<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_20_1347221</id>
	<title>Madoff's Programmers Indicted</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1269096180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>jason8 writes with news that two programmers who worked at Bernie Madoff's investment firm <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE62G52P20100317">have now been indicted</a> on charges of 'conspiracy, falsifying records of a broker-dealer and falsifying records of an investment adviser,' for their role in <a href="http://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/March10/oharajeromeandperezgeorgeindictmentpr.pdf">hiding the firm's activities</a> (PDF) from the SEC and external accountants. Quoting Reuters:
<i>"O'Hara and Perez, employed at the firm from 1990 and 1991, respectively, were primarily responsible for developing and maintaining computer programs in the investment advisory unit at the center of the fraud. Many of the programs were run on an IBM server known as 'House 17,' according to court documents. Prosecutors said the men took hush money to help keep the fraud going and designed codes to make up fake trade blotters and phantom records. US prosecutors said the two men worked under the supervision of Madoff and his top aide, Frank DiPascali, to deceive the US Securities and Exchange Commission and a European accounting firm. DiPascali is cooperating with prosecutors, who said his information led to the arrests of the programmers and the now defunct firm's outside accountant."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>jason8 writes with news that two programmers who worked at Bernie Madoff 's investment firm have now been indicted on charges of 'conspiracy , falsifying records of a broker-dealer and falsifying records of an investment adviser, ' for their role in hiding the firm 's activities ( PDF ) from the SEC and external accountants .
Quoting Reuters : " O'Hara and Perez , employed at the firm from 1990 and 1991 , respectively , were primarily responsible for developing and maintaining computer programs in the investment advisory unit at the center of the fraud .
Many of the programs were run on an IBM server known as 'House 17, ' according to court documents .
Prosecutors said the men took hush money to help keep the fraud going and designed codes to make up fake trade blotters and phantom records .
US prosecutors said the two men worked under the supervision of Madoff and his top aide , Frank DiPascali , to deceive the US Securities and Exchange Commission and a European accounting firm .
DiPascali is cooperating with prosecutors , who said his information led to the arrests of the programmers and the now defunct firm 's outside accountant .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jason8 writes with news that two programmers who worked at Bernie Madoff's investment firm have now been indicted on charges of 'conspiracy, falsifying records of a broker-dealer and falsifying records of an investment adviser,' for their role in hiding the firm's activities (PDF) from the SEC and external accountants.
Quoting Reuters:
"O'Hara and Perez, employed at the firm from 1990 and 1991, respectively, were primarily responsible for developing and maintaining computer programs in the investment advisory unit at the center of the fraud.
Many of the programs were run on an IBM server known as 'House 17,' according to court documents.
Prosecutors said the men took hush money to help keep the fraud going and designed codes to make up fake trade blotters and phantom records.
US prosecutors said the two men worked under the supervision of Madoff and his top aide, Frank DiPascali, to deceive the US Securities and Exchange Commission and a European accounting firm.
DiPascali is cooperating with prosecutors, who said his information led to the arrests of the programmers and the now defunct firm's outside accountant.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550580</id>
	<title>Re:Would be interesting...</title>
	<author>karnal</author>
	<datestamp>1269111120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, instead of just being the man who designed the slim jim - in this car analogy, there would be two sets of people:</p><p>1.  Programmers / person who created AND GAVE the slim jim to #2<br>2.  DiPascali / person who broke into the car.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , instead of just being the man who designed the slim jim - in this car analogy , there would be two sets of people : 1 .
Programmers / person who created AND GAVE the slim jim to # 22 .
DiPascali / person who broke into the car .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, instead of just being the man who designed the slim jim - in this car analogy, there would be two sets of people:1.
Programmers / person who created AND GAVE the slim jim to #22.
DiPascali / person who broke into the car.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549764</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>tpstigers</author>
	<datestamp>1269103440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Success in our culture is often measured by money.  Unfortunately, money and morals don't usually go together.  So we generally have to make a choice - do I want to be rich, or would I rather be able to teach my kids the difference between right and wrong?  Personally, I think you made the right choice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Success in our culture is often measured by money .
Unfortunately , money and morals do n't usually go together .
So we generally have to make a choice - do I want to be rich , or would I rather be able to teach my kids the difference between right and wrong ?
Personally , I think you made the right choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Success in our culture is often measured by money.
Unfortunately, money and morals don't usually go together.
So we generally have to make a choice - do I want to be rich, or would I rather be able to teach my kids the difference between right and wrong?
Personally, I think you made the right choice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550084</id>
	<title>Re:Insert "scheme" joke here. Or "chroot jail"...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269106920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>chown warden youbitches</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>chown warden youbitches</tokentext>
<sentencetext>chown warden youbitches</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550100</id>
	<title>Re:No details</title>
	<author>Renraku</author>
	<datestamp>1269107040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not all hush money is created equally.  Most people wouldn't even know that it was hush money if they were receiving it.  Most likely, he hired some programmers and told them that they would be paid above what they're worth, in exchange for secrecy and trust.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not all hush money is created equally .
Most people would n't even know that it was hush money if they were receiving it .
Most likely , he hired some programmers and told them that they would be paid above what they 're worth , in exchange for secrecy and trust .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not all hush money is created equally.
Most people wouldn't even know that it was hush money if they were receiving it.
Most likely, he hired some programmers and told them that they would be paid above what they're worth, in exchange for secrecy and trust.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550174</id>
	<title>Re:So what?</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1269107760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are of course correct.  Also, Lehman Bros.  Especially Lehman Bros.  Their failure was the straw that broke the camels back.  And yes, they knew what they were doing.  They were so clever about what they were doing that they came up with ways to hide liability that no one ever thought of before.  String em all up I say.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are of course correct .
Also , Lehman Bros. Especially Lehman Bros. Their failure was the straw that broke the camels back .
And yes , they knew what they were doing .
They were so clever about what they were doing that they came up with ways to hide liability that no one ever thought of before .
String em all up I say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are of course correct.
Also, Lehman Bros.  Especially Lehman Bros.  Their failure was the straw that broke the camels back.
And yes, they knew what they were doing.
They were so clever about what they were doing that they came up with ways to hide liability that no one ever thought of before.
String em all up I say.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549632</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269101820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe if they weren't taking extra "hush money" for doing something they *knew* was illegal, maybe the "following orders" defense would have worked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe if they were n't taking extra " hush money " for doing something they * knew * was illegal , maybe the " following orders " defense would have worked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe if they weren't taking extra "hush money" for doing something they *knew* was illegal, maybe the "following orders" defense would have worked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549556</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269100860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I took the high road.  I've been unemployed for three years since.  I wish I had just done the fucking job and then my kids would have money in the college fund, my wife and I would have some savings, and I wouldn't stress about paying the mortgage each month.  I did contact the authorities, and they couldn't care less about my situation.  (found a huge hole where the exec mgmt had been moving money off the books, and either taking kickbacks, or using it to pay for "business expenses" they would rather not have been made public.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I took the high road .
I 've been unemployed for three years since .
I wish I had just done the fucking job and then my kids would have money in the college fund , my wife and I would have some savings , and I would n't stress about paying the mortgage each month .
I did contact the authorities , and they could n't care less about my situation .
( found a huge hole where the exec mgmt had been moving money off the books , and either taking kickbacks , or using it to pay for " business expenses " they would rather not have been made public .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I took the high road.
I've been unemployed for three years since.
I wish I had just done the fucking job and then my kids would have money in the college fund, my wife and I would have some savings, and I wouldn't stress about paying the mortgage each month.
I did contact the authorities, and they couldn't care less about my situation.
(found a huge hole where the exec mgmt had been moving money off the books, and either taking kickbacks, or using it to pay for "business expenses" they would rather not have been made public.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31552700</id>
	<title>Re:Digital Era Henchmen Among Us</title>
	<author>ikarous</author>
	<datestamp>1269084180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Big Tobacco health data. Big Pharma test data. Big Oil environmental data. Enron accounting or trading data. Retails sales zappers.</p><p>There is no way all this data "tweaking" can be done without involving IT people: DBA's, programmers, techies.</p><p>Right now, at this very moment, some of these Digital Era Henchmen are reading Slashdot on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money. And chances are that some of these people are making snide comments about Microsoft or Darl McBride's ethics. Tsk tsk.</p></div><p>Or maybe you're one of them, and the above comment is just a clever way to direct attention away from yourself. But what if, with this comment, I'm trying to achieve the same thing?</p><p>I... I just don't know anymore.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Big Tobacco health data .
Big Pharma test data .
Big Oil environmental data .
Enron accounting or trading data .
Retails sales zappers.There is no way all this data " tweaking " can be done without involving IT people : DBA 's , programmers , techies.Right now , at this very moment , some of these Digital Era Henchmen are reading Slashdot on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money .
And chances are that some of these people are making snide comments about Microsoft or Darl McBride 's ethics .
Tsk tsk.Or maybe you 're one of them , and the above comment is just a clever way to direct attention away from yourself .
But what if , with this comment , I 'm trying to achieve the same thing ? I... I just do n't know anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Big Tobacco health data.
Big Pharma test data.
Big Oil environmental data.
Enron accounting or trading data.
Retails sales zappers.There is no way all this data "tweaking" can be done without involving IT people: DBA's, programmers, techies.Right now, at this very moment, some of these Digital Era Henchmen are reading Slashdot on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money.
And chances are that some of these people are making snide comments about Microsoft or Darl McBride's ethics.
Tsk tsk.Or maybe you're one of them, and the above comment is just a clever way to direct attention away from yourself.
But what if, with this comment, I'm trying to achieve the same thing?I... I just don't know anymore.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550224</id>
	<title>DiPascali?  He's an Eyetie, right?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269108180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What would you expect from an Eyetie but to split on others to save his own greasy nigger  skin.</p><p>You know, I read a lot. Especially about things that have to do with history. I find that shit fascinating. Here's a fact, I don't know if you know or not, Eyeties were spawned by niggers.</p><p>It's a fact. You see, Eyeties have black blood pumpin' through their hearts. If you don't believe me, you can look it up. Hundreds and hundreds of years ago, you see, the Moors conquered Italy. And Moors are niggers.</p><p>So you see, way back then, Eyeties were like the wops from Southern Switzerland. They all had blonde hair and blue eyes, but, well, then the Moors moved in there, and well, they changed the whole country. They did so much fuckin' with Eyetie women that they changed the whole bloodline forever. That's why blonde hair and blue eyes became black hair and dark skin. You know, it's absolutely amazing to me to think that to this day, hundreds of years later, that Eyetie's still carry that nigger gene.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What would you expect from an Eyetie but to split on others to save his own greasy nigger skin.You know , I read a lot .
Especially about things that have to do with history .
I find that shit fascinating .
Here 's a fact , I do n't know if you know or not , Eyeties were spawned by niggers.It 's a fact .
You see , Eyeties have black blood pumpin ' through their hearts .
If you do n't believe me , you can look it up .
Hundreds and hundreds of years ago , you see , the Moors conquered Italy .
And Moors are niggers.So you see , way back then , Eyeties were like the wops from Southern Switzerland .
They all had blonde hair and blue eyes , but , well , then the Moors moved in there , and well , they changed the whole country .
They did so much fuckin ' with Eyetie women that they changed the whole bloodline forever .
That 's why blonde hair and blue eyes became black hair and dark skin .
You know , it 's absolutely amazing to me to think that to this day , hundreds of years later , that Eyetie 's still carry that nigger gene .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would you expect from an Eyetie but to split on others to save his own greasy nigger  skin.You know, I read a lot.
Especially about things that have to do with history.
I find that shit fascinating.
Here's a fact, I don't know if you know or not, Eyeties were spawned by niggers.It's a fact.
You see, Eyeties have black blood pumpin' through their hearts.
If you don't believe me, you can look it up.
Hundreds and hundreds of years ago, you see, the Moors conquered Italy.
And Moors are niggers.So you see, way back then, Eyeties were like the wops from Southern Switzerland.
They all had blonde hair and blue eyes, but, well, then the Moors moved in there, and well, they changed the whole country.
They did so much fuckin' with Eyetie women that they changed the whole bloodline forever.
That's why blonde hair and blue eyes became black hair and dark skin.
You know, it's absolutely amazing to me to think that to this day, hundreds of years later, that Eyetie's still carry that nigger gene.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31579870</id>
	<title>A crisis of conscience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269283320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They had a "crisis of conscience" which was quieted by a money payoff: proof of criminal intent.</p><p>They're going down, and should.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They had a " crisis of conscience " which was quieted by a money payoff : proof of criminal intent.They 're going down , and should .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They had a "crisis of conscience" which was quieted by a money payoff: proof of criminal intent.They're going down, and should.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550734</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269112080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know it doesn't put food on the table but you did good. Sometimes the satisfaction you get from doing the right thing is all you get for your efforts.</p><p>Let's hope there really is Karma.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know it does n't put food on the table but you did good .
Sometimes the satisfaction you get from doing the right thing is all you get for your efforts.Let 's hope there really is Karma .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know it doesn't put food on the table but you did good.
Sometimes the satisfaction you get from doing the right thing is all you get for your efforts.Let's hope there really is Karma.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555316</id>
	<title>Re:No it isn't. The moral is: don't commit fraud.</title>
	<author>Compaqt</author>
	<datestamp>1269109620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But if someone (like Madoff) is making hundreds of millions of dollars, how much do you think the life of 2 nerds is worth?</htmltext>
<tokenext>But if someone ( like Madoff ) is making hundreds of millions of dollars , how much do you think the life of 2 nerds is worth ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But if someone (like Madoff) is making hundreds of millions of dollars, how much do you think the life of 2 nerds is worth?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555416</id>
	<title>Re:About Time!</title>
	<author>Compaqt</author>
	<datestamp>1269110820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is there is no real standardization of "Software Engineer" titles. The result is programmers continuing to pimp themselves out.</p><p>Real engineers have professional associations that won't tolerate browbeating of engineers. And I've never heard of a software architecture that won't go forward without the written signature and permission of an engineer.</p><p>I don't really think the IEEEeee! puts the fear of anything into anyone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is there is no real standardization of " Software Engineer " titles .
The result is programmers continuing to pimp themselves out.Real engineers have professional associations that wo n't tolerate browbeating of engineers .
And I 've never heard of a software architecture that wo n't go forward without the written signature and permission of an engineer.I do n't really think the IEEEeee !
puts the fear of anything into anyone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is there is no real standardization of "Software Engineer" titles.
The result is programmers continuing to pimp themselves out.Real engineers have professional associations that won't tolerate browbeating of engineers.
And I've never heard of a software architecture that won't go forward without the written signature and permission of an engineer.I don't really think the IEEEeee!
puts the fear of anything into anyone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549874</id>
	<title>Re:No details</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269104820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is why we have trials. I'm amazed at the number of people here who hold strong opinions as to the guilt or innocence of those accused of crimes without any knowledge of the evidence or the applicable laws. Its just a reflex: all management is guilty and all technicians are innocent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is why we have trials .
I 'm amazed at the number of people here who hold strong opinions as to the guilt or innocence of those accused of crimes without any knowledge of the evidence or the applicable laws .
Its just a reflex : all management is guilty and all technicians are innocent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is why we have trials.
I'm amazed at the number of people here who hold strong opinions as to the guilt or innocence of those accused of crimes without any knowledge of the evidence or the applicable laws.
Its just a reflex: all management is guilty and all technicians are innocent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550326</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>NotBornYesterday</author>
	<datestamp>1269108840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>as the gun mostly is used for illegal things anyway/quote&gt;
Uh, you're being facetious, right?</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>as the gun mostly is used for illegal things anyway/quote &gt; Uh , you 're being facetious , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as the gun mostly is used for illegal things anyway/quote&gt;
Uh, you're being facetious, right?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550112</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>WCguru42</author>
	<datestamp>1269107160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If a boss tells me to program an option, and that option could be used for illegal things then it's actually my fault?</p></div><p>I think this does become your responsibility if that option can <b>only</b> be used for illegal purposes.  I'm not knowledgeable enough about the financial industry to say whether or not what these guys programmed was obviously illegal and had no legal area of use, but if it only had use for illegal acts then they knowingly aided in Madoff's scheme and should be prosecuted for it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If a boss tells me to program an option , and that option could be used for illegal things then it 's actually my fault ? I think this does become your responsibility if that option can only be used for illegal purposes .
I 'm not knowledgeable enough about the financial industry to say whether or not what these guys programmed was obviously illegal and had no legal area of use , but if it only had use for illegal acts then they knowingly aided in Madoff 's scheme and should be prosecuted for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a boss tells me to program an option, and that option could be used for illegal things then it's actually my fault?I think this does become your responsibility if that option can only be used for illegal purposes.
I'm not knowledgeable enough about the financial industry to say whether or not what these guys programmed was obviously illegal and had no legal area of use, but if it only had use for illegal acts then they knowingly aided in Madoff's scheme and should be prosecuted for it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549642</id>
	<title>Damned if you do</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269101880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damned if you don't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damned if you do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damned if you don't.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549654</id>
	<title>Re:So what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269102000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While ur at it,</p><p>wake me up when Ben Bernanke gets indicted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While ur at it,wake me up when Ben Bernanke gets indicted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While ur at it,wake me up when Ben Bernanke gets indicted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549982</id>
	<title>About Time!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269106020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's about time some simple programmers got held accountable for their deeds.</p><p>I can live with programmers and bad testing, bad code, bad QA, but I can NOT accept EVIL code.</p><p>Just following orders does not cut it. These people knew what they were doing, there is no hiding it.</p><p>Want to be called a "software engineer"? Live by the engineers code of ethics, be judged by the engineers standards, and accept the same punishment. Otherwise, it's just being a simple programmer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's about time some simple programmers got held accountable for their deeds.I can live with programmers and bad testing , bad code , bad QA , but I can NOT accept EVIL code.Just following orders does not cut it .
These people knew what they were doing , there is no hiding it.Want to be called a " software engineer " ?
Live by the engineers code of ethics , be judged by the engineers standards , and accept the same punishment .
Otherwise , it 's just being a simple programmer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's about time some simple programmers got held accountable for their deeds.I can live with programmers and bad testing, bad code, bad QA, but I can NOT accept EVIL code.Just following orders does not cut it.
These people knew what they were doing, there is no hiding it.Want to be called a "software engineer"?
Live by the engineers code of ethics, be judged by the engineers standards, and accept the same punishment.
Otherwise, it's just being a simple programmer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550032</id>
	<title>Re:No details</title>
	<author>morgan\_greywolf</author>
	<datestamp>1269106560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They would <em>have</em> to know what they were doing was fraudulent, since the software they wrote generated false trade records.  A real electronic trade connects to the trade exchange systems, which feeds back a confirmation code that the transaction took place.  Since no actual trade took place, no there was no confirmation code.  The software they wrote simply made it <em>appear</em> that the trade legimitately took place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They would have to know what they were doing was fraudulent , since the software they wrote generated false trade records .
A real electronic trade connects to the trade exchange systems , which feeds back a confirmation code that the transaction took place .
Since no actual trade took place , no there was no confirmation code .
The software they wrote simply made it appear that the trade legimitately took place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They would have to know what they were doing was fraudulent, since the software they wrote generated false trade records.
A real electronic trade connects to the trade exchange systems, which feeds back a confirmation code that the transaction took place.
Since no actual trade took place, no there was no confirmation code.
The software they wrote simply made it appear that the trade legimitately took place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550378</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269109320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"if your boss asks you to break the law, tell them that you won't do it, and if they persist, explain that you are going to contact authorities immediately."</p><p>IMO,  That is the worst advice I have ever heard,  why on earth would you tell someone you were going to turn them in?  What a great way to put yourself and your family in danger.  Wouldn't it be better to just resign and report it anonymously?  \_Telling\_ your boss (or anyone) that your going to turn them in serves no purpose and is just pure stupidity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" if your boss asks you to break the law , tell them that you wo n't do it , and if they persist , explain that you are going to contact authorities immediately .
" IMO , That is the worst advice I have ever heard , why on earth would you tell someone you were going to turn them in ?
What a great way to put yourself and your family in danger .
Would n't it be better to just resign and report it anonymously ?
\ _Telling \ _ your boss ( or anyone ) that your going to turn them in serves no purpose and is just pure stupidity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"if your boss asks you to break the law, tell them that you won't do it, and if they persist, explain that you are going to contact authorities immediately.
"IMO,  That is the worst advice I have ever heard,  why on earth would you tell someone you were going to turn them in?
What a great way to put yourself and your family in danger.
Wouldn't it be better to just resign and report it anonymously?
\_Telling\_ your boss (or anyone) that your going to turn them in serves no purpose and is just pure stupidity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549730</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>DoofusOfDeath</author>
	<datestamp>1269102900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If your boss asks you to break the law, the argument "I was just following orders!" doesn't hold up according to the authorities, especially when your boss decides to "cooperate with them" and throw you under the bus.</p></div></blockquote><p>This is only sometimes true.  If you tortured people for the CIA under orders, the Obama administration says it won't prosecute you.  Although that's not exactly the same, because their argument is that it's okay because the CIA lawyers <i>said</i> it was.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If your boss asks you to break the law , the argument " I was just following orders !
" does n't hold up according to the authorities , especially when your boss decides to " cooperate with them " and throw you under the bus.This is only sometimes true .
If you tortured people for the CIA under orders , the Obama administration says it wo n't prosecute you .
Although that 's not exactly the same , because their argument is that it 's okay because the CIA lawyers said it was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your boss asks you to break the law, the argument "I was just following orders!
" doesn't hold up according to the authorities, especially when your boss decides to "cooperate with them" and throw you under the bus.This is only sometimes true.
If you tortured people for the CIA under orders, the Obama administration says it won't prosecute you.
Although that's not exactly the same, because their argument is that it's okay because the CIA lawyers said it was.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551786</id>
	<title>Re:Would be interesting...</title>
	<author>ralphdaugherty</author>
	<datestamp>1269077100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Madoff made billions from this.</i></p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; There is no indication of this. His collection of properties and luxeries were quite modest for a renowned legendary career trader on Wall Street who co-founded NASDAQ.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; As for the programmers, they lived in average midde class homes. They asked for a bonus of $60,000 but were fed up with what they were being asked to do, which was to rig up some information for auditors. I've looked at this in some detail (they were AS/400 programmers, and so am I), and it's unclear to me how misled they were.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; As far as that goes, all the employees on the 17th floor were told the trades they thought they were doing settled in Europe (London Exchange?).</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Clearly there were various activities at times of rigging up fake trades and entering them for reporting, but they all seemed to believe that Madoff was doing something with the account funds and just needed something to report. Fraudulent? Yes. Conspiracy with Madoff? No.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I've blogged what I could determine of it all as the story unwound last year.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Was Bernie Madoff really running a Ponzi scheme?<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="http://www.justiceforchandra.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3875" title="justiceforchandra.com">http://www.justiceforchandra.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3875</a> [justiceforchandra.com]</p><p>
&nbsp; rd</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Madoff made billions from this .
      There is no indication of this .
His collection of properties and luxeries were quite modest for a renowned legendary career trader on Wall Street who co-founded NASDAQ .
      As for the programmers , they lived in average midde class homes .
They asked for a bonus of $ 60,000 but were fed up with what they were being asked to do , which was to rig up some information for auditors .
I 've looked at this in some detail ( they were AS/400 programmers , and so am I ) , and it 's unclear to me how misled they were .
      As far as that goes , all the employees on the 17th floor were told the trades they thought they were doing settled in Europe ( London Exchange ? ) .
      Clearly there were various activities at times of rigging up fake trades and entering them for reporting , but they all seemed to believe that Madoff was doing something with the account funds and just needed something to report .
Fraudulent ? Yes .
Conspiracy with Madoff ?
No .       I 've blogged what I could determine of it all as the story unwound last year .
      Was Bernie Madoff really running a Ponzi scheme ?
      http : //www.justiceforchandra.com/forums/viewtopic.php ? t = 3875 [ justiceforchandra.com ]   rd      </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Madoff made billions from this.
      There is no indication of this.
His collection of properties and luxeries were quite modest for a renowned legendary career trader on Wall Street who co-founded NASDAQ.
      As for the programmers, they lived in average midde class homes.
They asked for a bonus of $60,000 but were fed up with what they were being asked to do, which was to rig up some information for auditors.
I've looked at this in some detail (they were AS/400 programmers, and so am I), and it's unclear to me how misled they were.
      As far as that goes, all the employees on the 17th floor were told the trades they thought they were doing settled in Europe (London Exchange?).
      Clearly there were various activities at times of rigging up fake trades and entering them for reporting, but they all seemed to believe that Madoff was doing something with the account funds and just needed something to report.
Fraudulent? Yes.
Conspiracy with Madoff?
No.
      I've blogged what I could determine of it all as the story unwound last year.
      Was Bernie Madoff really running a Ponzi scheme?
      http://www.justiceforchandra.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3875 [justiceforchandra.com]
  rd
     </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550168</id>
	<title>Re:So what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269107700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is what you "conservatives" really mean when you bitching about government regulation isnt it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what you " conservatives " really mean when you bitching about government regulation isnt it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what you "conservatives" really mean when you bitching about government regulation isnt it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555362</id>
	<title>Servers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269110220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well I have read at least two different versions of this "story". Bother version are quite different than this version as to accuracy.</p><p>Version 1. The computer was an IBM AS400 (NOT a server)</p><p>Version 2. The computer was an IBM mainframe (again NOT a server)</p><p>Whatever version that you believe the programmers were guilty as charged PERIOD.</p><p>I cannot believe these guys could ever of thought they were doing something legit. It was clearly illegal to anyone that had a half a brain. Programmers (for the most part) are intelligent(I know but I did say for the most part).</p><p>I would hope that these programmers were sent to a medium security environment. ALthough they were guilty (no question) they did make it possible for MADOFF to delay being caught (which is a major part of the story as to where the SEC was in this mess).<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I have read at least two different versions of this " story " .
Bother version are quite different than this version as to accuracy.Version 1 .
The computer was an IBM AS400 ( NOT a server ) Version 2 .
The computer was an IBM mainframe ( again NOT a server ) Whatever version that you believe the programmers were guilty as charged PERIOD.I can not believe these guys could ever of thought they were doing something legit .
It was clearly illegal to anyone that had a half a brain .
Programmers ( for the most part ) are intelligent ( I know but I did say for the most part ) .I would hope that these programmers were sent to a medium security environment .
ALthough they were guilty ( no question ) they did make it possible for MADOFF to delay being caught ( which is a major part of the story as to where the SEC was in this mess ) .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I have read at least two different versions of this "story".
Bother version are quite different than this version as to accuracy.Version 1.
The computer was an IBM AS400 (NOT a server)Version 2.
The computer was an IBM mainframe (again NOT a server)Whatever version that you believe the programmers were guilty as charged PERIOD.I cannot believe these guys could ever of thought they were doing something legit.
It was clearly illegal to anyone that had a half a brain.
Programmers (for the most part) are intelligent(I know but I did say for the most part).I would hope that these programmers were sent to a medium security environment.
ALthough they were guilty (no question) they did make it possible for MADOFF to delay being caught (which is a major part of the story as to where the SEC was in this mess).
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550578</id>
	<title>Re:So what?</title>
	<author>insufflate10mg</author>
	<datestamp>1269111120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>COUGH The reason we gave them the money was to save them from collapse and save our economy from the problems that would create.  They are paying it back.  ENDCOUGH</htmltext>
<tokenext>COUGH The reason we gave them the money was to save them from collapse and save our economy from the problems that would create .
They are paying it back .
ENDCOUGH</tokentext>
<sentencetext>COUGH The reason we gave them the money was to save them from collapse and save our economy from the problems that would create.
They are paying it back.
ENDCOUGH</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550158</id>
	<title>no ethics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269107640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While working on a contact for company A, which was servicing company B, I was asked to commit fraud to the tune of maybe 300k by falsifying data in the deliverable to Company B.  I refused.  It is scary to think about the absolute lack of ethics I have seen...before I walked off site in this instance I had a manager yelling at me to just do it.  They found someone else to do it, eventually got caught and it was a pretty ugly fiasco, but my company was not involved.  Company B was huge and could have owned us all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While working on a contact for company A , which was servicing company B , I was asked to commit fraud to the tune of maybe 300k by falsifying data in the deliverable to Company B. I refused .
It is scary to think about the absolute lack of ethics I have seen...before I walked off site in this instance I had a manager yelling at me to just do it .
They found someone else to do it , eventually got caught and it was a pretty ugly fiasco , but my company was not involved .
Company B was huge and could have owned us all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While working on a contact for company A, which was servicing company B, I was asked to commit fraud to the tune of maybe 300k by falsifying data in the deliverable to Company B.  I refused.
It is scary to think about the absolute lack of ethics I have seen...before I walked off site in this instance I had a manager yelling at me to just do it.
They found someone else to do it, eventually got caught and it was a pretty ugly fiasco, but my company was not involved.
Company B was huge and could have owned us all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549480</id>
	<title>I was going to post</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269100020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That if they're actually guilty of helping pull this stuff off then fuck them but then I'm reminded if they get convicted that's probably actually going to happen to them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That if they 're actually guilty of helping pull this stuff off then fuck them but then I 'm reminded if they get convicted that 's probably actually going to happen to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That if they're actually guilty of helping pull this stuff off then fuck them but then I'm reminded if they get convicted that's probably actually going to happen to them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549592</id>
	<title>Should've used the standard programmer defense</title>
	<author>Average\_Joe\_Sixpack</author>
	<datestamp>1269101220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Hey I was just following the spec!!  Honestly I didn't know it's all hex to me!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Hey I was just following the spec ! !
Honestly I did n't know it 's all hex to me !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Hey I was just following the spec!!
Honestly I didn't know it's all hex to me!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551892</id>
	<title>Re:Digital Era Henchmen Among Us</title>
	<author>Pichu0102</author>
	<datestamp>1269077880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be fair, once they find out, it's usually a thing where if they tell, it's blacklisting for life from any company, if you don't conveniently "disappear". Just look at the news.<br>So not continuing to follow orders could put you on the streets, homeless forever, or worse. No matter what you do at that point, your life is already in jeopardy, perhaps physically.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be fair , once they find out , it 's usually a thing where if they tell , it 's blacklisting for life from any company , if you do n't conveniently " disappear " .
Just look at the news.So not continuing to follow orders could put you on the streets , homeless forever , or worse .
No matter what you do at that point , your life is already in jeopardy , perhaps physically .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be fair, once they find out, it's usually a thing where if they tell, it's blacklisting for life from any company, if you don't conveniently "disappear".
Just look at the news.So not continuing to follow orders could put you on the streets, homeless forever, or worse.
No matter what you do at that point, your life is already in jeopardy, perhaps physically.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555130</id>
	<title>Re:No details</title>
	<author>dr\_dank</author>
	<datestamp>1269106740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>While it is possible to "dummy" in trade reports, even a rudimentary glance at the corresponding blotter would throw up red flags as there would be no clearing associated with the trades, and they would have no presence on the tape. I know the auditors were crooked, but this is an aspect of the scam that the SEC should have been all over.</i></p><p>A fake blotter report would take care of this. An auditor following the trade from the initial booking to settlement would be satisfied from seeing these reports. There's zero chance that your average auditing wonk would call the contrabroker to see if the trade was legit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While it is possible to " dummy " in trade reports , even a rudimentary glance at the corresponding blotter would throw up red flags as there would be no clearing associated with the trades , and they would have no presence on the tape .
I know the auditors were crooked , but this is an aspect of the scam that the SEC should have been all over.A fake blotter report would take care of this .
An auditor following the trade from the initial booking to settlement would be satisfied from seeing these reports .
There 's zero chance that your average auditing wonk would call the contrabroker to see if the trade was legit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While it is possible to "dummy" in trade reports, even a rudimentary glance at the corresponding blotter would throw up red flags as there would be no clearing associated with the trades, and they would have no presence on the tape.
I know the auditors were crooked, but this is an aspect of the scam that the SEC should have been all over.A fake blotter report would take care of this.
An auditor following the trade from the initial booking to settlement would be satisfied from seeing these reports.
There's zero chance that your average auditing wonk would call the contrabroker to see if the trade was legit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549886</id>
	<title>Re:So what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269105000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Insightful? Really? This is nothing but a witch hunt.</p><p>You leave AIG alone. I won't stand anyone smearing them unnecessarily, not when I have half of my money in their stock!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Insightful ?
Really ? This is nothing but a witch hunt.You leave AIG alone .
I wo n't stand anyone smearing them unnecessarily , not when I have half of my money in their stock !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Insightful?
Really? This is nothing but a witch hunt.You leave AIG alone.
I won't stand anyone smearing them unnecessarily, not when I have half of my money in their stock!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550250</id>
	<title>Codes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269108420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those codes would be some kind of accounting term, right?  So long as it isn't computer software, as that would be CODE (singular, not plural), slashdotters can rest easy.  These 'codes' are something accountants have.  It's an accounting term.  Since computer source code is <i>ALWAYS</i>, singular, then I know for sure when they say codes, that its an accounting term.  Only a moron, someone with the IQ of a fruit fly would make a dumb-ass mistake of calling computer software 'codes'.  Since the article comes from a reputable firm, a firm that would never talk about someone getting a hairs cut, or going on a roads trip, they wouldn't make a dumb-ass mistake like making something plural where it REALLY REALLY should appear singular.<br>So long as it's some kind of accounting term though...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those codes would be some kind of accounting term , right ?
So long as it is n't computer software , as that would be CODE ( singular , not plural ) , slashdotters can rest easy .
These 'codes ' are something accountants have .
It 's an accounting term .
Since computer source code is ALWAYS , singular , then I know for sure when they say codes , that its an accounting term .
Only a moron , someone with the IQ of a fruit fly would make a dumb-ass mistake of calling computer software 'codes' .
Since the article comes from a reputable firm , a firm that would never talk about someone getting a hairs cut , or going on a roads trip , they would n't make a dumb-ass mistake like making something plural where it REALLY REALLY should appear singular.So long as it 's some kind of accounting term though.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those codes would be some kind of accounting term, right?
So long as it isn't computer software, as that would be CODE (singular, not plural), slashdotters can rest easy.
These 'codes' are something accountants have.
It's an accounting term.
Since computer source code is ALWAYS, singular, then I know for sure when they say codes, that its an accounting term.
Only a moron, someone with the IQ of a fruit fly would make a dumb-ass mistake of calling computer software 'codes'.
Since the article comes from a reputable firm, a firm that would never talk about someone getting a hairs cut, or going on a roads trip, they wouldn't make a dumb-ass mistake like making something plural where it REALLY REALLY should appear singular.So long as it's some kind of accounting term though...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549762</id>
	<title>Re:Would be interesting...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269103440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are plenty of systems I work on and develop for wherein I depend on the domain knowledge of others to help me along.  I normally learn just enough of the systems to get the requested functionality to work.  They tell me how to do things legally (as the time constraints don't permit me enough time to research all the statutes, nor am I a lawyer to trust my parsing of the requisite statutes).  I can easily envision a scenario wherein the coders did break the law, but didn't know that the specific situation was unlawful.<br> <br>
Granted, the details will probably come out in the trial, but if they're innocent (or innocent enough not to go to pound me in the ass prison), I hope they can afford to defend themselves.  I know ignorance of the law isn't an escuse, but I hope that the ones who designed the system are the ones to get punished.<br> <br>
To use a car analogy, who would you rather have sent to jail, the man who designed the Slim Jim used to break into your car, or the person that procured said Slim Jim, used it to overcome the locks in your car, and drove away with it while getting you to fork out for the loss of the vehicle.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are plenty of systems I work on and develop for wherein I depend on the domain knowledge of others to help me along .
I normally learn just enough of the systems to get the requested functionality to work .
They tell me how to do things legally ( as the time constraints do n't permit me enough time to research all the statutes , nor am I a lawyer to trust my parsing of the requisite statutes ) .
I can easily envision a scenario wherein the coders did break the law , but did n't know that the specific situation was unlawful .
Granted , the details will probably come out in the trial , but if they 're innocent ( or innocent enough not to go to pound me in the ass prison ) , I hope they can afford to defend themselves .
I know ignorance of the law is n't an escuse , but I hope that the ones who designed the system are the ones to get punished .
To use a car analogy , who would you rather have sent to jail , the man who designed the Slim Jim used to break into your car , or the person that procured said Slim Jim , used it to overcome the locks in your car , and drove away with it while getting you to fork out for the loss of the vehicle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are plenty of systems I work on and develop for wherein I depend on the domain knowledge of others to help me along.
I normally learn just enough of the systems to get the requested functionality to work.
They tell me how to do things legally (as the time constraints don't permit me enough time to research all the statutes, nor am I a lawyer to trust my parsing of the requisite statutes).
I can easily envision a scenario wherein the coders did break the law, but didn't know that the specific situation was unlawful.
Granted, the details will probably come out in the trial, but if they're innocent (or innocent enough not to go to pound me in the ass prison), I hope they can afford to defend themselves.
I know ignorance of the law isn't an escuse, but I hope that the ones who designed the system are the ones to get punished.
To use a car analogy, who would you rather have sent to jail, the man who designed the Slim Jim used to break into your car, or the person that procured said Slim Jim, used it to overcome the locks in your car, and drove away with it while getting you to fork out for the loss of the vehicle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550810</id>
	<title>Scotty is rolling over in his orbital grave</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1269112620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"As engineers and software developers, we generally feel obliged to do what we are told."</p><p>Shut your mouth! You are going to ruin it for the rest of us!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" As engineers and software developers , we generally feel obliged to do what we are told .
" Shut your mouth !
You are going to ruin it for the rest of us !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"As engineers and software developers, we generally feel obliged to do what we are told.
"Shut your mouth!
You are going to ruin it for the rest of us!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555380</id>
	<title>Re:No details</title>
	<author>Compaqt</author>
	<datestamp>1269110400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really? Agile and company are all about testing, mock objects, dependency injection, etc.</p><p>Is there a legal requirement that testing of financial software not be done using the actual names and values of stocks?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
Agile and company are all about testing , mock objects , dependency injection , etc.Is there a legal requirement that testing of financial software not be done using the actual names and values of stocks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
Agile and company are all about testing, mock objects, dependency injection, etc.Is there a legal requirement that testing of financial software not be done using the actual names and values of stocks?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549698</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269102540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is that somebody who's orchestrating a billion-dollar scheme likely uses more subtle techniques to manipulate people into acquiescence than pointedly asking "will you break the law for me?"  And if they do ask openly, you can be sure they've got some leverage: they'll either bribe or blackmail you.  So, in this case, the moral really is: don't take bribes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that somebody who 's orchestrating a billion-dollar scheme likely uses more subtle techniques to manipulate people into acquiescence than pointedly asking " will you break the law for me ?
" And if they do ask openly , you can be sure they 've got some leverage : they 'll either bribe or blackmail you .
So , in this case , the moral really is : do n't take bribes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that somebody who's orchestrating a billion-dollar scheme likely uses more subtle techniques to manipulate people into acquiescence than pointedly asking "will you break the law for me?
"  And if they do ask openly, you can be sure they've got some leverage: they'll either bribe or blackmail you.
So, in this case, the moral really is: don't take bribes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551340</id>
	<title>Re:20 years ago?</title>
	<author>ibsteve2u</author>
	<datestamp>1269116460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From your <a href="http://www.finextra.com/news/fullstory.aspx?newsitemid=21200" title="finextra.com">link</a> [finextra.com]:<p><div class="quote"><p>It is alleged that the men had a "crisis of conscience" in 2006, but were persuaded to continue with the fraud after being offered a salary increase of nearly 25\% along with one-time bonuses in late 2006 of more than $60,000 each.</p></div><p>Now you know why I start laughing when I hear people say "Why does Wall Street and the banks keep giving those huge bonuses when they know it just pisses the American people off?"</p><p>'Tis either that, or wonder who will turn state's evidence.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From your link [ finextra.com ] : It is alleged that the men had a " crisis of conscience " in 2006 , but were persuaded to continue with the fraud after being offered a salary increase of nearly 25 \ % along with one-time bonuses in late 2006 of more than $ 60,000 each.Now you know why I start laughing when I hear people say " Why does Wall Street and the banks keep giving those huge bonuses when they know it just pisses the American people off ?
" 'T is either that , or wonder who will turn state 's evidence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From your link [finextra.com]:It is alleged that the men had a "crisis of conscience" in 2006, but were persuaded to continue with the fraud after being offered a salary increase of nearly 25\% along with one-time bonuses in late 2006 of more than $60,000 each.Now you know why I start laughing when I hear people say "Why does Wall Street and the banks keep giving those huge bonuses when they know it just pisses the American people off?
"'Tis either that, or wonder who will turn state's evidence.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549936</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>SuperDre</author>
	<datestamp>1269105540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But there lies the problem... YOU don't break the law, it's the user who uses your piece of software that is breaking the law.. If a boss tells me to program an option, and that option could be used for illegal things then it's actually my fault? yeah right, that would mean that every gun-maker is also breaking the law as the gun mostly is used for illegal things anyway (and ofcourse there are more then enough other branches to think of).

It's also like this, we create software for calculating your wages, It's against the law to pay less as minimumwages, our software makes it possible to pay less (because it's just not possible for us to actually know why they pay less because of so many regulations) and we know some of our customers are knowingly stiffing their workers by paying less. Does that make us responsible and accountable?</htmltext>
<tokenext>But there lies the problem... YOU do n't break the law , it 's the user who uses your piece of software that is breaking the law.. If a boss tells me to program an option , and that option could be used for illegal things then it 's actually my fault ?
yeah right , that would mean that every gun-maker is also breaking the law as the gun mostly is used for illegal things anyway ( and ofcourse there are more then enough other branches to think of ) .
It 's also like this , we create software for calculating your wages , It 's against the law to pay less as minimumwages , our software makes it possible to pay less ( because it 's just not possible for us to actually know why they pay less because of so many regulations ) and we know some of our customers are knowingly stiffing their workers by paying less .
Does that make us responsible and accountable ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But there lies the problem... YOU don't break the law, it's the user who uses your piece of software that is breaking the law.. If a boss tells me to program an option, and that option could be used for illegal things then it's actually my fault?
yeah right, that would mean that every gun-maker is also breaking the law as the gun mostly is used for illegal things anyway (and ofcourse there are more then enough other branches to think of).
It's also like this, we create software for calculating your wages, It's against the law to pay less as minimumwages, our software makes it possible to pay less (because it's just not possible for us to actually know why they pay less because of so many regulations) and we know some of our customers are knowingly stiffing their workers by paying less.
Does that make us responsible and accountable?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31560790</id>
	<title>Re:About Time!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269170160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I can live with programmers and bad testing, bad code, bad QA, but I can NOT accept EVIL code.</p></div><p>Really? You can live with bad testing, code and QA? Don't you have pride in your work? Don't you realise that shoddy code causes people like me endless grief?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can live with programmers and bad testing , bad code , bad QA , but I can NOT accept EVIL code.Really ?
You can live with bad testing , code and QA ?
Do n't you have pride in your work ?
Do n't you realise that shoddy code causes people like me endless grief ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can live with programmers and bad testing, bad code, bad QA, but I can NOT accept EVIL code.Really?
You can live with bad testing, code and QA?
Don't you have pride in your work?
Don't you realise that shoddy code causes people like me endless grief?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549666</id>
	<title>Re:No details</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269102240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Generally, trade reports are generated from you know, trades.  Typically, for the reason of the article, these systems don't allow the users to generate reports even for testing purposes.  Rather, they would submit a trade in a test stock such as ZVZZT or ZXZZT.  These would generate a trade, which would show on the reports, but not have any clearing associated with them.  While it is possible to "dummy" in trade reports, even a rudimentary glance at the corresponding blotter would throw up red flags as there would be no clearing associated with the trades, and they would have no presence on the tape.  I know the auditors were crooked, but this is an aspect of the scam that the SEC should have been all over. A system which would make it appear as if there was clearing (at least on the paper that Madoff was generating) without that clearing actually being there is something that should shout "FRAUD" to anyone involved in the project.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Generally , trade reports are generated from you know , trades .
Typically , for the reason of the article , these systems do n't allow the users to generate reports even for testing purposes .
Rather , they would submit a trade in a test stock such as ZVZZT or ZXZZT .
These would generate a trade , which would show on the reports , but not have any clearing associated with them .
While it is possible to " dummy " in trade reports , even a rudimentary glance at the corresponding blotter would throw up red flags as there would be no clearing associated with the trades , and they would have no presence on the tape .
I know the auditors were crooked , but this is an aspect of the scam that the SEC should have been all over .
A system which would make it appear as if there was clearing ( at least on the paper that Madoff was generating ) without that clearing actually being there is something that should shout " FRAUD " to anyone involved in the project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Generally, trade reports are generated from you know, trades.
Typically, for the reason of the article, these systems don't allow the users to generate reports even for testing purposes.
Rather, they would submit a trade in a test stock such as ZVZZT or ZXZZT.
These would generate a trade, which would show on the reports, but not have any clearing associated with them.
While it is possible to "dummy" in trade reports, even a rudimentary glance at the corresponding blotter would throw up red flags as there would be no clearing associated with the trades, and they would have no presence on the tape.
I know the auditors were crooked, but this is an aspect of the scam that the SEC should have been all over.
A system which would make it appear as if there was clearing (at least on the paper that Madoff was generating) without that clearing actually being there is something that should shout "FRAUD" to anyone involved in the project.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551176</id>
	<title>Re:So what?</title>
	<author>sgt\_doom</author>
	<datestamp>1269115560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank the gods, they've finally found the two guys responsible for the global economic meltdown ----</p><p>OR NOT!!!  Perhaps it was Bradley Birkenfeld, the UBS banker who attempted to out all those mega-rich American tax cheats to the US Treasury???? (Already in jail -- for 40 months for attempting to be a whistleblower - about the only real crime today in the USA).  Say, whatever became of Robert Rubin, Maurice Greenberg, Hank Paulson, Alan Greenspan and the rest of those supercriminals?????</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank the gods , they 've finally found the two guys responsible for the global economic meltdown ----OR NOT ! ! !
Perhaps it was Bradley Birkenfeld , the UBS banker who attempted to out all those mega-rich American tax cheats to the US Treasury ? ? ? ?
( Already in jail -- for 40 months for attempting to be a whistleblower - about the only real crime today in the USA ) .
Say , whatever became of Robert Rubin , Maurice Greenberg , Hank Paulson , Alan Greenspan and the rest of those supercriminals ? ? ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank the gods, they've finally found the two guys responsible for the global economic meltdown ----OR NOT!!!
Perhaps it was Bradley Birkenfeld, the UBS banker who attempted to out all those mega-rich American tax cheats to the US Treasury????
(Already in jail -- for 40 months for attempting to be a whistleblower - about the only real crime today in the USA).
Say, whatever became of Robert Rubin, Maurice Greenberg, Hank Paulson, Alan Greenspan and the rest of those supercriminals????
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550220</id>
	<title>Yes, they were paid off, and here's how much.</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1269108180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Here are the payoff details, from <a href="http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2009/lr21292.htm" title="sec.gov">the SEC press release</a> [sec.gov].  They were paid off, but not very well.
</p><p>

<i>
The SEC alleges that O'Hara and Perez had a crisis of conscience in 2006 and tried to cover their tracks by attempting to delete approximately 218 of the 225 special programs from the House 17 computer. But they did not delete the monthly backup tapes. O'Hara and Perez then cashed out hundreds of thousands of dollars each from their personal BMIS accounts before confronting Madoff and refusing to generate any more fabricated books and records.
</i></p><p><i>
According to O'Hara's handwritten notes from the encounter, one of them told Madoff, "I won't lie any longer. Next time, I say 'ask Frank,'" meaning that Madoff should rely on DiPascali alone to create the false data and reports.
</i></p><p><i>
The SEC's complaint alleges that Madoff responded by telling DiPascali to offer O'Hara and Perez as much money as necessary to keep quiet and not expose the misrepresentations. O'Hara and Perez considered the offer and demanded a salary increase of nearly 25 percent along with one-time bonuses in late 2006 of more than $60,000 each. They stated to DiPascali at the time that they did not ask for more because a greater amount might appear too suspicious. DiPascali then managed to convince O'Hara and Perez to modify computer programs so that he and other 17th floor employees could create the necessary reports themselves.</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here are the payoff details , from the SEC press release [ sec.gov ] .
They were paid off , but not very well .
The SEC alleges that O'Hara and Perez had a crisis of conscience in 2006 and tried to cover their tracks by attempting to delete approximately 218 of the 225 special programs from the House 17 computer .
But they did not delete the monthly backup tapes .
O'Hara and Perez then cashed out hundreds of thousands of dollars each from their personal BMIS accounts before confronting Madoff and refusing to generate any more fabricated books and records .
According to O'Hara 's handwritten notes from the encounter , one of them told Madoff , " I wo n't lie any longer .
Next time , I say 'ask Frank, ' " meaning that Madoff should rely on DiPascali alone to create the false data and reports .
The SEC 's complaint alleges that Madoff responded by telling DiPascali to offer O'Hara and Perez as much money as necessary to keep quiet and not expose the misrepresentations .
O'Hara and Perez considered the offer and demanded a salary increase of nearly 25 percent along with one-time bonuses in late 2006 of more than $ 60,000 each .
They stated to DiPascali at the time that they did not ask for more because a greater amount might appear too suspicious .
DiPascali then managed to convince O'Hara and Perez to modify computer programs so that he and other 17th floor employees could create the necessary reports themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Here are the payoff details, from the SEC press release [sec.gov].
They were paid off, but not very well.
The SEC alleges that O'Hara and Perez had a crisis of conscience in 2006 and tried to cover their tracks by attempting to delete approximately 218 of the 225 special programs from the House 17 computer.
But they did not delete the monthly backup tapes.
O'Hara and Perez then cashed out hundreds of thousands of dollars each from their personal BMIS accounts before confronting Madoff and refusing to generate any more fabricated books and records.
According to O'Hara's handwritten notes from the encounter, one of them told Madoff, "I won't lie any longer.
Next time, I say 'ask Frank,'" meaning that Madoff should rely on DiPascali alone to create the false data and reports.
The SEC's complaint alleges that Madoff responded by telling DiPascali to offer O'Hara and Perez as much money as necessary to keep quiet and not expose the misrepresentations.
O'Hara and Perez considered the offer and demanded a salary increase of nearly 25 percent along with one-time bonuses in late 2006 of more than $60,000 each.
They stated to DiPascali at the time that they did not ask for more because a greater amount might appear too suspicious.
DiPascali then managed to convince O'Hara and Perez to modify computer programs so that he and other 17th floor employees could create the necessary reports themselves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550090</id>
	<title>Statute of Limitations?</title>
	<author>Rick Zeman</author>
	<datestamp>1269106920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would think that after 19 or 20 years, respectively, that the statute of limitations for mere fraud would have kicked in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would think that after 19 or 20 years , respectively , that the statute of limitations for mere fraud would have kicked in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would think that after 19 or 20 years, respectively, that the statute of limitations for mere fraud would have kicked in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549720</id>
	<title>Re:So what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269102780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget Barney Frank, Jamie Gorelick and more.</p><p>(They might enjoy the federal prison.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget Barney Frank , Jamie Gorelick and more .
( They might enjoy the federal prison .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget Barney Frank, Jamie Gorelick and more.
(They might enjoy the federal prison.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550772</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269112320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If your boss asks you to break the law, the argument "I was just following orders!" doesn't hold up...</p></div><p>Unless its water boarding, or tapping phones without a warrant.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If your boss asks you to break the law , the argument " I was just following orders !
" does n't hold up...Unless its water boarding , or tapping phones without a warrant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your boss asks you to break the law, the argument "I was just following orders!
" doesn't hold up...Unless its water boarding, or tapping phones without a warrant.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31567126</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>randyleepublic</author>
	<datestamp>1269269640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt;&gt; tell them that you won't do it, and if they persist, explain that you are going to contact authorities immediately.
<br> <br>
No moron.  You innocently stall, and then quit because "my sister in Ohio is sick."  Leave town.  DO NOT CONTACT THE POLICE EVER!  They hate snitches as much as any other criminal gang, and will throw you under the bus just like that asshole Pisscarelli.
<br> <br>
Either that or you run the scam, and, as soon as possible, ice your boss.  "I never trusted that piece of shit."  If you don't have the balls for the second procedure, follow the first one.
<br> <br>
I love your line, "explain that you are going to contact authorities..."
<br>"What happened to that guy, Fred, the new programmer?"  "I haven't seen him around lately."
<br>"Yeah, he had an accident."
<br>"Oh."</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; tell them that you wo n't do it , and if they persist , explain that you are going to contact authorities immediately .
No moron .
You innocently stall , and then quit because " my sister in Ohio is sick .
" Leave town .
DO NOT CONTACT THE POLICE EVER !
They hate snitches as much as any other criminal gang , and will throw you under the bus just like that asshole Pisscarelli .
Either that or you run the scam , and , as soon as possible , ice your boss .
" I never trusted that piece of shit .
" If you do n't have the balls for the second procedure , follow the first one .
I love your line , " explain that you are going to contact authorities... " " What happened to that guy , Fred , the new programmer ?
" " I have n't seen him around lately .
" " Yeah , he had an accident .
" " Oh .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; tell them that you won't do it, and if they persist, explain that you are going to contact authorities immediately.
No moron.
You innocently stall, and then quit because "my sister in Ohio is sick.
"  Leave town.
DO NOT CONTACT THE POLICE EVER!
They hate snitches as much as any other criminal gang, and will throw you under the bus just like that asshole Pisscarelli.
Either that or you run the scam, and, as soon as possible, ice your boss.
"I never trusted that piece of shit.
"  If you don't have the balls for the second procedure, follow the first one.
I love your line, "explain that you are going to contact authorities..."
"What happened to that guy, Fred, the new programmer?
"  "I haven't seen him around lately.
"
"Yeah, he had an accident.
"
"Oh.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474</id>
	<title>So what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269099960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wake me up when someone at AIG gets indicted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wake me up when someone at AIG gets indicted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wake me up when someone at AIG gets indicted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549608</id>
	<title>Re:So what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269101460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dont forget Goldman, Citi, Fanny, Freddy, BofA, CountryWide, etc....</p><p>They all new what they were doing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dont forget Goldman , Citi , Fanny , Freddy , BofA , CountryWide , etc....They all new what they were doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dont forget Goldman, Citi, Fanny, Freddy, BofA, CountryWide, etc....They all new what they were doing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549548</id>
	<title>Insert "scheme" joke here. Or "chroot jail"...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269100680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Insert "scheme" joke here. Or "chroot jail", "execution protection", "dropping privileges",...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Insert " scheme " joke here .
Or " chroot jail " , " execution protection " , " dropping privileges " ,.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Insert "scheme" joke here.
Or "chroot jail", "execution protection", "dropping privileges",...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550294</id>
	<title>Re:Would be interesting...</title>
	<author>shawn(at)fsu</author>
	<datestamp>1269108660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an engineer you should do what is right and not illegal. The engineer is the one who makes ideas manifest in the real world, and as such you should know that if it's illegal you're head will be on the chopping block. Up until that point where it's created it's just an illegal idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an engineer you should do what is right and not illegal .
The engineer is the one who makes ideas manifest in the real world , and as such you should know that if it 's illegal you 're head will be on the chopping block .
Up until that point where it 's created it 's just an illegal idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an engineer you should do what is right and not illegal.
The engineer is the one who makes ideas manifest in the real world, and as such you should know that if it's illegal you're head will be on the chopping block.
Up until that point where it's created it's just an illegal idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549692</id>
	<title>20 years ago?</title>
	<author>Vellmont</author>
	<datestamp>1269102480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since they only worked for him for a total of 2 years, 20 years ago, it makes you wonder who did the programmer dirty work for the next 17 years.  These guys sound like small fish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since they only worked for him for a total of 2 years , 20 years ago , it makes you wonder who did the programmer dirty work for the next 17 years .
These guys sound like small fish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since they only worked for him for a total of 2 years, 20 years ago, it makes you wonder who did the programmer dirty work for the next 17 years.
These guys sound like small fish.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549966</id>
	<title>No it isn't. The moral is: don't commit fraud.</title>
	<author>golodh</author>
	<datestamp>1269105900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As far as I can see from the opening post, the question whether these people were programmers or not doesn't come into it at all.
<p>
If we are to believe the indictment quoted in the opening post, those people were guilty of the following:</p><blockquote><div><p>BLMIS's
As part of a
concerted effort overseen by MADOFF and his employee, FRANK
DIPASCALI, JR., to deceive both the SEC and the European
accounting firm, O'HARA and PEREZ <b>developed and maintained
computer programs that generated numerous false and fraudulent
records.
O'HARA and PEREZ are alleged to have known that the
special programs they developed contained fraudulent information
and that they were used in connection with the SEC and European
accounting firm reviews.</b></p></div> </blockquote><p>
Unless people want to argue that they were somehow entitled to do this simply because they were salaried employees who would have been fired if they hadn't done as they were told, they deliberately helped commit fraud and hide the traces.
</p><p>
As far as I understand, the law simply asks if you (or any ordinary person in your place) could reasonably have known that you were helping with fraud. If you were, you're guilty. Whether you're on the janitorial staff or a director. That doesn't strike me as particularly unreasonable. Creating fraudulent trade records for an audit isn't something you can do without knowing.
</p><p>
Of course we all know that they were probably enticed or pressured into cooperating. And yes, it's very probable that they would have been fired (without a reference) had they refused to assist in covering up this fraud. And they might have been blackmailed (or even threatened with violence) if they had so much as hinted at disclosure. But even then they could have gone to the police to report the whole thing; if necessary anonymously. However they didn't, and since they actively helped commit fraud they are culpable no matter their position in the firm.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I can see from the opening post , the question whether these people were programmers or not does n't come into it at all .
If we are to believe the indictment quoted in the opening post , those people were guilty of the following : BLMIS 's As part of a concerted effort overseen by MADOFF and his employee , FRANK DIPASCALI , JR. , to deceive both the SEC and the European accounting firm , O'HARA and PEREZ developed and maintained computer programs that generated numerous false and fraudulent records .
O'HARA and PEREZ are alleged to have known that the special programs they developed contained fraudulent information and that they were used in connection with the SEC and European accounting firm reviews .
Unless people want to argue that they were somehow entitled to do this simply because they were salaried employees who would have been fired if they had n't done as they were told , they deliberately helped commit fraud and hide the traces .
As far as I understand , the law simply asks if you ( or any ordinary person in your place ) could reasonably have known that you were helping with fraud .
If you were , you 're guilty .
Whether you 're on the janitorial staff or a director .
That does n't strike me as particularly unreasonable .
Creating fraudulent trade records for an audit is n't something you can do without knowing .
Of course we all know that they were probably enticed or pressured into cooperating .
And yes , it 's very probable that they would have been fired ( without a reference ) had they refused to assist in covering up this fraud .
And they might have been blackmailed ( or even threatened with violence ) if they had so much as hinted at disclosure .
But even then they could have gone to the police to report the whole thing ; if necessary anonymously .
However they did n't , and since they actively helped commit fraud they are culpable no matter their position in the firm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I can see from the opening post, the question whether these people were programmers or not doesn't come into it at all.
If we are to believe the indictment quoted in the opening post, those people were guilty of the following:BLMIS's
As part of a
concerted effort overseen by MADOFF and his employee, FRANK
DIPASCALI, JR., to deceive both the SEC and the European
accounting firm, O'HARA and PEREZ developed and maintained
computer programs that generated numerous false and fraudulent
records.
O'HARA and PEREZ are alleged to have known that the
special programs they developed contained fraudulent information
and that they were used in connection with the SEC and European
accounting firm reviews.
Unless people want to argue that they were somehow entitled to do this simply because they were salaried employees who would have been fired if they hadn't done as they were told, they deliberately helped commit fraud and hide the traces.
As far as I understand, the law simply asks if you (or any ordinary person in your place) could reasonably have known that you were helping with fraud.
If you were, you're guilty.
Whether you're on the janitorial staff or a director.
That doesn't strike me as particularly unreasonable.
Creating fraudulent trade records for an audit isn't something you can do without knowing.
Of course we all know that they were probably enticed or pressured into cooperating.
And yes, it's very probable that they would have been fired (without a reference) had they refused to assist in covering up this fraud.
And they might have been blackmailed (or even threatened with violence) if they had so much as hinted at disclosure.
But even then they could have gone to the police to report the whole thing; if necessary anonymously.
However they didn't, and since they actively helped commit fraud they are culpable no matter their position in the firm.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550214</id>
	<title>Re:Statute of Limitations?</title>
	<author>Corbets</author>
	<datestamp>1269108060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would think that someone capable of finding his way to Slashdot should be able to RTFA correctly...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... wait, never mind.</p><p>Given that this is Slashdot, allow me to clarify it for you: they have been working for him (one since 1990, the other since 1991) until as recently as the last 4 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would think that someone capable of finding his way to Slashdot should be able to RTFA correctly... ... wait , never mind.Given that this is Slashdot , allow me to clarify it for you : they have been working for him ( one since 1990 , the other since 1991 ) until as recently as the last 4 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would think that someone capable of finding his way to Slashdot should be able to RTFA correctly... ... wait, never mind.Given that this is Slashdot, allow me to clarify it for you: they have been working for him (one since 1990, the other since 1991) until as recently as the last 4 years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550396</id>
	<title>Re:Insert "scheme" joke here. Or "chroot jail"...</title>
	<author>sourcerror</author>
	<datestamp>1269109620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>create schema ponzi;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>create schema ponzi ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>create schema ponzi;</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584</id>
	<title>No details</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269101220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Reading the article and the indictment no details are given that the men knew it was a fraud other than the allegations.  Also no details are given about "hush" money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reading the article and the indictment no details are given that the men knew it was a fraud other than the allegations .
Also no details are given about " hush " money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reading the article and the indictment no details are given that the men knew it was a fraud other than the allegations.
Also no details are given about "hush" money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549810</id>
	<title>Re:20 years ago?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269104040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You need to re-read the summary, at the least.  The programmers were employed at the firm FROM 1990 and 1991, respectively (this means IN THE ORDER NAMED).....  This means they began their employment in those years and no mention is made of the duration of their employment, which seems to imply they were continuously employed from their start dates through to when the scheme crumbled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You need to re-read the summary , at the least .
The programmers were employed at the firm FROM 1990 and 1991 , respectively ( this means IN THE ORDER NAMED ) ..... This means they began their employment in those years and no mention is made of the duration of their employment , which seems to imply they were continuously employed from their start dates through to when the scheme crumbled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need to re-read the summary, at the least.
The programmers were employed at the firm FROM 1990 and 1991, respectively (this means IN THE ORDER NAMED).....  This means they began their employment in those years and no mention is made of the duration of their employment, which seems to imply they were continuously employed from their start dates through to when the scheme crumbled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560</id>
	<title>Would be interesting...</title>
	<author>timeOday</author>
	<datestamp>1269100920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>...to know how much "hush money" they actually received?  Madoff made <i>billions</i> from this.  I'll bet anything these guys were paid less than the average Goldman Sachs annual bonus.
<p>
I hope I would say "no" to something like this.  As engineers and software developers, we generally feel obliged to do what we are told.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...to know how much " hush money " they actually received ?
Madoff made billions from this .
I 'll bet anything these guys were paid less than the average Goldman Sachs annual bonus .
I hope I would say " no " to something like this .
As engineers and software developers , we generally feel obliged to do what we are told .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...to know how much "hush money" they actually received?
Madoff made billions from this.
I'll bet anything these guys were paid less than the average Goldman Sachs annual bonus.
I hope I would say "no" to something like this.
As engineers and software developers, we generally feel obliged to do what we are told.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551922</id>
	<title>Re:Digital Era Henchmen Among Us</title>
	<author>Velex</author>
	<datestamp>1269078180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money.</p></div><p>
Money's money.  Let me know where to get in on that.  All I do is cook meaningless data right now because our data-entry system is so riddled with bugs and agents don't care to report errors.  Where do I apply to cook meaningful data?  I'd sure like to be able to afford a car one of these days.  Capitalism in action.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money .
Money 's money .
Let me know where to get in on that .
All I do is cook meaningless data right now because our data-entry system is so riddled with bugs and agents do n't care to report errors .
Where do I apply to cook meaningful data ?
I 'd sure like to be able to afford a car one of these days .
Capitalism in action .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money.
Money's money.
Let me know where to get in on that.
All I do is cook meaningless data right now because our data-entry system is so riddled with bugs and agents don't care to report errors.
Where do I apply to cook meaningful data?
I'd sure like to be able to afford a car one of these days.
Capitalism in action.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549598</id>
	<title>Makes me think of this scene from Clerks</title>
	<author>colmore</author>
	<datestamp>1269101340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6lzEhoXads" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6lzEhoXads</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = n6lzEhoXads [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6lzEhoXads [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549742</id>
	<title>Re:20 years ago?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269103140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Um, they didn't work for him from 1990 to 1991.  One was hired in 1990, the other in 1991.  They still worked for him beyond 2006: <a href="http://www.finextra.com/news/fullstory.aspx?newsitemid=21200" title="finextra.com">http://www.finextra.com/news/fullstory.aspx?newsitemid=21200</a> [finextra.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , they did n't work for him from 1990 to 1991 .
One was hired in 1990 , the other in 1991 .
They still worked for him beyond 2006 : http : //www.finextra.com/news/fullstory.aspx ? newsitemid = 21200 [ finextra.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, they didn't work for him from 1990 to 1991.
One was hired in 1990, the other in 1991.
They still worked for him beyond 2006: http://www.finextra.com/news/fullstory.aspx?newsitemid=21200 [finextra.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555810</id>
	<title>Re:About Time!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269204900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>there is no such thing as "software engineering."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>there is no such thing as " software engineering .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there is no such thing as "software engineering.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549606</id>
	<title>Re:I guess the moral of the story is to have moral</title>
	<author>beakerMeep</author>
	<datestamp>1269101400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Thank You for Smoking the lobbyist called that the 'Yuppie Nuremberg Defense'
<br> <br>
Sorry for the Godwin.  But I agree, it seems the roles of who is cooperating are reversed here from what I'd expect.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Thank You for Smoking the lobbyist called that the 'Yuppie Nuremberg Defense ' Sorry for the Godwin .
But I agree , it seems the roles of who is cooperating are reversed here from what I 'd expect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Thank You for Smoking the lobbyist called that the 'Yuppie Nuremberg Defense'
 
Sorry for the Godwin.
But I agree, it seems the roles of who is cooperating are reversed here from what I'd expect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549800</id>
	<title>Digital Era Henchmen Among Us</title>
	<author>lucm</author>
	<datestamp>1269103800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Big Tobacco health data. Big Pharma test data. Big Oil environmental data. Enron accounting or trading data. Retails sales zappers.</p><p>There is no way all this data "tweaking" can be done without involving IT people: DBA's, programmers, techies.</p><p>Right now, at this very moment, some of these Digital Era Henchmen are reading Slashdot on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money. And chances are that some of these people are making snide comments about Microsoft or Darl McBride's ethics. Tsk tsk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Big Tobacco health data .
Big Pharma test data .
Big Oil environmental data .
Enron accounting or trading data .
Retails sales zappers.There is no way all this data " tweaking " can be done without involving IT people : DBA 's , programmers , techies.Right now , at this very moment , some of these Digital Era Henchmen are reading Slashdot on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money .
And chances are that some of these people are making snide comments about Microsoft or Darl McBride 's ethics .
Tsk tsk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Big Tobacco health data.
Big Pharma test data.
Big Oil environmental data.
Enron accounting or trading data.
Retails sales zappers.There is no way all this data "tweaking" can be done without involving IT people: DBA's, programmers, techies.Right now, at this very moment, some of these Digital Era Henchmen are reading Slashdot on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money.
And chances are that some of these people are making snide comments about Microsoft or Darl McBride's ethics.
Tsk tsk.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549736</id>
	<title>Re:20 years ago?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269102960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you read that wrong... they have been working for him "from" (i.e. since) 1990 and 1991, not "during 1990 and 1991."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you read that wrong... they have been working for him " from " ( i.e .
since ) 1990 and 1991 , not " during 1990 and 1991 .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you read that wrong... they have been working for him "from" (i.e.
since) 1990 and 1991, not "during 1990 and 1991.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551776</id>
	<title>Re:Yes, they were paid off, and here's how much.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269077040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fucked because you have a working backup strategy, isn't that ironic ? Also a rookie mistake.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fucked because you have a working backup strategy , is n't that ironic ?
Also a rookie mistake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fucked because you have a working backup strategy, isn't that ironic ?
Also a rookie mistake.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549680</id>
	<title>Re:No details</title>
	<author>beakerMeep</author>
	<datestamp>1269102360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe, but you have to grant that it was a McCool article.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe , but you have to grant that it was a McCool article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe, but you have to grant that it was a McCool article.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549610</id>
	<title>Re:So what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269101460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about Madoff's sons?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about Madoff 's sons ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about Madoff's sons?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549770</id>
	<title>Re:20 years ago?</title>
	<author>nextekcarl</author>
	<datestamp>1269103500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What if they went on to do this same stuff for others afterward? Maybe that's why they granted leniency to Madoff in exchange for helping nap these guys? Otherwise that part just sounds quite odd. Though that just makes you wonder who else is doing the same thing that we haven't heard about. tl;dr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What if they went on to do this same stuff for others afterward ?
Maybe that 's why they granted leniency to Madoff in exchange for helping nap these guys ?
Otherwise that part just sounds quite odd .
Though that just makes you wonder who else is doing the same thing that we have n't heard about .
tl ; dr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if they went on to do this same stuff for others afterward?
Maybe that's why they granted leniency to Madoff in exchange for helping nap these guys?
Otherwise that part just sounds quite odd.
Though that just makes you wonder who else is doing the same thing that we haven't heard about.
tl;dr</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551280</id>
	<title>Re:Digital Era Henchmen Among Us</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269116100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Big Tobacco health data. Big Pharma test data. Big Oil environmental data. Enron accounting or trading data. Retails sales zappers.</p><p>There is no way all this data "tweaking" can be done without involving IT people: DBA's, programmers, techies.</p><p>Right now, at this very moment, some of these Digital Era Henchmen are reading Slashdot on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money. And chances are that some of these people are making snide comments about Microsoft or Darl McBride's ethics. Tsk tsk.</p></div><p>My god, some rich S-o-B has a $350 tv! The horror! String those bastards up!</p><p>Bestbuy sells 65" tv's for under a grand on sale. Worry when your tech has a 100" LCD - not a $599 projector.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Big Tobacco health data .
Big Pharma test data .
Big Oil environmental data .
Enron accounting or trading data .
Retails sales zappers.There is no way all this data " tweaking " can be done without involving IT people : DBA 's , programmers , techies.Right now , at this very moment , some of these Digital Era Henchmen are reading Slashdot on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money .
And chances are that some of these people are making snide comments about Microsoft or Darl McBride 's ethics .
Tsk tsk.My god , some rich S-o-B has a $ 350 tv !
The horror !
String those bastards up ! Bestbuy sells 65 " tv 's for under a grand on sale .
Worry when your tech has a 100 " LCD - not a $ 599 projector .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Big Tobacco health data.
Big Pharma test data.
Big Oil environmental data.
Enron accounting or trading data.
Retails sales zappers.There is no way all this data "tweaking" can be done without involving IT people: DBA's, programmers, techies.Right now, at this very moment, some of these Digital Era Henchmen are reading Slashdot on iPhones or 32 inch monitors purchased with blood money.
And chances are that some of these people are making snide comments about Microsoft or Darl McBride's ethics.
Tsk tsk.My god, some rich S-o-B has a $350 tv!
The horror!
String those bastards up!Bestbuy sells 65" tv's for under a grand on sale.
Worry when your tech has a 100" LCD - not a $599 projector.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494</id>
	<title>I guess the moral of the story is to have morals.</title>
	<author>Agamous Child</author>
	<datestamp>1269100140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>If your boss asks you to break the law, the argument "I was just following orders!" doesn't hold up according to the authorities, especially when your boss decides to "cooperate with them" and throw you under the bus.

Always question the motives and the legality of a system you design, and if your boss asks you to break the law, tell them that you won't do it, and if they persist, explain that you are going to contact authorities immediately.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If your boss asks you to break the law , the argument " I was just following orders !
" does n't hold up according to the authorities , especially when your boss decides to " cooperate with them " and throw you under the bus .
Always question the motives and the legality of a system you design , and if your boss asks you to break the law , tell them that you wo n't do it , and if they persist , explain that you are going to contact authorities immediately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your boss asks you to break the law, the argument "I was just following orders!
" doesn't hold up according to the authorities, especially when your boss decides to "cooperate with them" and throw you under the bus.
Always question the motives and the legality of a system you design, and if your boss asks you to break the law, tell them that you won't do it, and if they persist, explain that you are going to contact authorities immediately.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31567126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551922
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31552700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31560790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550112
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_1347221_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549548
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550084
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549886
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550174
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551176
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31567126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549936
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550326
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549556
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549764
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549606
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550378
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549966
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550214
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550220
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549762
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550580
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549598
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555362
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549666
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555130
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31550032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549874
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549692
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549742
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549770
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31551892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31552700
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31560790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31555416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_1347221.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_1347221.31549592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
