communist" as an insult, aside from the rabid USian cold war leftovers, means someone who would grab your property in the name of the people, ie, a fascist who pretends to be wearing sheep's clothing in the name of the people.
Fascists always pretend to be wearing wolf's clothing in the name of the country.Wheter they be fascists, communists, authoritarian, dictatorial, or any other name you can think of, it all comes down to them wanting to run your life because you are incompetent and not to be trusted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160</id>
	<title>Re:well, Conroy clearly has a good case</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1262691900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hi, just a couple of quick questions:<ul> <li>What does "fascism" mean?</li><li>Which policies does the fascist party of Australia advocate regarding network filtering?</li><li>"Fascist" is frequently used in this day and age as a pejorative insult to those with whom the speaker disagrees politically.  In which ways does this man's viewpoints agree with actual, objective fascist policies?  Keep in mind that there is no "right" or "wrong", merely different points of view, all equally valid.</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi , just a couple of quick questions : What does " fascism " mean ? Which policies does the fascist party of Australia advocate regarding network filtering ?
" Fascist " is frequently used in this day and age as a pejorative insult to those with whom the speaker disagrees politically .
In which ways does this man 's viewpoints agree with actual , objective fascist policies ?
Keep in mind that there is no " right " or " wrong " , merely different points of view , all equally valid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi, just a couple of quick questions: What does "fascism" mean?Which policies does the fascist party of Australia advocate regarding network filtering?
"Fascist" is frequently used in this day and age as a pejorative insult to those with whom the speaker disagrees politically.
In which ways does this man's viewpoints agree with actual, objective fascist policies?
Keep in mind that there is no "right" or "wrong", merely different points of view, all equally valid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653660</id>
	<title>Re:These guys are not helping</title>
	<author>Cimexus</author>
	<datestamp>1262698920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mod parent up. AuDA are in fact a bunch of retards for many reasons, but this is not one of them. Simply, the domain as registered did not originally meet the criteria for a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com.au domain (a valid, registered Australian business).</p><p>Didn't know they got around this by actually registering a business called STEPHENCONROY. That is pretty funny<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent up .
AuDA are in fact a bunch of retards for many reasons , but this is not one of them .
Simply , the domain as registered did not originally meet the criteria for a .com.au domain ( a valid , registered Australian business ) .Did n't know they got around this by actually registering a business called STEPHENCONROY .
That is pretty funny : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent up.
AuDA are in fact a bunch of retards for many reasons, but this is not one of them.
Simply, the domain as registered did not originally meet the criteria for a .com.au domain (a valid, registered Australian business).Didn't know they got around this by actually registering a business called STEPHENCONROY.
That is pretty funny :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526</id>
	<title>These guys are not helping</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262696940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an Australian protesting against the proposed filter I find the activities of stephen-conroy.com frustrating. There are strict rules on the registration of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.au domains. This has always been the case -- they may look draconian to outsiders used to the standard<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.org etc. TLDs, but that's how it is for us. And it's not such a bad thing. We can be more sure upfront that a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com.au site is actually an Australian business.</p><p>It's tempting to look upon auDA shutting down their registration as censorship. But it's not. They registered a domain which has nothing to do with a business. Then in a display of immaturity they have registered the precise business name STEPHENCONROY in Victoria so that they can legally register the domain. This is not helping our cause at all... it's just showing protesters against the filter to be against the spirit of well-meant laws.</p><p>Frustrating Government offices with stupid behaviour is not going to stop this filter. Making the general voting public aware of it and concerned about it might. May luck be with us in that endeavour.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an Australian protesting against the proposed filter I find the activities of stephen-conroy.com frustrating .
There are strict rules on the registration of .au domains .
This has always been the case -- they may look draconian to outsiders used to the standard .com .org etc .
TLDs , but that 's how it is for us .
And it 's not such a bad thing .
We can be more sure upfront that a .com.au site is actually an Australian business.It 's tempting to look upon auDA shutting down their registration as censorship .
But it 's not .
They registered a domain which has nothing to do with a business .
Then in a display of immaturity they have registered the precise business name STEPHENCONROY in Victoria so that they can legally register the domain .
This is not helping our cause at all... it 's just showing protesters against the filter to be against the spirit of well-meant laws.Frustrating Government offices with stupid behaviour is not going to stop this filter .
Making the general voting public aware of it and concerned about it might .
May luck be with us in that endeavour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an Australian protesting against the proposed filter I find the activities of stephen-conroy.com frustrating.
There are strict rules on the registration of .au domains.
This has always been the case -- they may look draconian to outsiders used to the standard .com .org etc.
TLDs, but that's how it is for us.
And it's not such a bad thing.
We can be more sure upfront that a .com.au site is actually an Australian business.It's tempting to look upon auDA shutting down their registration as censorship.
But it's not.
They registered a domain which has nothing to do with a business.
Then in a display of immaturity they have registered the precise business name STEPHENCONROY in Victoria so that they can legally register the domain.
This is not helping our cause at all... it's just showing protesters against the filter to be against the spirit of well-meant laws.Frustrating Government offices with stupid behaviour is not going to stop this filter.
Making the general voting public aware of it and concerned about it might.
May luck be with us in that endeavour.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653506</id>
	<title>Great questions DNS-AND-BIND, &amp; some more here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262696580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><div class="quote"><p><b>"Hi, just a couple of quick questions:<br>What does "fascism" mean?<br>Which policies does the fascist party of Australia advocate regarding network filtering?<br>"Fascist" is frequently used in this day and age as a pejorative insult to those with whom the speaker disagrees politically. In which ways does this man's viewpoints agree with actual, objective fascist policies? Keep in mind that there is no "right" or "wrong", merely different points of view, all equally valid."</b> - by DNS-and-BIND (461968) on Tuesday January 05, @05:45AM (#30653160) Homepage</p></div><p>Good points DNS-and-BIND (or rather, good questions for clarification on your part).</p><p>I'd also like to further your questions in fact! Only 2 more questions, actually, on MY part:</p><p>#1 - I'd like to know what it is that the Australian gov't. is supposedly blocking out that are "so bad to block out"...</p><p>I mean, because if they're blocking out KNOWN purveyors of malwares (any types) or KNOWN botnet "C&amp;C" servers for example? Well, then, if those 2 are the case here &amp; that's it?</p><p>Well, I'd have to say they're on the "right track"!</p><p>(And, I certainly can see malware makers &amp;/or botnet masters being "p.o.'d" about being 'shot down' @ the DNS/ISP/BSP level for instance, before they can even GET anywhere (for most folks that is, there are ways to circumvent things after all))</p><p>----</p><p>#2 - Plus, on the "political front" (the province of scumbags largely imo @ least)?</p><p>I can see your points there, &amp; how I perceived them is that in that case, that their opponents would use ANYTHING to try to cut these folks down in Aussie gov't., so they can 'take the reigns' themselves.</p><p>Yes, even IF the folks instituting this filtering are out to do good (the current folks in Aussie gov't. instituting this filtering) because the current gov't. in Australia's opposition are just "grasping for power" themselves and are attempting to discredit the folks in power (who apparently are doing this filtration currently)</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; I ask the same things DNS and BIND does here, &amp; what I did about blacklisting, because in THAT case? So-called "blacklisting" does work &amp; work well (on the SIMPLEST PRINCIPLE OF ALL, in "you can't get burned if you don't go into the fire")... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Hi , just a couple of quick questions : What does " fascism " mean ? Which policies does the fascist party of Australia advocate regarding network filtering ?
" Fascist " is frequently used in this day and age as a pejorative insult to those with whom the speaker disagrees politically .
In which ways does this man 's viewpoints agree with actual , objective fascist policies ?
Keep in mind that there is no " right " or " wrong " , merely different points of view , all equally valid .
" - by DNS-and-BIND ( 461968 ) on Tuesday January 05 , @ 05 : 45AM ( # 30653160 ) HomepageGood points DNS-and-BIND ( or rather , good questions for clarification on your part ) .I 'd also like to further your questions in fact !
Only 2 more questions , actually , on MY part : # 1 - I 'd like to know what it is that the Australian gov't .
is supposedly blocking out that are " so bad to block out " ...I mean , because if they 're blocking out KNOWN purveyors of malwares ( any types ) or KNOWN botnet " C&amp;C " servers for example ?
Well , then , if those 2 are the case here &amp; that 's it ? Well , I 'd have to say they 're on the " right track " !
( And , I certainly can see malware makers &amp;/or botnet masters being " p.o .
'd " about being 'shot down ' @ the DNS/ISP/BSP level for instance , before they can even GET anywhere ( for most folks that is , there are ways to circumvent things after all ) ) ---- # 2 - Plus , on the " political front " ( the province of scumbags largely imo @ least ) ? I can see your points there , &amp; how I perceived them is that in that case , that their opponents would use ANYTHING to try to cut these folks down in Aussie gov't. , so they can 'take the reigns ' themselves.Yes , even IF the folks instituting this filtering are out to do good ( the current folks in Aussie gov't .
instituting this filtering ) because the current gov't .
in Australia 's opposition are just " grasping for power " themselves and are attempting to discredit the folks in power ( who apparently are doing this filtration currently ) APKP.S. = &gt; I ask the same things DNS and BIND does here , &amp; what I did about blacklisting , because in THAT case ?
So-called " blacklisting " does work &amp; work well ( on the SIMPLEST PRINCIPLE OF ALL , in " you ca n't get burned if you do n't go into the fire " ) ... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Hi, just a couple of quick questions:What does "fascism" mean?Which policies does the fascist party of Australia advocate regarding network filtering?
"Fascist" is frequently used in this day and age as a pejorative insult to those with whom the speaker disagrees politically.
In which ways does this man's viewpoints agree with actual, objective fascist policies?
Keep in mind that there is no "right" or "wrong", merely different points of view, all equally valid.
" - by DNS-and-BIND (461968) on Tuesday January 05, @05:45AM (#30653160) HomepageGood points DNS-and-BIND (or rather, good questions for clarification on your part).I'd also like to further your questions in fact!
Only 2 more questions, actually, on MY part:#1 - I'd like to know what it is that the Australian gov't.
is supposedly blocking out that are "so bad to block out"...I mean, because if they're blocking out KNOWN purveyors of malwares (any types) or KNOWN botnet "C&amp;C" servers for example?
Well, then, if those 2 are the case here &amp; that's it?Well, I'd have to say they're on the "right track"!
(And, I certainly can see malware makers &amp;/or botnet masters being "p.o.
'd" about being 'shot down' @ the DNS/ISP/BSP level for instance, before they can even GET anywhere (for most folks that is, there are ways to circumvent things after all))----#2 - Plus, on the "political front" (the province of scumbags largely imo @ least)?I can see your points there, &amp; how I perceived them is that in that case, that their opponents would use ANYTHING to try to cut these folks down in Aussie gov't., so they can 'take the reigns' themselves.Yes, even IF the folks instituting this filtering are out to do good (the current folks in Aussie gov't.
instituting this filtering) because the current gov't.
in Australia's opposition are just "grasping for power" themselves and are attempting to discredit the folks in power (who apparently are doing this filtration currently)APKP.S.=&gt; I ask the same things DNS and BIND does here, &amp; what I did about blacklisting, because in THAT case?
So-called "blacklisting" does work &amp; work well (on the SIMPLEST PRINCIPLE OF ALL, in "you can't get burned if you don't go into the fire")... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654804</id>
	<title>Re:well, Conroy clearly has a good case</title>
	<author>Evildonald</author>
	<datestamp>1262706960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654092</id>
	<title>Re:These guys are not helping</title>
	<author>countach</author>
	<datestamp>1262703120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The "strict rules" are a bunch of baloney when you can spend fifty bucks or something to register a vaguely related business name for no particular reason, and thereby hold the domain. They might as well just give up on the rules and make it a free for all.</p><p>I might add that I had problems with auDA ages ago because they wouldn't let me register the exact name of my company, which I had owned from well before the internet was popular, just because my company name was considered "generic" or some crap. I appealed and won, but I still consider auDA to be a bunch of retards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The " strict rules " are a bunch of baloney when you can spend fifty bucks or something to register a vaguely related business name for no particular reason , and thereby hold the domain .
They might as well just give up on the rules and make it a free for all.I might add that I had problems with auDA ages ago because they would n't let me register the exact name of my company , which I had owned from well before the internet was popular , just because my company name was considered " generic " or some crap .
I appealed and won , but I still consider auDA to be a bunch of retards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "strict rules" are a bunch of baloney when you can spend fifty bucks or something to register a vaguely related business name for no particular reason, and thereby hold the domain.
They might as well just give up on the rules and make it a free for all.I might add that I had problems with auDA ages ago because they wouldn't let me register the exact name of my company, which I had owned from well before the internet was popular, just because my company name was considered "generic" or some crap.
I appealed and won, but I still consider auDA to be a bunch of retards.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654222</id>
	<title>Re:These guys are not helping</title>
	<author>DJRumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1262703900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you stating that only a business can get a domain name from this group? That in itself is censorship. If this is the case, then things in AU must be in worse shape than I previously imagined.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you stating that only a business can get a domain name from this group ?
That in itself is censorship .
If this is the case , then things in AU must be in worse shape than I previously imagined .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you stating that only a business can get a domain name from this group?
That in itself is censorship.
If this is the case, then things in AU must be in worse shape than I previously imagined.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653936</id>
	<title>Re:AuDA is run by evil people bent on evil methods</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262701800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if you dont have a abn dont bother trying to get an<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.au domain unless you want a id.au domain also it costs almost 4 times the cost of a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com domain</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if you dont have a abn dont bother trying to get an .au domain unless you want a id.au domain also it costs almost 4 times the cost of a .com domain</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if you dont have a abn dont bother trying to get an .au domain unless you want a id.au domain also it costs almost 4 times the cost of a .com domain</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653496</id>
	<title>Not about free speech at all.</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1262696400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The domain name is stephen-conroy.com.  I'd say, that's trademark infringement.  Like, you could own stephen-conroy-sucks.com, but, having a site that has the capacity to mislead people in order to get hits is as wrong as calling something Cheerios when it is not.<br>The irony here is that they basically are saying that someone is a fascist in order to protect their right to lie.  I wonder if, really, the rest of the their message is actually honest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The domain name is stephen-conroy.com .
I 'd say , that 's trademark infringement .
Like , you could own stephen-conroy-sucks.com , but , having a site that has the capacity to mislead people in order to get hits is as wrong as calling something Cheerios when it is not.The irony here is that they basically are saying that someone is a fascist in order to protect their right to lie .
I wonder if , really , the rest of the their message is actually honest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The domain name is stephen-conroy.com.
I'd say, that's trademark infringement.
Like, you could own stephen-conroy-sucks.com, but, having a site that has the capacity to mislead people in order to get hits is as wrong as calling something Cheerios when it is not.The irony here is that they basically are saying that someone is a fascist in order to protect their right to lie.
I wonder if, really, the rest of the their message is actually honest.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653216</id>
	<title>YAY!</title>
	<author>Whiteox</author>
	<datestamp>1262692680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>YAY! About time. I still don't understand the motivation of AuDA. Maybe they're a bunch of jerks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>YAY !
About time .
I still do n't understand the motivation of AuDA .
Maybe they 're a bunch of jerks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>YAY!
About time.
I still don't understand the motivation of AuDA.
Maybe they're a bunch of jerks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653434</id>
	<title>Forgive my ignorance</title>
	<author>Chrisq</author>
	<datestamp>1262695260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Forgive my ignorance<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. i assume he is the shadow minister for fascism then?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Forgive my ignorance .. i assume he is the shadow minister for fascism then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forgive my ignorance .. i assume he is the shadow minister for fascism then?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653462</id>
	<title>Good question...</title>
	<author>Dilaudid</author>
	<datestamp>1262695920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In 1944 George Orwell wrote: "It would seem that, as used, the word &lsquo;Fascism&rsquo; is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox hunting, bullfighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else."</p><p>
Recently on Slashdot the term has become significantly less specific.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In 1944 George Orwell wrote : " It would seem that , as used , the word    Fascism    is almost entirely meaningless .
In conversation , of course , it is used even more wildly than in print .
I have heard it applied to farmers , shopkeepers , Social Credit , corporal punishment , fox hunting , bullfighting , the 1922 Committee , the 1941 Committee , Kipling , Gandhi , Chiang Kai-Shek , homosexuality , Priestley 's broadcasts , Youth Hostels , astrology , women , dogs and I do not know what else .
" Recently on Slashdot the term has become significantly less specific .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In 1944 George Orwell wrote: "It would seem that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless.
In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print.
I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox hunting, bullfighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.
"
Recently on Slashdot the term has become significantly less specific.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653078</id>
	<title>First</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262690640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>\o/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>\ o/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>\o/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30656818</id>
	<title>Facism is a merger of State and Corporations</title>
	<author>boorack</author>
	<datestamp>1262714700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Benito Mussolini used to say that facism should be called corporatism because it's a merger of state and corporations. Franklin D. Roosevelt also had in interesting observation in one of his speeches: "The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism&mdash;ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power."
<p>
Sticking to those (informal) definitions, US is a full fledged facist state today. Along with Russia, to some extent China and some others. It seems that facism sadly became a dominant form of government in the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Benito Mussolini used to say that facism should be called corporatism because it 's a merger of state and corporations .
Franklin D. Roosevelt also had in interesting observation in one of his speeches : " The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself .
That , in its essence , is fascism    ownership of government by an individual , by a group , or by any other controlling private power .
" Sticking to those ( informal ) definitions , US is a full fledged facist state today .
Along with Russia , to some extent China and some others .
It seems that facism sadly became a dominant form of government in the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Benito Mussolini used to say that facism should be called corporatism because it's a merger of state and corporations.
Franklin D. Roosevelt also had in interesting observation in one of his speeches: "The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself.
That, in its essence, is fascism—ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.
"

Sticking to those (informal) definitions, US is a full fledged facist state today.
Along with Russia, to some extent China and some others.
It seems that facism sadly became a dominant form of government in the world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30668062</id>
	<title>Re:These guys are not helping</title>
	<author>arctanx</author>
	<datestamp>1262783820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed, I will concede that the 3 hours in which to present your case was rather harsh. Nobody should be expected to pull together their information in so short a time, valid use of the domain or not. All the same, I don't think stephenconroy.com.au deserved more than, say, 24 hours, as their site was obviously not intended for commercial purposes. Common sense, please!</p><p>And indeed clearly others who have commented have had bad experiences with auDA which I haven't had to face. All the same, the website was obviously not selling a product. I'm a fan of following common sense and the spirit of the law. Perhaps you speak truth when you say that these are not strictly speaking 'laws', but policies which auDA has implemented, but they are a standard, have been for some time, and freer alternatives exist. I do not believe that auDA is fundamentally undermining our democracy by not allowing a protest site to occupy a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com.au domain.</p><p>I also agree that the site has brought attention to the anti-censorship issue -- but in the wrong light. I am pleased that the site brings publicity to the issue but the fact that the site is using underhanded tactics to have the right to register a domain undermines their cause, if you ask me.</p><p>Goodness knows that I'm not personally offended by the use of stephenconroy.com.au as a protest site, but the last thing we need is more ammunition against the protesters suggesting that we are disrespectful of Internet policies that aren't actually inherently bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , I will concede that the 3 hours in which to present your case was rather harsh .
Nobody should be expected to pull together their information in so short a time , valid use of the domain or not .
All the same , I do n't think stephenconroy.com.au deserved more than , say , 24 hours , as their site was obviously not intended for commercial purposes .
Common sense , please ! And indeed clearly others who have commented have had bad experiences with auDA which I have n't had to face .
All the same , the website was obviously not selling a product .
I 'm a fan of following common sense and the spirit of the law .
Perhaps you speak truth when you say that these are not strictly speaking 'laws ' , but policies which auDA has implemented , but they are a standard , have been for some time , and freer alternatives exist .
I do not believe that auDA is fundamentally undermining our democracy by not allowing a protest site to occupy a .com.au domain.I also agree that the site has brought attention to the anti-censorship issue -- but in the wrong light .
I am pleased that the site brings publicity to the issue but the fact that the site is using underhanded tactics to have the right to register a domain undermines their cause , if you ask me.Goodness knows that I 'm not personally offended by the use of stephenconroy.com.au as a protest site , but the last thing we need is more ammunition against the protesters suggesting that we are disrespectful of Internet policies that are n't actually inherently bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, I will concede that the 3 hours in which to present your case was rather harsh.
Nobody should be expected to pull together their information in so short a time, valid use of the domain or not.
All the same, I don't think stephenconroy.com.au deserved more than, say, 24 hours, as their site was obviously not intended for commercial purposes.
Common sense, please!And indeed clearly others who have commented have had bad experiences with auDA which I haven't had to face.
All the same, the website was obviously not selling a product.
I'm a fan of following common sense and the spirit of the law.
Perhaps you speak truth when you say that these are not strictly speaking 'laws', but policies which auDA has implemented, but they are a standard, have been for some time, and freer alternatives exist.
I do not believe that auDA is fundamentally undermining our democracy by not allowing a protest site to occupy a .com.au domain.I also agree that the site has brought attention to the anti-censorship issue -- but in the wrong light.
I am pleased that the site brings publicity to the issue but the fact that the site is using underhanded tactics to have the right to register a domain undermines their cause, if you ask me.Goodness knows that I'm not personally offended by the use of stephenconroy.com.au as a protest site, but the last thing we need is more ammunition against the protesters suggesting that we are disrespectful of Internet policies that aren't actually inherently bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653390</id>
	<title>Re:well, Conroy clearly has a good case</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262694600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Fascism is a political ideology advocating the subsumption of all groups within the state, and internal coordination of these groups by use of the state apparatus (corporatism). In the words of the Italian dictator: "all within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state".</p><p>2. To my knowledge, there is no such thing as a fascist party of Australia.</p><p>3. Fascists would presumably advocate state control of the internet, so as to draw the internet itself into the state. This not being possible, they would advocate indirect means of controlling the internet, such as by censorship. Therefore, the position of Conroy as in favor of internet censorship can be called, to some extent, fascist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Fascism is a political ideology advocating the subsumption of all groups within the state , and internal coordination of these groups by use of the state apparatus ( corporatism ) .
In the words of the Italian dictator : " all within the state , nothing outside the state , nothing against the state " .2 .
To my knowledge , there is no such thing as a fascist party of Australia.3 .
Fascists would presumably advocate state control of the internet , so as to draw the internet itself into the state .
This not being possible , they would advocate indirect means of controlling the internet , such as by censorship .
Therefore , the position of Conroy as in favor of internet censorship can be called , to some extent , fascist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Fascism is a political ideology advocating the subsumption of all groups within the state, and internal coordination of these groups by use of the state apparatus (corporatism).
In the words of the Italian dictator: "all within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state".2.
To my knowledge, there is no such thing as a fascist party of Australia.3.
Fascists would presumably advocate state control of the internet, so as to draw the internet itself into the state.
This not being possible, they would advocate indirect means of controlling the internet, such as by censorship.
Therefore, the position of Conroy as in favor of internet censorship can be called, to some extent, fascist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654300</id>
	<title>Re:These guys are not helping</title>
	<author>sinyk</author>
	<datestamp>1262704380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>DISCLAIMER: I have a direct relationship to stephenconroy.com.au.<br> <br>

The real issue here is that the domain administrator chose to give us less than three hours to explain our eligibility for the site before closing it down. This is contrary to their published policy as well as other documented instances of this arbitration process, which all seem to indicate that generally ~ 1 week is provided for the respondent to make representations regarding their eligibility. We became aware of another policy complaint lodged with auDA on 21-12-2009 where they responded to the complainant stating that their investigation would take up to 30 days. To this date we are still unaware of any reply form auDA regarding this, which seems to indicate a direct contrast between the way this and our complaint was handled. We specifically asked auDA about how this complaint was different a number of times and these questions were all flatly ignored in return correspondence.<br> <br>

Further to this, auDA flatly refused to rationally consider to any statements regarding our eligibility following the initial three hour period. This seems to indicate that the 14 day 'pending-delete' period the domain was placed in is superfluous, as all arguments following the initial 3 hour period were ignored. Again, we questioned this, as well as the extremely short 3 hour takedown window, a number of times and again all questions were flatly ignored in return correspondence.<br> <br>

Your comment regarding laws seems a little ill-conceived: there are no 'laws' regarding domain registration criteria in Australia - this is handled solely by auDA as an independent body with absolutely no regulatory oversight whatsoever. They make the rules, enforce them how they see fit, and are accountable to nobody. As is quoted on our website:<br> <br>

"This incident reflects worrying concerns about the power that private domain name regulators have to silence critical political speech without going through legitimate legal channels." -- EFA<br> <br>

If nothing else this whole scenario (which, as we're been repeatedly saying, is ultimately a red-herring in the whole censorship debate/movement) has brought international attention to the Anti-Censorship cause. At times we've been taking tens of thousands of hits per day from all over the world, many of which it's rational to assume are from people who were previously unaware of the fight going on here. Love us or hate us, we want exactly the same thing as everyone else -- to see this whole filthy thing dropped. Our methods may have been to date somewhat more guerilla than others, but we're getting the word our en masse.</htmltext>
<tokenext>DISCLAIMER : I have a direct relationship to stephenconroy.com.au .
The real issue here is that the domain administrator chose to give us less than three hours to explain our eligibility for the site before closing it down .
This is contrary to their published policy as well as other documented instances of this arbitration process , which all seem to indicate that generally ~ 1 week is provided for the respondent to make representations regarding their eligibility .
We became aware of another policy complaint lodged with auDA on 21-12-2009 where they responded to the complainant stating that their investigation would take up to 30 days .
To this date we are still unaware of any reply form auDA regarding this , which seems to indicate a direct contrast between the way this and our complaint was handled .
We specifically asked auDA about how this complaint was different a number of times and these questions were all flatly ignored in return correspondence .
Further to this , auDA flatly refused to rationally consider to any statements regarding our eligibility following the initial three hour period .
This seems to indicate that the 14 day 'pending-delete ' period the domain was placed in is superfluous , as all arguments following the initial 3 hour period were ignored .
Again , we questioned this , as well as the extremely short 3 hour takedown window , a number of times and again all questions were flatly ignored in return correspondence .
Your comment regarding laws seems a little ill-conceived : there are no 'laws ' regarding domain registration criteria in Australia - this is handled solely by auDA as an independent body with absolutely no regulatory oversight whatsoever .
They make the rules , enforce them how they see fit , and are accountable to nobody .
As is quoted on our website : " This incident reflects worrying concerns about the power that private domain name regulators have to silence critical political speech without going through legitimate legal channels .
" -- EFA If nothing else this whole scenario ( which , as we 're been repeatedly saying , is ultimately a red-herring in the whole censorship debate/movement ) has brought international attention to the Anti-Censorship cause .
At times we 've been taking tens of thousands of hits per day from all over the world , many of which it 's rational to assume are from people who were previously unaware of the fight going on here .
Love us or hate us , we want exactly the same thing as everyone else -- to see this whole filthy thing dropped .
Our methods may have been to date somewhat more guerilla than others , but we 're getting the word our en masse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DISCLAIMER: I have a direct relationship to stephenconroy.com.au.
The real issue here is that the domain administrator chose to give us less than three hours to explain our eligibility for the site before closing it down.
This is contrary to their published policy as well as other documented instances of this arbitration process, which all seem to indicate that generally ~ 1 week is provided for the respondent to make representations regarding their eligibility.
We became aware of another policy complaint lodged with auDA on 21-12-2009 where they responded to the complainant stating that their investigation would take up to 30 days.
To this date we are still unaware of any reply form auDA regarding this, which seems to indicate a direct contrast between the way this and our complaint was handled.
We specifically asked auDA about how this complaint was different a number of times and these questions were all flatly ignored in return correspondence.
Further to this, auDA flatly refused to rationally consider to any statements regarding our eligibility following the initial three hour period.
This seems to indicate that the 14 day 'pending-delete' period the domain was placed in is superfluous, as all arguments following the initial 3 hour period were ignored.
Again, we questioned this, as well as the extremely short 3 hour takedown window, a number of times and again all questions were flatly ignored in return correspondence.
Your comment regarding laws seems a little ill-conceived: there are no 'laws' regarding domain registration criteria in Australia - this is handled solely by auDA as an independent body with absolutely no regulatory oversight whatsoever.
They make the rules, enforce them how they see fit, and are accountable to nobody.
As is quoted on our website: 

"This incident reflects worrying concerns about the power that private domain name regulators have to silence critical political speech without going through legitimate legal channels.
" -- EFA 

If nothing else this whole scenario (which, as we're been repeatedly saying, is ultimately a red-herring in the whole censorship debate/movement) has brought international attention to the Anti-Censorship cause.
At times we've been taking tens of thousands of hits per day from all over the world, many of which it's rational to assume are from people who were previously unaware of the fight going on here.
Love us or hate us, we want exactly the same thing as everyone else -- to see this whole filthy thing dropped.
Our methods may have been to date somewhat more guerilla than others, but we're getting the word our en masse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653296</id>
	<title>Outcome</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1262693520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Kevin Rudd isn't sitting up in The Lodge scanning the opinions of contributors to this site. OTH he is surely paying close attention to public opinion and the opinions of certain members of parliament who hold the balance of power.</p><p>I think it is important to avoid giving Rudd and Conroy ammunition at this point. <b>Do not</b> behave like a bunch of idiots. Public opinion is fragile. I am reminded of the pilots dispute of almost 20 years ago. The Government swung public opinion their way early on and the pilots never had a chance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Kevin Rudd is n't sitting up in The Lodge scanning the opinions of contributors to this site .
OTH he is surely paying close attention to public opinion and the opinions of certain members of parliament who hold the balance of power.I think it is important to avoid giving Rudd and Conroy ammunition at this point .
Do not behave like a bunch of idiots .
Public opinion is fragile .
I am reminded of the pilots dispute of almost 20 years ago .
The Government swung public opinion their way early on and the pilots never had a chance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kevin Rudd isn't sitting up in The Lodge scanning the opinions of contributors to this site.
OTH he is surely paying close attention to public opinion and the opinions of certain members of parliament who hold the balance of power.I think it is important to avoid giving Rudd and Conroy ammunition at this point.
Do not behave like a bunch of idiots.
Public opinion is fragile.
I am reminded of the pilots dispute of almost 20 years ago.
The Government swung public opinion their way early on and the pilots never had a chance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30664646</id>
	<title>Re:AuDA is run by evil people bent on evil methods</title>
	<author>jobst</author>
	<datestamp>1262706300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*I* know<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)<br>AuDA would need to remove many more websites than the Conroy parody if it would stand to the ruling that the removal was entirely due to "you do not have the right to own the domain because you business does not have anything to do with Conroy". There are so many cases of domain NAMES owned by companies in Oz that have absolutely NOTHING in common with the business.<br>AuDA and Conroy belong in the same pot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* I * know ; - ) AuDA would need to remove many more websites than the Conroy parody if it would stand to the ruling that the removal was entirely due to " you do not have the right to own the domain because you business does not have anything to do with Conroy " .
There are so many cases of domain NAMES owned by companies in Oz that have absolutely NOTHING in common with the business.AuDA and Conroy belong in the same pot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*I* know ;-)AuDA would need to remove many more websites than the Conroy parody if it would stand to the ruling that the removal was entirely due to "you do not have the right to own the domain because you business does not have anything to do with Conroy".
There are so many cases of domain NAMES owned by companies in Oz that have absolutely NOTHING in common with the business.AuDA and Conroy belong in the same pot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30664826</id>
	<title>Re:These guys are not helping</title>
	<author>jobst</author>
	<datestamp>1262707200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always wondered why your lawyers never put the point up "but then AuDA needs to take more domains/websites offline as there are so many websites that claim they have got something to do with the domain name but when you look closer they have not. I get frustrated when Google searches return results that have got nothing to do with what I am searching for and is biased by "incorrect" domain names.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always wondered why your lawyers never put the point up " but then AuDA needs to take more domains/websites offline as there are so many websites that claim they have got something to do with the domain name but when you look closer they have not .
I get frustrated when Google searches return results that have got nothing to do with what I am searching for and is biased by " incorrect " domain names .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always wondered why your lawyers never put the point up "but then AuDA needs to take more domains/websites offline as there are so many websites that claim they have got something to do with the domain name but when you look closer they have not.
I get frustrated when Google searches return results that have got nothing to do with what I am searching for and is biased by "incorrect" domain names.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653570</id>
	<title>Re:AuDA is run by evil people bent on evil methods</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262697540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's well known that AuDA board members operate link farms with<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.au domains. They shouldn't be allowed to under their own rules, but they make the decisions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's well known that AuDA board members operate link farms with .au domains .
They should n't be allowed to under their own rules , but they make the decisions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's well known that AuDA board members operate link farms with .au domains.
They shouldn't be allowed to under their own rules, but they make the decisions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30660928</id>
	<title>Re:These guys are not helping</title>
	<author>doug20r</author>
	<datestamp>1262687160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are wrong around the registration requirements for<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com.au domain names.  Simply selling advertising relating to the domain name is enough to show a 'close a substantial connection' and qualify and the stephenconroy.com.au. name could easily meet these requirements. Things have changed since the auDA took over, and the auDA has allowed the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com.au domain name space to become full of parked monetised websites.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are wrong around the registration requirements for .com.au domain names .
Simply selling advertising relating to the domain name is enough to show a 'close a substantial connection ' and qualify and the stephenconroy.com.au .
name could easily meet these requirements .
Things have changed since the auDA took over , and the auDA has allowed the .com.au domain name space to become full of parked monetised websites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are wrong around the registration requirements for .com.au domain names.
Simply selling advertising relating to the domain name is enough to show a 'close a substantial connection' and qualify and the stephenconroy.com.au.
name could easily meet these requirements.
Things have changed since the auDA took over, and the auDA has allowed the .com.au domain name space to become full of parked monetised websites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653094</id>
	<title>What do you say to something like this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262690880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>An injustice occurred, and now it's been righted. I suppose I could say "goodo" or "w00t" or something. I mean, it's just a little weird, because I'm used to attacking wrongs, not praising rights.<br>
<br>
Oh, wait. "managaed" in TFS is a typo. There, I've justified my comment.<br>
<br>
On a more serious note, I mean it when I say "good for them." I do admit that it's a little weird for a parody/criticism website of a person to use a URL that is not obviously parody/criticism. But I tend to err on the side of the little guy when he's pitted towards the big guy.<br>
<br>
(Also, it's a little ironic that the issue behind the website's existence is online censorship.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>An injustice occurred , and now it 's been righted .
I suppose I could say " goodo " or " w00t " or something .
I mean , it 's just a little weird , because I 'm used to attacking wrongs , not praising rights .
Oh , wait .
" managaed " in TFS is a typo .
There , I 've justified my comment .
On a more serious note , I mean it when I say " good for them .
" I do admit that it 's a little weird for a parody/criticism website of a person to use a URL that is not obviously parody/criticism .
But I tend to err on the side of the little guy when he 's pitted towards the big guy .
( Also , it 's a little ironic that the issue behind the website 's existence is online censorship .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An injustice occurred, and now it's been righted.
I suppose I could say "goodo" or "w00t" or something.
I mean, it's just a little weird, because I'm used to attacking wrongs, not praising rights.
Oh, wait.
"managaed" in TFS is a typo.
There, I've justified my comment.
On a more serious note, I mean it when I say "good for them.
" I do admit that it's a little weird for a parody/criticism website of a person to use a URL that is not obviously parody/criticism.
But I tend to err on the side of the little guy when he's pitted towards the big guy.
(Also, it's a little ironic that the issue behind the website's existence is online censorship.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30656818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30657882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30661574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30664646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30668062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30664826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_0356235_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30660928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0356235.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653336
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0356235.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653660
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30660928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654300
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30668062
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30664826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30661574
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0356235.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653296
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0356235.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653496
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0356235.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653160
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30657882
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30656818
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653390
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653462
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653530
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653338
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30654804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0356235.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653116
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30664646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653936
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_0356235.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_0356235.30653094
</commentlist>
</conversation>
