<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_28_1713210</id>
	<title>Hackers Target Tsunami Search Results</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1267381680000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>xsee writes <i>"Only hours after the earthquake and resulting tsunami from Chile, hackers began manipulating search results to <a href="http://www.sophos.com/blogs/chetw/g/2010/02/27/tsunami-blackhat-seo-attack/">direct people seeking information on the event to infected webpages</a>. Exercise caution as to where you get information on this tragedy. Chester Wisniewski describes what happened after he saw a suspicious site listed second on a Google search: 'It appears to be a normal website with information and videos about different Asian tsunamis over the past few years. It is difficult to tell whether this particular page was SEO-optimized, or was an innocent victim of a malicious script. SophosLabs got back to me that this page contains some obfuscated malicious JavaScript that we detect as MAL/ObfJS-R. This script was appended after the normal code on the page.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>xsee writes " Only hours after the earthquake and resulting tsunami from Chile , hackers began manipulating search results to direct people seeking information on the event to infected webpages .
Exercise caution as to where you get information on this tragedy .
Chester Wisniewski describes what happened after he saw a suspicious site listed second on a Google search : 'It appears to be a normal website with information and videos about different Asian tsunamis over the past few years .
It is difficult to tell whether this particular page was SEO-optimized , or was an innocent victim of a malicious script .
SophosLabs got back to me that this page contains some obfuscated malicious JavaScript that we detect as MAL/ObfJS-R. This script was appended after the normal code on the page .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>xsee writes "Only hours after the earthquake and resulting tsunami from Chile, hackers began manipulating search results to direct people seeking information on the event to infected webpages.
Exercise caution as to where you get information on this tragedy.
Chester Wisniewski describes what happened after he saw a suspicious site listed second on a Google search: 'It appears to be a normal website with information and videos about different Asian tsunamis over the past few years.
It is difficult to tell whether this particular page was SEO-optimized, or was an innocent victim of a malicious script.
SophosLabs got back to me that this page contains some obfuscated malicious JavaScript that we detect as MAL/ObfJS-R. This script was appended after the normal code on the page.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31312430</id>
	<title>Re:Protection?</title>
	<author>phillipsjk256</author>
	<datestamp>1267384800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Disable Client-side scripting like Javascript. Don't install Flash and Silverlight plug-ins. If a website does not work, they are probably not worth the time of day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Disable Client-side scripting like Javascript .
Do n't install Flash and Silverlight plug-ins .
If a website does not work , they are probably not worth the time of day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Disable Client-side scripting like Javascript.
Don't install Flash and Silverlight plug-ins.
If a website does not work, they are probably not worth the time of day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308306</id>
	<title>Not Hackers... Crackers!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267347660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the knowledge is still be using to do bad things, the individual one is a Cracker, not a Hacker.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the knowledge is still be using to do bad things , the individual one is a Cracker , not a Hacker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the knowledge is still be using to do bad things, the individual one is a Cracker, not a Hacker.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307596</id>
	<title>Sick?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267385460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not only do I think this is a little sick on the part of the blackhats, but it does pose some other concerns.<br> <br>

Firstly, are the media going to pick up on this and if they do, will they spin it as an opportunity to bad-mouth the Web and its communities, as well as encourage talk of "tougher rules" and the like.<br> <br>

Since this is a JS vulnerability, I'd certainly like to see more discussion and thought around how seriously we take JS integration on the web and how we approach it as a core target for evil-doers to exploit. Could more be done?<br> <br>

Lastly, how are the web search engines going to react? Could more things like this call for censorship of Google, Yahoo etc; or at least more claims for 'responsibility of the search engines'?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only do I think this is a little sick on the part of the blackhats , but it does pose some other concerns .
Firstly , are the media going to pick up on this and if they do , will they spin it as an opportunity to bad-mouth the Web and its communities , as well as encourage talk of " tougher rules " and the like .
Since this is a JS vulnerability , I 'd certainly like to see more discussion and thought around how seriously we take JS integration on the web and how we approach it as a core target for evil-doers to exploit .
Could more be done ?
Lastly , how are the web search engines going to react ?
Could more things like this call for censorship of Google , Yahoo etc ; or at least more claims for 'responsibility of the search engines ' ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only do I think this is a little sick on the part of the blackhats, but it does pose some other concerns.
Firstly, are the media going to pick up on this and if they do, will they spin it as an opportunity to bad-mouth the Web and its communities, as well as encourage talk of "tougher rules" and the like.
Since this is a JS vulnerability, I'd certainly like to see more discussion and thought around how seriously we take JS integration on the web and how we approach it as a core target for evil-doers to exploit.
Could more be done?
Lastly, how are the web search engines going to react?
Could more things like this call for censorship of Google, Yahoo etc; or at least more claims for 'responsibility of the search engines'?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31309416</id>
	<title>Re:Protection?</title>
	<author>Spyware23</author>
	<datestamp>1267356420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Allow javascript -only- on a whitelist basis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Allow javascript -only- on a whitelist basis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Allow javascript -only- on a whitelist basis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307932</id>
	<title>Re:Protection?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267388040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Easy: Do not allow your computer to run software that you don't have a good reason to trust.  It's that simple.  It applies to both native executables and "sandboxed" (if you're lucky) javascript and so on.</p><p>EVERY web site should be treated as untrusted unless you have a reason to trust it.  The default should be untrusted, not trusted.  Unless you trust it, don't allow it to run any software on your computer.  It's *your* computer, not *their* computer.  You get the ultimate say in what it does, not some random 3rd party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Easy : Do not allow your computer to run software that you do n't have a good reason to trust .
It 's that simple .
It applies to both native executables and " sandboxed " ( if you 're lucky ) javascript and so on.EVERY web site should be treated as untrusted unless you have a reason to trust it .
The default should be untrusted , not trusted .
Unless you trust it , do n't allow it to run any software on your computer .
It 's * your * computer , not * their * computer .
You get the ultimate say in what it does , not some random 3rd party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Easy: Do not allow your computer to run software that you don't have a good reason to trust.
It's that simple.
It applies to both native executables and "sandboxed" (if you're lucky) javascript and so on.EVERY web site should be treated as untrusted unless you have a reason to trust it.
The default should be untrusted, not trusted.
Unless you trust it, don't allow it to run any software on your computer.
It's *your* computer, not *their* computer.
You get the ultimate say in what it does, not some random 3rd party.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31309460</id>
	<title>Re:Wake up!!!</title>
	<author>Kooty-Sentinel</author>
	<datestamp>1267356840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately in today's world, 'cracker' just doesn't have the same ring as 'hacker' is. I work for a it security consulting firm - even in our marketing materials we knowingly use the term 'hacker' to describe the bad guys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately in today 's world , 'cracker ' just does n't have the same ring as 'hacker ' is .
I work for a it security consulting firm - even in our marketing materials we knowingly use the term 'hacker ' to describe the bad guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately in today's world, 'cracker' just doesn't have the same ring as 'hacker' is.
I work for a it security consulting firm - even in our marketing materials we knowingly use the term 'hacker' to describe the bad guys.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307964</id>
	<title>Re:Sick?</title>
	<author>Vellmont</author>
	<datestamp>1267388340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i><br>Firstly, are the media going to pick up on this<br></i><br>I doubt it.  Your computer being infected with crap isn't particularly scary..  probably because it happens so often that most people are already familiar with how un-scary (but obviously annoying) it really is.  The media picks subjects that are NOT common.  Man bites dog, not dog bites man.  They'll continue on spreading fear about uncommon events on the internet like sexual predators and stalkers.  People fear things they don't know about.<br><i><br>Since this is a JS vulnerability<br></i><br>The "javascript vulnerability" just redirects you to a known malware site.  Going to a website isn't in itself much of a threat.</p><p>The real vulnerabilities (the ones that can infect your computer) exist in largely Adobe Flash, Microsoft Internet Explorer, somewhat in Adobe PDF Reader, and people just being stupid and running an executable because "the computer" told them to.</p><p>The last item is probably the hardest one to fix, and likely can't be fixed with technology  (the authoritarians of the world like Kaspersky want to try to solve this through idiotic internet licensing schemes).  The other three most certainly are technology problems, and can be fixed with technology.  Adobe and Microsoft aren't too keen on actually fixing the problems however.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firstly , are the media going to pick up on thisI doubt it .
Your computer being infected with crap is n't particularly scary.. probably because it happens so often that most people are already familiar with how un-scary ( but obviously annoying ) it really is .
The media picks subjects that are NOT common .
Man bites dog , not dog bites man .
They 'll continue on spreading fear about uncommon events on the internet like sexual predators and stalkers .
People fear things they do n't know about.Since this is a JS vulnerabilityThe " javascript vulnerability " just redirects you to a known malware site .
Going to a website is n't in itself much of a threat.The real vulnerabilities ( the ones that can infect your computer ) exist in largely Adobe Flash , Microsoft Internet Explorer , somewhat in Adobe PDF Reader , and people just being stupid and running an executable because " the computer " told them to.The last item is probably the hardest one to fix , and likely ca n't be fixed with technology ( the authoritarians of the world like Kaspersky want to try to solve this through idiotic internet licensing schemes ) .
The other three most certainly are technology problems , and can be fixed with technology .
Adobe and Microsoft are n't too keen on actually fixing the problems however .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firstly, are the media going to pick up on thisI doubt it.
Your computer being infected with crap isn't particularly scary..  probably because it happens so often that most people are already familiar with how un-scary (but obviously annoying) it really is.
The media picks subjects that are NOT common.
Man bites dog, not dog bites man.
They'll continue on spreading fear about uncommon events on the internet like sexual predators and stalkers.
People fear things they don't know about.Since this is a JS vulnerabilityThe "javascript vulnerability" just redirects you to a known malware site.
Going to a website isn't in itself much of a threat.The real vulnerabilities (the ones that can infect your computer) exist in largely Adobe Flash, Microsoft Internet Explorer, somewhat in Adobe PDF Reader, and people just being stupid and running an executable because "the computer" told them to.The last item is probably the hardest one to fix, and likely can't be fixed with technology  (the authoritarians of the world like Kaspersky want to try to solve this through idiotic internet licensing schemes).
The other three most certainly are technology problems, and can be fixed with technology.
Adobe and Microsoft aren't too keen on actually fixing the problems however.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307600</id>
	<title>Disgusting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267385520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>When criminal greed crosses the line to utter malice, it's a sign that someone needs to encounter some righteous justice. Some people just deserve a beating.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When criminal greed crosses the line to utter malice , it 's a sign that someone needs to encounter some righteous justice .
Some people just deserve a beating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When criminal greed crosses the line to utter malice, it's a sign that someone needs to encounter some righteous justice.
Some people just deserve a beating.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308478</id>
	<title>Re:Disgusting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267348980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, you don't want to beat them up because they've upset you? It's because they "deserve" it.</p><p>Right. If you want some street justice then get it yourself, tough guy.</p><p>I'll see you in the news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , you do n't want to beat them up because they 've upset you ?
It 's because they " deserve " it.Right .
If you want some street justice then get it yourself , tough guy.I 'll see you in the news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, you don't want to beat them up because they've upset you?
It's because they "deserve" it.Right.
If you want some street justice then get it yourself, tough guy.I'll see you in the news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307580</id>
	<title>first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267385400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>first first!</htmltext>
<tokenext>first first !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>first first!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307940</id>
	<title>Re:Sick?</title>
	<author>geekmux</author>
	<datestamp>1267388100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Not only do I think this is a little sick on the part of the blackhats, but it does pose some other concerns.</p></div><p>No real surprise there.  Morality is waaaay down the Blackhat list, well below "money" and "power".</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Firstly, are the media going to pick up on this and if they do, will they spin it as an opportunity to bad-mouth the Web and its communities, as well as encourage talk of "tougher rules" and the like.</p></div><p>Yes, and it's rather unfortunate that the media has about as much accuracy on the subject as the National Enquirer does reporting fact.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Since this is a JS vulnerability, I'd certainly like to see more discussion and thought around how seriously we take JS integration on the web and how we approach it as a core target for evil-doers to exploit. Could more be done?</p></div><p>Never gonna happen.  Java/JRE/JS is the holy grail of environments when it comes to cross-OS integration, and it's not like other options (flash) are devoid of their vulns.  Besides, it's always a risk/reward for companies, and a company will generally never take Security over Revenue.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Lastly, how are the web search engines going to react? Could more things like this call for censorship of Google, Yahoo etc; or at least more claims for 'responsibility of the search engines'?</p></div><p>What you're asking from the search engines would pretty much be the death of them.  I'd much rather have products like AVG warn me in search engine results, or rely on better browser protection rather than censor my results.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only do I think this is a little sick on the part of the blackhats , but it does pose some other concerns.No real surprise there .
Morality is waaaay down the Blackhat list , well below " money " and " power " .Firstly , are the media going to pick up on this and if they do , will they spin it as an opportunity to bad-mouth the Web and its communities , as well as encourage talk of " tougher rules " and the like.Yes , and it 's rather unfortunate that the media has about as much accuracy on the subject as the National Enquirer does reporting fact.Since this is a JS vulnerability , I 'd certainly like to see more discussion and thought around how seriously we take JS integration on the web and how we approach it as a core target for evil-doers to exploit .
Could more be done ? Never gon na happen .
Java/JRE/JS is the holy grail of environments when it comes to cross-OS integration , and it 's not like other options ( flash ) are devoid of their vulns .
Besides , it 's always a risk/reward for companies , and a company will generally never take Security over Revenue.Lastly , how are the web search engines going to react ?
Could more things like this call for censorship of Google , Yahoo etc ; or at least more claims for 'responsibility of the search engines ' ? What you 're asking from the search engines would pretty much be the death of them .
I 'd much rather have products like AVG warn me in search engine results , or rely on better browser protection rather than censor my results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only do I think this is a little sick on the part of the blackhats, but it does pose some other concerns.No real surprise there.
Morality is waaaay down the Blackhat list, well below "money" and "power".Firstly, are the media going to pick up on this and if they do, will they spin it as an opportunity to bad-mouth the Web and its communities, as well as encourage talk of "tougher rules" and the like.Yes, and it's rather unfortunate that the media has about as much accuracy on the subject as the National Enquirer does reporting fact.Since this is a JS vulnerability, I'd certainly like to see more discussion and thought around how seriously we take JS integration on the web and how we approach it as a core target for evil-doers to exploit.
Could more be done?Never gonna happen.
Java/JRE/JS is the holy grail of environments when it comes to cross-OS integration, and it's not like other options (flash) are devoid of their vulns.
Besides, it's always a risk/reward for companies, and a company will generally never take Security over Revenue.Lastly, how are the web search engines going to react?
Could more things like this call for censorship of Google, Yahoo etc; or at least more claims for 'responsibility of the search engines'?What you're asking from the search engines would pretty much be the death of them.
I'd much rather have products like AVG warn me in search engine results, or rely on better browser protection rather than censor my results.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308980</id>
	<title>Re:Sick?</title>
	<author>Darkman, Walkin Dude</author>
	<datestamp>1267352820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Not only do I think this is a little sick on the part of the blackhats</p></div><p>A little sick? These swine are long overdue a greeting from a gnarled set of knuckles, methinks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only do I think this is a little sick on the part of the blackhatsA little sick ?
These swine are long overdue a greeting from a gnarled set of knuckles , methinks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only do I think this is a little sick on the part of the blackhatsA little sick?
These swine are long overdue a greeting from a gnarled set of knuckles, methinks.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31309992</id>
	<title>Re:Wake up!!!</title>
	<author>jgrahn</author>
	<datestamp>1267360560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., right? Can we please STOP calling these FUCKTARDS hackers!!!</p></div></blockquote><p>AOL.
The unwashed masses can call them "hackers" all they want, but the word shouldn't have that meaning here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is /. , right ?
Can we please STOP calling these FUCKTARDS hackers ! ! ! AOL .
The unwashed masses can call them " hackers " all they want , but the word should n't have that meaning here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is /., right?
Can we please STOP calling these FUCKTARDS hackers!!!AOL.
The unwashed masses can call them "hackers" all they want, but the word shouldn't have that meaning here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307988</id>
	<title>Re:Protection?</title>
	<author>EMG at MU</author>
	<datestamp>1267388520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The NoScript plug-in for Firefox.
<br>
<br>
Or run your browser in a VM and revert to a clean image each time your done browsing.
<br>
<br>
Or disable javascript in Opera, but the web will act a lot different.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The NoScript plug-in for Firefox .
Or run your browser in a VM and revert to a clean image each time your done browsing .
Or disable javascript in Opera , but the web will act a lot different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The NoScript plug-in for Firefox.
Or run your browser in a VM and revert to a clean image each time your done browsing.
Or disable javascript in Opera, but the web will act a lot different.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31318632</id>
	<title>Search engines need malware detection</title>
	<author>butlerm</author>
	<datestamp>1267468200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Incidents like this are a good reason for search engine operators like Google to add malware detection to their systems, refuse to index such pages, and actively blacklist the hosts (by dropping them entirely from the index or from the search results) until the problem is fixed.</p><p>It is probably also a good idea to penalize pages with clearly dodgy (if not malicious) javascript in terms of page rank as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Incidents like this are a good reason for search engine operators like Google to add malware detection to their systems , refuse to index such pages , and actively blacklist the hosts ( by dropping them entirely from the index or from the search results ) until the problem is fixed.It is probably also a good idea to penalize pages with clearly dodgy ( if not malicious ) javascript in terms of page rank as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Incidents like this are a good reason for search engine operators like Google to add malware detection to their systems, refuse to index such pages, and actively blacklist the hosts (by dropping them entirely from the index or from the search results) until the problem is fixed.It is probably also a good idea to penalize pages with clearly dodgy (if not malicious) javascript in terms of page rank as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307816</id>
	<title>If there really is a hell...</title>
	<author>gyrogeerloose</author>
	<datestamp>1267387020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...Satan is readying a room for these guys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...Satan is readying a room for these guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Satan is readying a room for these guys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308942</id>
	<title>Watch Hawaii Tsunami Video</title>
	<author>aguntukbd</author>
	<datestamp>1267352580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Watch Hawaii Tsunami Video: The one of the effects of Chile Earthquake 2010

The aftermath of Chile earthquake is worsening. Today morning a Japanese island was hit. The one of the effects of the strong earthquake that recently hit Chile is the tsunami that has hit Hawaii.

<strong> <a href="http://thetechjournal.com/internet/watch-hawaii-tsunami-video-the-one-of-the-effects-of-chile-earthquake-2010.xhtml" title="thetechjournal.com" rel="nofollow">Watch Here</a> [thetechjournal.com] </strong></htmltext>
<tokenext>Watch Hawaii Tsunami Video : The one of the effects of Chile Earthquake 2010 The aftermath of Chile earthquake is worsening .
Today morning a Japanese island was hit .
The one of the effects of the strong earthquake that recently hit Chile is the tsunami that has hit Hawaii .
Watch Here [ thetechjournal.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Watch Hawaii Tsunami Video: The one of the effects of Chile Earthquake 2010

The aftermath of Chile earthquake is worsening.
Today morning a Japanese island was hit.
The one of the effects of the strong earthquake that recently hit Chile is the tsunami that has hit Hawaii.
Watch Here [thetechjournal.com] </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31311012</id>
	<title>Re:Sick?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267368780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is a good argument for inhumane punishment for black hats. Their crimes transcend human decency. I suppose a proactive use of apprehended black hats would be to slice up their brains for research into this human look alike species and the rest sent to Purina to be recycled to fertilizer.<br>Can anyone find a complete definition of "human" that applies to black hats, in light of these and other antics?<br>We do pull weeds to preserve the garden, this is no different.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is a good argument for inhumane punishment for black hats .
Their crimes transcend human decency .
I suppose a proactive use of apprehended black hats would be to slice up their brains for research into this human look alike species and the rest sent to Purina to be recycled to fertilizer.Can anyone find a complete definition of " human " that applies to black hats , in light of these and other antics ? We do pull weeds to preserve the garden , this is no different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is a good argument for inhumane punishment for black hats.
Their crimes transcend human decency.
I suppose a proactive use of apprehended black hats would be to slice up their brains for research into this human look alike species and the rest sent to Purina to be recycled to fertilizer.Can anyone find a complete definition of "human" that applies to black hats, in light of these and other antics?We do pull weeds to preserve the garden, this is no different.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31311198</id>
	<title>Lost in the next tsunami?</title>
	<author>OrangeTide</author>
	<datestamp>1267370160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What if the people who did this mysteriously disappears the next time there is a tsunami, even if they are far inland? Would anyone actually bother looking for them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What if the people who did this mysteriously disappears the next time there is a tsunami , even if they are far inland ?
Would anyone actually bother looking for them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if the people who did this mysteriously disappears the next time there is a tsunami, even if they are far inland?
Would anyone actually bother looking for them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308568</id>
	<title>Re:Disgusting</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1267349700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When criminal greed crosses the line to utter malice, it's a sign that someone needs to encounter some righteous justice. Some people just deserve a beating.</p></div><p>Of course, we never make mistakes in our conclusions over who the guilty party is. Advocating the use of permanent physical damage to a person's body as an acceptable judiciary solution renders impossible the reversal of the damage should new evidence ever become available, or the process itself fail in some fashion. It is for this reason that we prefer the use of federal prison, with its own set of more socially acceptable punishments for which the state is not responsible. Hint: Soap.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When criminal greed crosses the line to utter malice , it 's a sign that someone needs to encounter some righteous justice .
Some people just deserve a beating.Of course , we never make mistakes in our conclusions over who the guilty party is .
Advocating the use of permanent physical damage to a person 's body as an acceptable judiciary solution renders impossible the reversal of the damage should new evidence ever become available , or the process itself fail in some fashion .
It is for this reason that we prefer the use of federal prison , with its own set of more socially acceptable punishments for which the state is not responsible .
Hint : Soap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When criminal greed crosses the line to utter malice, it's a sign that someone needs to encounter some righteous justice.
Some people just deserve a beating.Of course, we never make mistakes in our conclusions over who the guilty party is.
Advocating the use of permanent physical damage to a person's body as an acceptable judiciary solution renders impossible the reversal of the damage should new evidence ever become available, or the process itself fail in some fashion.
It is for this reason that we prefer the use of federal prison, with its own set of more socially acceptable punishments for which the state is not responsible.
Hint: Soap.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307644</id>
	<title>I love these!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267385820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They all use XSS for page redirection... I just go through and make my list of pages vulnerable to XSS for my own use when I want to toy with someone on a forum<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They all use XSS for page redirection... I just go through and make my list of pages vulnerable to XSS for my own use when I want to toy with someone on a forum : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They all use XSS for page redirection... I just go through and make my list of pages vulnerable to XSS for my own use when I want to toy with someone on a forum :D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307840</id>
	<title>Protection?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267387320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do we protect ourselves from these malicious script websites?<br>(Note:  I'm using the Opera X 10.10 browser.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do we protect ourselves from these malicious script websites ?
( Note : I 'm using the Opera X 10.10 browser .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do we protect ourselves from these malicious script websites?
(Note:  I'm using the Opera X 10.10 browser.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308228</id>
	<title>happens with with the killer whatle story too</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267390200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is happening too with the trainer killed by the whale, I googled and found 2 sites trying to make download a file that virustotal says 4/41 is a worm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is happening too with the trainer killed by the whale , I googled and found 2 sites trying to make download a file that virustotal says 4/41 is a worm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is happening too with the trainer killed by the whale, I googled and found 2 sites trying to make download a file that virustotal says 4/41 is a worm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308056</id>
	<title>Same thing happend with Joannie Rochette</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267389120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After Joannie Rochettes short program, I googled it because I missed it.  Literally the first 2 pages or so of results were 90\% dummy sites with malicious payloads.</p><p>This isn't new at all.  EVERY time a popular search pops up, these douchebags try to game the results to get their pages on the first page.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After Joannie Rochettes short program , I googled it because I missed it .
Literally the first 2 pages or so of results were 90 \ % dummy sites with malicious payloads.This is n't new at all .
EVERY time a popular search pops up , these douchebags try to game the results to get their pages on the first page .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After Joannie Rochettes short program, I googled it because I missed it.
Literally the first 2 pages or so of results were 90\% dummy sites with malicious payloads.This isn't new at all.
EVERY time a popular search pops up, these douchebags try to game the results to get their pages on the first page.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307618</id>
	<title>So...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267385640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This happens every time a big news story breaks, especially for natural disasters. We saw it with Haiti as well - it's hardly news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This happens every time a big news story breaks , especially for natural disasters .
We saw it with Haiti as well - it 's hardly news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This happens every time a big news story breaks, especially for natural disasters.
We saw it with Haiti as well - it's hardly news.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307824</id>
	<title>Can someone explain this to me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267387140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How can a browser, via javascript on top of that, infect a computer with a virus/trojan/whatever? And can Javascript even write files to your drive?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How can a browser , via javascript on top of that , infect a computer with a virus/trojan/whatever ?
And can Javascript even write files to your drive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can a browser, via javascript on top of that, infect a computer with a virus/trojan/whatever?
And can Javascript even write files to your drive?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31311116</id>
	<title>allchile.net fighting the spammers</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1267369500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I operate allchile.net, a forum for expats in Chile that has been operating for a little over 4 years. I am located in Temuco, Chile (about 100 miles south of the worst devastation) and just got my internet connection back a few hours to see all the spammers on google trying to force their way in to the position. Now me and all the other established sites in Chile, with real history and connections to know what is going on in Chile are fighting the Google spammers to try and get people in touch with their missing relatives and get news out to the World about the distaster.</p><p>If you have a web site, and want to help us, link to the real sites about Chile. Even Facebook, twitter, and CNN are in a way in our way. They will be all chatting up the topic for a week or two more, then they will be gone. Our sites will still have to fight back up to the top of Google while trying to assist with the reconstruction.</p><p>My sites and my friends sites (all run by people on the ground in the disaster by the way):<br><a href="http://www.allchile.net/" title="allchile.net">http://www.allchile.net/</a> [allchile.net]<br><a href="http://www.allsouthernchile.com/" title="allsouthernchile.com">http://www.allsouthernchile.com/</a> [allsouthernchile.com]<br><a href="http://www.santiagoradio.cl/" title="santiagoradio.cl">http://www.santiagoradio.cl/</a> [santiagoradio.cl]<br><a href="http://www.thepulse.cl/" title="thepulse.cl">http://www.thepulse.cl/</a> [thepulse.cl]<br><a href="http://www.spencerglobal.com/" title="spencerglobal.com">http://www.spencerglobal.com/</a> [spencerglobal.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I operate allchile.net , a forum for expats in Chile that has been operating for a little over 4 years .
I am located in Temuco , Chile ( about 100 miles south of the worst devastation ) and just got my internet connection back a few hours to see all the spammers on google trying to force their way in to the position .
Now me and all the other established sites in Chile , with real history and connections to know what is going on in Chile are fighting the Google spammers to try and get people in touch with their missing relatives and get news out to the World about the distaster.If you have a web site , and want to help us , link to the real sites about Chile .
Even Facebook , twitter , and CNN are in a way in our way .
They will be all chatting up the topic for a week or two more , then they will be gone .
Our sites will still have to fight back up to the top of Google while trying to assist with the reconstruction.My sites and my friends sites ( all run by people on the ground in the disaster by the way ) : http : //www.allchile.net/ [ allchile.net ] http : //www.allsouthernchile.com/ [ allsouthernchile.com ] http : //www.santiagoradio.cl/ [ santiagoradio.cl ] http : //www.thepulse.cl/ [ thepulse.cl ] http : //www.spencerglobal.com/ [ spencerglobal.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I operate allchile.net, a forum for expats in Chile that has been operating for a little over 4 years.
I am located in Temuco, Chile (about 100 miles south of the worst devastation) and just got my internet connection back a few hours to see all the spammers on google trying to force their way in to the position.
Now me and all the other established sites in Chile, with real history and connections to know what is going on in Chile are fighting the Google spammers to try and get people in touch with their missing relatives and get news out to the World about the distaster.If you have a web site, and want to help us, link to the real sites about Chile.
Even Facebook, twitter, and CNN are in a way in our way.
They will be all chatting up the topic for a week or two more, then they will be gone.
Our sites will still have to fight back up to the top of Google while trying to assist with the reconstruction.My sites and my friends sites (all run by people on the ground in the disaster by the way):http://www.allchile.net/ [allchile.net]http://www.allsouthernchile.com/ [allsouthernchile.com]http://www.santiagoradio.cl/ [santiagoradio.cl]http://www.thepulse.cl/ [thepulse.cl]http://www.spencerglobal.com/ [spencerglobal.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308426</id>
	<title>Re:Disgusting</title>
	<author>Macka</author>
	<datestamp>1267348560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed.  There should be a special kind of hell waiting for these people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
There should be a special kind of hell waiting for these people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
There should be a special kind of hell waiting for these people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307600</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31309450</id>
	<title>meanies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267356720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>gosh darn meanies. to heck with those cunts.  muddy funsters that they are!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>gosh darn meanies .
to heck with those cunts .
muddy funsters that they are !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>gosh darn meanies.
to heck with those cunts.
muddy funsters that they are!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31311194</id>
	<title>I put on my robe and grammar Nazi hat.</title>
	<author>zill</author>
	<datestamp>1267370100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is difficult to tell whether this particular page was SEO-optimized...</p></div><p>Search engine optimization-optimized?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is difficult to tell whether this particular page was SEO-optimized...Search engine optimization-optimized ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is difficult to tell whether this particular page was SEO-optimized...Search engine optimization-optimized?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307858</id>
	<title>Wake up!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267387500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., right? Can we please STOP calling these FUCKTARDS hackers!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is /. , right ?
Can we please STOP calling these FUCKTARDS hackers ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is /., right?
Can we please STOP calling these FUCKTARDS hackers!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307638</id>
	<title>Color me unsurprised</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267385760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I saw clients hit with this behavior after the Michael Jackson hit the news and with each major story since.  Each time a tragedy hits I tell my girlfriend virus/spyware cleaning calls are about to pick up a bit for me.  Sad but entirely predictable now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw clients hit with this behavior after the Michael Jackson hit the news and with each major story since .
Each time a tragedy hits I tell my girlfriend virus/spyware cleaning calls are about to pick up a bit for me .
Sad but entirely predictable now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw clients hit with this behavior after the Michael Jackson hit the news and with each major story since.
Each time a tragedy hits I tell my girlfriend virus/spyware cleaning calls are about to pick up a bit for me.
Sad but entirely predictable now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31309460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31309416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31311012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31312430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_28_1713210_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31309992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_28_1713210.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308568
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308478
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_28_1713210.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31309992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31309460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_28_1713210.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31312430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31309416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_28_1713210.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31311012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31308980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307940
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_28_1713210.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307618
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_28_1713210.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307638
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_28_1713210.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_28_1713210.31307824
</commentlist>
</conversation>
