<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_10_0547236</id>
	<title>Blizzard Previews Revamped Battle.net</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1265794800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Blizzard updated the official <em>StarCraft II</em> site today with <a href="http://www.starcraft2.com/features/misc/battlenet.xml">a preview of how the revamped Battle.net will function</a>. They emphasize the social features, competitive matchmaking system, and the ease of sharing mods and maps. Quoting:
<i>"When the legacy Battle.net service introduced support for user-created mods such as <em>DotA</em>, <em>Tower Defense</em>, and many others, these user-created game types became immensely popular. But while Battle.net supported mods at a basic level, integration with tools and the mod community wasn't where it needed to be for a game releasing in 2010. The new Battle.net service will see some major improvements in this area. <em>StarCraft II</em> will include a full-featured content-creation toolkit &mdash; the same tools used by the <em>StarCraft II</em> design team to create the single-player campaign. To fully harness the community's mapmaking prowess, Battle.net will introduce a feature called Map Publishing. Map Publishing will let users upload their maps to the service and share them with the rest of the community immediately on the service. This also ties in with the goal of making Battle.net an always-connected experience &mdash; you can publish, browse, and download maps directly via the Battle.net client. Finding games based on specific mods will also be much easier with our all-new custom game system, placing the full breadth of the modding community's efforts at your fingertips."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Blizzard updated the official StarCraft II site today with a preview of how the revamped Battle.net will function .
They emphasize the social features , competitive matchmaking system , and the ease of sharing mods and maps .
Quoting : " When the legacy Battle.net service introduced support for user-created mods such as DotA , Tower Defense , and many others , these user-created game types became immensely popular .
But while Battle.net supported mods at a basic level , integration with tools and the mod community was n't where it needed to be for a game releasing in 2010 .
The new Battle.net service will see some major improvements in this area .
StarCraft II will include a full-featured content-creation toolkit    the same tools used by the StarCraft II design team to create the single-player campaign .
To fully harness the community 's mapmaking prowess , Battle.net will introduce a feature called Map Publishing .
Map Publishing will let users upload their maps to the service and share them with the rest of the community immediately on the service .
This also ties in with the goal of making Battle.net an always-connected experience    you can publish , browse , and download maps directly via the Battle.net client .
Finding games based on specific mods will also be much easier with our all-new custom game system , placing the full breadth of the modding community 's efforts at your fingertips .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blizzard updated the official StarCraft II site today with a preview of how the revamped Battle.net will function.
They emphasize the social features, competitive matchmaking system, and the ease of sharing mods and maps.
Quoting:
"When the legacy Battle.net service introduced support for user-created mods such as DotA, Tower Defense, and many others, these user-created game types became immensely popular.
But while Battle.net supported mods at a basic level, integration with tools and the mod community wasn't where it needed to be for a game releasing in 2010.
The new Battle.net service will see some major improvements in this area.
StarCraft II will include a full-featured content-creation toolkit — the same tools used by the StarCraft II design team to create the single-player campaign.
To fully harness the community's mapmaking prowess, Battle.net will introduce a feature called Map Publishing.
Map Publishing will let users upload their maps to the service and share them with the rest of the community immediately on the service.
This also ties in with the goal of making Battle.net an always-connected experience — you can publish, browse, and download maps directly via the Battle.net client.
Finding games based on specific mods will also be much easier with our all-new custom game system, placing the full breadth of the modding community's efforts at your fingertips.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084876</id>
	<title>How to do tournament play? with out have the on li</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1265036040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How to do tournament play? with out have the on line part? as for tournament you need to keep stuff to local systems only as any kind of lag / server mess up may mess things up and being on line makes it more likely to not be 100\% the same for all players. also people may not want to get banded for what ever software may be on the tournaments systems that are not there own systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How to do tournament play ?
with out have the on line part ?
as for tournament you need to keep stuff to local systems only as any kind of lag / server mess up may mess things up and being on line makes it more likely to not be 100 \ % the same for all players .
also people may not want to get banded for what ever software may be on the tournaments systems that are not there own systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How to do tournament play?
with out have the on line part?
as for tournament you need to keep stuff to local systems only as any kind of lag / server mess up may mess things up and being on line makes it more likely to not be 100\% the same for all players.
also people may not want to get banded for what ever software may be on the tournaments systems that are not there own systems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085418</id>
	<title>Re:Fawks</title>
	<author>VGPowerlord</author>
	<datestamp>1265038680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"I bought your product even though I thought you screwed it up, but if you screw it up again I won't buy it. Honest!"</p></div></blockquote><p>Actually, wasn't this more of a "I bought one of your products and found out while playing it that it sucked, and if you screw it up again I won't buy the next one. Honest!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I bought your product even though I thought you screwed it up , but if you screw it up again I wo n't buy it .
Honest ! " Actually , was n't this more of a " I bought one of your products and found out while playing it that it sucked , and if you screw it up again I wo n't buy the next one .
Honest ! "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I bought your product even though I thought you screwed it up, but if you screw it up again I won't buy it.
Honest!"Actually, wasn't this more of a "I bought one of your products and found out while playing it that it sucked, and if you screw it up again I won't buy the next one.
Honest!"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546</id>
	<title>Facebattle.net</title>
	<author>tuxedobob</author>
	<datestamp>1265021820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great, more of this "social networking" garbage? Can't a game just be a game anymore?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great , more of this " social networking " garbage ?
Ca n't a game just be a game anymore ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great, more of this "social networking" garbage?
Can't a game just be a game anymore?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085294</id>
	<title>Selling mods...</title>
	<author>kungfugleek</author>
	<datestamp>1265038080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFA: "With the StarCraft II Marketplace, players will be able to browse, download, rate, comment on, and even buy mods if their creators choose to put a price tag on their work."  <br>  That's neat and all, but I'm wondering if there will be some way to prevent a user from buying a mod, changing it just slightly, and re-uploading it for free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : " With the StarCraft II Marketplace , players will be able to browse , download , rate , comment on , and even buy mods if their creators choose to put a price tag on their work .
" That 's neat and all , but I 'm wondering if there will be some way to prevent a user from buying a mod , changing it just slightly , and re-uploading it for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA: "With the StarCraft II Marketplace, players will be able to browse, download, rate, comment on, and even buy mods if their creators choose to put a price tag on their work.
"    That's neat and all, but I'm wondering if there will be some way to prevent a user from buying a mod, changing it just slightly, and re-uploading it for free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31090242</id>
	<title>Re:Facebattle.net</title>
	<author>Cornflake917</author>
	<datestamp>1265016540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Starcraft II will have a single player mode.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Starcraft II will have a single player mode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Starcraft II will have a single player mode.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31109734</id>
	<title>Re:Why does everything have to be a market?</title>
	<author>mal3</author>
	<datestamp>1265912340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google "capitalism" sometime.  Its amazing the things people will create to try and make money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google " capitalism " sometime .
Its amazing the things people will create to try and make money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google "capitalism" sometime.
Its amazing the things people will create to try and make money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083662</id>
	<title>Re:Facebattle.net</title>
	<author>alienzed</author>
	<datestamp>1265023620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not fun until people you know know you think it's fun.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not fun until people you know know you think it 's fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not fun until people you know know you think it's fun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083828</id>
	<title>Re:Facebattle.net</title>
	<author>DavidD\_CA</author>
	<datestamp>1265025600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes.  Just don't log on to Battle.net.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
Just do n't log on to Battle.net .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
Just don't log on to Battle.net.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087634</id>
	<title>Re:Fawks</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1265048400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What about those of us who will not buy StarCraft II without LAN party capability?</i></p><p>Your money will scarcely be missed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about those of us who will not buy StarCraft II without LAN party capability ? Your money will scarcely be missed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about those of us who will not buy StarCraft II without LAN party capability?Your money will scarcely be missed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31096706</id>
	<title>Re:Why does everything have to be a market?</title>
	<author>grumbel</author>
	<datestamp>1265919420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The trouble is that creating something fun, isn't always fun. Money is a good incentive to walk the last mile to add that extra polish which turns a neat idea into an actually good game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The trouble is that creating something fun , is n't always fun .
Money is a good incentive to walk the last mile to add that extra polish which turns a neat idea into an actually good game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The trouble is that creating something fun, isn't always fun.
Money is a good incentive to walk the last mile to add that extra polish which turns a neat idea into an actually good game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760</id>
	<title>*always* connected?</title>
	<author>xlsior</author>
	<datestamp>1265024760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>From their site: <i>In the past, Battle.net was presented as a multiplayer option off to the side, off of the main menu of Blizzard Entertainment titles. That is all changing. With the new Battle.net experience, the service and the game are now interwoven into one experience. Whether you are in <b>single-player</b> or multiplayer StarCraft II, <b>you are always connected</b>, and enjoy a bevy of new and enhanced functionality.</i> <br>
<br>
Just... Great.<br>
<br>
Yet another game that you can't play without being tethered to the internet. No biggie for multiplayer, but it really shouldn't have any business in single-player campaign mode...</htmltext>
<tokenext>From their site : In the past , Battle.net was presented as a multiplayer option off to the side , off of the main menu of Blizzard Entertainment titles .
That is all changing .
With the new Battle.net experience , the service and the game are now interwoven into one experience .
Whether you are in single-player or multiplayer StarCraft II , you are always connected , and enjoy a bevy of new and enhanced functionality .
Just... Great .
Yet another game that you ca n't play without being tethered to the internet .
No biggie for multiplayer , but it really should n't have any business in single-player campaign mode.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From their site: In the past, Battle.net was presented as a multiplayer option off to the side, off of the main menu of Blizzard Entertainment titles.
That is all changing.
With the new Battle.net experience, the service and the game are now interwoven into one experience.
Whether you are in single-player or multiplayer StarCraft II, you are always connected, and enjoy a bevy of new and enhanced functionality.
Just... Great.
Yet another game that you can't play without being tethered to the internet.
No biggie for multiplayer, but it really shouldn't have any business in single-player campaign mode...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083998</id>
	<title>Re:Fawks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265027460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"I bought your product even though I thought you screwed it up, but if you screw it up <i>again</i> I won't buy it. Honest!"<br> <br>

(plus, bonus "I hated and didn't finish one of your GOTY titles, thus demonstrating I am not your representative customer and can be safely ignored")</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I bought your product even though I thought you screwed it up , but if you screw it up again I wo n't buy it .
Honest ! " ( plus , bonus " I hated and did n't finish one of your GOTY titles , thus demonstrating I am not your representative customer and can be safely ignored " )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I bought your product even though I thought you screwed it up, but if you screw it up again I won't buy it.
Honest!" 

(plus, bonus "I hated and didn't finish one of your GOTY titles, thus demonstrating I am not your representative customer and can be safely ignored")</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083520</id>
	<title>Why does everything have to be a market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265021460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't adding a  monetary incentive for mods going to overshadow the inherent incentive of creating something fun?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't adding a monetary incentive for mods going to overshadow the inherent incentive of creating something fun ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't adding a  monetary incentive for mods going to overshadow the inherent incentive of creating something fun?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</id>
	<title>Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1265038560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here is a problem that has risen from social networking and what not and I can point the finger at Blizzard.</p><p>In WoW they came up with all this great new data mining and achievements. We end up with gear scores and Wow Heroes etc.</p><p>Now I have a friend that just decided to start playing back in October. He signs up and starts playing on Elune for instance. In 3 months he never was invited into a single group. Ever. Why? "He didn't have any heirloom gear" and "His gear score is too low." etc... The digital equivalent of "The rich get richer and the poor get poorer."</p><p>At far as what I've seen most of this social networking crap is only going to frustrate new players and build walls to keep new players out. Most game related social networking results in Clique building and tribal nonsense. I survived the ACiD, TRiBE, iCE ANSI wars in the BBS era. I witnessed the grand flame wars of Usenet. I saw the clan wars in the MMO days, I saw the Guild fights in the early days of the MMOs culminating in the rise of the Uber guilds. The one thing I can say with certainty is "The more 'social' networking tools the more 'anti-social' people behave." or another way to say it is "Social networking is the fertilizer on the asshole crop". I am also fond of "Shit floats in the waters of user content" but that is a bit off topic.</p><p>I fear that, from what I've seen, Bnet's new social networking tools is going to be more about shutting people out rather then bringing people together.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is a problem that has risen from social networking and what not and I can point the finger at Blizzard.In WoW they came up with all this great new data mining and achievements .
We end up with gear scores and Wow Heroes etc.Now I have a friend that just decided to start playing back in October .
He signs up and starts playing on Elune for instance .
In 3 months he never was invited into a single group .
Ever. Why ?
" He did n't have any heirloom gear " and " His gear score is too low .
" etc... The digital equivalent of " The rich get richer and the poor get poorer .
" At far as what I 've seen most of this social networking crap is only going to frustrate new players and build walls to keep new players out .
Most game related social networking results in Clique building and tribal nonsense .
I survived the ACiD , TRiBE , iCE ANSI wars in the BBS era .
I witnessed the grand flame wars of Usenet .
I saw the clan wars in the MMO days , I saw the Guild fights in the early days of the MMOs culminating in the rise of the Uber guilds .
The one thing I can say with certainty is " The more 'social ' networking tools the more 'anti-social ' people behave .
" or another way to say it is " Social networking is the fertilizer on the asshole crop " .
I am also fond of " Shit floats in the waters of user content " but that is a bit off topic.I fear that , from what I 've seen , Bnet 's new social networking tools is going to be more about shutting people out rather then bringing people together .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is a problem that has risen from social networking and what not and I can point the finger at Blizzard.In WoW they came up with all this great new data mining and achievements.
We end up with gear scores and Wow Heroes etc.Now I have a friend that just decided to start playing back in October.
He signs up and starts playing on Elune for instance.
In 3 months he never was invited into a single group.
Ever. Why?
"He didn't have any heirloom gear" and "His gear score is too low.
" etc... The digital equivalent of "The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
"At far as what I've seen most of this social networking crap is only going to frustrate new players and build walls to keep new players out.
Most game related social networking results in Clique building and tribal nonsense.
I survived the ACiD, TRiBE, iCE ANSI wars in the BBS era.
I witnessed the grand flame wars of Usenet.
I saw the clan wars in the MMO days, I saw the Guild fights in the early days of the MMOs culminating in the rise of the Uber guilds.
The one thing I can say with certainty is "The more 'social' networking tools the more 'anti-social' people behave.
" or another way to say it is "Social networking is the fertilizer on the asshole crop".
I am also fond of "Shit floats in the waters of user content" but that is a bit off topic.I fear that, from what I've seen, Bnet's new social networking tools is going to be more about shutting people out rather then bringing people together.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31107210</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265891880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a rant.  I am, by most definitions, one of the bad guys.  You've been forewarned.</p><p>The "good old days"<br>You don't need superior comm tools for exclusivity, clannishness, douchery, or whatever you want to call it.  I reckon that I'm a little younger than you, so excuse my presence on your lawn, but I DID get my start back in the DikuMUD days, albeit via a relatively-snappy 33.6k modem.  Someone who really knew what they were doing could have a max-level character on the MUD I played in a couple nights of hard play -- god bless rogues.  Thanks to scripting, proxies, and multiplay, they could turn that one character into a half-dozen in a couple more nights.  The only "community" tools we had back then were one super-crappy html message board and e-mail.  That didn't decrease the douchery, I'm sorry to say.  My little group of seven to nine players (we weren't called a clan, but we had a custom tag we all appended to our names -- how little things change) was hugely insular and protective.  We harvested the game's best gear and even made a point of monopolizing it -- grabbing copies from infrequent spawns and targeting other players that had them (today's players haven't got a frickin' clue about PVP), then either publicly dropping it into the junkyard (item poofs with a visible message) or hiding them in our fleet of rent-alts (saving equipment cost money, see?).  When someone managed to kill some of our characters, our revenge was venomous; we'd keep someone logged in 24/7 to spawn-rape them repeatedly.  This was easy, because everyone logged in at the same spot in the Temple of Midgaard.  Hell, we could sit a level nothing alt in that room on a spare connection and have our client beep us and all our allies the instant that anyone on the black-list popped in.  Ctrl-alt-1 and my entire squad immediately recited recall scrolls and appeared on top of the target, ready for butchery.  Oh yes, we could track your sorry butt anywhere in-game.  We could charm and control you.  Even if, by some miracle, you could take us toe-to-toe in combat, we could flood you offline by making 40,000 freshly-purchased pet kitten cubs mew in the room with you -- a room we would NOT be in.  We didn't CARE about newbies, but if we had, we could have stopped every last one from playing at all.  The ops would have gotten tired of us at that point (even though we had one on our side covering our filthy asses), but a the ENTIRE WORLD, which amounted to at most 300-400 unique players, was controllable by one small circle of rotten trolls.  No Web 2.0 necessary.</p><p>But enough about my early-adolescent brutality.  I played Everquest, too, and I was a douchey clan-tard there, too.  We had an HTML BBS and ICQ for communication at that point; one of us even had an IT job and an ISDN line for web hosting, but voice chat still wasn't an option for 2/3 of us.  In-game, we did more of the same as before.  However, it wasn't so easy to control everything.  Yes, we took over a few key spawns on our servers for extended periods; we operated both on the "Zeks" (PVP) and several "blue" (PVE) servers, and we caused the care-bear guilds some grief.  However, coordination and application of power were recurrent problems.  Most of us couldn't afford to have the accounts or the computing horsepower necessary to log in full groups of characters simultaneously; I two-boxed with two, sometimes three accounts, but the second and third characters were only running at 60-80\% of best performance.  And, sad to say, in spite of picking up some new talent, we got outfoxed sometimes by better-organized guilds on both pvp and pve servers.  In the OLD Everquest days, building up characters took a LONG time.  Even if you could tag-team and power-level a character through the experience grind in a week, gearing them up took much longer.  Every single raid went down with the textual equivalent of the youTube "MORE DOTs" guy, with explicit instructions given for every damn thing, because it didn't work any other way.  Oh, yeah, instances.  Kids, remember what I said</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a rant .
I am , by most definitions , one of the bad guys .
You 've been forewarned.The " good old days " You do n't need superior comm tools for exclusivity , clannishness , douchery , or whatever you want to call it .
I reckon that I 'm a little younger than you , so excuse my presence on your lawn , but I DID get my start back in the DikuMUD days , albeit via a relatively-snappy 33.6k modem .
Someone who really knew what they were doing could have a max-level character on the MUD I played in a couple nights of hard play -- god bless rogues .
Thanks to scripting , proxies , and multiplay , they could turn that one character into a half-dozen in a couple more nights .
The only " community " tools we had back then were one super-crappy html message board and e-mail .
That did n't decrease the douchery , I 'm sorry to say .
My little group of seven to nine players ( we were n't called a clan , but we had a custom tag we all appended to our names -- how little things change ) was hugely insular and protective .
We harvested the game 's best gear and even made a point of monopolizing it -- grabbing copies from infrequent spawns and targeting other players that had them ( today 's players have n't got a frickin ' clue about PVP ) , then either publicly dropping it into the junkyard ( item poofs with a visible message ) or hiding them in our fleet of rent-alts ( saving equipment cost money , see ? ) .
When someone managed to kill some of our characters , our revenge was venomous ; we 'd keep someone logged in 24/7 to spawn-rape them repeatedly .
This was easy , because everyone logged in at the same spot in the Temple of Midgaard .
Hell , we could sit a level nothing alt in that room on a spare connection and have our client beep us and all our allies the instant that anyone on the black-list popped in .
Ctrl-alt-1 and my entire squad immediately recited recall scrolls and appeared on top of the target , ready for butchery .
Oh yes , we could track your sorry butt anywhere in-game .
We could charm and control you .
Even if , by some miracle , you could take us toe-to-toe in combat , we could flood you offline by making 40,000 freshly-purchased pet kitten cubs mew in the room with you -- a room we would NOT be in .
We did n't CARE about newbies , but if we had , we could have stopped every last one from playing at all .
The ops would have gotten tired of us at that point ( even though we had one on our side covering our filthy asses ) , but a the ENTIRE WORLD , which amounted to at most 300-400 unique players , was controllable by one small circle of rotten trolls .
No Web 2.0 necessary.But enough about my early-adolescent brutality .
I played Everquest , too , and I was a douchey clan-tard there , too .
We had an HTML BBS and ICQ for communication at that point ; one of us even had an IT job and an ISDN line for web hosting , but voice chat still was n't an option for 2/3 of us .
In-game , we did more of the same as before .
However , it was n't so easy to control everything .
Yes , we took over a few key spawns on our servers for extended periods ; we operated both on the " Zeks " ( PVP ) and several " blue " ( PVE ) servers , and we caused the care-bear guilds some grief .
However , coordination and application of power were recurrent problems .
Most of us could n't afford to have the accounts or the computing horsepower necessary to log in full groups of characters simultaneously ; I two-boxed with two , sometimes three accounts , but the second and third characters were only running at 60-80 \ % of best performance .
And , sad to say , in spite of picking up some new talent , we got outfoxed sometimes by better-organized guilds on both pvp and pve servers .
In the OLD Everquest days , building up characters took a LONG time .
Even if you could tag-team and power-level a character through the experience grind in a week , gearing them up took much longer .
Every single raid went down with the textual equivalent of the youTube " MORE DOTs " guy , with explicit instructions given for every damn thing , because it did n't work any other way .
Oh , yeah , instances .
Kids , remember what I said</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a rant.
I am, by most definitions, one of the bad guys.
You've been forewarned.The "good old days"You don't need superior comm tools for exclusivity, clannishness, douchery, or whatever you want to call it.
I reckon that I'm a little younger than you, so excuse my presence on your lawn, but I DID get my start back in the DikuMUD days, albeit via a relatively-snappy 33.6k modem.
Someone who really knew what they were doing could have a max-level character on the MUD I played in a couple nights of hard play -- god bless rogues.
Thanks to scripting, proxies, and multiplay, they could turn that one character into a half-dozen in a couple more nights.
The only "community" tools we had back then were one super-crappy html message board and e-mail.
That didn't decrease the douchery, I'm sorry to say.
My little group of seven to nine players (we weren't called a clan, but we had a custom tag we all appended to our names -- how little things change) was hugely insular and protective.
We harvested the game's best gear and even made a point of monopolizing it -- grabbing copies from infrequent spawns and targeting other players that had them (today's players haven't got a frickin' clue about PVP), then either publicly dropping it into the junkyard (item poofs with a visible message) or hiding them in our fleet of rent-alts (saving equipment cost money, see?).
When someone managed to kill some of our characters, our revenge was venomous; we'd keep someone logged in 24/7 to spawn-rape them repeatedly.
This was easy, because everyone logged in at the same spot in the Temple of Midgaard.
Hell, we could sit a level nothing alt in that room on a spare connection and have our client beep us and all our allies the instant that anyone on the black-list popped in.
Ctrl-alt-1 and my entire squad immediately recited recall scrolls and appeared on top of the target, ready for butchery.
Oh yes, we could track your sorry butt anywhere in-game.
We could charm and control you.
Even if, by some miracle, you could take us toe-to-toe in combat, we could flood you offline by making 40,000 freshly-purchased pet kitten cubs mew in the room with you -- a room we would NOT be in.
We didn't CARE about newbies, but if we had, we could have stopped every last one from playing at all.
The ops would have gotten tired of us at that point (even though we had one on our side covering our filthy asses), but a the ENTIRE WORLD, which amounted to at most 300-400 unique players, was controllable by one small circle of rotten trolls.
No Web 2.0 necessary.But enough about my early-adolescent brutality.
I played Everquest, too, and I was a douchey clan-tard there, too.
We had an HTML BBS and ICQ for communication at that point; one of us even had an IT job and an ISDN line for web hosting, but voice chat still wasn't an option for 2/3 of us.
In-game, we did more of the same as before.
However, it wasn't so easy to control everything.
Yes, we took over a few key spawns on our servers for extended periods; we operated both on the "Zeks" (PVP) and several "blue" (PVE) servers, and we caused the care-bear guilds some grief.
However, coordination and application of power were recurrent problems.
Most of us couldn't afford to have the accounts or the computing horsepower necessary to log in full groups of characters simultaneously; I two-boxed with two, sometimes three accounts, but the second and third characters were only running at 60-80\% of best performance.
And, sad to say, in spite of picking up some new talent, we got outfoxed sometimes by better-organized guilds on both pvp and pve servers.
In the OLD Everquest days, building up characters took a LONG time.
Even if you could tag-team and power-level a character through the experience grind in a week, gearing them up took much longer.
Every single raid went down with the textual equivalent of the youTube "MORE DOTs" guy, with explicit instructions given for every damn thing, because it didn't work any other way.
Oh, yeah, instances.
Kids, remember what I said</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086488</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>scamper\_22</author>
	<datestamp>1265043300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so... you have a problem with humanity then?</p><p>Online social networks are not much different from regular life networks</p><p>Have you grown out of the high school stage where you sit there pointlessly wondering "why can't everyone be invited to the party?"</p><p>Well everyone can't.  The house only fits 20 people.  You can't be friends with everyone, because there's only 24 hours in a day and you won't get to know anyone a friend without sacrificing time with someone else.  Socializing means excluding some others.  Just accept that as a fact of reality.</p><p>And the same is with guilds.  No different than regular groups of people in life... just more exclusive.  Like car owner clubs, or sports clubs...</p><p>You have nothing to fear but your own denial of reality.  Form your own guild and help your buddy out and when it comes time for you guys to enjoy your group, you'll have to exclude people too...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so... you have a problem with humanity then ? Online social networks are not much different from regular life networksHave you grown out of the high school stage where you sit there pointlessly wondering " why ca n't everyone be invited to the party ?
" Well everyone ca n't .
The house only fits 20 people .
You ca n't be friends with everyone , because there 's only 24 hours in a day and you wo n't get to know anyone a friend without sacrificing time with someone else .
Socializing means excluding some others .
Just accept that as a fact of reality.And the same is with guilds .
No different than regular groups of people in life... just more exclusive .
Like car owner clubs , or sports clubs...You have nothing to fear but your own denial of reality .
Form your own guild and help your buddy out and when it comes time for you guys to enjoy your group , you 'll have to exclude people too.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so... you have a problem with humanity then?Online social networks are not much different from regular life networksHave you grown out of the high school stage where you sit there pointlessly wondering "why can't everyone be invited to the party?
"Well everyone can't.
The house only fits 20 people.
You can't be friends with everyone, because there's only 24 hours in a day and you won't get to know anyone a friend without sacrificing time with someone else.
Socializing means excluding some others.
Just accept that as a fact of reality.And the same is with guilds.
No different than regular groups of people in life... just more exclusive.
Like car owner clubs, or sports clubs...You have nothing to fear but your own denial of reality.
Form your own guild and help your buddy out and when it comes time for you guys to enjoy your group, you'll have to exclude people too...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084622</id>
	<title>WINE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265034000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Honestly I just hope it will work in WINE.<br>
If it does I might give it a shot. Will DRM not make work it in WINE?<br>
Well one less customer.<br>
Have fun!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly I just hope it will work in WINE .
If it does I might give it a shot .
Will DRM not make work it in WINE ?
Well one less customer .
Have fun !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly I just hope it will work in WINE.
If it does I might give it a shot.
Will DRM not make work it in WINE?
Well one less customer.
Have fun!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084458</id>
	<title>Re:*always* connected?</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1265032740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It doesn't say that it's mandatory, just that it's available. XBox Live and Steam both have an online presence in singleplayer games, it didn't stop you starting the software offline.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't say that it 's mandatory , just that it 's available .
XBox Live and Steam both have an online presence in singleplayer games , it did n't stop you starting the software offline .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't say that it's mandatory, just that it's available.
XBox Live and Steam both have an online presence in singleplayer games, it didn't stop you starting the software offline.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083938</id>
	<title>Re:*always* connected?</title>
	<author>zoloto</author>
	<datestamp>1265026740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Could always  have your firewall block and play in offline mode. It's not like they'll prevent it like Steam tried to, right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Could always have your firewall block and play in offline mode .
It 's not like they 'll prevent it like Steam tried to , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could always  have your firewall block and play in offline mode.
It's not like they'll prevent it like Steam tried to, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084042</id>
	<title>Re:*always* connected?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265027880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Other than assuming the worst, there's no reason to assume the game cannot function in single player without being connected to battle.net.</p><p>After all (and ignoring that GFWL is crap for a second), I could make the same statements about Fallout 3, Dawn of War, or Resident Evil 5 and GFWL.  Being able to be "always connected" for "enhanced functionality".  None of them require you to log into GFWL to function in single player though.  Or any Steam game for that matter (you can go to offline mode, but then you lose the "enhanced functionality" of steam achievements and friends.</p><p>I'd expect something similar to the Steam overlay for the new battle.net.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Other than assuming the worst , there 's no reason to assume the game can not function in single player without being connected to battle.net.After all ( and ignoring that GFWL is crap for a second ) , I could make the same statements about Fallout 3 , Dawn of War , or Resident Evil 5 and GFWL .
Being able to be " always connected " for " enhanced functionality " .
None of them require you to log into GFWL to function in single player though .
Or any Steam game for that matter ( you can go to offline mode , but then you lose the " enhanced functionality " of steam achievements and friends.I 'd expect something similar to the Steam overlay for the new battle.net .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Other than assuming the worst, there's no reason to assume the game cannot function in single player without being connected to battle.net.After all (and ignoring that GFWL is crap for a second), I could make the same statements about Fallout 3, Dawn of War, or Resident Evil 5 and GFWL.
Being able to be "always connected" for "enhanced functionality".
None of them require you to log into GFWL to function in single player though.
Or any Steam game for that matter (you can go to offline mode, but then you lose the "enhanced functionality" of steam achievements and friends.I'd expect something similar to the Steam overlay for the new battle.net.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083772</id>
	<title>arg...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265024880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't read it here in Korea since it just endlessly redirects me to the empty Korean version of the site.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't read it here in Korea since it just endlessly redirects me to the empty Korean version of the site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't read it here in Korea since it just endlessly redirects me to the empty Korean version of the site.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088068</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265050200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My friend started playing and he had no problem getting groups and/or gear. Within months he has full epics, just like everyone else. Maybe your friend sucks at playing, sucks at socializing. Wow really isn't that hard, and there are tons of people that are new and willing to form groups with other new people. It sounds to me like your friend wants to go lone wolf style, and only join groups when he wants stuff. WoW is an mmo and that kind of behavior doesn't work well.</p><p>I also hate to break it to you, but there are no "uber guilds" in either Wow or Starcraft. Both games are highly competitive, unlike those other games you've played, where there was nothing for people to do other than flame each other en masse. People don't want to waste time with shit groups. Having a gigantic guild does not help you whatsoever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My friend started playing and he had no problem getting groups and/or gear .
Within months he has full epics , just like everyone else .
Maybe your friend sucks at playing , sucks at socializing .
Wow really is n't that hard , and there are tons of people that are new and willing to form groups with other new people .
It sounds to me like your friend wants to go lone wolf style , and only join groups when he wants stuff .
WoW is an mmo and that kind of behavior does n't work well.I also hate to break it to you , but there are no " uber guilds " in either Wow or Starcraft .
Both games are highly competitive , unlike those other games you 've played , where there was nothing for people to do other than flame each other en masse .
People do n't want to waste time with shit groups .
Having a gigantic guild does not help you whatsoever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My friend started playing and he had no problem getting groups and/or gear.
Within months he has full epics, just like everyone else.
Maybe your friend sucks at playing, sucks at socializing.
Wow really isn't that hard, and there are tons of people that are new and willing to form groups with other new people.
It sounds to me like your friend wants to go lone wolf style, and only join groups when he wants stuff.
WoW is an mmo and that kind of behavior doesn't work well.I also hate to break it to you, but there are no "uber guilds" in either Wow or Starcraft.
Both games are highly competitive, unlike those other games you've played, where there was nothing for people to do other than flame each other en masse.
People don't want to waste time with shit groups.
Having a gigantic guild does not help you whatsoever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087840</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>brkello</author>
	<datestamp>1265049180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All new players are going to feel left behind when they join an MMO years after it started.  It isn't hard to find a group because of gear, it's hard because most people don't run lower level instances any more.  At higher levels, there isn't much of a problem finding groups unless you really have no idea what you are doing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All new players are going to feel left behind when they join an MMO years after it started .
It is n't hard to find a group because of gear , it 's hard because most people do n't run lower level instances any more .
At higher levels , there is n't much of a problem finding groups unless you really have no idea what you are doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All new players are going to feel left behind when they join an MMO years after it started.
It isn't hard to find a group because of gear, it's hard because most people don't run lower level instances any more.
At higher levels, there isn't much of a problem finding groups unless you really have no idea what you are doing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087396</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you're blaming the tool and not the assholes who don't use it correctly?</p><p>http://www.mmo-champion.com/raids-dungeons/gearscore-\%28long-you\%27ve-been-warned-dont-bitch\%29/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're blaming the tool and not the assholes who do n't use it correctly ? http : //www.mmo-champion.com/raids-dungeons/gearscore- \ % 28long-you \ % 27ve-been-warned-dont-bitch \ % 29/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're blaming the tool and not the assholes who don't use it correctly?http://www.mmo-champion.com/raids-dungeons/gearscore-\%28long-you\%27ve-been-warned-dont-bitch\%29/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084326</id>
	<title>Re:*always* connected?</title>
	<author>s1lverl0rd</author>
	<datestamp>1265031240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What makes you think it isn't optional? I think you'll be able to play the game without Battle.net quite well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What makes you think it is n't optional ?
I think you 'll be able to play the game without Battle.net quite well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What makes you think it isn't optional?
I think you'll be able to play the game without Battle.net quite well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088212</id>
	<title>Re:*always* connected?</title>
	<author>ildon</author>
	<datestamp>1265050800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can play it just fine in offline ("Guest") mode. It simply does not record your "achievements" in that mode. But you can still play single players and save your games and what not. This was discussed at length at Blizzcon, mostly due to angry people asking about LAN play at the Q&amp;A session after the speech. I didn't check out this new preview so I'm not sure if it was mentioned there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can play it just fine in offline ( " Guest " ) mode .
It simply does not record your " achievements " in that mode .
But you can still play single players and save your games and what not .
This was discussed at length at Blizzcon , mostly due to angry people asking about LAN play at the Q&amp;A session after the speech .
I did n't check out this new preview so I 'm not sure if it was mentioned there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can play it just fine in offline ("Guest") mode.
It simply does not record your "achievements" in that mode.
But you can still play single players and save your games and what not.
This was discussed at length at Blizzcon, mostly due to angry people asking about LAN play at the Q&amp;A session after the speech.
I didn't check out this new preview so I'm not sure if it was mentioned there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084362</id>
	<title>Re:Fawks</title>
	<author>Kenoli</author>
	<datestamp>1265031720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>over a decade late</p></div><p>Pffth! It only took them seven years to make it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>over a decade latePffth !
It only took them seven years to make it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>over a decade latePffth!
It only took them seven years to make it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086346</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>mrxak</author>
	<datestamp>1265042820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You really can't compare MMORPG drama with social tools like having a buddy list in an RTS matchmaking system. There's no persistent gear in Starcraft II. There's going to be battle.net clans, but there already are battle.net clans. The new tools will help those clans keep in touch with each other better, that's really it. As for the achievements, they amount to "this guy finished the campaign" or "this guy reached rank 10 on the multiplayer ladders", neither of which will really matter beyond what will already be readily apparent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You really ca n't compare MMORPG drama with social tools like having a buddy list in an RTS matchmaking system .
There 's no persistent gear in Starcraft II .
There 's going to be battle.net clans , but there already are battle.net clans .
The new tools will help those clans keep in touch with each other better , that 's really it .
As for the achievements , they amount to " this guy finished the campaign " or " this guy reached rank 10 on the multiplayer ladders " , neither of which will really matter beyond what will already be readily apparent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You really can't compare MMORPG drama with social tools like having a buddy list in an RTS matchmaking system.
There's no persistent gear in Starcraft II.
There's going to be battle.net clans, but there already are battle.net clans.
The new tools will help those clans keep in touch with each other better, that's really it.
As for the achievements, they amount to "this guy finished the campaign" or "this guy reached rank 10 on the multiplayer ladders", neither of which will really matter beyond what will already be readily apparent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088606</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>Thaelon</author>
	<datestamp>1265052300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tools are just tools.</p><p>How they're used says nothing about the tools and everything about the user.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tools are just tools.How they 're used says nothing about the tools and everything about the user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tools are just tools.How they're used says nothing about the tools and everything about the user.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083810</id>
	<title>Nice deep integration but hoping for API</title>
	<author>tarkin</author>
	<datestamp>1265025300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like the deep cross-game integration of status, matchmaking and voice chat but I wish all the players building their own closed social gaming platforms would also build a proper external API to go with it (Xbox Live, Steam etc.).
<br> <br>
Maybe we need a Open Game Achievement Standards Body RFC comity group thingie?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the deep cross-game integration of status , matchmaking and voice chat but I wish all the players building their own closed social gaming platforms would also build a proper external API to go with it ( Xbox Live , Steam etc. ) .
Maybe we need a Open Game Achievement Standards Body RFC comity group thingie ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like the deep cross-game integration of status, matchmaking and voice chat but I wish all the players building their own closed social gaming platforms would also build a proper external API to go with it (Xbox Live, Steam etc.).
Maybe we need a Open Game Achievement Standards Body RFC comity group thingie?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086280</id>
	<title>Re:Selling mods...</title>
	<author>mrxak</author>
	<datestamp>1265042520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably nothing will prevent somebody from doing that, other than edit protections built into the maps themselves. Such things tend to get hacked, though. The real thing will be simply folks making a very similar map for free. My guess is, the folks trying to actually charge for maps will be laughed/scorned so much that nobody really bothers, though maybe we'll get some commercial-grade full campaign mods that cost a bit of money (and actually be worth it).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably nothing will prevent somebody from doing that , other than edit protections built into the maps themselves .
Such things tend to get hacked , though .
The real thing will be simply folks making a very similar map for free .
My guess is , the folks trying to actually charge for maps will be laughed/scorned so much that nobody really bothers , though maybe we 'll get some commercial-grade full campaign mods that cost a bit of money ( and actually be worth it ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably nothing will prevent somebody from doing that, other than edit protections built into the maps themselves.
Such things tend to get hacked, though.
The real thing will be simply folks making a very similar map for free.
My guess is, the folks trying to actually charge for maps will be laughed/scorned so much that nobody really bothers, though maybe we'll get some commercial-grade full campaign mods that cost a bit of money (and actually be worth it).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088258</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>court12b</author>
	<datestamp>1265050980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I came back to WoW after a 2 year break. I didn't know a single active player on any server. I explained my situation to a few top tier raiding guilds and it wasn't long before I got a guild invite for my non-max level main character.

There are decent groups of gamers in this world. Finding them takes more effort than zero however.

My beef is with WoW's new Dungeon Finder system. You can stumble across some really great people, have the time of your life for an hour or so, and have no way of interacting with them for the rest of your life because they're from another server.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I came back to WoW after a 2 year break .
I did n't know a single active player on any server .
I explained my situation to a few top tier raiding guilds and it was n't long before I got a guild invite for my non-max level main character .
There are decent groups of gamers in this world .
Finding them takes more effort than zero however .
My beef is with WoW 's new Dungeon Finder system .
You can stumble across some really great people , have the time of your life for an hour or so , and have no way of interacting with them for the rest of your life because they 're from another server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I came back to WoW after a 2 year break.
I didn't know a single active player on any server.
I explained my situation to a few top tier raiding guilds and it wasn't long before I got a guild invite for my non-max level main character.
There are decent groups of gamers in this world.
Finding them takes more effort than zero however.
My beef is with WoW's new Dungeon Finder system.
You can stumble across some really great people, have the time of your life for an hour or so, and have no way of interacting with them for the rest of your life because they're from another server.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088420</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>NeutronCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1265051580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or, in other words, make sure you play with friends. Then you don't have to worry about gear checks, loot whores, anonymous assholes and other douchebaggery. And look - the social networking tools make that easy! Whodathunkit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , in other words , make sure you play with friends .
Then you do n't have to worry about gear checks , loot whores , anonymous assholes and other douchebaggery .
And look - the social networking tools make that easy !
Whodathunkit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, in other words, make sure you play with friends.
Then you don't have to worry about gear checks, loot whores, anonymous assholes and other douchebaggery.
And look - the social networking tools make that easy!
Whodathunkit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084502</id>
	<title>Re:*always* connected?</title>
	<author>regular\_gonzalez</author>
	<datestamp>1265032980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I imagine the subset of the population that this will impact is vanishingly small.  Your desktop is obviously always connected, so we're looking at laptops.  Given that the graphics are fairly modern, we can eliminate vast swaths of the notebook market.  RTS games require a mouse - using a touchpad for an RTS is an exercise in frustration and can only sound like a viable option to someone who has never actually tried it.  So now we're looking at a gaming laptop with enough flat area to use a mouse - something like a desk or table.  Certainly a larger area than, say, the fold-up tray on an airplane; something more like a table at your local coffee shop (which almost assuredly has free wifi).  It's not a huge leap to say that the number of people who will play this game on a gaming laptop in an area with no internet connection is miniscule.<br> <br>And that's not even taking into account that there will likely be an offline mode similar to Steam.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I imagine the subset of the population that this will impact is vanishingly small .
Your desktop is obviously always connected , so we 're looking at laptops .
Given that the graphics are fairly modern , we can eliminate vast swaths of the notebook market .
RTS games require a mouse - using a touchpad for an RTS is an exercise in frustration and can only sound like a viable option to someone who has never actually tried it .
So now we 're looking at a gaming laptop with enough flat area to use a mouse - something like a desk or table .
Certainly a larger area than , say , the fold-up tray on an airplane ; something more like a table at your local coffee shop ( which almost assuredly has free wifi ) .
It 's not a huge leap to say that the number of people who will play this game on a gaming laptop in an area with no internet connection is miniscule .
And that 's not even taking into account that there will likely be an offline mode similar to Steam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I imagine the subset of the population that this will impact is vanishingly small.
Your desktop is obviously always connected, so we're looking at laptops.
Given that the graphics are fairly modern, we can eliminate vast swaths of the notebook market.
RTS games require a mouse - using a touchpad for an RTS is an exercise in frustration and can only sound like a viable option to someone who has never actually tried it.
So now we're looking at a gaming laptop with enough flat area to use a mouse - something like a desk or table.
Certainly a larger area than, say, the fold-up tray on an airplane; something more like a table at your local coffee shop (which almost assuredly has free wifi).
It's not a huge leap to say that the number of people who will play this game on a gaming laptop in an area with no internet connection is miniscule.
And that's not even taking into account that there will likely be an offline mode similar to Steam.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086096</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265041680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When's the last time you play? 5-man groups are formed by the blizzard random machine in the latest patch as long as you sign up via the in-game LFG interface. You'll only be quizzed about your gearscore and achievement if you try to join a raid group. And why is your friend not playing on your server? It's easy to boost a new player into full t9 now with emblem farming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When 's the last time you play ?
5-man groups are formed by the blizzard random machine in the latest patch as long as you sign up via the in-game LFG interface .
You 'll only be quizzed about your gearscore and achievement if you try to join a raid group .
And why is your friend not playing on your server ?
It 's easy to boost a new player into full t9 now with emblem farming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When's the last time you play?
5-man groups are formed by the blizzard random machine in the latest patch as long as you sign up via the in-game LFG interface.
You'll only be quizzed about your gearscore and achievement if you try to join a raid group.
And why is your friend not playing on your server?
It's easy to boost a new player into full t9 now with emblem farming.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084788</id>
	<title>Rejoin game?</title>
	<author>killsome</author>
	<datestamp>1265035320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The most important feature would be, to be able to reconnect to a running match.
I don't want to know how much time I have waisted because someone was disconnected...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The most important feature would be , to be able to reconnect to a running match .
I do n't want to know how much time I have waisted because someone was disconnected.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The most important feature would be, to be able to reconnect to a running match.
I don't want to know how much time I have waisted because someone was disconnected...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088312</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>apoc.famine</author>
	<datestamp>1265051220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>....I've seen attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.....</htmltext>
<tokenext>....I 've seen attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion .
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>....I've seen attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion.
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084208</id>
	<title>Re:Fawks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265029980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Blizzard had one simple job: release a sequel to StarCraft. All they needed to do was give us a new race, some UI enhancements, increase the unit cap and make a few other tweaks. Instead, over a decade late, we get this nerf'd piece of shit. But "oooh it's got nice graphics." Right..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Blizzard had one simple job : release a sequel to StarCraft .
All they needed to do was give us a new race , some UI enhancements , increase the unit cap and make a few other tweaks .
Instead , over a decade late , we get this nerf 'd piece of shit .
But " oooh it 's got nice graphics .
" Right. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blizzard had one simple job: release a sequel to StarCraft.
All they needed to do was give us a new race, some UI enhancements, increase the unit cap and make a few other tweaks.
Instead, over a decade late, we get this nerf'd piece of shit.
But "oooh it's got nice graphics.
" Right..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087652</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>bigstrat2003</author>
	<datestamp>1265048460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now I have a friend that just decided to start playing back in October. He signs up and starts playing on Elune for instance. In 3 months he never was invited into a single group. Ever. Why? "He didn't have any heirloom gear" and "His gear score is too low." etc... The digital equivalent of "The rich get richer and the poor get poorer."</p></div><p>So wait... you're blaming Blizzard's tools for the fact that these other players are morons? Any WoW player with any sense knows that it's not worth obsessing over someone's gear for 5-mans, let alone the low-level ones. It's unfortunate that Elune is apparently populated by elitist morons, but I don't think we can blame the Armory for that. Before there was the Armory, there was inspecting someone, and yes, people got booted from groups when they got inspected and their gear wasn't up to someone's "standard".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I have a friend that just decided to start playing back in October .
He signs up and starts playing on Elune for instance .
In 3 months he never was invited into a single group .
Ever. Why ?
" He did n't have any heirloom gear " and " His gear score is too low .
" etc... The digital equivalent of " The rich get richer and the poor get poorer .
" So wait... you 're blaming Blizzard 's tools for the fact that these other players are morons ?
Any WoW player with any sense knows that it 's not worth obsessing over someone 's gear for 5-mans , let alone the low-level ones .
It 's unfortunate that Elune is apparently populated by elitist morons , but I do n't think we can blame the Armory for that .
Before there was the Armory , there was inspecting someone , and yes , people got booted from groups when they got inspected and their gear was n't up to someone 's " standard " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I have a friend that just decided to start playing back in October.
He signs up and starts playing on Elune for instance.
In 3 months he never was invited into a single group.
Ever. Why?
"He didn't have any heirloom gear" and "His gear score is too low.
" etc... The digital equivalent of "The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
"So wait... you're blaming Blizzard's tools for the fact that these other players are morons?
Any WoW player with any sense knows that it's not worth obsessing over someone's gear for 5-mans, let alone the low-level ones.
It's unfortunate that Elune is apparently populated by elitist morons, but I don't think we can blame the Armory for that.
Before there was the Armory, there was inspecting someone, and yes, people got booted from groups when they got inspected and their gear wasn't up to someone's "standard".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083526</id>
	<title>Will it stay free?</title>
	<author>Shag</author>
	<datestamp>1265021520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wondering.  The subscription model of WoW has kept me using WC3.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wondering .
The subscription model of WoW has kept me using WC3 .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wondering.
The subscription model of WoW has kept me using WC3.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083502</id>
	<title>Great stuff!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265021220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think they really recognized one of the strengths of their game(s).</p><p>Sounds great, Blizz!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think they really recognized one of the strengths of their game ( s ) .Sounds great , Blizz !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think they really recognized one of the strengths of their game(s).Sounds great, Blizz!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088232</id>
	<title>No, it has to have community</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265050860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it has to have community aspects now for direct marketing and brain warping via "game cliques"...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it has to have community aspects now for direct marketing and brain warping via " game cliques " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it has to have community aspects now for direct marketing and brain warping via "game cliques"...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087790</id>
	<title>Re:Fawks</title>
	<author>brkello</author>
	<datestamp>1265049000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I really don't get people like you.  You don't finish a game because the artistic style is so offensive to you.  I thought game play mattered more than graphics?<br> <br>If I were a Blizzard employee, I would be annoyed with you too.  They probably had nothing to do with the development of WC III.  And you just come up and randomly trashing a game their company makes.<br> <br>I think you have severe social skill problems.  And that says something when you are on a tech site.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really do n't get people like you .
You do n't finish a game because the artistic style is so offensive to you .
I thought game play mattered more than graphics ?
If I were a Blizzard employee , I would be annoyed with you too .
They probably had nothing to do with the development of WC III .
And you just come up and randomly trashing a game their company makes .
I think you have severe social skill problems .
And that says something when you are on a tech site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really don't get people like you.
You don't finish a game because the artistic style is so offensive to you.
I thought game play mattered more than graphics?
If I were a Blizzard employee, I would be annoyed with you too.
They probably had nothing to do with the development of WC III.
And you just come up and randomly trashing a game their company makes.
I think you have severe social skill problems.
And that says something when you are on a tech site.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083632</id>
	<title>Re:Facebattle.net</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265023260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. This is simply poorly hidden DRM.</p><p>"Lets give the sucker... erm, 'customers' some features they -already had-, but make them call-home constantly in order to use it, so that when we want to release SC3, we can just shut this version down and make them all 'upgrade'"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
This is simply poorly hidden DRM .
" Lets give the sucker... erm , 'customers ' some features they -already had- , but make them call-home constantly in order to use it , so that when we want to release SC3 , we can just shut this version down and make them all 'upgrade ' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
This is simply poorly hidden DRM.
"Lets give the sucker... erm, 'customers' some features they -already had-, but make them call-home constantly in order to use it, so that when we want to release SC3, we can just shut this version down and make them all 'upgrade'"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084552</id>
	<title>This gets published on Slashdot?</title>
	<author>Elokane</author>
	<datestamp>1265033400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All of this information was already revealed during the last Blizzcon, and it wasn't exactly mind blowing then if you compare it to what's already available for WarCraft 3.
<a href="http://www.sc2blog.com/2009/08/24/blizzcon-2009-battle-net-2-0-and-the-galaxy-editors-hour/" title="sc2blog.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.sc2blog.com/2009/08/24/blizzcon-2009-battle-net-2-0-and-the-galaxy-editors-hour/</a> [sc2blog.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of this information was already revealed during the last Blizzcon , and it was n't exactly mind blowing then if you compare it to what 's already available for WarCraft 3 . http : //www.sc2blog.com/2009/08/24/blizzcon-2009-battle-net-2-0-and-the-galaxy-editors-hour/ [ sc2blog.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of this information was already revealed during the last Blizzcon, and it wasn't exactly mind blowing then if you compare it to what's already available for WarCraft 3.
http://www.sc2blog.com/2009/08/24/blizzcon-2009-battle-net-2-0-and-the-galaxy-editors-hour/ [sc2blog.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083830</id>
	<title>Fawks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265025600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's ok for moders.  What about those of us who will not buy StarCraft II without LAN party capability?

I think I irritated a Blizzard employee one time when we met.  I told him, I hope Blizzard does not screw up StarCraft II like they did WarCraft III.  I hated the look of WCIII and did not even finish the human single player campaign.  Thats after paying $70 for the special box set of WarCraft III.  If they do not have LAN capability in StarCraft II, I will not  even waste my money on purchasing the game.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's ok for moders .
What about those of us who will not buy StarCraft II without LAN party capability ?
I think I irritated a Blizzard employee one time when we met .
I told him , I hope Blizzard does not screw up StarCraft II like they did WarCraft III .
I hated the look of WCIII and did not even finish the human single player campaign .
Thats after paying $ 70 for the special box set of WarCraft III .
If they do not have LAN capability in StarCraft II , I will not even waste my money on purchasing the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's ok for moders.
What about those of us who will not buy StarCraft II without LAN party capability?
I think I irritated a Blizzard employee one time when we met.
I told him, I hope Blizzard does not screw up StarCraft II like they did WarCraft III.
I hated the look of WCIII and did not even finish the human single player campaign.
Thats after paying $70 for the special box set of WarCraft III.
If they do not have LAN capability in StarCraft II, I will not  even waste my money on purchasing the game.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088474</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>ildon</author>
	<datestamp>1265051820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In WoW they came up with all this great new data mining and achievements. We end up with gear scores and Wow Heroes etc.</p></div></blockquote><p>All the data gearscore uses has been available since WoW 1.0. All it does is inspect a player (something you've always been able to do), add up the item levels of their gear (while hidden to players until recently, item level has been available to mods since 1.0), and then share that number with other users of the mod using the mod communication channels (which have been available since 1.12 or so, but mods like Cosmos and CTRaid had been setting up their own in-game channels before that anyway).</p><p>100\% of gearscore's functionality has 0\% to do with the armory or WoW's "social networking" features. The fact that a site like wow-heroes can put that on a webpage is pretty irrelevant when douchebags are just going to inspect you and boot you if your gear is bad when they see it in-game, anyway.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In WoW they came up with all this great new data mining and achievements .
We end up with gear scores and Wow Heroes etc.All the data gearscore uses has been available since WoW 1.0 .
All it does is inspect a player ( something you 've always been able to do ) , add up the item levels of their gear ( while hidden to players until recently , item level has been available to mods since 1.0 ) , and then share that number with other users of the mod using the mod communication channels ( which have been available since 1.12 or so , but mods like Cosmos and CTRaid had been setting up their own in-game channels before that anyway ) .100 \ % of gearscore 's functionality has 0 \ % to do with the armory or WoW 's " social networking " features .
The fact that a site like wow-heroes can put that on a webpage is pretty irrelevant when douchebags are just going to inspect you and boot you if your gear is bad when they see it in-game , anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In WoW they came up with all this great new data mining and achievements.
We end up with gear scores and Wow Heroes etc.All the data gearscore uses has been available since WoW 1.0.
All it does is inspect a player (something you've always been able to do), add up the item levels of their gear (while hidden to players until recently, item level has been available to mods since 1.0), and then share that number with other users of the mod using the mod communication channels (which have been available since 1.12 or so, but mods like Cosmos and CTRaid had been setting up their own in-game channels before that anyway).100\% of gearscore's functionality has 0\% to do with the armory or WoW's "social networking" features.
The fact that a site like wow-heroes can put that on a webpage is pretty irrelevant when douchebags are just going to inspect you and boot you if your gear is bad when they see it in-game, anyway.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086908</id>
	<title>Re:Selling mods...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265045220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Copyright.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Copyright .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Copyright.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31090302</id>
	<title>Re:Here is a Problem</title>
	<author>euxneks</author>
	<datestamp>1265016840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[...] I survived the ACiD, TRiBE, iCE ANSI wars in the BBS era. I witnessed the grand flame wars of Usenet. I saw the clan wars in the MMO days, I saw the Guild fights in the early days of the MMOs culminating in the rise of the Uber guilds. [...]</p></div><p>"I've seen.. things, you people wouldn't believe... All those moments will be lost in time. Like tears in the rain..."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ ... ] I survived the ACiD , TRiBE , iCE ANSI wars in the BBS era .
I witnessed the grand flame wars of Usenet .
I saw the clan wars in the MMO days , I saw the Guild fights in the early days of the MMOs culminating in the rise of the Uber guilds .
[ ... ] " I 've seen.. things , you people would n't believe... All those moments will be lost in time .
Like tears in the rain... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[...] I survived the ACiD, TRiBE, iCE ANSI wars in the BBS era.
I witnessed the grand flame wars of Usenet.
I saw the clan wars in the MMO days, I saw the Guild fights in the early days of the MMOs culminating in the rise of the Uber guilds.
[...]"I've seen.. things, you people wouldn't believe... All those moments will be lost in time.
Like tears in the rain..."
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31096706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083520
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087840
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31090242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31090302
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31109734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083520
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31107210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_0547236_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_0547236.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083526
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_0547236.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083662
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31090242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083632
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_0547236.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086908
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_0547236.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083502
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_0547236.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084552
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_0547236.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_0547236.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083772
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_0547236.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31090302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31107210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31086346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_0547236.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083998
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31085418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084208
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31087634
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_0547236.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31109734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31096706
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_0547236.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31083938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31088212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_0547236.31084326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
