<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_12_1428201</id>
	<title>Anonymous Speaks About Australian Gov't. Attacks</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1265993400000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>daria42 writes <i>"The loose-knit collective of individuals known as <a href="http://delimiter.com.au/2010/02/12/anonymous-attacks-better-than-signing-a-petition/">'Anonymous' has broken its silence</a> about the distributed denial of service <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/10/02/10/1459257/Hackers-Attack-AU-Websites-To-Protest-Censorship">attacks on the Australian government</a>. An individual (who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group) said the attacks were more effective at stopping the government's Internet filtering project than signing a petition, and that the <a href="http://www.news.com.au/technology/anonymous-hackers-threaten-to-shut-down-australian-government-websites-for-months/story-e6frfro0-1225829536342">attacks could go on for months</a>."</i> The site where some members of Anonymous are said to hang out, 4chan, got a visibility boost yesterday when its founder <a href="http://arstechnica.com/staff/palatine/2010/02/4chans-moot-takes-pro-anonymity-to-ted-2010.ars">moot spoke at the TED conference</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>daria42 writes " The loose-knit collective of individuals known as 'Anonymous ' has broken its silence about the distributed denial of service attacks on the Australian government .
An individual ( who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group ) said the attacks were more effective at stopping the government 's Internet filtering project than signing a petition , and that the attacks could go on for months .
" The site where some members of Anonymous are said to hang out , 4chan , got a visibility boost yesterday when its founder moot spoke at the TED conference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>daria42 writes "The loose-knit collective of individuals known as 'Anonymous' has broken its silence about the distributed denial of service attacks on the Australian government.
An individual (who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group) said the attacks were more effective at stopping the government's Internet filtering project than signing a petition, and that the attacks could go on for months.
" The site where some members of Anonymous are said to hang out, 4chan, got a visibility boost yesterday when its founder moot spoke at the TED conference.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115182</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Bluebottel</author>
	<datestamp>1265998800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Jailed toughguy vs free coward. Hmm... have you seen any rambo movies lately? Ask someone in the army if they need more people like him. <br>
And stop confusing the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/b/tards with capital-A Anonymous. They might overlap in some areas but they are different enough to not be seen as one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jailed toughguy vs free coward .
Hmm... have you seen any rambo movies lately ?
Ask someone in the army if they need more people like him .
And stop confusing the /b/tards with capital-A Anonymous .
They might overlap in some areas but they are different enough to not be seen as one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jailed toughguy vs free coward.
Hmm... have you seen any rambo movies lately?
Ask someone in the army if they need more people like him.
And stop confusing the /b/tards with capital-A Anonymous.
They might overlap in some areas but they are different enough to not be seen as one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115204</id>
	<title>GODDAMN, CAN YOU HAZ READING COMPREHENSION?!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265998860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>you quoted:<p><div class="quote"><p>According to Merriam-Webster, terrorism is the systematic use of <b>terror</b> especially as a means of coercion while terror is defined as <b>a state of intense fear</b></p> </div><p>
It's not like annonymous is running around chopping people's arms off with machetes and raping them. Or disappearing them in to covert prisons. <b>GET A FUCKING GRIP</b></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>you quoted : According to Merriam-Webster , terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion while terror is defined as a state of intense fear It 's not like annonymous is running around chopping people 's arms off with machetes and raping them .
Or disappearing them in to covert prisons .
GET A FUCKING GRIP</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you quoted:According to Merriam-Webster, terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion while terror is defined as a state of intense fear 
It's not like annonymous is running around chopping people's arms off with machetes and raping them.
Or disappearing them in to covert prisons.
GET A FUCKING GRIP
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31123162</id>
	<title>As an Australian citizen.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265985480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good on them, we need awareness made about this, no matter how it is done.   Anonymous - I salute you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good on them , we need awareness made about this , no matter how it is done .
Anonymous - I salute you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good on them, we need awareness made about this, no matter how it is done.
Anonymous - I salute you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31120382</id>
	<title>Re:We Are Anonymous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265972940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>An impudent imposter, apparently.</htmltext>
<tokenext>An impudent imposter , apparently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An impudent imposter, apparently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114752</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115284</id>
	<title>Re:We Are Anonymous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not a native English speaker, so can somebody please explain to me what "We are legion" means?</p><p>I do know about the concept of a Roman legion. Is it related?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not a native English speaker , so can somebody please explain to me what " We are legion " means ? I do know about the concept of a Roman legion .
Is it related ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not a native English speaker, so can somebody please explain to me what "We are legion" means?I do know about the concept of a Roman legion.
Is it related?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114752</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31127026</id>
	<title>Re:Democracy in action.</title>
	<author>Demonoid-Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1266077520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you make it sound so - American. <p>Ever considered that imposing your views on other might be - patronizing? </p><p>That your failure to clean up your own back yard first might be - hypocritical? </p><p>That the rationale the Australian government uses for censoring "our" internet is just a front for a system of control orchestrated by "your government" (think ACTA).</p><p>Like Bacon and Eggs - Anonymous make, at most, a contribution, and threaten the work of those of us that make a commitment.</p><p>You are an arseclown, </p><p>Sincerely, I'll not use my real name - 'cause I'm in it for the long haul.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you make it sound so - American .
Ever considered that imposing your views on other might be - patronizing ?
That your failure to clean up your own back yard first might be - hypocritical ?
That the rationale the Australian government uses for censoring " our " internet is just a front for a system of control orchestrated by " your government " ( think ACTA ) .Like Bacon and Eggs - Anonymous make , at most , a contribution , and threaten the work of those of us that make a commitment.You are an arseclown , Sincerely , I 'll not use my real name - 'cause I 'm in it for the long haul .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you make it sound so - American.
Ever considered that imposing your views on other might be - patronizing?
That your failure to clean up your own back yard first might be - hypocritical?
That the rationale the Australian government uses for censoring "our" internet is just a front for a system of control orchestrated by "your government" (think ACTA).Like Bacon and Eggs - Anonymous make, at most, a contribution, and threaten the work of those of us that make a commitment.You are an arseclown, Sincerely, I'll not use my real name - 'cause I'm in it for the long haul.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31123100</id>
	<title>Re:Anonymous isn;t really a group</title>
	<author>Harinezumi</author>
	<datestamp>1265985000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is no one will in Anonymous, no more than there is a will in a beehive or in an anthill. There is simply a vast number of individuals, independently responding to stimuli based upon a common set of simple rules. These responses, however, do end up producing emergent behavior complex enough to be comparable to that of a unified will.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no one will in Anonymous , no more than there is a will in a beehive or in an anthill .
There is simply a vast number of individuals , independently responding to stimuli based upon a common set of simple rules .
These responses , however , do end up producing emergent behavior complex enough to be comparable to that of a unified will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no one will in Anonymous, no more than there is a will in a beehive or in an anthill.
There is simply a vast number of individuals, independently responding to stimuli based upon a common set of simple rules.
These responses, however, do end up producing emergent behavior complex enough to be comparable to that of a unified will.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116514</id>
	<title>Re:The most likely long term effect</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1266004140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>By making attacks like this, they can grab headlines. Any good news reporter tries to get input from both sides, which means anonymous can potentially get their complaints into mainstream newspapers. Obviously, attacking a few websites will not make politicians back down, as they would look weak. Raise enough public interest in the issue, and politicians will listen. Like with most tech-related issues, I do not realistically expect a large public response, but you cant say anonymous isn't trying.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By making attacks like this , they can grab headlines .
Any good news reporter tries to get input from both sides , which means anonymous can potentially get their complaints into mainstream newspapers .
Obviously , attacking a few websites will not make politicians back down , as they would look weak .
Raise enough public interest in the issue , and politicians will listen .
Like with most tech-related issues , I do not realistically expect a large public response , but you cant say anonymous is n't trying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By making attacks like this, they can grab headlines.
Any good news reporter tries to get input from both sides, which means anonymous can potentially get their complaints into mainstream newspapers.
Obviously, attacking a few websites will not make politicians back down, as they would look weak.
Raise enough public interest in the issue, and politicians will listen.
Like with most tech-related issues, I do not realistically expect a large public response, but you cant say anonymous isn't trying.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115000</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115718</id>
	<title>Re:Good Gravy</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1266000900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>The site where some members of Anonymous are said to hang out, 4chan...</p></div></blockquote><p>Yeah, let me know when you see Anonymous on there.</p></div><p>"Anonymous" is on 4chan all the time.  He also posts on this site quite a bit, but we've made it our official position to question his courage.  "Anonymous" shows up everywhere, and that's exactly the point.
</p><p>We're not talking about a person or even a group called "Anonymous".  The point is that it's a ad hoc collection of anonymous people.  Are the anonymous on 4chan or the anonymous on Slashdot the same as the anonymous creating this attack?  Well... not as a group.  It's not like it's all the Slashdot Anonymous Cowards are a codified group somewhere making subversive plans.  But I wouldn't be surprised to learn that someone involved in the Australian attack had posted here as AC at least once.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The site where some members of Anonymous are said to hang out , 4chan...Yeah , let me know when you see Anonymous on there .
" Anonymous " is on 4chan all the time .
He also posts on this site quite a bit , but we 've made it our official position to question his courage .
" Anonymous " shows up everywhere , and that 's exactly the point .
We 're not talking about a person or even a group called " Anonymous " .
The point is that it 's a ad hoc collection of anonymous people .
Are the anonymous on 4chan or the anonymous on Slashdot the same as the anonymous creating this attack ?
Well... not as a group .
It 's not like it 's all the Slashdot Anonymous Cowards are a codified group somewhere making subversive plans .
But I would n't be surprised to learn that someone involved in the Australian attack had posted here as AC at least once .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The site where some members of Anonymous are said to hang out, 4chan...Yeah, let me know when you see Anonymous on there.
"Anonymous" is on 4chan all the time.
He also posts on this site quite a bit, but we've made it our official position to question his courage.
"Anonymous" shows up everywhere, and that's exactly the point.
We're not talking about a person or even a group called "Anonymous".
The point is that it's a ad hoc collection of anonymous people.
Are the anonymous on 4chan or the anonymous on Slashdot the same as the anonymous creating this attack?
Well... not as a group.
It's not like it's all the Slashdot Anonymous Cowards are a codified group somewhere making subversive plans.
But I wouldn't be surprised to learn that someone involved in the Australian attack had posted here as AC at least once.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31120126</id>
	<title>"Anonymous" isn't a particular group</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265972160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Anonymous" isn't a particular group; it's the personification of anonymity.  When you go to the grocery store and pay cash, you're a "member" of "Anonymous".  Anyone who claims to "represent Anonymous" as if it's a coherent group is full of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Anonymous " is n't a particular group ; it 's the personification of anonymity .
When you go to the grocery store and pay cash , you 're a " member " of " Anonymous " .
Anyone who claims to " represent Anonymous " as if it 's a coherent group is full of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Anonymous" isn't a particular group; it's the personification of anonymity.
When you go to the grocery store and pay cash, you're a "member" of "Anonymous".
Anyone who claims to "represent Anonymous" as if it's a coherent group is full of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115250</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wish that word would get pulled from the English language it's been stretched and misused so much.</p><p>And who in their right mind would allow themselves to be identified?  That's not cowardly, that's smart.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish that word would get pulled from the English language it 's been stretched and misused so much.And who in their right mind would allow themselves to be identified ?
That 's not cowardly , that 's smart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish that word would get pulled from the English language it's been stretched and misused so much.And who in their right mind would allow themselves to be identified?
That's not cowardly, that's smart.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</id>
	<title>How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265998260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to Merriam-Webster, terrorism is <i>the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion</i> while terror is defined as <i>a state of intense fear.</i></p><p>Nice going anonymous.  While I applaud how you've peacefully gone after the Church of Scientology; DOS attacks are going a bit too far.  You probably picked this type of attack because it's hard to determine who's actually launching it.</p><p>Cowards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to Merriam-Webster , terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion while terror is defined as a state of intense fear.Nice going anonymous .
While I applaud how you 've peacefully gone after the Church of Scientology ; DOS attacks are going a bit too far .
You probably picked this type of attack because it 's hard to determine who 's actually launching it.Cowards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to Merriam-Webster, terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion while terror is defined as a state of intense fear.Nice going anonymous.
While I applaud how you've peacefully gone after the Church of Scientology; DOS attacks are going a bit too far.
You probably picked this type of attack because it's hard to determine who's actually launching it.Cowards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31141450</id>
	<title>Re:Impossible!</title>
	<author>mcrbids</author>
	<datestamp>1266264120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Except "Anonymous" is the bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 14 year old script kiddies, an unholy horde of angry-at-the-world genuinely decent at coding 20 somethings, and a frightning legion of bored in-it-for-the-lulz near or middle aged men.</i></p><p>So.... anonymous is mostly people between ages of 14 and 50?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except " Anonymous " is the bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 14 year old script kiddies , an unholy horde of angry-at-the-world genuinely decent at coding 20 somethings , and a frightning legion of bored in-it-for-the-lulz near or middle aged men.So.... anonymous is mostly people between ages of 14 and 50 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except "Anonymous" is the bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 14 year old script kiddies, an unholy horde of angry-at-the-world genuinely decent at coding 20 somethings, and a frightning legion of bored in-it-for-the-lulz near or middle aged men.So.... anonymous is mostly people between ages of 14 and 50?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115628</id>
	<title>Re:Impossible!</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1266000600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually its a bit more than that. You could say that slashdot is the "Bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 18 year old CS students, a completely misinformed group of editors, and a legion of bored in-IT-for-the-money near or middle aged men. The only difference between Slashdot readers and Anonymous is that Anonymous makes an impact on the world.</p><p>So - whatever your views about them are, positive or negative, realize that they <b>do</b> earn some merit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually its a bit more than that .
You could say that slashdot is the " Bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 18 year old CS students , a completely misinformed group of editors , and a legion of bored in-IT-for-the-money near or middle aged men .
The only difference between Slashdot readers and Anonymous is that Anonymous makes an impact on the world.So - whatever your views about them are , positive or negative , realize that they do earn some merit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually its a bit more than that.
You could say that slashdot is the "Bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 18 year old CS students, a completely misinformed group of editors, and a legion of bored in-IT-for-the-money near or middle aged men.
The only difference between Slashdot readers and Anonymous is that Anonymous makes an impact on the world.So - whatever your views about them are, positive or negative, realize that they do earn some merit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114752</id>
	<title>We Are Anonymous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265997120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are legion.</p><p>Let's just check this box to post as AC and...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are legion.Let 's just check this box to post as AC and.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are legion.Let's just check this box to post as AC and...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115446</id>
	<title>Re:We Are Anonymous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It means "we are very many".  <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/legion" title="reference.com" rel="nofollow">See #5 here.</a> [reference.com]

</p><p>And you are correct - the word legion is often associated with the Roman legion, or the French legionnaires.  So the phrase also implies that Anonymous is a vast army of soldiers.  Which is part of their motif.  If one "soldier" winds up in the <a href="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=party+van" title="urbandictionary.com" rel="nofollow">party van,</a> [urbandictionary.com] there are uncounted hordes of other anons that will take his place and continue the work, whatever that may be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It means " we are very many " .
See # 5 here .
[ reference.com ] And you are correct - the word legion is often associated with the Roman legion , or the French legionnaires .
So the phrase also implies that Anonymous is a vast army of soldiers .
Which is part of their motif .
If one " soldier " winds up in the party van , [ urbandictionary.com ] there are uncounted hordes of other anons that will take his place and continue the work , whatever that may be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It means "we are very many".
See #5 here.
[reference.com]

And you are correct - the word legion is often associated with the Roman legion, or the French legionnaires.
So the phrase also implies that Anonymous is a vast army of soldiers.
Which is part of their motif.
If one "soldier" winds up in the party van, [urbandictionary.com] there are uncounted hordes of other anons that will take his place and continue the work, whatever that may be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115730</id>
	<title>"Don't Mess with Football"</title>
	<author>hkgroove</author>
	<datestamp>1266000960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the Jake Brahm incident (when he threatened to bomb stadiums) may have been a better avenue for saying that anonymous sites can still track someone stupid down and work with government officials.
<br>
<br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4chan#Threats\_of\_violence" title="wikipedia.org">Don't mess with football</a> [wikipedia.org]
<br>
<a href="http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Jake\_Brahm" title="encycloped...matica.com">Jake Brahm</a> [encycloped...matica.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the Jake Brahm incident ( when he threatened to bomb stadiums ) may have been a better avenue for saying that anonymous sites can still track someone stupid down and work with government officials .
Do n't mess with football [ wikipedia.org ] Jake Brahm [ encycloped...matica.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the Jake Brahm incident (when he threatened to bomb stadiums) may have been a better avenue for saying that anonymous sites can still track someone stupid down and work with government officials.
Don't mess with football [wikipedia.org]

Jake Brahm [encycloped...matica.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115180</id>
	<title>from the drek and morass</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1265998800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>of the stupidest lamest waste of time on the internet</p><p>comes the most effective force for progressive change</p><p>the one thing that an idiot has, that a wise man does not seem to have, is freedom to act</p><p>when your education acclimates you to acceptance of a lame status quo, then your education is worth less than being an idiot</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>of the stupidest lamest waste of time on the internetcomes the most effective force for progressive changethe one thing that an idiot has , that a wise man does not seem to have , is freedom to actwhen your education acclimates you to acceptance of a lame status quo , then your education is worth less than being an idiot</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of the stupidest lamest waste of time on the internetcomes the most effective force for progressive changethe one thing that an idiot has, that a wise man does not seem to have, is freedom to actwhen your education acclimates you to acceptance of a lame status quo, then your education is worth less than being an idiot</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116102</id>
	<title>Re:Anonymous isn;t really a group</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266002340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> # any number of entities (members) considered as a unit<br>Except they aren't a unit. If it is, it is an amorphous one.<br>Think of a bus.It would be like saying that people who use buses are acting as a group. They aren't. They are individuals doing the same thing at the same time. They use it/do it for different reasons. They get on and off at different stops with no one directing them to.</p><p>Anonymous is like a bus which is always in motion but with no driver or set course.</p><p># a set that is closed, associative, has an identity element and every element has an inverse<br># arrange into a group or groups; "Can you group these shapes together?"<br># (chemistry) two or more atoms bound together as a single unit and forming part of a molecule</p><p>There is no defining element. There is no parameter. There is no standard. There is no "shape" to it. It's a group of bus riders. Just people of all different sorts. You don't have to rich or poor, you don't have to be blue collar or white collar you don't have to have the same ideologies, you don't have to agree about anything. No one EVER drives the bus.</p><p>Now, this bus is an extremely large bus that could, theoretically, fit the entire population of the world inside it.<br>Sometimes a number of the riders agree about something (Let's say carving figurines out of wood). In this case, the figurine carvers huddle together and start carving figurines.</p><p>Some of the riders on the bus don't know about it, some do but don't care, some people are offended by it, some people wish they wouldn't, some people just watch, some may even tell them to stop. But this doesn't matter. They can't stop the wood carvers unless they lowered themselves to that level. The only way to stop the wood carvers would be to carve wood and no one else wants to do that! Or they could use force/violence against them but that is even worse than carving wood! They have no control over the wood carvers. So they sit and watch (or don't watch, or bitch, or remain silent, or don't even know it's going on).</p><p>These are by-standers to the wood carvers. They are not in any way shape or form associated in any real way to the wood carvers, they are just on a giant bus that could theoretically hold the entire population of the world. Going wherever, going everywhere, going nowhere, at the same time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext># any number of entities ( members ) considered as a unitExcept they are n't a unit .
If it is , it is an amorphous one.Think of a bus.It would be like saying that people who use buses are acting as a group .
They are n't .
They are individuals doing the same thing at the same time .
They use it/do it for different reasons .
They get on and off at different stops with no one directing them to.Anonymous is like a bus which is always in motion but with no driver or set course. # a set that is closed , associative , has an identity element and every element has an inverse # arrange into a group or groups ; " Can you group these shapes together ?
" # ( chemistry ) two or more atoms bound together as a single unit and forming part of a moleculeThere is no defining element .
There is no parameter .
There is no standard .
There is no " shape " to it .
It 's a group of bus riders .
Just people of all different sorts .
You do n't have to rich or poor , you do n't have to be blue collar or white collar you do n't have to have the same ideologies , you do n't have to agree about anything .
No one EVER drives the bus.Now , this bus is an extremely large bus that could , theoretically , fit the entire population of the world inside it.Sometimes a number of the riders agree about something ( Let 's say carving figurines out of wood ) .
In this case , the figurine carvers huddle together and start carving figurines.Some of the riders on the bus do n't know about it , some do but do n't care , some people are offended by it , some people wish they would n't , some people just watch , some may even tell them to stop .
But this does n't matter .
They ca n't stop the wood carvers unless they lowered themselves to that level .
The only way to stop the wood carvers would be to carve wood and no one else wants to do that !
Or they could use force/violence against them but that is even worse than carving wood !
They have no control over the wood carvers .
So they sit and watch ( or do n't watch , or bitch , or remain silent , or do n't even know it 's going on ) .These are by-standers to the wood carvers .
They are not in any way shape or form associated in any real way to the wood carvers , they are just on a giant bus that could theoretically hold the entire population of the world .
Going wherever , going everywhere , going nowhere , at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> # any number of entities (members) considered as a unitExcept they aren't a unit.
If it is, it is an amorphous one.Think of a bus.It would be like saying that people who use buses are acting as a group.
They aren't.
They are individuals doing the same thing at the same time.
They use it/do it for different reasons.
They get on and off at different stops with no one directing them to.Anonymous is like a bus which is always in motion but with no driver or set course.# a set that is closed, associative, has an identity element and every element has an inverse# arrange into a group or groups; "Can you group these shapes together?
"# (chemistry) two or more atoms bound together as a single unit and forming part of a moleculeThere is no defining element.
There is no parameter.
There is no standard.
There is no "shape" to it.
It's a group of bus riders.
Just people of all different sorts.
You don't have to rich or poor, you don't have to be blue collar or white collar you don't have to have the same ideologies, you don't have to agree about anything.
No one EVER drives the bus.Now, this bus is an extremely large bus that could, theoretically, fit the entire population of the world inside it.Sometimes a number of the riders agree about something (Let's say carving figurines out of wood).
In this case, the figurine carvers huddle together and start carving figurines.Some of the riders on the bus don't know about it, some do but don't care, some people are offended by it, some people wish they wouldn't, some people just watch, some may even tell them to stop.
But this doesn't matter.
They can't stop the wood carvers unless they lowered themselves to that level.
The only way to stop the wood carvers would be to carve wood and no one else wants to do that!
Or they could use force/violence against them but that is even worse than carving wood!
They have no control over the wood carvers.
So they sit and watch (or don't watch, or bitch, or remain silent, or don't even know it's going on).These are by-standers to the wood carvers.
They are not in any way shape or form associated in any real way to the wood carvers, they are just on a giant bus that could theoretically hold the entire population of the world.
Going wherever, going everywhere, going nowhere, at the same time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31119180</id>
	<title>Re:Anonymous = Al Qaeda</title>
	<author>Bovius</author>
	<datestamp>1265969520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can anyone think of a historical (as in pre-internet<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) ) example of something similar?</p></div><p>Christians.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can anyone think of a historical ( as in pre-internet : ) ) example of something similar ? Christians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can anyone think of a historical (as in pre-internet :) ) example of something similar?Christians.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115216</id>
	<title>Re:The most likely long term effect</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265998920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is going to be a rapid acceleration in the restriction and closing off of the Internet, greater activity by Governments in monitoring and repressing activity, and eventually a culture in which computer users are licensed and all computers outside the Government and academia run limited, crippled operating systems and applications.</p><p>Way to go, guys. You need to learn some history and some sociology. Then you will understand that the most successful criminals DO NOT ADVERTISE their existence. At a certain nuisance level, the cost of your attacks will exceed the cost of fixing the system to stop you. And the rest of us will be made to pay for it.</p></div><p>Both St. Augustine ("an unjust law is no law at all.") and MLK (Letter from a Birmingham Jail) have tread this road before..ya know Just and Unjust laws?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is going to be a rapid acceleration in the restriction and closing off of the Internet , greater activity by Governments in monitoring and repressing activity , and eventually a culture in which computer users are licensed and all computers outside the Government and academia run limited , crippled operating systems and applications.Way to go , guys .
You need to learn some history and some sociology .
Then you will understand that the most successful criminals DO NOT ADVERTISE their existence .
At a certain nuisance level , the cost of your attacks will exceed the cost of fixing the system to stop you .
And the rest of us will be made to pay for it.Both St. Augustine ( " an unjust law is no law at all .
" ) and MLK ( Letter from a Birmingham Jail ) have tread this road before..ya know Just and Unjust laws ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is going to be a rapid acceleration in the restriction and closing off of the Internet, greater activity by Governments in monitoring and repressing activity, and eventually a culture in which computer users are licensed and all computers outside the Government and academia run limited, crippled operating systems and applications.Way to go, guys.
You need to learn some history and some sociology.
Then you will understand that the most successful criminals DO NOT ADVERTISE their existence.
At a certain nuisance level, the cost of your attacks will exceed the cost of fixing the system to stop you.
And the rest of us will be made to pay for it.Both St. Augustine ("an unjust law is no law at all.
") and MLK (Letter from a Birmingham Jail) have tread this road before..ya know Just and Unjust laws?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115000</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822</id>
	<title>Impossible!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265997360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"An individual (who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group)"</p><p>So, basically, a nobody commented.</p><p>All right.</p><p>I am Canadian and so I say the Canadian government disapproves too. Though I insist I'm not speaking in the name of the Canadian government.</p><p>Yay?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" An individual ( who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group ) " So , basically , a nobody commented.All right.I am Canadian and so I say the Canadian government disapproves too .
Though I insist I 'm not speaking in the name of the Canadian government.Yay ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"An individual (who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group)"So, basically, a nobody commented.All right.I am Canadian and so I say the Canadian government disapproves too.
Though I insist I'm not speaking in the name of the Canadian government.Yay?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115136</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265998620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If your response to a DDOS attack on the a few websites is "a state of intense fear", you need to get out more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If your response to a DDOS attack on the a few websites is " a state of intense fear " , you need to get out more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your response to a DDOS attack on the a few websites is "a state of intense fear", you need to get out more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31117134</id>
	<title>Re:Inconsistency.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266007140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hello. As you can see above, this is Coward, official spokespuppet for Anonymous.</p><p>I hereby confirm that anyone may speak for Anonymous as long as they remain Anonymous. Whether or not that makes them a spokesperson is... moot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hello .
As you can see above , this is Coward , official spokespuppet for Anonymous.I hereby confirm that anyone may speak for Anonymous as long as they remain Anonymous .
Whether or not that makes them a spokesperson is... moot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hello.
As you can see above, this is Coward, official spokespuppet for Anonymous.I hereby confirm that anyone may speak for Anonymous as long as they remain Anonymous.
Whether or not that makes them a spokesperson is... moot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115094</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114924</id>
	<title>Re:Impossible!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265997660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, basically, a nobody commented.</p></div><p>This is Anonymous -- if they <i>weren't</i> a nobody, then their opinion would be invalid. As it is, they are the most appropriate person to ask.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , basically , a nobody commented.This is Anonymous -- if they were n't a nobody , then their opinion would be invalid .
As it is , they are the most appropriate person to ask .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, basically, a nobody commented.This is Anonymous -- if they weren't a nobody, then their opinion would be invalid.
As it is, they are the most appropriate person to ask.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114802</id>
	<title>Hmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265997300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never heard of this site, "fourchan". It seems like its a pretty cool activist site. Can someone tell me more about it? I'd go there, but my ISP is blocking it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never heard of this site , " fourchan " .
It seems like its a pretty cool activist site .
Can someone tell me more about it ?
I 'd go there , but my ISP is blocking it : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never heard of this site, "fourchan".
It seems like its a pretty cool activist site.
Can someone tell me more about it?
I'd go there, but my ISP is blocking it :(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115464</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266000000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was wondering how many comments down it would be before 4chan got mentioned. Second post for the internet rules, then this.</p><p>I'm an Australian citizen, and I don't much like Australian politics! COME GET ME NOW!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was wondering how many comments down it would be before 4chan got mentioned .
Second post for the internet rules , then this.I 'm an Australian citizen , and I do n't much like Australian politics !
COME GET ME NOW !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was wondering how many comments down it would be before 4chan got mentioned.
Second post for the internet rules, then this.I'm an Australian citizen, and I don't much like Australian politics!
COME GET ME NOW!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126388</id>
	<title>Re:Impossible!</title>
	<author>Demonoid-Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1266071100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You could say that slashdot is the "Bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 18 year old CS students, a completely misinformed group of editors, and a legion of bored in-IT-for-the-money near or middle aged men.</p> </div><p>Says you, bubba. The demographics you propose don't match any of the posters I know - but then you don't actually know any non-blood related women do you? So if you are not describing us - who is you describe with such feeling?? Too much emotional content I suspect.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The only difference between Slashdot readers and Anonymous is that Anonymous makes an impact on the world.</p></div><p>All the impact of those that paint in brown on toilet walls...</p><p>Anyone who thinks that stopping public servants from doing what little work they do each day, and conforming to the stereotype "hacker" that The Embalmer, The Pearly Gates, and Rupert - Call Me God have been FUDing about... are just bound to discover that history does repeat. Name once in history when civil disobedience ended well? </p><p><div class="quote"><p>So - whatever your views about them are, positive or negative, realize that they do earn some merit.</p></div><p>Perhaps when puberty arrives you'll learn otherwise - the future is a boot stamping on your face. Forever. The only way to beat it is from within. (subversion)</p><p> Next stop compulsory "computer licence" and total surveillance. You and your ilk just mean the state will now have the support of the pensioners... game over arseclown.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You could say that slashdot is the " Bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 18 year old CS students , a completely misinformed group of editors , and a legion of bored in-IT-for-the-money near or middle aged men .
Says you , bubba .
The demographics you propose do n't match any of the posters I know - but then you do n't actually know any non-blood related women do you ?
So if you are not describing us - who is you describe with such feeling ? ?
Too much emotional content I suspect.The only difference between Slashdot readers and Anonymous is that Anonymous makes an impact on the world.All the impact of those that paint in brown on toilet walls...Anyone who thinks that stopping public servants from doing what little work they do each day , and conforming to the stereotype " hacker " that The Embalmer , The Pearly Gates , and Rupert - Call Me God have been FUDing about... are just bound to discover that history does repeat .
Name once in history when civil disobedience ended well ?
So - whatever your views about them are , positive or negative , realize that they do earn some merit.Perhaps when puberty arrives you 'll learn otherwise - the future is a boot stamping on your face .
Forever. The only way to beat it is from within .
( subversion ) Next stop compulsory " computer licence " and total surveillance .
You and your ilk just mean the state will now have the support of the pensioners... game over arseclown .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could say that slashdot is the "Bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 18 year old CS students, a completely misinformed group of editors, and a legion of bored in-IT-for-the-money near or middle aged men.
Says you, bubba.
The demographics you propose don't match any of the posters I know - but then you don't actually know any non-blood related women do you?
So if you are not describing us - who is you describe with such feeling??
Too much emotional content I suspect.The only difference between Slashdot readers and Anonymous is that Anonymous makes an impact on the world.All the impact of those that paint in brown on toilet walls...Anyone who thinks that stopping public servants from doing what little work they do each day, and conforming to the stereotype "hacker" that The Embalmer, The Pearly Gates, and Rupert - Call Me God have been FUDing about... are just bound to discover that history does repeat.
Name once in history when civil disobedience ended well?
So - whatever your views about them are, positive or negative, realize that they do earn some merit.Perhaps when puberty arrives you'll learn otherwise - the future is a boot stamping on your face.
Forever. The only way to beat it is from within.
(subversion) Next stop compulsory "computer licence" and total surveillance.
You and your ilk just mean the state will now have the support of the pensioners... game over arseclown.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115628</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31130794</id>
	<title>Re:Anonymous isn't really a group</title>
	<author>Doctor O</author>
	<datestamp>1266063180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually if someone really were so stupid to even *want* to speak for Anonymous, he would be in for some of the worst harassment you can imagine, apart from all the things they'd do just to make him and them look bad.</p><p>OTOH, it would probably lead to one or more trials with defendants telling the judge ITIFTL. Which would be lulz indeed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually if someone really were so stupid to even * want * to speak for Anonymous , he would be in for some of the worst harassment you can imagine , apart from all the things they 'd do just to make him and them look bad.OTOH , it would probably lead to one or more trials with defendants telling the judge ITIFTL .
Which would be lulz indeed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually if someone really were so stupid to even *want* to speak for Anonymous, he would be in for some of the worst harassment you can imagine, apart from all the things they'd do just to make him and them look bad.OTOH, it would probably lead to one or more trials with defendants telling the judge ITIFTL.
Which would be lulz indeed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31143330</id>
	<title>Re:Impossible!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266245100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am Obama and I do not approve. I am speaking in the name of the U.S. government. Let's see you DDOS us your miserable wimpy anonymous cowards. I dare you.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; We are Democrats.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; We are socialist.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; We will be forgiven.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; We want you to forget.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Keep voting for us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am Obama and I do not approve .
I am speaking in the name of the U.S. government. Let 's see you DDOS us your miserable wimpy anonymous cowards .
I dare you .
          We are Democrats .
          We are socialist .
          We will be forgiven .
          We want you to forget .
            Keep voting for us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am Obama and I do not approve.
I am speaking in the name of the U.S. government. Let's see you DDOS us your miserable wimpy anonymous cowards.
I dare you.
          We are Democrats.
          We are socialist.
          We will be forgiven.
          We want you to forget.
            Keep voting for us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31118768</id>
	<title>1337</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265968500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"An individual (who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group) said the attacks were more effective at stopping the government's Internet filtering project than signing a petition"</i></p><p>No they aren't. While a petition may not be effective, neither will this. It just feels cooler and more anti-establishment to be a h4x0r than to try and engage in the political process. I'm sure Australia has a liberal media of some sort. Here in the UK, ID cards went from being a vote winner to a vote loser, thanks to an effective campaign that made good arguments and got support in the mainstream press, in spite of terrorism and immigration still being major issues in the public conciousness. A DDoS will end censorship in Australia in the same way that it brought down the Church Of Scientology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" An individual ( who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group ) said the attacks were more effective at stopping the government 's Internet filtering project than signing a petition " No they are n't .
While a petition may not be effective , neither will this .
It just feels cooler and more anti-establishment to be a h4x0r than to try and engage in the political process .
I 'm sure Australia has a liberal media of some sort .
Here in the UK , ID cards went from being a vote winner to a vote loser , thanks to an effective campaign that made good arguments and got support in the mainstream press , in spite of terrorism and immigration still being major issues in the public conciousness .
A DDoS will end censorship in Australia in the same way that it brought down the Church Of Scientology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"An individual (who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group) said the attacks were more effective at stopping the government's Internet filtering project than signing a petition"No they aren't.
While a petition may not be effective, neither will this.
It just feels cooler and more anti-establishment to be a h4x0r than to try and engage in the political process.
I'm sure Australia has a liberal media of some sort.
Here in the UK, ID cards went from being a vote winner to a vote loser, thanks to an effective campaign that made good arguments and got support in the mainstream press, in spite of terrorism and immigration still being major issues in the public conciousness.
A DDoS will end censorship in Australia in the same way that it brought down the Church Of Scientology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114918</id>
	<title>Re:Impossible!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265997660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except "Anonymous" is the bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 14 year old script kiddies, an unholy horde of angry-at-the-world genuinely decent at coding 20 somethings, and a frightning legion of bored in-it-for-the-lulz near or middle aged men.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except " Anonymous " is the bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 14 year old script kiddies , an unholy horde of angry-at-the-world genuinely decent at coding 20 somethings , and a frightning legion of bored in-it-for-the-lulz near or middle aged men .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except "Anonymous" is the bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 14 year old script kiddies, an unholy horde of angry-at-the-world genuinely decent at coding 20 somethings, and a frightning legion of bored in-it-for-the-lulz near or middle aged men.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115434</id>
	<title>Bah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>All these periodic "public raids" do is stuff b full of what is commonly called "cancer" (I call them IE users who click on the ads that infest b).  Anyone who had been paying attention lately knows that the scroll rate of b was down significantly.  people were even able to pull off slowpoke combos.  So I guess mootykins (or one of the mods) decided it was time for a new cause complete with raids and IRL failfests.
<br> <br>
This whole idea of anonymous was created by a group of young men trying to monetize a website.  It is one of the largest trollings in the history of the internets.  If they were doing it for the lulz then it would be fine but i suspect they do it for the ad dollars (despite Christopher's strong denials).</htmltext>
<tokenext>All these periodic " public raids " do is stuff b full of what is commonly called " cancer " ( I call them IE users who click on the ads that infest b ) .
Anyone who had been paying attention lately knows that the scroll rate of b was down significantly .
people were even able to pull off slowpoke combos .
So I guess mootykins ( or one of the mods ) decided it was time for a new cause complete with raids and IRL failfests .
This whole idea of anonymous was created by a group of young men trying to monetize a website .
It is one of the largest trollings in the history of the internets .
If they were doing it for the lulz then it would be fine but i suspect they do it for the ad dollars ( despite Christopher 's strong denials ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All these periodic "public raids" do is stuff b full of what is commonly called "cancer" (I call them IE users who click on the ads that infest b).
Anyone who had been paying attention lately knows that the scroll rate of b was down significantly.
people were even able to pull off slowpoke combos.
So I guess mootykins (or one of the mods) decided it was time for a new cause complete with raids and IRL failfests.
This whole idea of anonymous was created by a group of young men trying to monetize a website.
It is one of the largest trollings in the history of the internets.
If they were doing it for the lulz then it would be fine but i suspect they do it for the ad dollars (despite Christopher's strong denials).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115200</id>
	<title>Re:Good Gravy</title>
	<author>stonewallred</author>
	<datestamp>1265998860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ebaum's world is where all this stuff blamed on 4chan comes from. It is all Ebaum's World fault. And Gaia.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ebaum 's world is where all this stuff blamed on 4chan comes from .
It is all Ebaum 's World fault .
And Gaia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ebaum's world is where all this stuff blamed on 4chan comes from.
It is all Ebaum's World fault.
And Gaia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115912</id>
	<title>Re:Impossible!</title>
	<author>Shadow of Eternity</author>
	<datestamp>1266001620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like the sibling post says, many slashdotters ARE 4channers.</p><p>I never really said they were bad, I don't consider 4chan any more evil than I do a hurricane. If anything I think of Anonymous as a sort of physical collective superego and id for the internet with no mediating ego, they're more like a force of nature than anything else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like the sibling post says , many slashdotters ARE 4channers.I never really said they were bad , I do n't consider 4chan any more evil than I do a hurricane .
If anything I think of Anonymous as a sort of physical collective superego and id for the internet with no mediating ego , they 're more like a force of nature than anything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like the sibling post says, many slashdotters ARE 4channers.I never really said they were bad, I don't consider 4chan any more evil than I do a hurricane.
If anything I think of Anonymous as a sort of physical collective superego and id for the internet with no mediating ego, they're more like a force of nature than anything else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115628</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31119584</id>
	<title>the men who dwell in the shadow of the net</title>
	<author>agrif</author>
	<datestamp>1265970540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As cheesy as it is to take phrases from anime, I really can think of no better term for this.</p><p> <em>Anonymous</em> is a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy\_of\_Ghost\_in\_the\_Shell#Stand\_Alone\_Complex" title="wikipedia.org">Stand Alone Complex</a> [wikipedia.org], a group of individuals acting as copycats with no clear original, produced by the confluence of thoughts caused by mass exposure to similar media. This sort of thing is easily caused by the Internet in general, and especially the echo-chamber effect and high information volume on 4chan (and others, including Slashdot, though we tend to be less active about it).</p><p>Also, though <em>Anonymous</em> no longer shows this, SACs tend to be composed of people acting independently, with no knowledge of the others actions. Or, they can be thought of as a leaderless group caused by networked, subconscious groupthink on a massive scale.</p><p>I <em>highly</em> encourage the adoption of this term, not because I like the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost\_in\_the\_Shell:\_Stand\_Alone\_Complex" title="wikipedia.org">anime it came from</a> [wikipedia.org], but because I think it is an extraordinarily accurate description of phenomena like <em>Anonymous</em>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As cheesy as it is to take phrases from anime , I really can think of no better term for this .
Anonymous is a Stand Alone Complex [ wikipedia.org ] , a group of individuals acting as copycats with no clear original , produced by the confluence of thoughts caused by mass exposure to similar media .
This sort of thing is easily caused by the Internet in general , and especially the echo-chamber effect and high information volume on 4chan ( and others , including Slashdot , though we tend to be less active about it ) .Also , though Anonymous no longer shows this , SACs tend to be composed of people acting independently , with no knowledge of the others actions .
Or , they can be thought of as a leaderless group caused by networked , subconscious groupthink on a massive scale.I highly encourage the adoption of this term , not because I like the anime it came from [ wikipedia.org ] , but because I think it is an extraordinarily accurate description of phenomena like Anonymous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As cheesy as it is to take phrases from anime, I really can think of no better term for this.
Anonymous is a Stand Alone Complex [wikipedia.org], a group of individuals acting as copycats with no clear original, produced by the confluence of thoughts caused by mass exposure to similar media.
This sort of thing is easily caused by the Internet in general, and especially the echo-chamber effect and high information volume on 4chan (and others, including Slashdot, though we tend to be less active about it).Also, though Anonymous no longer shows this, SACs tend to be composed of people acting independently, with no knowledge of the others actions.
Or, they can be thought of as a leaderless group caused by networked, subconscious groupthink on a massive scale.I highly encourage the adoption of this term, not because I like the anime it came from [wikipedia.org], but because I think it is an extraordinarily accurate description of phenomena like Anonymous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115214</id>
	<title>Democracy in action.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265998920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The will of the people is the true purpose of democracy. Regardless of the fact that people are doing this anonymously, this is similar in line to the rebellion against a tyrannical government.

Just because the tyranny is not as bad (censorship of porn), and the attack by the people (DDoSing government websites) does not make it a "joke" or an immature prank.

If the government was actively rounding up thousands of people from a certain ethnic group for "cleansing", you could expect everyone to gather guns to kill them.

Since it is not that serious, you get a less serious, albeit effective response. It made them realize what the public wants.

And I don't believe this is a symptom of the "vocal minority" simply because people don't get involved with something for no financial gain, unless they genuinely believe in it, and while it could be the act of a few, it is most likely the act of many.

Even if it were a vocal minority, in the US, the constitution was created to protect the freedom of the minority. I don't know how Australia views it's minorities, but I would hope a country that everyone considers "western" holds the same ideal.

Anonymous is the true unhindered will of the people. It does not give in to socially acceptable norms, or anything that hides what someone truly wants.

If people want porn, they will do so under anonymous.

Anonymous is legion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The will of the people is the true purpose of democracy .
Regardless of the fact that people are doing this anonymously , this is similar in line to the rebellion against a tyrannical government .
Just because the tyranny is not as bad ( censorship of porn ) , and the attack by the people ( DDoSing government websites ) does not make it a " joke " or an immature prank .
If the government was actively rounding up thousands of people from a certain ethnic group for " cleansing " , you could expect everyone to gather guns to kill them .
Since it is not that serious , you get a less serious , albeit effective response .
It made them realize what the public wants .
And I do n't believe this is a symptom of the " vocal minority " simply because people do n't get involved with something for no financial gain , unless they genuinely believe in it , and while it could be the act of a few , it is most likely the act of many .
Even if it were a vocal minority , in the US , the constitution was created to protect the freedom of the minority .
I do n't know how Australia views it 's minorities , but I would hope a country that everyone considers " western " holds the same ideal .
Anonymous is the true unhindered will of the people .
It does not give in to socially acceptable norms , or anything that hides what someone truly wants .
If people want porn , they will do so under anonymous .
Anonymous is legion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The will of the people is the true purpose of democracy.
Regardless of the fact that people are doing this anonymously, this is similar in line to the rebellion against a tyrannical government.
Just because the tyranny is not as bad (censorship of porn), and the attack by the people (DDoSing government websites) does not make it a "joke" or an immature prank.
If the government was actively rounding up thousands of people from a certain ethnic group for "cleansing", you could expect everyone to gather guns to kill them.
Since it is not that serious, you get a less serious, albeit effective response.
It made them realize what the public wants.
And I don't believe this is a symptom of the "vocal minority" simply because people don't get involved with something for no financial gain, unless they genuinely believe in it, and while it could be the act of a few, it is most likely the act of many.
Even if it were a vocal minority, in the US, the constitution was created to protect the freedom of the minority.
I don't know how Australia views it's minorities, but I would hope a country that everyone considers "western" holds the same ideal.
Anonymous is the true unhindered will of the people.
It does not give in to socially acceptable norms, or anything that hides what someone truly wants.
If people want porn, they will do so under anonymous.
Anonymous is legion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115410</id>
	<title>The end doesn't always justify the means</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1265999700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Blowing up the buildings housing the filters would also be more effective than a petition, but that's not legal either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Blowing up the buildings housing the filters would also be more effective than a petition , but that 's not legal either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blowing up the buildings housing the filters would also be more effective than a petition, but that's not legal either.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115094</id>
	<title>Inconsistency.</title>
	<author>ladadadada</author>
	<datestamp>1265998380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Summary says:</p><p>"An individual (who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group) said..."</p><p>TFA says exactly the opposite:</p><p>"...received a reply from an individual claiming to be a spokesperson."</p><p>Authenticity of said spokesperson: YMMV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Summary says : " An individual ( who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group ) said... " TFA says exactly the opposite : " ...received a reply from an individual claiming to be a spokesperson .
" Authenticity of said spokesperson : YMMV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Summary says:"An individual (who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group) said..."TFA says exactly the opposite:"...received a reply from an individual claiming to be a spokesperson.
"Authenticity of said spokesperson: YMMV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115198</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265998800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OH NOES! MY WEBSITES IS NO LONGER SAFE! PANIC! FEAR!</p><p>Stupid filter. Of course I'm yelling. It's because I'm terrified because my website is down due to a DDOS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OH NOES !
MY WEBSITES IS NO LONGER SAFE !
PANIC ! FEAR ! Stupid filter .
Of course I 'm yelling .
It 's because I 'm terrified because my website is down due to a DDOS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OH NOES!
MY WEBSITES IS NO LONGER SAFE!
PANIC! FEAR!Stupid filter.
Of course I'm yelling.
It's because I'm terrified because my website is down due to a DDOS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31124196</id>
	<title>Other people trying to do change too</title>
	<author>Joakal</author>
	<datestamp>1265994600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here's the list of party positions determined: <a href="http://shockseat.com/communications/internet-filtering-scheme" title="shockseat.com" rel="nofollow">http://shockseat.com/communications/internet-filtering-scheme</a> [shockseat.com] <br> <br>

However, the DDOS attacks are preventing me from determining the votes of Lower and Upper House on issues like Copyright for the upcoming Federal Election, so whenever some of the government sites are up I am unable to access it at all, especially Copyright Amendment Bill 2006 at aph.gov.au (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;adv=yes;db=;group=;holdingType=;id=;orderBy=priority,title;page=3;query=Dataset\%3AbillsPrevParl\%20Decade\%3A\%222000s\%22\%20Year\%3A\%222006\%22;querytype=;rec=5;).<br> <br>

Some media are talking about it occasionally, it's not front page news and mostly it's just aggravating the government, the officials and site visitors. This isn't making the government abandon it or raising strong awareness with the public.<br> <br>

I implore you guys not to attack the government websites for months on end. If you're going to protest, try something else that's better at raising awareness.<br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/disclaimer, I run shockseat.com</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's the list of party positions determined : http : //shockseat.com/communications/internet-filtering-scheme [ shockseat.com ] However , the DDOS attacks are preventing me from determining the votes of Lower and Upper House on issues like Copyright for the upcoming Federal Election , so whenever some of the government sites are up I am unable to access it at all , especially Copyright Amendment Bill 2006 at aph.gov.au ( http : //parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p ; adv = yes ; db = ; group = ; holdingType = ; id = ; orderBy = priority,title ; page = 3 ; query = Dataset \ % 3AbillsPrevParl \ % 20Decade \ % 3A \ % 222000s \ % 22 \ % 20Year \ % 3A \ % 222006 \ % 22 ; querytype = ; rec = 5 ; ) .
Some media are talking about it occasionally , it 's not front page news and mostly it 's just aggravating the government , the officials and site visitors .
This is n't making the government abandon it or raising strong awareness with the public .
I implore you guys not to attack the government websites for months on end .
If you 're going to protest , try something else that 's better at raising awareness .
/disclaimer , I run shockseat.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's the list of party positions determined: http://shockseat.com/communications/internet-filtering-scheme [shockseat.com]  

However, the DDOS attacks are preventing me from determining the votes of Lower and Upper House on issues like Copyright for the upcoming Federal Election, so whenever some of the government sites are up I am unable to access it at all, especially Copyright Amendment Bill 2006 at aph.gov.au (http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;adv=yes;db=;group=;holdingType=;id=;orderBy=priority,title;page=3;query=Dataset\%3AbillsPrevParl\%20Decade\%3A\%222000s\%22\%20Year\%3A\%222006\%22;querytype=;rec=5;).
Some media are talking about it occasionally, it's not front page news and mostly it's just aggravating the government, the officials and site visitors.
This isn't making the government abandon it or raising strong awareness with the public.
I implore you guys not to attack the government websites for months on end.
If you're going to protest, try something else that's better at raising awareness.
/disclaimer, I run shockseat.com</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115064</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115000</id>
	<title>The most likely long term effect</title>
	<author>Kupfernigk</author>
	<datestamp>1265998020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is going to be a rapid acceleration in the restriction and closing off of the Internet, greater activity by Governments in monitoring and repressing activity, and eventually a culture in which computer users are licensed and all computers outside the Government and academia run limited, crippled operating systems and applications.<p>Way to go, guys. You need to learn some history and some sociology. Then you will understand that the most successful criminals DO NOT ADVERTISE their existence. At a certain nuisance level, the cost of your attacks will exceed the cost of fixing the system to stop you. And the rest of us will be made to pay for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is going to be a rapid acceleration in the restriction and closing off of the Internet , greater activity by Governments in monitoring and repressing activity , and eventually a culture in which computer users are licensed and all computers outside the Government and academia run limited , crippled operating systems and applications.Way to go , guys .
You need to learn some history and some sociology .
Then you will understand that the most successful criminals DO NOT ADVERTISE their existence .
At a certain nuisance level , the cost of your attacks will exceed the cost of fixing the system to stop you .
And the rest of us will be made to pay for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is going to be a rapid acceleration in the restriction and closing off of the Internet, greater activity by Governments in monitoring and repressing activity, and eventually a culture in which computer users are licensed and all computers outside the Government and academia run limited, crippled operating systems and applications.Way to go, guys.
You need to learn some history and some sociology.
Then you will understand that the most successful criminals DO NOT ADVERTISE their existence.
At a certain nuisance level, the cost of your attacks will exceed the cost of fixing the system to stop you.
And the rest of us will be made to pay for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115114</id>
	<title>Re:Anonymous isn;t really a group</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265998440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly. You can either think of it as a group of individuals who merely believe the same ideals and co-operate in order to do what makes each individual happy. OR they are a collective consciousness where they are all controlled by one will, but they simply don't know it. I think its the latter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
You can either think of it as a group of individuals who merely believe the same ideals and co-operate in order to do what makes each individual happy .
OR they are a collective consciousness where they are all controlled by one will , but they simply do n't know it .
I think its the latter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
You can either think of it as a group of individuals who merely believe the same ideals and co-operate in order to do what makes each individual happy.
OR they are a collective consciousness where they are all controlled by one will, but they simply don't know it.
I think its the latter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31118306</id>
	<title>Re:Good Gravy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265967360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep. Totally correct.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep .
Totally correct .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep.
Totally correct.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115200</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115406</id>
	<title>Re:We Are Anonymous</title>
	<author>zeromorph</author>
	<datestamp>1265999700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion\_in\_popular\_culture" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion\_in\_popular\_culture</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion \ _in \ _popular \ _culture [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion\_in\_popular\_culture [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31121214</id>
	<title>Re:Mission Impossible /b/</title>
	<author>ae1294</author>
	<datestamp>1265975760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If anything I think of Anonymous as a sort of physical collective superego and id for the internet with no mediating ego, they're more like a force of nature than anything else.</p></div><p> <b>Stop trying to put a fucking label on me jackass.</b> It's people like you that eat babies because they are so very fresh and rather delicious but then have the nerve to go and never file your tax returns because the <b>government</b> 'disagrees' with your child molesting church hobby deduction. I mean seriously, when are you going to respond to the <b>fact</b> that in 1997 you raped and murdered a 97 year old man just to see if it was something you'd be interested in majoring in up at the local community college?</p><p><i>Not posted anonymously because I don't fucking feel like waiting.</i></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If anything I think of Anonymous as a sort of physical collective superego and id for the internet with no mediating ego , they 're more like a force of nature than anything else .
Stop trying to put a fucking label on me jackass .
It 's people like you that eat babies because they are so very fresh and rather delicious but then have the nerve to go and never file your tax returns because the government 'disagrees ' with your child molesting church hobby deduction .
I mean seriously , when are you going to respond to the fact that in 1997 you raped and murdered a 97 year old man just to see if it was something you 'd be interested in majoring in up at the local community college ? Not posted anonymously because I do n't fucking feel like waiting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If anything I think of Anonymous as a sort of physical collective superego and id for the internet with no mediating ego, they're more like a force of nature than anything else.
Stop trying to put a fucking label on me jackass.
It's people like you that eat babies because they are so very fresh and rather delicious but then have the nerve to go and never file your tax returns because the government 'disagrees' with your child molesting church hobby deduction.
I mean seriously, when are you going to respond to the fact that in 1997 you raped and murdered a 97 year old man just to see if it was something you'd be interested in majoring in up at the local community college?Not posted anonymously because I don't fucking feel like waiting.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31145714</id>
	<title>Re:We Are Anonymous</title>
	<author>Denihil</author>
	<datestamp>1266257400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>posting as anon without posting as anonymous coward = epic fail.</htmltext>
<tokenext>posting as anon without posting as anonymous coward = epic fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>posting as anon without posting as anonymous coward = epic fail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114752</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115144</id>
	<title>SPEECHPOCALYPSE 2010!</title>
	<author>RomulusNR</author>
	<datestamp>1265998620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>could transform the humble Icelander into a legal superman, virtually untouchable abroad for comments written</i></p><p>It's a word! It's a claim! No, it's FreeSpeechMan!</p><p>Whatever will we do when Iceland is overrun with people with the power to say whatever they want?</p><p>Freedom Of Speech -- It's Scary!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>could transform the humble Icelander into a legal superman , virtually untouchable abroad for comments writtenIt 's a word !
It 's a claim !
No , it 's FreeSpeechMan ! Whatever will we do when Iceland is overrun with people with the power to say whatever they want ? Freedom Of Speech -- It 's Scary !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>could transform the humble Icelander into a legal superman, virtually untouchable abroad for comments writtenIt's a word!
It's a claim!
No, it's FreeSpeechMan!Whatever will we do when Iceland is overrun with people with the power to say whatever they want?Freedom Of Speech -- It's Scary!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31122934</id>
	<title>you are an idiot</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1265983980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A denial of services attack by numerous individuals is civil disobedience, obviously.</p><p>A bot-net based denial of services attack is more like civil clashes between economic entities, like if amazon pulls some publishers books, although the bot-net was obviously illegal anyways.</p><p>A even more criminal version of a denial of services attack would be identifying all the government employees involved, identifying their personal information, and giving it all the nigerian scammers.</p><p>A good rule of thumb is "It's not terrorism if it does not involve an attempted killing."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A denial of services attack by numerous individuals is civil disobedience , obviously.A bot-net based denial of services attack is more like civil clashes between economic entities , like if amazon pulls some publishers books , although the bot-net was obviously illegal anyways.A even more criminal version of a denial of services attack would be identifying all the government employees involved , identifying their personal information , and giving it all the nigerian scammers.A good rule of thumb is " It 's not terrorism if it does not involve an attempted killing .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A denial of services attack by numerous individuals is civil disobedience, obviously.A bot-net based denial of services attack is more like civil clashes between economic entities, like if amazon pulls some publishers books, although the bot-net was obviously illegal anyways.A even more criminal version of a denial of services attack would be identifying all the government employees involved, identifying their personal information, and giving it all the nigerian scammers.A good rule of thumb is "It's not terrorism if it does not involve an attempted killing.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126470</id>
	<title>Re:The most likely long term effect</title>
	<author>Demonoid-Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1266072000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mod up - informative (surrounded by ego)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod up - informative ( surrounded by ego )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod up - informative (surrounded by ego)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115000</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115146</id>
	<title>Re:Impossible!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265998620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Except "Anonymous" is the bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 14 year old script kiddies</p></div><p>Wrong, because this would be a blatant violation of 4chan rules:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If you are under the age of 18, or it is illegal for you to view the materials contained on this website, discontinue browsing immediately.</p></div><p>So it is obvious that 14 year olds (along with people from Australia and Iran) are not allowed to access 4chan because of the rules.</p><p>Ref: <a href="http://www.4chan.org/rules" title="4chan.org" rel="nofollow">4chan roolz!</a> [4chan.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except " Anonymous " is the bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 14 year old script kiddiesWrong , because this would be a blatant violation of 4chan rules : If you are under the age of 18 , or it is illegal for you to view the materials contained on this website , discontinue browsing immediately.So it is obvious that 14 year olds ( along with people from Australia and Iran ) are not allowed to access 4chan because of the rules.Ref : 4chan roolz !
[ 4chan.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except "Anonymous" is the bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 14 year old script kiddiesWrong, because this would be a blatant violation of 4chan rules:If you are under the age of 18, or it is illegal for you to view the materials contained on this website, discontinue browsing immediately.So it is obvious that 14 year olds (along with people from Australia and Iran) are not allowed to access 4chan because of the rules.Ref: 4chan roolz!
[4chan.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114934</id>
	<title>Anonymous? Silence?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265997720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just read 4chan or Encyclopedia Dramatica and you can read the latest groupthink. Anon isn't a real group and it doesn't have official announcements.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just read 4chan or Encyclopedia Dramatica and you can read the latest groupthink .
Anon is n't a real group and it does n't have official announcements .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just read 4chan or Encyclopedia Dramatica and you can read the latest groupthink.
Anon isn't a real group and it doesn't have official announcements.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115350</id>
	<title>Re:Good Gravy</title>
	<author>qoncept</author>
	<datestamp>1265999520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sorry, did you just reference a rule as evidence of the activities from a website? I wonder what The Pirate Bay's rules say.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry , did you just reference a rule as evidence of the activities from a website ?
I wonder what The Pirate Bay 's rules say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry, did you just reference a rule as evidence of the activities from a website?
I wonder what The Pirate Bay's rules say.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115428</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>91degrees</author>
	<datestamp>1265999820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why does it matter whether it's terrorism or not?
<br> <br>
It is arguably damage.  It isn't killing anybody.  It is a political act.  Labelling it terrorism just muddies the water by using emotive language.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does it matter whether it 's terrorism or not ?
It is arguably damage .
It is n't killing anybody .
It is a political act .
Labelling it terrorism just muddies the water by using emotive language .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does it matter whether it's terrorism or not?
It is arguably damage.
It isn't killing anybody.
It is a political act.
Labelling it terrorism just muddies the water by using emotive language.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126556</id>
	<title>Re:Democracy in action.</title>
	<author>zsau</author>
	<datestamp>1266072840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Australia has a very different form of rights protection, which is positively archaic. It isn't a great stretch to say that we have <em>no</em> rights protection at all, beyond a general assumption of democracy. There's one or two rights explicitly protected in the constitution (e.g. freedom of religion, right to vote), related documents, or High Court judgements (some limited form of freedom of speech is "implied" in the constitution). But the High Court tends to make its judgements so as to extend the Commonwealth (i.e. federal or national) Parliament's power as far as can conceivably be done e.g. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R\_v\_Pearson;\_Ex\_parte\_Sipka" title="wikipedia.org">R v Pearson; Ex parte Sipka</a> [wikipedia.org]. In other words, that democracy that is our only real rights protection is not even constitutionally protected in any meaningful way.</p><p>In essence, we still have the system whereby people are expected to vote only for people who will protect the rights they find worth protecting. So if a state or the Commonwealth Parliament decides to pass a law that abrogates the right against self-incrimination, <a href="http://www.chiefexaminer.vic.gov.au/content.asp?a=OCESite" title="vic.gov.au">they can</a> [vic.gov.au]. We are also under a far higher degree of surveillance than most democracies would appreciate; anecdotally, the very common speed and red light cameras throughout the state of Victoria take photos of vehicles as they pass through (even if they aren't speeding or running a red) and compares the car registration to a database of cars owned by people with suspended licences. They then quickly send a police car round to let them know their licence is suspended even more.</p><p>Notice that the state of Victoria is the only in Australia with an explicit protection of human rights. (The ACT, a territory, also does; however, laws---including charters of rights---passed by a territory can be arbitrarily overturned by the Commonwealth Parliament.) But the last word is still in the hands of the state parliament, and the court's powers and human rights can (have!) thereby be limited compared to what is seen in other states; what I know of the charter of human rights in Victoria makes me more scared, rather than feel more secure.</p><p>We also have (or have had) indefinite detention: Both of stateless people illegally in Australia (they can't leave even if they want to!), as well as of criminals to prevent the commission of purely hypothetical crimes in the future.</p><p>Censorship of pornography is something that always been done in Australia; it remains officially illegal to purchase X-rated material in shops in every state (although I think this law isn't actively enforced). I think it would be very hard to convince a court that it was inappropriate in light of our democracy or popular standards. But if you think this is bad (and many Australians do), you ain't seen nothing yet.</p><p>In Australia, even your thoughts are subject to government regulation. You are required to have and express an opinion on who you want to govern you. Not just who you want to govern you most, but who you to govern you the second, third, nth most, for everyone who stands in the election. Now, ordinarily, unless you fail to vote you won't be charged with any crime, because votes are (meaningfully) anonymous. However, the High Court found it constitutional for the Parliament to create a law which prohibited discussing all the possible ways you could cast a valid vote, ultimately leading to the jailing of Albert Langer for contempt of court.</p><p>Compared to other nations, it also seems we have far more government advertising, inculding was is essentially propaganda. Not just "community service" style advertising like health campaigns or information about new laws, but reminders of the government's progress and political advertisements defending laws (spent using government money).</p><p>Australia is a representational democracy, and there's no way to deny that. But we are in no sense the liberal democracy we believe ourselves to be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Australia has a very different form of rights protection , which is positively archaic .
It is n't a great stretch to say that we have no rights protection at all , beyond a general assumption of democracy .
There 's one or two rights explicitly protected in the constitution ( e.g .
freedom of religion , right to vote ) , related documents , or High Court judgements ( some limited form of freedom of speech is " implied " in the constitution ) .
But the High Court tends to make its judgements so as to extend the Commonwealth ( i.e .
federal or national ) Parliament 's power as far as can conceivably be done e.g .
R v Pearson ; Ex parte Sipka [ wikipedia.org ] .
In other words , that democracy that is our only real rights protection is not even constitutionally protected in any meaningful way.In essence , we still have the system whereby people are expected to vote only for people who will protect the rights they find worth protecting .
So if a state or the Commonwealth Parliament decides to pass a law that abrogates the right against self-incrimination , they can [ vic.gov.au ] .
We are also under a far higher degree of surveillance than most democracies would appreciate ; anecdotally , the very common speed and red light cameras throughout the state of Victoria take photos of vehicles as they pass through ( even if they are n't speeding or running a red ) and compares the car registration to a database of cars owned by people with suspended licences .
They then quickly send a police car round to let them know their licence is suspended even more.Notice that the state of Victoria is the only in Australia with an explicit protection of human rights .
( The ACT , a territory , also does ; however , laws---including charters of rights---passed by a territory can be arbitrarily overturned by the Commonwealth Parliament .
) But the last word is still in the hands of the state parliament , and the court 's powers and human rights can ( have !
) thereby be limited compared to what is seen in other states ; what I know of the charter of human rights in Victoria makes me more scared , rather than feel more secure.We also have ( or have had ) indefinite detention : Both of stateless people illegally in Australia ( they ca n't leave even if they want to !
) , as well as of criminals to prevent the commission of purely hypothetical crimes in the future.Censorship of pornography is something that always been done in Australia ; it remains officially illegal to purchase X-rated material in shops in every state ( although I think this law is n't actively enforced ) .
I think it would be very hard to convince a court that it was inappropriate in light of our democracy or popular standards .
But if you think this is bad ( and many Australians do ) , you ai n't seen nothing yet.In Australia , even your thoughts are subject to government regulation .
You are required to have and express an opinion on who you want to govern you .
Not just who you want to govern you most , but who you to govern you the second , third , nth most , for everyone who stands in the election .
Now , ordinarily , unless you fail to vote you wo n't be charged with any crime , because votes are ( meaningfully ) anonymous .
However , the High Court found it constitutional for the Parliament to create a law which prohibited discussing all the possible ways you could cast a valid vote , ultimately leading to the jailing of Albert Langer for contempt of court.Compared to other nations , it also seems we have far more government advertising , inculding was is essentially propaganda .
Not just " community service " style advertising like health campaigns or information about new laws , but reminders of the government 's progress and political advertisements defending laws ( spent using government money ) .Australia is a representational democracy , and there 's no way to deny that .
But we are in no sense the liberal democracy we believe ourselves to be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Australia has a very different form of rights protection, which is positively archaic.
It isn't a great stretch to say that we have no rights protection at all, beyond a general assumption of democracy.
There's one or two rights explicitly protected in the constitution (e.g.
freedom of religion, right to vote), related documents, or High Court judgements (some limited form of freedom of speech is "implied" in the constitution).
But the High Court tends to make its judgements so as to extend the Commonwealth (i.e.
federal or national) Parliament's power as far as can conceivably be done e.g.
R v Pearson; Ex parte Sipka [wikipedia.org].
In other words, that democracy that is our only real rights protection is not even constitutionally protected in any meaningful way.In essence, we still have the system whereby people are expected to vote only for people who will protect the rights they find worth protecting.
So if a state or the Commonwealth Parliament decides to pass a law that abrogates the right against self-incrimination, they can [vic.gov.au].
We are also under a far higher degree of surveillance than most democracies would appreciate; anecdotally, the very common speed and red light cameras throughout the state of Victoria take photos of vehicles as they pass through (even if they aren't speeding or running a red) and compares the car registration to a database of cars owned by people with suspended licences.
They then quickly send a police car round to let them know their licence is suspended even more.Notice that the state of Victoria is the only in Australia with an explicit protection of human rights.
(The ACT, a territory, also does; however, laws---including charters of rights---passed by a territory can be arbitrarily overturned by the Commonwealth Parliament.
) But the last word is still in the hands of the state parliament, and the court's powers and human rights can (have!
) thereby be limited compared to what is seen in other states; what I know of the charter of human rights in Victoria makes me more scared, rather than feel more secure.We also have (or have had) indefinite detention: Both of stateless people illegally in Australia (they can't leave even if they want to!
), as well as of criminals to prevent the commission of purely hypothetical crimes in the future.Censorship of pornography is something that always been done in Australia; it remains officially illegal to purchase X-rated material in shops in every state (although I think this law isn't actively enforced).
I think it would be very hard to convince a court that it was inappropriate in light of our democracy or popular standards.
But if you think this is bad (and many Australians do), you ain't seen nothing yet.In Australia, even your thoughts are subject to government regulation.
You are required to have and express an opinion on who you want to govern you.
Not just who you want to govern you most, but who you to govern you the second, third, nth most, for everyone who stands in the election.
Now, ordinarily, unless you fail to vote you won't be charged with any crime, because votes are (meaningfully) anonymous.
However, the High Court found it constitutional for the Parliament to create a law which prohibited discussing all the possible ways you could cast a valid vote, ultimately leading to the jailing of Albert Langer for contempt of court.Compared to other nations, it also seems we have far more government advertising, inculding was is essentially propaganda.
Not just "community service" style advertising like health campaigns or information about new laws, but reminders of the government's progress and political advertisements defending laws (spent using government money).Australia is a representational democracy, and there's no way to deny that.
But we are in no sense the liberal democracy we believe ourselves to be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31118228</id>
	<title>Re:Good Gravy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265967180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The point is that it's a ad hoc collection of anonymous people.</p> </div><p>A collection of people, that's not a group at all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The point is that it 's a ad hoc collection of anonymous people .
A collection of people , that 's not a group at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The point is that it's a ad hoc collection of anonymous people.
A collection of people, that's not a group at all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115718</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115478</id>
	<title>I am not Anonymous, you are not Anonymous.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266000060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People in positions of power are afraid of unfettered access to information of all sorts. They are afraid of arenas where the "regular" people can say whatever they want. They are scared of anything that allows the "regular" people to exchange information and ideas. This is why the first amendment was placed where it was.</p><p>I will submit a WWII example, but not the one you're probably thinking of.</p><p>What would have happened if there was an internet during WWII where Americans could find out what Stalin REALLY was? People in positions of power knew he was a mass murderer and genocidal maniac. Instead, he was routinely referred to in propaganda, mainstream news, and the general public as "Uncle Joe". Think about that for a minute.</p><p>People in positions of power have, in the past, relied on the control of the flow of information in order to maintain control and steer "regular" people toward a desired response. This is how they maintain social/political control. There are so many articles and documentaries about this it isn't funny. There are various ways of doing this. Basically through the use of framing through the control of information and propaganda you can be fairly sure to condition a desired response.</p><p>This is why there will be filtering. Not to save the children, not because of libel, not because someone may be offended. Those are just ways to sell the public on it.  It is because it makes it easier to condition a response and thus people easier to control. It won't just be China, Iran, Australia, etc,  either.</p><p>This filtering is just one part of a larger issue for everyone who cares about the truly free exchange of ideas and information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People in positions of power are afraid of unfettered access to information of all sorts .
They are afraid of arenas where the " regular " people can say whatever they want .
They are scared of anything that allows the " regular " people to exchange information and ideas .
This is why the first amendment was placed where it was.I will submit a WWII example , but not the one you 're probably thinking of.What would have happened if there was an internet during WWII where Americans could find out what Stalin REALLY was ?
People in positions of power knew he was a mass murderer and genocidal maniac .
Instead , he was routinely referred to in propaganda , mainstream news , and the general public as " Uncle Joe " .
Think about that for a minute.People in positions of power have , in the past , relied on the control of the flow of information in order to maintain control and steer " regular " people toward a desired response .
This is how they maintain social/political control .
There are so many articles and documentaries about this it is n't funny .
There are various ways of doing this .
Basically through the use of framing through the control of information and propaganda you can be fairly sure to condition a desired response.This is why there will be filtering .
Not to save the children , not because of libel , not because someone may be offended .
Those are just ways to sell the public on it .
It is because it makes it easier to condition a response and thus people easier to control .
It wo n't just be China , Iran , Australia , etc , either.This filtering is just one part of a larger issue for everyone who cares about the truly free exchange of ideas and information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People in positions of power are afraid of unfettered access to information of all sorts.
They are afraid of arenas where the "regular" people can say whatever they want.
They are scared of anything that allows the "regular" people to exchange information and ideas.
This is why the first amendment was placed where it was.I will submit a WWII example, but not the one you're probably thinking of.What would have happened if there was an internet during WWII where Americans could find out what Stalin REALLY was?
People in positions of power knew he was a mass murderer and genocidal maniac.
Instead, he was routinely referred to in propaganda, mainstream news, and the general public as "Uncle Joe".
Think about that for a minute.People in positions of power have, in the past, relied on the control of the flow of information in order to maintain control and steer "regular" people toward a desired response.
This is how they maintain social/political control.
There are so many articles and documentaries about this it isn't funny.
There are various ways of doing this.
Basically through the use of framing through the control of information and propaganda you can be fairly sure to condition a desired response.This is why there will be filtering.
Not to save the children, not because of libel, not because someone may be offended.
Those are just ways to sell the public on it.
It is because it makes it easier to condition a response and thus people easier to control.
It won't just be China, Iran, Australia, etc,  either.This filtering is just one part of a larger issue for everyone who cares about the truly free exchange of ideas and information.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115152</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265998680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Coward.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Coward .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coward.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116360</id>
	<title>Re:from the drek and morass</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266003300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>comes the most effective force for progressive change</p></div><p>Most effective? From what I can see, so far, it seems to have gone like this, so far:</p><p>AU gov't: The Internet is out of control! We need to impose draconian regulations in order to have law and order again!</p><p>Trolls: How dare you imply we're out of control! We're not! Here, to prove our point, we'll hack and (D)DoS you!</p><p>Honestly, if THAT is the "most effective force for progressive change", I don't want to see the others.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>comes the most effective force for progressive changeMost effective ?
From what I can see , so far , it seems to have gone like this , so far : AU gov't : The Internet is out of control !
We need to impose draconian regulations in order to have law and order again ! Trolls : How dare you imply we 're out of control !
We 're not !
Here , to prove our point , we 'll hack and ( D ) DoS you ! Honestly , if THAT is the " most effective force for progressive change " , I do n't want to see the others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>comes the most effective force for progressive changeMost effective?
From what I can see, so far, it seems to have gone like this, so far:AU gov't: The Internet is out of control!
We need to impose draconian regulations in order to have law and order again!Trolls: How dare you imply we're out of control!
We're not!
Here, to prove our point, we'll hack and (D)DoS you!Honestly, if THAT is the "most effective force for progressive change", I don't want to see the others.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115398</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>O('\_')O\_Bush</author>
	<datestamp>1265999700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is what's called "Hacktivism".<br><br>It's no more a form of terrorism as is honking a horn at a car that cuts in front of you. (car analogy, just for you)</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what 's called " Hacktivism " .It 's no more a form of terrorism as is honking a horn at a car that cuts in front of you .
( car analogy , just for you )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what's called "Hacktivism".It's no more a form of terrorism as is honking a horn at a car that cuts in front of you.
(car analogy, just for you)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115842</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266001320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I'm glad you pointed out the definition of 'terrorism'. Those particular words were well thought out, I believe.
</p><p>
How much real fear in instilled in you, the Australian people, the Australian government, or the target site's admins as a result of this event? Any fear at all? Is this fear a reasonable response to this event? It's just computer systems and public websites, after all. Do you equate 'inconvenience' with 'danger'?
</p><p>
We're being conditioned to experience fear when we're told, on demand. We're told that an attack against a server is an attack on the people and therefore the expected response is fear, nee 'Terror'. As an individual, I ask you if you choose what you are afraid of? Do you hold in yourself the determination behind your actions, your beliefs, and your responses to external events? Do events out of your control cause you to fear them and their instigators because you believe that you are truly in danger, or because you have been conditioned to respond as if it were so by people who have a specific interest and benefit by your fearful response?
</p><p>
If you want to call these events 'Acts of Terrorism', if you want to be afraid, please do so on your own terms and not those handed to you along with the blindfold and handcuffs. You are a powerful individual, my friend, and you are capable of deciding for yourself what is right if you will only objectively view the events and effects that you experience. Keep that power to yourself, instead of simply handing it off to those who would manipulate you for their gain.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm glad you pointed out the definition of 'terrorism' .
Those particular words were well thought out , I believe .
How much real fear in instilled in you , the Australian people , the Australian government , or the target site 's admins as a result of this event ?
Any fear at all ?
Is this fear a reasonable response to this event ?
It 's just computer systems and public websites , after all .
Do you equate 'inconvenience ' with 'danger ' ?
We 're being conditioned to experience fear when we 're told , on demand .
We 're told that an attack against a server is an attack on the people and therefore the expected response is fear , nee 'Terror' .
As an individual , I ask you if you choose what you are afraid of ?
Do you hold in yourself the determination behind your actions , your beliefs , and your responses to external events ?
Do events out of your control cause you to fear them and their instigators because you believe that you are truly in danger , or because you have been conditioned to respond as if it were so by people who have a specific interest and benefit by your fearful response ?
If you want to call these events 'Acts of Terrorism ' , if you want to be afraid , please do so on your own terms and not those handed to you along with the blindfold and handcuffs .
You are a powerful individual , my friend , and you are capable of deciding for yourself what is right if you will only objectively view the events and effects that you experience .
Keep that power to yourself , instead of simply handing it off to those who would manipulate you for their gain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I'm glad you pointed out the definition of 'terrorism'.
Those particular words were well thought out, I believe.
How much real fear in instilled in you, the Australian people, the Australian government, or the target site's admins as a result of this event?
Any fear at all?
Is this fear a reasonable response to this event?
It's just computer systems and public websites, after all.
Do you equate 'inconvenience' with 'danger'?
We're being conditioned to experience fear when we're told, on demand.
We're told that an attack against a server is an attack on the people and therefore the expected response is fear, nee 'Terror'.
As an individual, I ask you if you choose what you are afraid of?
Do you hold in yourself the determination behind your actions, your beliefs, and your responses to external events?
Do events out of your control cause you to fear them and their instigators because you believe that you are truly in danger, or because you have been conditioned to respond as if it were so by people who have a specific interest and benefit by your fearful response?
If you want to call these events 'Acts of Terrorism', if you want to be afraid, please do so on your own terms and not those handed to you along with the blindfold and handcuffs.
You are a powerful individual, my friend, and you are capable of deciding for yourself what is right if you will only objectively view the events and effects that you experience.
Keep that power to yourself, instead of simply handing it off to those who would manipulate you for their gain.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115064</id>
	<title>Anonymous Users vs Anonymous Government</title>
	<author>Herkum01</author>
	<datestamp>1265998260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is an appropriate response to a figurehead politician making these rules, because it is a bunch of anonymous peons that are implementing them. The peons hide behind the facade of a government which they don't have to take responsibility for their actions.</p><p>Governments love when an individual speaks out, because they can release a bureaucratic horde of government employees to crush them. An individual who cannot be expected to address numerous rules, regulations and pressures a government can bring against them.</p><p>So Anonymous vs the government, as far as I am concerned is a fair fight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is an appropriate response to a figurehead politician making these rules , because it is a bunch of anonymous peons that are implementing them .
The peons hide behind the facade of a government which they do n't have to take responsibility for their actions.Governments love when an individual speaks out , because they can release a bureaucratic horde of government employees to crush them .
An individual who can not be expected to address numerous rules , regulations and pressures a government can bring against them.So Anonymous vs the government , as far as I am concerned is a fair fight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is an appropriate response to a figurehead politician making these rules, because it is a bunch of anonymous peons that are implementing them.
The peons hide behind the facade of a government which they don't have to take responsibility for their actions.Governments love when an individual speaks out, because they can release a bureaucratic horde of government employees to crush them.
An individual who cannot be expected to address numerous rules, regulations and pressures a government can bring against them.So Anonymous vs the government, as far as I am concerned is a fair fight.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115978</id>
	<title>Re:We Are Anonymous</title>
	<author>trapnest</author>
	<datestamp>1266001860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>*horde: a vast multitude<br>
*numerous: amounting to a large indefinite number; "numerous times"; "the family was numerous"; "Palomar's fans are legion"</htmltext>
<tokenext>* horde : a vast multitude * numerous : amounting to a large indefinite number ; " numerous times " ; " the family was numerous " ; " Palomar 's fans are legion "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*horde: a vast multitude
*numerous: amounting to a large indefinite number; "numerous times"; "the family was numerous"; "Palomar's fans are legion"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31117020</id>
	<title>Re:Good Gravy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266006720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>4chan? What's 4chan? I'm pretty sure anonymous hangs out at ebaumsworld</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>4chan ?
What 's 4chan ?
I 'm pretty sure anonymous hangs out at ebaumsworld</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4chan?
What's 4chan?
I'm pretty sure anonymous hangs out at ebaumsworld</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114808</id>
	<title>Legion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265997300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are Anonymous<br>We are Legion<br>We do not forgive<br>We do not forget<br>Expect Us<br>(and throw a few prawns on the barbie, Skip)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are AnonymousWe are LegionWe do not forgiveWe do not forgetExpect Us ( and throw a few prawns on the barbie , Skip )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are AnonymousWe are LegionWe do not forgiveWe do not forgetExpect Us(and throw a few prawns on the barbie, Skip)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126342</id>
	<title>Re:Anonymous to Australian Government:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266070620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Pool's Closed.</p></div><p>I think in this case 'Connection pool's closed' might make more sense.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pool 's Closed.I think in this case 'Connection pool 's closed ' might make more sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pool's Closed.I think in this case 'Connection pool's closed' might make more sense.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114894</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31117034</id>
	<title>Re:The most likely long term effect</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266006780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...eventually a culture in which computer users are licensed and all computers outside the Government and academia run limited, crippled operating systems and applications.</p></div></blockquote><p>

You can't code, can you?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...eventually a culture in which computer users are licensed and all computers outside the Government and academia run limited , crippled operating systems and applications .
You ca n't code , can you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...eventually a culture in which computer users are licensed and all computers outside the Government and academia run limited, crippled operating systems and applications.
You can't code, can you?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115000</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31121004</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1265975040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>According to Merriam-Webster, terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion while terror is defined as a state of intense fear.</i></p><p>Sounds to me like quite a few fear mongering politicians are guilty of terrorism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to Merriam-Webster , terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion while terror is defined as a state of intense fear.Sounds to me like quite a few fear mongering politicians are guilty of terrorism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to Merriam-Webster, terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion while terror is defined as a state of intense fear.Sounds to me like quite a few fear mongering politicians are guilty of terrorism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115922</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266001620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>According to Merriam-Webster, terrorism is <i>the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion</i> while terror is defined as <i>a state of intense fear.</i> </p><p>Nice going anonymous.  While I applaud how you've peacefully gone after the Church of Scientology; DOS attacks are going a bit too far.  You probably picked this type of attack because it's hard to determine who's actually launching it.</p><p>Cowards.</p></div><p>
1. Terror* is the over-used buzzword of the decade. Yes, there are instances where it should be applied, but its been used way too much, and I do not think a DOS is causing intense fear. Its probably pissing off a bunch of people, and could be called blackmail or racketeering by a stretch (ie: undo the filters and the anonymous DOS will probably cease) but this is not terrorism, stop watching FOX NEWS <br>
2. You refer to anonymous as if it were a single defined entity, and reference other acts as if they were perpetrated by the same organization or individuals. You have failed to comprehend the very definition of "Anonymous". There is no organization. The individuals perpetrating the current DOS might or might not have any connection with previous events or with each other. This is the power of Anonymous as well as its weakness if it even cared about such things. It could be anyone, it could be no one, it could be someone else posing as anonymous. As there is no organization, there is no leader, only individuals, only nobody, there is no way to address or control the actions attributed to it. The only thing that ties all this together is the action and conjecture by the press. Sure, there are places where ideas around a common theme are shared between some of the individuals that might be part of this, but even without the specific one cited in TFA there are innumerable others that are also anonymous. Anonymous did not pick or choose anything as it cannot, "IT" does not exist, the action happened as the will of individuals sought a wrong to right and came to an idea of how to do so, and thus acted.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to Merriam-Webster , terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion while terror is defined as a state of intense fear .
Nice going anonymous .
While I applaud how you 've peacefully gone after the Church of Scientology ; DOS attacks are going a bit too far .
You probably picked this type of attack because it 's hard to determine who 's actually launching it.Cowards .
1. Terror * is the over-used buzzword of the decade .
Yes , there are instances where it should be applied , but its been used way too much , and I do not think a DOS is causing intense fear .
Its probably pissing off a bunch of people , and could be called blackmail or racketeering by a stretch ( ie : undo the filters and the anonymous DOS will probably cease ) but this is not terrorism , stop watching FOX NEWS 2 .
You refer to anonymous as if it were a single defined entity , and reference other acts as if they were perpetrated by the same organization or individuals .
You have failed to comprehend the very definition of " Anonymous " .
There is no organization .
The individuals perpetrating the current DOS might or might not have any connection with previous events or with each other .
This is the power of Anonymous as well as its weakness if it even cared about such things .
It could be anyone , it could be no one , it could be someone else posing as anonymous .
As there is no organization , there is no leader , only individuals , only nobody , there is no way to address or control the actions attributed to it .
The only thing that ties all this together is the action and conjecture by the press .
Sure , there are places where ideas around a common theme are shared between some of the individuals that might be part of this , but even without the specific one cited in TFA there are innumerable others that are also anonymous .
Anonymous did not pick or choose anything as it can not , " IT " does not exist , the action happened as the will of individuals sought a wrong to right and came to an idea of how to do so , and thus acted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to Merriam-Webster, terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion while terror is defined as a state of intense fear.
Nice going anonymous.
While I applaud how you've peacefully gone after the Church of Scientology; DOS attacks are going a bit too far.
You probably picked this type of attack because it's hard to determine who's actually launching it.Cowards.
1. Terror* is the over-used buzzword of the decade.
Yes, there are instances where it should be applied, but its been used way too much, and I do not think a DOS is causing intense fear.
Its probably pissing off a bunch of people, and could be called blackmail or racketeering by a stretch (ie: undo the filters and the anonymous DOS will probably cease) but this is not terrorism, stop watching FOX NEWS 
2.
You refer to anonymous as if it were a single defined entity, and reference other acts as if they were perpetrated by the same organization or individuals.
You have failed to comprehend the very definition of "Anonymous".
There is no organization.
The individuals perpetrating the current DOS might or might not have any connection with previous events or with each other.
This is the power of Anonymous as well as its weakness if it even cared about such things.
It could be anyone, it could be no one, it could be someone else posing as anonymous.
As there is no organization, there is no leader, only individuals, only nobody, there is no way to address or control the actions attributed to it.
The only thing that ties all this together is the action and conjecture by the press.
Sure, there are places where ideas around a common theme are shared between some of the individuals that might be part of this, but even without the specific one cited in TFA there are innumerable others that are also anonymous.
Anonymous did not pick or choose anything as it cannot, "IT" does not exist, the action happened as the will of individuals sought a wrong to right and came to an idea of how to do so, and thus acted.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114742</id>
	<title>good reporting</title>
	<author>stonewallred</author>
	<datestamp>1265997060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lol, stupid reporters.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lol , stupid reporters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lol, stupid reporters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115650</id>
	<title>Anonymous declared terrorist organisation...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266000660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>in 3...2...1...</p><p>Oh boy. All those hipster college kids are gonna be in for a NASTY surprise when Teh Party Van sweeps them away to gitmo....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in 3...2...1...Oh boy .
All those hipster college kids are gon na be in for a NASTY surprise when Teh Party Van sweeps them away to gitmo... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in 3...2...1...Oh boy.
All those hipster college kids are gonna be in for a NASTY surprise when Teh Party Van sweeps them away to gitmo....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31121332</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>richlv</author>
	<datestamp>1265976240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yes, completely agreed. it's so stupid. i mean, governments all over the world have been so reasonable - there are no censorship attempts at all, flying is very pleasant, we haven't heard about any torturing taking place for centuries.<br>now, just now, because of this action people will turn against any free speech attempts and governments will have to take the only legitimate choice left to them - revoke all the free speech that's currently freely available, install cameras - first on streets, then in pubs, then in homes - because you can never be sure where a freespeecher-childpornographer is !<br>fear. blame. be a good citizen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yes , completely agreed .
it 's so stupid .
i mean , governments all over the world have been so reasonable - there are no censorship attempts at all , flying is very pleasant , we have n't heard about any torturing taking place for centuries.now , just now , because of this action people will turn against any free speech attempts and governments will have to take the only legitimate choice left to them - revoke all the free speech that 's currently freely available , install cameras - first on streets , then in pubs , then in homes - because you can never be sure where a freespeecher-childpornographer is ! fear .
blame. be a good citizen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes, completely agreed.
it's so stupid.
i mean, governments all over the world have been so reasonable - there are no censorship attempts at all, flying is very pleasant, we haven't heard about any torturing taking place for centuries.now, just now, because of this action people will turn against any free speech attempts and governments will have to take the only legitimate choice left to them - revoke all the free speech that's currently freely available, install cameras - first on streets, then in pubs, then in homes - because you can never be sure where a freespeecher-childpornographer is !fear.
blame. be a good citizen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115504</id>
	<title>Re:Inconsistency.</title>
	<author>hoggoth</author>
	<datestamp>1266000120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The meme called "Anonymous" (it's isn't a "group") can't have a spokesperson because there is no official "group", no "membership", no shared beliefs, no secret-handshake.<br>Someone gets an idea to do something, and posts the idea on several popular websites. Anyone who agrees the idea is a good one and takes the suggested action is, for that moment, part of "Anonymous". An hour later someone posts a different idea, some different people agree with that one and take some action and for that moment THEY are "Anonymous".</p><p>Some people who may or may not have ever joined in on suggested ideas under the banner of "Anonymous" understand that there is strength in the concept of NOT having any set membership or agenda that can be attacked, responded to, or replied to. Although I, myself, have never participated in any actions proposed by anyone under the banner Anonymous, I can see that this can be important especially in this day of increasing surveillance and abusive governments.</p><p>The idea of having a spokesperson for an un-group is preposterous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The meme called " Anonymous " ( it 's is n't a " group " ) ca n't have a spokesperson because there is no official " group " , no " membership " , no shared beliefs , no secret-handshake.Someone gets an idea to do something , and posts the idea on several popular websites .
Anyone who agrees the idea is a good one and takes the suggested action is , for that moment , part of " Anonymous " .
An hour later someone posts a different idea , some different people agree with that one and take some action and for that moment THEY are " Anonymous " .Some people who may or may not have ever joined in on suggested ideas under the banner of " Anonymous " understand that there is strength in the concept of NOT having any set membership or agenda that can be attacked , responded to , or replied to .
Although I , myself , have never participated in any actions proposed by anyone under the banner Anonymous , I can see that this can be important especially in this day of increasing surveillance and abusive governments.The idea of having a spokesperson for an un-group is preposterous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The meme called "Anonymous" (it's isn't a "group") can't have a spokesperson because there is no official "group", no "membership", no shared beliefs, no secret-handshake.Someone gets an idea to do something, and posts the idea on several popular websites.
Anyone who agrees the idea is a good one and takes the suggested action is, for that moment, part of "Anonymous".
An hour later someone posts a different idea, some different people agree with that one and take some action and for that moment THEY are "Anonymous".Some people who may or may not have ever joined in on suggested ideas under the banner of "Anonymous" understand that there is strength in the concept of NOT having any set membership or agenda that can be attacked, responded to, or replied to.
Although I, myself, have never participated in any actions proposed by anyone under the banner Anonymous, I can see that this can be important especially in this day of increasing surveillance and abusive governments.The idea of having a spokesperson for an un-group is preposterous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115094</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115322</id>
	<title>operation titstorm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where can I sign up to be ddos'd by this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where can I sign up to be ddos 'd by this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where can I sign up to be ddos'd by this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114896</id>
	<title>Good Gravy</title>
	<author>Mr. DOS</author>
	<datestamp>1265997600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...(who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group)...</p></div></blockquote><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...because the &ldquo;group&rdquo; does not <em>have</em> a spokesperson. Remember the &ldquo;loose-knit&rdquo; thing?</p><blockquote><div><p>The site where some members of Anonymous are said to hang out, 4chan...</p></div></blockquote><p>Yeah, let me know when you see Anonymous on there. They're totally a bunch of black shadowy figures hanging out in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/b/. Also, last time I checked, this was <a href="http://www.4chan.org/rules" title="4chan.org">4chan rule #4</a> [4chan.org]:</p><blockquote><div><p>The posting of personal information or calls to invasion is prohibited.</p></div></blockquote><p>4chan has a reputation for being a launchpad for this sort of thing, but it's not, at least, not any more. Go blame IRC, go blame any of the dozen clone boards, but it's not 4chan now.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; --- Mr. DOS</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... ( who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group ) ... ...because the    group    does not have a spokesperson .
Remember the    loose-knit    thing ? The site where some members of Anonymous are said to hang out , 4chan...Yeah , let me know when you see Anonymous on there .
They 're totally a bunch of black shadowy figures hanging out in /b/ .
Also , last time I checked , this was 4chan rule # 4 [ 4chan.org ] : The posting of personal information or calls to invasion is prohibited.4chan has a reputation for being a launchpad for this sort of thing , but it 's not , at least , not any more .
Go blame IRC , go blame any of the dozen clone boards , but it 's not 4chan now .
      --- Mr. DOS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...(who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group)... ...because the “group” does not have a spokesperson.
Remember the “loose-knit” thing?The site where some members of Anonymous are said to hang out, 4chan...Yeah, let me know when you see Anonymous on there.
They're totally a bunch of black shadowy figures hanging out in /b/.
Also, last time I checked, this was 4chan rule #4 [4chan.org]:The posting of personal information or calls to invasion is prohibited.4chan has a reputation for being a launchpad for this sort of thing, but it's not, at least, not any more.
Go blame IRC, go blame any of the dozen clone boards, but it's not 4chan now.
      --- Mr. DOS
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115394</id>
	<title>Re:We Are Anonymous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion\_\%28demon\%29</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion \ _ \ % 28demon \ % 29</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion\_\%28demon\%29</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114872</id>
	<title>Anonymous isn;t really a group</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265997540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's more of an activity.  Possibly a culture.  It certainly doesn't have anyone who speaks for the group as a whole.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's more of an activity .
Possibly a culture .
It certainly does n't have anyone who speaks for the group as a whole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's more of an activity.
Possibly a culture.
It certainly doesn't have anyone who speaks for the group as a whole.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115724</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266000960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How isn't this a form of terrorism?</p></div><p>*ahem*</p><p><div class="quote"><p>terror is defined as a state of intense fear</p></div><p>My work here is done.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is n't this a form of terrorism ?
* ahem * terror is defined as a state of intense fearMy work here is done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How isn't this a form of terrorism?
*ahem*terror is defined as a state of intense fearMy work here is done.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115620</id>
	<title>Re:Anonymous Users vs Anonymous Government</title>
	<author>silverbax</author>
	<datestamp>1266000540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's an interesting take, when I read the section about how the group flooded the emails of politicians and DDoS'd their websites, my first thought was of politicians who don't even know they have a website and don't know how to use email. So basically, an anonymous, faceless group sending massive digital attacks against email boxes that never get checked and websites nobody reads.</p><p>It brings into full discussion the group's claim that attacks are more effective than petitions...are they actually more effective? It's an old argument about terrorism, where the organization under attack is forced to do nothing because reacting simply brings more attacks. While I agree that petitions rarely bring change (the Turing case in England being an instance where a petition actually worked), how 'effective' is an all-out digital attack at forcing governments to change policy?</p><p>I will say the only effect thus far seems to be creating discussion of the issue (of which I was previously ignorant), but if Slashdot is any indication, people will discuss the idea over an 'Anonymous' spokesperson far more than the merits of their methods or their cause.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's an interesting take , when I read the section about how the group flooded the emails of politicians and DDoS 'd their websites , my first thought was of politicians who do n't even know they have a website and do n't know how to use email .
So basically , an anonymous , faceless group sending massive digital attacks against email boxes that never get checked and websites nobody reads.It brings into full discussion the group 's claim that attacks are more effective than petitions...are they actually more effective ?
It 's an old argument about terrorism , where the organization under attack is forced to do nothing because reacting simply brings more attacks .
While I agree that petitions rarely bring change ( the Turing case in England being an instance where a petition actually worked ) , how 'effective ' is an all-out digital attack at forcing governments to change policy ? I will say the only effect thus far seems to be creating discussion of the issue ( of which I was previously ignorant ) , but if Slashdot is any indication , people will discuss the idea over an 'Anonymous ' spokesperson far more than the merits of their methods or their cause .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's an interesting take, when I read the section about how the group flooded the emails of politicians and DDoS'd their websites, my first thought was of politicians who don't even know they have a website and don't know how to use email.
So basically, an anonymous, faceless group sending massive digital attacks against email boxes that never get checked and websites nobody reads.It brings into full discussion the group's claim that attacks are more effective than petitions...are they actually more effective?
It's an old argument about terrorism, where the organization under attack is forced to do nothing because reacting simply brings more attacks.
While I agree that petitions rarely bring change (the Turing case in England being an instance where a petition actually worked), how 'effective' is an all-out digital attack at forcing governments to change policy?I will say the only effect thus far seems to be creating discussion of the issue (of which I was previously ignorant), but if Slashdot is any indication, people will discuss the idea over an 'Anonymous' spokesperson far more than the merits of their methods or their cause.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115064</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115402</id>
	<title>Be glad it's only DDoS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Around sixty years ago some rather clever, industrious American physicists, engineers and other scientists invented, designed, tested and produced an ingenious device that can solve troublesome problems like Australia for ever. Allowing them to collect rust underground unused would be a great insult to their dedicated service to their country.</p><p>And honestly, with all of the crap Australians allow their government to get away with (e.g., 'cyberbullying panic button', ISP-level filtering, refusing classification to L4D2 while allowing a game with an airport massacre scene untouched, and so on) and the potential for it to corrupt the rest of the world, they've had it coming for far, far too long.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Around sixty years ago some rather clever , industrious American physicists , engineers and other scientists invented , designed , tested and produced an ingenious device that can solve troublesome problems like Australia for ever .
Allowing them to collect rust underground unused would be a great insult to their dedicated service to their country.And honestly , with all of the crap Australians allow their government to get away with ( e.g. , 'cyberbullying panic button ' , ISP-level filtering , refusing classification to L4D2 while allowing a game with an airport massacre scene untouched , and so on ) and the potential for it to corrupt the rest of the world , they 've had it coming for far , far too long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Around sixty years ago some rather clever, industrious American physicists, engineers and other scientists invented, designed, tested and produced an ingenious device that can solve troublesome problems like Australia for ever.
Allowing them to collect rust underground unused would be a great insult to their dedicated service to their country.And honestly, with all of the crap Australians allow their government to get away with (e.g., 'cyberbullying panic button', ISP-level filtering, refusing classification to L4D2 while allowing a game with an airport massacre scene untouched, and so on) and the potential for it to corrupt the rest of the world, they've had it coming for far, far too long.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115538</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266000240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>while terror is defined as <i>a state of intense fear.</i></p> </div><p>So you get intensely afraid when your computer doesn't work properly?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>while terror is defined as a state of intense fear .
So you get intensely afraid when your computer does n't work properly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>while terror is defined as a state of intense fear.
So you get intensely afraid when your computer doesn't work properly?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115416</id>
	<title>Re:How isn't this a form of terrorism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wrong.</p><p>Firstly, this isn't terrorism according to your own definition, because the recipients do not enter a state of intense fear. In fact, if I write you a letter saying that next year on a certain date I will burn down your house, and the exact method I will use so that there is nothing you can do about it, warning you to stay outside, that is not terrorism either,  because you wouldn't be in a state of intense fear. Neither if I notify you that I will streak past your house covered in dog poo. You would be annoyed and pissed off, but if we broaden 'terrorism' to 'when one or more people cause others to be pissed off' we have gotten quite out of the original scope.</p><p>Conclusion: It is the reaction of the people subject to an attack that define whether it's terrorism.</p><p>It's also debatable whether attacking \_and not saying who you are to someone who could destroy you at will\_ is more cowardly than \_saying who you are but being in a situation where there is nothing the target can do to reach you\_. If it's not, the US would be enormous cowards for using flying drones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wrong.Firstly , this is n't terrorism according to your own definition , because the recipients do not enter a state of intense fear .
In fact , if I write you a letter saying that next year on a certain date I will burn down your house , and the exact method I will use so that there is nothing you can do about it , warning you to stay outside , that is not terrorism either , because you would n't be in a state of intense fear .
Neither if I notify you that I will streak past your house covered in dog poo .
You would be annoyed and pissed off , but if we broaden 'terrorism ' to 'when one or more people cause others to be pissed off ' we have gotten quite out of the original scope.Conclusion : It is the reaction of the people subject to an attack that define whether it 's terrorism.It 's also debatable whether attacking \ _and not saying who you are to someone who could destroy you at will \ _ is more cowardly than \ _saying who you are but being in a situation where there is nothing the target can do to reach you \ _ .
If it 's not , the US would be enormous cowards for using flying drones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wrong.Firstly, this isn't terrorism according to your own definition, because the recipients do not enter a state of intense fear.
In fact, if I write you a letter saying that next year on a certain date I will burn down your house, and the exact method I will use so that there is nothing you can do about it, warning you to stay outside, that is not terrorism either,  because you wouldn't be in a state of intense fear.
Neither if I notify you that I will streak past your house covered in dog poo.
You would be annoyed and pissed off, but if we broaden 'terrorism' to 'when one or more people cause others to be pissed off' we have gotten quite out of the original scope.Conclusion: It is the reaction of the people subject to an attack that define whether it's terrorism.It's also debatable whether attacking \_and not saying who you are to someone who could destroy you at will\_ is more cowardly than \_saying who you are but being in a situation where there is nothing the target can do to reach you\_.
If it's not, the US would be enormous cowards for using flying drones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116294</id>
	<title>Anonymous = Al Qaeda</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266003060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now before everyone mods this to hell (I'm sure everyone will anyways, so I'll just post as AC to be safe), I'm not saying that Anonymous are terrorists or affliated with Al Qaeda.  But I've learned from<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. that it's better to post a misleading title to get people to pay attention<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Seriously, what the two organizations have in common is that they have no 'actual' leadership, as in leadership that gives direction that is followed by 'subordinates'.<br>Yeah sure, Al Qaeda has Bin Laden, but his only real capability at the moment is to stay alive (which, frankly, is enough).  Did he plan the shoe bomber attack?  No, all he does mostly is state ideology.  Same thing with Anonymous.</p><p>Then because of the power of the internet, those ideas find like-minded individuals, who then on their own, decide to take action based on that ideology, and because of the amount of information available on the internet, are actually able to take action with nearly no support structure or assistance.</p><p>It's really amazing really, from a group dynamics point of view.  I'm pretty sure both are unprecedented in the level of decentralization they now employ, and the level of impact a single 'agent' can have globally.  Even classic insurgencies had local 'cells' that were connected to each other, and those cells generally could only have a local impact.</p><p>It also makes that type of organization pretty much impossible to 'kill'.  And so far that seems to be true for both AQ and Anonymous.</p><p>Can anyone think of a historical (as in pre-internet<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) ) example of something similar?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now before everyone mods this to hell ( I 'm sure everyone will anyways , so I 'll just post as AC to be safe ) , I 'm not saying that Anonymous are terrorists or affliated with Al Qaeda .
But I 've learned from / .
that it 's better to post a misleading title to get people to pay attention : ) Seriously , what the two organizations have in common is that they have no 'actual ' leadership , as in leadership that gives direction that is followed by 'subordinates'.Yeah sure , Al Qaeda has Bin Laden , but his only real capability at the moment is to stay alive ( which , frankly , is enough ) .
Did he plan the shoe bomber attack ?
No , all he does mostly is state ideology .
Same thing with Anonymous.Then because of the power of the internet , those ideas find like-minded individuals , who then on their own , decide to take action based on that ideology , and because of the amount of information available on the internet , are actually able to take action with nearly no support structure or assistance.It 's really amazing really , from a group dynamics point of view .
I 'm pretty sure both are unprecedented in the level of decentralization they now employ , and the level of impact a single 'agent ' can have globally .
Even classic insurgencies had local 'cells ' that were connected to each other , and those cells generally could only have a local impact.It also makes that type of organization pretty much impossible to 'kill' .
And so far that seems to be true for both AQ and Anonymous.Can anyone think of a historical ( as in pre-internet : ) ) example of something similar ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now before everyone mods this to hell (I'm sure everyone will anyways, so I'll just post as AC to be safe), I'm not saying that Anonymous are terrorists or affliated with Al Qaeda.
But I've learned from /.
that it's better to post a misleading title to get people to pay attention :)Seriously, what the two organizations have in common is that they have no 'actual' leadership, as in leadership that gives direction that is followed by 'subordinates'.Yeah sure, Al Qaeda has Bin Laden, but his only real capability at the moment is to stay alive (which, frankly, is enough).
Did he plan the shoe bomber attack?
No, all he does mostly is state ideology.
Same thing with Anonymous.Then because of the power of the internet, those ideas find like-minded individuals, who then on their own, decide to take action based on that ideology, and because of the amount of information available on the internet, are actually able to take action with nearly no support structure or assistance.It's really amazing really, from a group dynamics point of view.
I'm pretty sure both are unprecedented in the level of decentralization they now employ, and the level of impact a single 'agent' can have globally.
Even classic insurgencies had local 'cells' that were connected to each other, and those cells generally could only have a local impact.It also makes that type of organization pretty much impossible to 'kill'.
And so far that seems to be true for both AQ and Anonymous.Can anyone think of a historical (as in pre-internet :) ) example of something similar?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115440</id>
	<title>Re:Impossible!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Except "Anonymous" is the bastard hybrid of a bunch of bored 14 year old script kiddies, an unholy horde of angry-at-the-world genuinely decent at coding 20 somethings, and a frightning legion of bored in-it-for-the-lulz near or middle aged men...</i> all united by the fact that none of them have gotten laid recently.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except " Anonymous " is the bastard hybrid of a bunch of bored 14 year old script kiddies , an unholy horde of angry-at-the-world genuinely decent at coding 20 somethings , and a frightning legion of bored in-it-for-the-lulz near or middle aged men... all united by the fact that none of them have gotten laid recently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except "Anonymous" is the bastard hybrid of a bunch of bored 14 year old script kiddies, an unholy horde of angry-at-the-world genuinely decent at coding 20 somethings, and a frightning legion of bored in-it-for-the-lulz near or middle aged men... all united by the fact that none of them have gotten laid recently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115276</id>
	<title>I'd expect more from Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd expect that Slashdot moderators would be savvy enough on the internet to know enough and know enough about 'anonymous' to post a news item that's not an unknowing parody of mainstream news sites. When Fox news gets the internet completely wrong, that's funny... but Slashdot? C'mon Kdawson.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd expect that Slashdot moderators would be savvy enough on the internet to know enough and know enough about 'anonymous ' to post a news item that 's not an unknowing parody of mainstream news sites .
When Fox news gets the internet completely wrong , that 's funny... but Slashdot ?
C'mon Kdawson .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd expect that Slashdot moderators would be savvy enough on the internet to know enough and know enough about 'anonymous' to post a news item that's not an unknowing parody of mainstream news sites.
When Fox news gets the internet completely wrong, that's funny... but Slashdot?
C'mon Kdawson.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31125274</id>
	<title>Re:Anonymous isn;t really a group</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266052080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Psst.<br>We are Legion.<br>We are bored AIs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Psst.We are Legion.We are bored AIs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Psst.We are Legion.We are bored AIs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31120794</id>
	<title>Re:Inconsistency.</title>
	<author>icebraining</author>
	<datestamp>1265974320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Anonymous is a group, in the sense that a flock of birds is a group. How do you know they're a group? Because they're traveling in the same direction. At any given moment, more birds could join, leave, peel off in another direction entirely.</p></div></blockquote><p>--Landers, Chris, Baltimore City Paper, April 2, 2008.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anonymous is a group , in the sense that a flock of birds is a group .
How do you know they 're a group ?
Because they 're traveling in the same direction .
At any given moment , more birds could join , leave , peel off in another direction entirely.--Landers , Chris , Baltimore City Paper , April 2 , 2008 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anonymous is a group, in the sense that a flock of birds is a group.
How do you know they're a group?
Because they're traveling in the same direction.
At any given moment, more birds could join, leave, peel off in another direction entirely.--Landers, Chris, Baltimore City Paper, April 2, 2008.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115192</id>
	<title>Re:Impossible!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265998800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I declare that the article is nonesense, and that I have never DDOSed the Australian government.
-Anonymous C.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I declare that the article is nonesense , and that I have never DDOSed the Australian government .
-Anonymous C .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I declare that the article is nonesense, and that I have never DDOSed the Australian government.
-Anonymous C.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114894</id>
	<title>Anonymous to Australian Government:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265997600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pool's Closed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pool 's Closed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pool's Closed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115180
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31117020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31124196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31127026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31145714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31119180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31121332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31119584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31121004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31125274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31118306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31120382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31141450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31121214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31120794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31117134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31117034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31130794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31123100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31122934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31143330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_1428201_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31118228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115718
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31117034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116514
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114742
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115402
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115322
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114802
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115464
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115114
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31123100
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116102
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31125274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31130794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31119584
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115064
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31124196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31119180
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126342
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31141450
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115146
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115628
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115912
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31121214
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31143330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114924
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115504
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31120794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31117134
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31121004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31122934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31121332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115538
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31120382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115284
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115978
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115394
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115446
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31145714
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31114896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115200
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31118306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31117020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115718
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31118228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115350
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31116360
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_1428201.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31115214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31127026
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_1428201.31126556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
