<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_24_198243</id>
	<title>GoDaddy Follows Google's Lead; No More Registrations In China</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1269460080000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>phantomfive writes <i>"GoDaddy has announced it <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/24/AR2010032401543.html">will no longer register domain names in China</a>, in response to new requirements that each registrant be photographed, and their business ID number be submitted. GoDaddy's representative said, 'The intent of the procedures appeared, to us, to be based on a desire by the Chinese authorities to exercise increased control over the subject matter of domain name registrations by Chinese nationals.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>phantomfive writes " GoDaddy has announced it will no longer register domain names in China , in response to new requirements that each registrant be photographed , and their business ID number be submitted .
GoDaddy 's representative said , 'The intent of the procedures appeared , to us , to be based on a desire by the Chinese authorities to exercise increased control over the subject matter of domain name registrations by Chinese nationals .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>phantomfive writes "GoDaddy has announced it will no longer register domain names in China, in response to new requirements that each registrant be photographed, and their business ID number be submitted.
GoDaddy's representative said, 'The intent of the procedures appeared, to us, to be based on a desire by the Chinese authorities to exercise increased control over the subject matter of domain name registrations by Chinese nationals.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604942</id>
	<title>give up dealextreme? no thanks...</title>
	<author>djdavetrouble</author>
	<datestamp>1269431220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no freaking way in hell that I am going to stop shopping on dealextreme.com</p><p>no. way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no freaking way in hell that I am going to stop shopping on dealextreme.comno .
way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no freaking way in hell that I am going to stop shopping on dealextreme.comno.
way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31606358</id>
	<title>Re:They still have a stranglehold...</title>
	<author>Mordok-DestroyerOfWo</author>
	<datestamp>1269441240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Frightening scenario my friend.  I tend to agree with you.  In the U.S. it's a similar story.  I tried to go without buying anything made in China for lent (long story), and failed after 3 days.  The fact of the matter is that if the West truly wants to become competitive again we need to be willing to pay more for products.  Since corporations will vehemently protect their bottom-line that burden will get passed on to the consumer.  With the global economy as shaky as it is, it doesn't bode well for us.  We do live in interesting times.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Frightening scenario my friend .
I tend to agree with you .
In the U.S. it 's a similar story .
I tried to go without buying anything made in China for lent ( long story ) , and failed after 3 days .
The fact of the matter is that if the West truly wants to become competitive again we need to be willing to pay more for products .
Since corporations will vehemently protect their bottom-line that burden will get passed on to the consumer .
With the global economy as shaky as it is , it does n't bode well for us .
We do live in interesting times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frightening scenario my friend.
I tend to agree with you.
In the U.S. it's a similar story.
I tried to go without buying anything made in China for lent (long story), and failed after 3 days.
The fact of the matter is that if the West truly wants to become competitive again we need to be willing to pay more for products.
Since corporations will vehemently protect their bottom-line that burden will get passed on to the consumer.
With the global economy as shaky as it is, it doesn't bode well for us.
We do live in interesting times.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604626</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1269429300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm inclined to think it's more about freedom. After all, there really isn't anything you can't sell with big-breasted women.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm inclined to think it 's more about freedom .
After all , there really is n't anything you ca n't sell with big-breasted women .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm inclined to think it's more about freedom.
After all, there really isn't anything you can't sell with big-breasted women.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603500</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1269424500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>flame me but can't we just let countries choose their own path? there is no reason we need to force the American world view down everyone's throat.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Wait, I am confused.</p><p>Is your contention that:<br>1) Countries should be free to choose their own path, or is it<br>2) Countries should not be free to choose the path of shoving their worldview down everyone's throat</p><p>Because you can't have both.</p><p>Furthermore, even if we accept that what China is doing is legitimate in terms of "choosing their own path" (rather than a case of "shoving their worldview down everyone's throat"), why does that mean it has to be free of consequences? China chooses its path. Google, GoDaddy, and who knows who else looks at that path and says, "you know what, we're not willing to do business on those terms" and stops doing business in China. Do you think that not only should countries be able to choose their own path, but that private entities should be actively compelled to continue to do business in countries that they no longer wish to do business in?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>flame me but ca n't we just let countries choose their own path ?
there is no reason we need to force the American world view down everyone 's throat .
Wait , I am confused.Is your contention that : 1 ) Countries should be free to choose their own path , or is it2 ) Countries should not be free to choose the path of shoving their worldview down everyone 's throatBecause you ca n't have both.Furthermore , even if we accept that what China is doing is legitimate in terms of " choosing their own path " ( rather than a case of " shoving their worldview down everyone 's throat " ) , why does that mean it has to be free of consequences ?
China chooses its path .
Google , GoDaddy , and who knows who else looks at that path and says , " you know what , we 're not willing to do business on those terms " and stops doing business in China .
Do you think that not only should countries be able to choose their own path , but that private entities should be actively compelled to continue to do business in countries that they no longer wish to do business in ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>flame me but can't we just let countries choose their own path?
there is no reason we need to force the American world view down everyone's throat.
Wait, I am confused.Is your contention that:1) Countries should be free to choose their own path, or is it2) Countries should not be free to choose the path of shoving their worldview down everyone's throatBecause you can't have both.Furthermore, even if we accept that what China is doing is legitimate in terms of "choosing their own path" (rather than a case of "shoving their worldview down everyone's throat"), why does that mean it has to be free of consequences?
China chooses its path.
Google, GoDaddy, and who knows who else looks at that path and says, "you know what, we're not willing to do business on those terms" and stops doing business in China.
Do you think that not only should countries be able to choose their own path, but that private entities should be actively compelled to continue to do business in countries that they no longer wish to do business in?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604808</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>dimeglio</author>
	<datestamp>1269430320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If picture IDs for domains were a requirement from the very start of domain name registrations worldwide, it might not have been a big deal. A bit like an Internet driver's license. Now it's too late and as a result, China is seen as controlling. The question is, why does it need to do this? I remember about a year or two ago, all of Google's searches hit<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.cn domain names. I'm glad that's cleaned-up. Not sure if it was as a result of the picture ID policy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If picture IDs for domains were a requirement from the very start of domain name registrations worldwide , it might not have been a big deal .
A bit like an Internet driver 's license .
Now it 's too late and as a result , China is seen as controlling .
The question is , why does it need to do this ?
I remember about a year or two ago , all of Google 's searches hit .cn domain names .
I 'm glad that 's cleaned-up .
Not sure if it was as a result of the picture ID policy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If picture IDs for domains were a requirement from the very start of domain name registrations worldwide, it might not have been a big deal.
A bit like an Internet driver's license.
Now it's too late and as a result, China is seen as controlling.
The question is, why does it need to do this?
I remember about a year or two ago, all of Google's searches hit .cn domain names.
I'm glad that's cleaned-up.
Not sure if it was as a result of the picture ID policy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603040</id>
	<title>Re:What is their bottom line in China?</title>
	<author>jsepeta</author>
	<datestamp>1269422760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you're confusing godaddy with register.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you 're confusing godaddy with register.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you're confusing godaddy with register.com</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602836</id>
	<title>0.0</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269422040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pew pew</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pew pew</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pew pew</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602648</id>
	<title>I wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269464340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If fu.cn is taken?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If fu.cn is taken ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If fu.cn is taken?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603266</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269423600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It does in Soviet Russia, too. Just got an email from my registrar telling me that registration of new<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ru domains, as well as maintenance of existing ones (cancellation, transfer, information update) will require an internal passport, with information in it that matches that submitted to domain registry (Russian passports have <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propiska#Registration\_authority\_in\_Russia" title="wikipedia.org">current place of permanent residence</a> [wikipedia.org] information in it, which citizens are required to update as they move), starting from April. Checked to see if it's true, and sure enough, it was a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ru-wide change of rules from several months ago (which is about to kick in now).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does in Soviet Russia , too .
Just got an email from my registrar telling me that registration of new .ru domains , as well as maintenance of existing ones ( cancellation , transfer , information update ) will require an internal passport , with information in it that matches that submitted to domain registry ( Russian passports have current place of permanent residence [ wikipedia.org ] information in it , which citizens are required to update as they move ) , starting from April .
Checked to see if it 's true , and sure enough , it was a .ru-wide change of rules from several months ago ( which is about to kick in now ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It does in Soviet Russia, too.
Just got an email from my registrar telling me that registration of new .ru domains, as well as maintenance of existing ones (cancellation, transfer, information update) will require an internal passport, with information in it that matches that submitted to domain registry (Russian passports have current place of permanent residence [wikipedia.org] information in it, which citizens are required to update as they move), starting from April.
Checked to see if it's true, and sure enough, it was a .ru-wide change of rules from several months ago (which is about to kick in now).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607762</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Yetihehe</author>
	<datestamp>1269547440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://media.photobucket.com/image/recent/joecooool418/P1012141.jpg" title="photobucket.com">This picture</a> [photobucket.com] really says it all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This picture [ photobucket.com ] really says it all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This picture [photobucket.com] really says it all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602976</id>
	<title>China isn't the only one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269422460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not even a week ago there was an article on how the US government was pushing domain registrars to curtal effectivly anonymous registrations by pushing ID requirements.  Before you critisize China you need to critical about the same shit closer to home.</p><p>Obviously the real reason why godaddy is pulling out is that for $5/yr or whatever the registration costs are the paperwork and ID requirements would not even come close to covering the cost of registration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not even a week ago there was an article on how the US government was pushing domain registrars to curtal effectivly anonymous registrations by pushing ID requirements .
Before you critisize China you need to critical about the same shit closer to home.Obviously the real reason why godaddy is pulling out is that for $ 5/yr or whatever the registration costs are the paperwork and ID requirements would not even come close to covering the cost of registration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not even a week ago there was an article on how the US government was pushing domain registrars to curtal effectivly anonymous registrations by pushing ID requirements.
Before you critisize China you need to critical about the same shit closer to home.Obviously the real reason why godaddy is pulling out is that for $5/yr or whatever the registration costs are the paperwork and ID requirements would not even come close to covering the cost of registration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604098</id>
	<title>Re:.CN domain extensions, not chinese registration</title>
	<author>d34dluk3</author>
	<datestamp>1269427080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would they point that out when they can spin it to be seen as noble agents of change?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would they point that out when they can spin it to be seen as noble agents of change ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would they point that out when they can spin it to be seen as noble agents of change?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603742</id>
	<title>improves their market share in china</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1269425580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure there are plenty of chinese nationals willing to settle for a domain outside China just to avoid the registration requirements.  So they might make more money in China by not being in China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure there are plenty of chinese nationals willing to settle for a domain outside China just to avoid the registration requirements .
So they might make more money in China by not being in China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure there are plenty of chinese nationals willing to settle for a domain outside China just to avoid the registration requirements.
So they might make more money in China by not being in China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31606764</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Reverend528</author>
	<datestamp>1269445560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe they will.  I was watching fox news today and apparently we are now socialists.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they will .
I was watching fox news today and apparently we are now socialists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they will.
I was watching fox news today and apparently we are now socialists.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603492</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269424500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is for race car drivers.  Most of them are men and Jimmy Spencer is retired.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is for race car drivers .
Most of them are men and Jimmy Spencer is retired .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is for race car drivers.
Most of them are men and Jimmy Spencer is retired.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31606954</id>
	<title>There are more registrars around.</title>
	<author>ub3r n3u7r4l1st</author>
	<datestamp>1269447480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't want to use a registrar where it stores your web hosting password with clear text.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't want to use a registrar where it stores your web hosting password with clear text .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't want to use a registrar where it stores your web hosting password with clear text.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603086</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269422940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607232</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269451020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's change the viewpoint. If the US &amp; EU wouldn't buy their stuff, to whom would they sell?</p><p>Sure, it's risky, but just cracking jokes at diplomatic meetings and enjoying the status quo is very disgusting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's change the viewpoint .
If the US &amp; EU would n't buy their stuff , to whom would they sell ? Sure , it 's risky , but just cracking jokes at diplomatic meetings and enjoying the status quo is very disgusting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's change the viewpoint.
If the US &amp; EU wouldn't buy their stuff, to whom would they sell?Sure, it's risky, but just cracking jokes at diplomatic meetings and enjoying the status quo is very disgusting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607310</id>
	<title>Google Impact</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269452640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China Should pay for how they treated Google.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China Should pay for how they treated Google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China Should pay for how they treated Google.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603262</id>
	<title>I see a trend here...</title>
	<author>bynary</author>
	<datestamp>1269423600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...that each registrant be photographed, and their business ID number be submitted...</p></div><p>
That doesn't sound too terribly far fetched for a step to be taken by any number of governments including the UK and US.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...that each registrant be photographed , and their business ID number be submitted.. . That does n't sound too terribly far fetched for a step to be taken by any number of governments including the UK and US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...that each registrant be photographed, and their business ID number be submitted...
That doesn't sound too terribly far fetched for a step to be taken by any number of governments including the UK and US.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607478</id>
	<title>Head-and-shoulders photo...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269456000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they want <a href="http://www.uk.pg.com/images/headAndShouldersPack\_IL.jpg" title="pg.com" rel="nofollow">"a color, head-and-shoulders photograph."</a> [pg.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they want " a color , head-and-shoulders photograph .
" [ pg.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they want "a color, head-and-shoulders photograph.
" [pg.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604548</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>WidgetGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1269429000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oops!  There goes WalMart.  Two birds with one stone?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oops !
There goes WalMart .
Two birds with one stone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oops!
There goes WalMart.
Two birds with one stone?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602600</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>religious freak</author>
	<datestamp>1269464160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Plus, it'll be a total change in process and increase costs below the point of profitability for Godaddy<br> <br>
fuck, shit, piss</htmltext>
<tokenext>Plus , it 'll be a total change in process and increase costs below the point of profitability for Godaddy fuck , shit , piss</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plus, it'll be a total change in process and increase costs below the point of profitability for Godaddy 
fuck, shit, piss</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31606822</id>
	<title>Censorship?</title>
	<author>Zacqary Adam Green</author>
	<datestamp>1269446160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll show you censorship! *Rips off clothing*

To see more, go to GoDaddy.com! (WARNING: WEB CONTENT UNRATED!!!)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll show you censorship !
* Rips off clothing * To see more , go to GoDaddy.com !
( WARNING : WEB CONTENT UNRATED ! ! !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll show you censorship!
*Rips off clothing*

To see more, go to GoDaddy.com!
(WARNING: WEB CONTENT UNRATED!!!
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605460</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269434520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed. You don't *have* to buy chinese goods, there are home manufactured alternatives for most. My simplistic view is that buying home manufactured goods is good for our economy and *not* buying chinese goods means not supporting their regime through financial contributions.<br>We can whine and whinge and complain about chinese governmental polices but if we continue to purchase 'made in china' stuff we're giving them the financial clout to grow and hurt our industries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
You do n't * have * to buy chinese goods , there are home manufactured alternatives for most .
My simplistic view is that buying home manufactured goods is good for our economy and * not * buying chinese goods means not supporting their regime through financial contributions.We can whine and whinge and complain about chinese governmental polices but if we continue to purchase 'made in china ' stuff we 're giving them the financial clout to grow and hurt our industries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
You don't *have* to buy chinese goods, there are home manufactured alternatives for most.
My simplistic view is that buying home manufactured goods is good for our economy and *not* buying chinese goods means not supporting their regime through financial contributions.We can whine and whinge and complain about chinese governmental polices but if we continue to purchase 'made in china' stuff we're giving them the financial clout to grow and hurt our industries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603168</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1269423240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously, it's hard to believe I used to recommend them as a hosting service--back before their advertising campaigns started looking like Hooter's commercials. Now they could have the best value on the market and I'd still be ashamed to recommend them to any real client (and by "real" I mean "Anyone who isn't an old frat brother").</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , it 's hard to believe I used to recommend them as a hosting service--back before their advertising campaigns started looking like Hooter 's commercials .
Now they could have the best value on the market and I 'd still be ashamed to recommend them to any real client ( and by " real " I mean " Anyone who is n't an old frat brother " ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, it's hard to believe I used to recommend them as a hosting service--back before their advertising campaigns started looking like Hooter's commercials.
Now they could have the best value on the market and I'd still be ashamed to recommend them to any real client (and by "real" I mean "Anyone who isn't an old frat brother").</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605126</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>pleappleappleap</author>
	<datestamp>1269432240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fuck China *and* fuck GoDaddy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck China * and * fuck GoDaddy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck China *and* fuck GoDaddy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603990</id>
	<title>Not necessarily a bad idea..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269426480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't mind if some tlds could only be registered with some sort of identity verification.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't mind if some tlds could only be registered with some sort of identity verification .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't mind if some tlds could only be registered with some sort of identity verification.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602918</id>
	<title>One word: Danica</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269422280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The real reason for Godaddy pulling out isn't because of the Chinese government's new registration requirements, but because it can't survive as business when the government starved the company advertising dollars by banning its Danica Patrick online porno video ads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The real reason for Godaddy pulling out is n't because of the Chinese government 's new registration requirements , but because it ca n't survive as business when the government starved the company advertising dollars by banning its Danica Patrick online porno video ads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real reason for Godaddy pulling out isn't because of the Chinese government's new registration requirements, but because it can't survive as business when the government starved the company advertising dollars by banning its Danica Patrick online porno video ads.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607500</id>
	<title>Re:Hey, Me Too!</title>
	<author>smash</author>
	<datestamp>1269456240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your mac is likely made in china btw (both my mini, and iphone 3G-S are).
<p>
However more to the point - if china stopped accepting contract work originating in the US, very little would actually get made for the US to purchase any more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your mac is likely made in china btw ( both my mini , and iphone 3G-S are ) .
However more to the point - if china stopped accepting contract work originating in the US , very little would actually get made for the US to purchase any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your mac is likely made in china btw (both my mini, and iphone 3G-S are).
However more to the point - if china stopped accepting contract work originating in the US, very little would actually get made for the US to purchase any more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744</id>
	<title>inalienable rights</title>
	<author>vxice</author>
	<datestamp>1269421620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>flame me but can't we just let countries choose their own path?  there is no reason we need to force the American world view down everyone's throat.  yes I do like my country but am awfully tired of our half assed attempts to export our way of life at all levels only when we see fit.  we have supported as many dictators as democracies mostly because dictators are easier to please and get to follow our wishes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>flame me but ca n't we just let countries choose their own path ?
there is no reason we need to force the American world view down everyone 's throat .
yes I do like my country but am awfully tired of our half assed attempts to export our way of life at all levels only when we see fit .
we have supported as many dictators as democracies mostly because dictators are easier to please and get to follow our wishes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>flame me but can't we just let countries choose their own path?
there is no reason we need to force the American world view down everyone's throat.
yes I do like my country but am awfully tired of our half assed attempts to export our way of life at all levels only when we see fit.
we have supported as many dictators as democracies mostly because dictators are easier to please and get to follow our wishes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602494</id>
	<title>Hey, Me Too!</title>
	<author>0racle</author>
	<datestamp>1269463800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would also like to announce that I will no longer be accepting contract work originating in China.<br> <br>Everything is easier when someone else takes the first steps.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would also like to announce that I will no longer be accepting contract work originating in China .
Everything is easier when someone else takes the first steps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would also like to announce that I will no longer be accepting contract work originating in China.
Everything is easier when someone else takes the first steps.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602766</id>
	<title>.CN domain extensions, not chinese registrations!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269421680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This article summary is fairly misleading, they are no longer registering the<nobr> <wbr></nobr><b>.CN extension</b></p><p>Here is some background:</p><p>
&nbsp; In December, giving 2 days notice to the international registrars, the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.CN registry changed their policy to require <b>paper documentation</b> to register a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.CN domain name. In January, because the registry didn't plan this very well, and because they gave absolutely no notice, they decided to turn off registrations all together until they could figure out how to actually implement their new policy. The registry implemented their policy without figuring out actually how to implement their policy..</p><p>After a month of no registrations, they opened it up, changing their policy once again to only allow<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.CN registrations for companies not individuals, and only companies that had an <b>office in china</b>. From what i understand, they are trying to remove the stigma of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.CN being the #1 fraud extension (before<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.cm came out that is)</p><p>So to be clear, godaddy is no longer doing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.CN registrations because<nobr> <wbr></nobr><b>.CN is no longer completely automated</b>,  which makes it unprofitable with their business model which is primarily based on volume.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This article summary is fairly misleading , they are no longer registering the .CN extensionHere is some background :   In December , giving 2 days notice to the international registrars , the .CN registry changed their policy to require paper documentation to register a .CN domain name .
In January , because the registry did n't plan this very well , and because they gave absolutely no notice , they decided to turn off registrations all together until they could figure out how to actually implement their new policy .
The registry implemented their policy without figuring out actually how to implement their policy..After a month of no registrations , they opened it up , changing their policy once again to only allow .CN registrations for companies not individuals , and only companies that had an office in china .
From what i understand , they are trying to remove the stigma of .CN being the # 1 fraud extension ( before .cm came out that is ) So to be clear , godaddy is no longer doing .CN registrations because .CN is no longer completely automated , which makes it unprofitable with their business model which is primarily based on volume .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article summary is fairly misleading, they are no longer registering the .CN extensionHere is some background:
  In December, giving 2 days notice to the international registrars, the .CN registry changed their policy to require paper documentation to register a .CN domain name.
In January, because the registry didn't plan this very well, and because they gave absolutely no notice, they decided to turn off registrations all together until they could figure out how to actually implement their new policy.
The registry implemented their policy without figuring out actually how to implement their policy..After a month of no registrations, they opened it up, changing their policy once again to only allow .CN registrations for companies not individuals, and only companies that had an office in china.
From what i understand, they are trying to remove the stigma of .CN being the #1 fraud extension (before .cm came out that is)So to be clear, godaddy is no longer doing .CN registrations because .CN is no longer completely automated,  which makes it unprofitable with their business model which is primarily based on volume.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603100</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269423000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Danica Patrick has a bra size of roughly 32B. That's hardly "big breasted"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Danica Patrick has a bra size of roughly 32B .
That 's hardly " big breasted " ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Danica Patrick has a bra size of roughly 32B.
That's hardly "big breasted" ;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603182</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269423300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>this was meant to be a counter argument to everyone who is inevitably going to say "way to go human rights."</htmltext>
<tokenext>this was meant to be a counter argument to everyone who is inevitably going to say " way to go human rights .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this was meant to be a counter argument to everyone who is inevitably going to say "way to go human rights.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603382</id>
	<title>What ?!? No more Chinese TO GO !?!</title>
	<author>Bob\_Who</author>
	<datestamp>1269424080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>...Daddy ?!?  Not even the spare ribs ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>...Daddy ? ! ?
Not even the spare ribs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Daddy ?!?
Not even the spare ribs ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603260</id>
	<title>cry wolfe: too many scam sites have .cn - but</title>
	<author>kubitus</author>
	<datestamp>1269423600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>then saying a photo and an ID for a domain registration is too much to stand for the sake of freedome?<p>

are there some hyptocrites around? </p><p>

In the news one can hear now that China does not like Google and some US services sharing bed and servers.</p><p>
I think now some of the real reasons show up!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>then saying a photo and an ID for a domain registration is too much to stand for the sake of freedome ?
are there some hyptocrites around ?
In the news one can hear now that China does not like Google and some US services sharing bed and servers .
I think now some of the real reasons show up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then saying a photo and an ID for a domain registration is too much to stand for the sake of freedome?
are there some hyptocrites around?
In the news one can hear now that China does not like Google and some US services sharing bed and servers.
I think now some of the real reasons show up!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603770</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>Jenming</author>
	<datestamp>1269425640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, letting an entire country choose its own path sounds good.<br>Letting a very small \% choose the path for a really large country has some problems with it. I mean do the citizens even know about Tiananmen Square? If my country was hiding something that recent and that huge from me I would hope somebody on the outside might put some pressure on them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , letting an entire country choose its own path sounds good.Letting a very small \ % choose the path for a really large country has some problems with it .
I mean do the citizens even know about Tiananmen Square ?
If my country was hiding something that recent and that huge from me I would hope somebody on the outside might put some pressure on them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, letting an entire country choose its own path sounds good.Letting a very small \% choose the path for a really large country has some problems with it.
I mean do the citizens even know about Tiananmen Square?
If my country was hiding something that recent and that huge from me I would hope somebody on the outside might put some pressure on them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602584</id>
	<title>GoDaddy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269464100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good for GoDaddy!  It probably won't make any difference, but it is always good to make a statement,</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good for GoDaddy !
It probably wo n't make any difference , but it is always good to make a statement,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good for GoDaddy!
It probably won't make any difference, but it is always good to make a statement,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604668</id>
	<title>Next is Russia.</title>
	<author>Neanderthal Ninny</author>
	<datestamp>1269429540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China is bad, Russia is worst. Also I noticed a large amount of international (ie a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.cn domain actually in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ru and vice-versa)  and I wonder what anyone will do these. I seen all of these as links in spam messages when I do a check on the links within the messages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China is bad , Russia is worst .
Also I noticed a large amount of international ( ie a .cn domain actually in .ru and vice-versa ) and I wonder what anyone will do these .
I seen all of these as links in spam messages when I do a check on the links within the messages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China is bad, Russia is worst.
Also I noticed a large amount of international (ie a .cn domain actually in .ru and vice-versa)  and I wonder what anyone will do these.
I seen all of these as links in spam messages when I do a check on the links within the messages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602920</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269422280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its also because GoDaddy asked if they would be allowed to accept Wii Miis instead of photos but China said no.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its also because GoDaddy asked if they would be allowed to accept Wii Miis instead of photos but China said no .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its also because GoDaddy asked if they would be allowed to accept Wii Miis instead of photos but China said no.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604232</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>shoehornjob</author>
	<datestamp>1269427620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>How can anyone mod the parent "interesting" when it's clearly funny. Must have been a bot or something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How can anyone mod the parent " interesting " when it 's clearly funny .
Must have been a bot or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can anyone mod the parent "interesting" when it's clearly funny.
Must have been a bot or something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603372</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1269424020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I used to be really annoyed that the US has worked with so many kings and dictators, but then I realized the truth: 60 years ago, there was no one else really to do business with. More of the world was in some form of dictatorship than it was in democracy.  When you look at it like that, the fact that we do business with Egypt really becomes more of a legacy operation than evilness, especially for the old guys in the state department who have been around a while.<p><div class="quote"><p>am awfully tired of our half assed attempts to export our way of life at all levels only when we see fit. we have supported as many dictators as democracies mostly because dictators are easier to please and get to follow our wishes.</p></div><p>So you see a problem, and that is we aren't consistent in trying to make the world better, and your solution is to stop trying?  If we change our policy, why don't we change it instead to be, encourage freedom where we can, deprecate evil wherever it is.  We can't change the world alone, but almost everyone should agree that freedom of speech, women's rights, and freedom of self-determination are a good thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to be really annoyed that the US has worked with so many kings and dictators , but then I realized the truth : 60 years ago , there was no one else really to do business with .
More of the world was in some form of dictatorship than it was in democracy .
When you look at it like that , the fact that we do business with Egypt really becomes more of a legacy operation than evilness , especially for the old guys in the state department who have been around a while.am awfully tired of our half assed attempts to export our way of life at all levels only when we see fit .
we have supported as many dictators as democracies mostly because dictators are easier to please and get to follow our wishes.So you see a problem , and that is we are n't consistent in trying to make the world better , and your solution is to stop trying ?
If we change our policy , why do n't we change it instead to be , encourage freedom where we can , deprecate evil wherever it is .
We ca n't change the world alone , but almost everyone should agree that freedom of speech , women 's rights , and freedom of self-determination are a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to be really annoyed that the US has worked with so many kings and dictators, but then I realized the truth: 60 years ago, there was no one else really to do business with.
More of the world was in some form of dictatorship than it was in democracy.
When you look at it like that, the fact that we do business with Egypt really becomes more of a legacy operation than evilness, especially for the old guys in the state department who have been around a while.am awfully tired of our half assed attempts to export our way of life at all levels only when we see fit.
we have supported as many dictators as democracies mostly because dictators are easier to please and get to follow our wishes.So you see a problem, and that is we aren't consistent in trying to make the world better, and your solution is to stop trying?
If we change our policy, why don't we change it instead to be, encourage freedom where we can, deprecate evil wherever it is.
We can't change the world alone, but almost everyone should agree that freedom of speech, women's rights, and freedom of self-determination are a good thing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603404</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269424140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, in the initial story I included a link to <a href="http://nodaddy.com/" title="nodaddy.com">no daddy</a> [nodaddy.com].  I just couldn't understand how GoDaddy could possibly be doing something non-evil.  There's gotta be an angle.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , in the initial story I included a link to no daddy [ nodaddy.com ] .
I just could n't understand how GoDaddy could possibly be doing something non-evil .
There 's got ta be an angle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, in the initial story I included a link to no daddy [nodaddy.com].
I just couldn't understand how GoDaddy could possibly be doing something non-evil.
There's gotta be an angle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603568</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory</title>
	<author>GodfatherofSoul</author>
	<datestamp>1269424740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nice one, wish I had mod points</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice one , wish I had mod points</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice one, wish I had mod points</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602936</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269422340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be one thing if the US government decided to force democracy down China's throat.</p><p>As things stand, that's not even in the ballpark of what's going on</p><p>This, my friend, is capitalism. Google's power comes from freedom of information, which is severely limited in China. Similarly, GoDaddy has decided that continuing to operate in China would be just too much hassle.</p><p>In my opinion, this is also the right thing to do. China is a big power -- possibly the next superpower. And if they do become at least as powerful as the US, it seems reasonable to hope that they will be dedicated to freedom instead of oppression.</p><p>But in the end, this is the market at work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be one thing if the US government decided to force democracy down China 's throat.As things stand , that 's not even in the ballpark of what 's going onThis , my friend , is capitalism .
Google 's power comes from freedom of information , which is severely limited in China .
Similarly , GoDaddy has decided that continuing to operate in China would be just too much hassle.In my opinion , this is also the right thing to do .
China is a big power -- possibly the next superpower .
And if they do become at least as powerful as the US , it seems reasonable to hope that they will be dedicated to freedom instead of oppression.But in the end , this is the market at work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be one thing if the US government decided to force democracy down China's throat.As things stand, that's not even in the ballpark of what's going onThis, my friend, is capitalism.
Google's power comes from freedom of information, which is severely limited in China.
Similarly, GoDaddy has decided that continuing to operate in China would be just too much hassle.In my opinion, this is also the right thing to do.
China is a big power -- possibly the next superpower.
And if they do become at least as powerful as the US, it seems reasonable to hope that they will be dedicated to freedom instead of oppression.But in the end, this is the market at work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602612</id>
	<title>Not political, just too much work</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1269464220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
China is imposing requirements that domain registrants must provide a photo and a business ID. That's too much hassle for GoDaddy, home of extreme low-end domain registrations.  This has little to do with politics and much to do with GoDaddy's business model.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China is imposing requirements that domain registrants must provide a photo and a business ID .
That 's too much hassle for GoDaddy , home of extreme low-end domain registrations .
This has little to do with politics and much to do with GoDaddy 's business model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
China is imposing requirements that domain registrants must provide a photo and a business ID.
That's too much hassle for GoDaddy, home of extreme low-end domain registrations.
This has little to do with politics and much to do with GoDaddy's business model.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603366</id>
	<title>Re:Hey, Me Too!</title>
	<author>interval1066</author>
	<datestamp>1269424020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't fault companies who refuse to do business in China for whatever reason. Its simply the right thing to do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't fault companies who refuse to do business in China for whatever reason .
Its simply the right thing to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't fault companies who refuse to do business in China for whatever reason.
Its simply the right thing to do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269463740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GoDaddy did something I like.
</p><p>Though, it probably has less to do with "Yay Freedom!" than "We can't sell that even with big-breasted women."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GoDaddy did something I like .
Though , it probably has less to do with " Yay Freedom !
" than " We ca n't sell that even with big-breasted women .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GoDaddy did something I like.
Though, it probably has less to do with "Yay Freedom!
" than "We can't sell that even with big-breasted women.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604326</id>
	<title>This will make them reconsider.</title>
	<author>PhasmatisApparatus</author>
	<datestamp>1269428040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>China will be feeling the pain when their businesses and citizens are no longer able to be conned out of their money by GoDaddy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>China will be feeling the pain when their businesses and citizens are no longer able to be conned out of their money by GoDaddy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China will be feeling the pain when their businesses and citizens are no longer able to be conned out of their money by GoDaddy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605214</id>
	<title>A little too familiar for them?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269432840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a shameless attempt by the world's worst domain registrar to ride on Google's coattails. As a registrar, GoDaddy engages in some of the shadiest practices ever devised in this little corner of the internet. If domain names were people, GoDaddy would be the China of DNS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a shameless attempt by the world 's worst domain registrar to ride on Google 's coattails .
As a registrar , GoDaddy engages in some of the shadiest practices ever devised in this little corner of the internet .
If domain names were people , GoDaddy would be the China of DNS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a shameless attempt by the world's worst domain registrar to ride on Google's coattails.
As a registrar, GoDaddy engages in some of the shadiest practices ever devised in this little corner of the internet.
If domain names were people, GoDaddy would be the China of DNS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603324</id>
	<title>Made in China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269423900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>how about we stop buying products that are Made In China?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how about we stop buying products that are Made In China ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how about we stop buying products that are Made In China?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602742</id>
	<title>Geeze...</title>
	<author>DoofusOfDeath</author>
	<datestamp>1269421620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a bunch of boobs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a bunch of boobs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a bunch of boobs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602788</id>
	<title>This is bullshit!</title>
	<author>e2d2</author>
	<datestamp>1269421800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is bullshit! This article is from today, it's not supposed to be posted here until earliest Friday and more likely by Sunday.</p><p>Do not comment! It will be posted again tomorrow anyway and your words will be forgotten. Or better yet I'll steal all the witty ones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is bullshit !
This article is from today , it 's not supposed to be posted here until earliest Friday and more likely by Sunday.Do not comment !
It will be posted again tomorrow anyway and your words will be forgotten .
Or better yet I 'll steal all the witty ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is bullshit!
This article is from today, it's not supposed to be posted here until earliest Friday and more likely by Sunday.Do not comment!
It will be posted again tomorrow anyway and your words will be forgotten.
Or better yet I'll steal all the witty ones.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604794</id>
	<title>Re:What is their bottom line in China?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269430260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Control freaks generally don't like sharing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Control freaks generally do n't like sharing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Control freaks generally don't like sharing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602608</id>
	<title>What is their bottom line in China?</title>
	<author>zero\_out</author>
	<datestamp>1269464220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have to wonder just how much GoDaddy.com was making from its presence in China.  What was its market share?  What was its gross revenue?</p><p>Based on the opinions of many<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. comments, I would have suspected that the two would make happy bedfellows.  Doesn't GoDaddy.com practice extreme control over their clients, rooting boxes, and taking over lapsed domain names to then extort their customers, or am I mistaking it for another registrar / host?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to wonder just how much GoDaddy.com was making from its presence in China .
What was its market share ?
What was its gross revenue ? Based on the opinions of many / .
comments , I would have suspected that the two would make happy bedfellows .
Does n't GoDaddy.com practice extreme control over their clients , rooting boxes , and taking over lapsed domain names to then extort their customers , or am I mistaking it for another registrar / host ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to wonder just how much GoDaddy.com was making from its presence in China.
What was its market share?
What was its gross revenue?Based on the opinions of many /.
comments, I would have suspected that the two would make happy bedfellows.
Doesn't GoDaddy.com practice extreme control over their clients, rooting boxes, and taking over lapsed domain names to then extort their customers, or am I mistaking it for another registrar / host?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31610160</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269529980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Proportionally-larger breasted" doesn't have the same ring to it, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Proportionally-larger breasted " does n't have the same ring to it , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Proportionally-larger breasted" doesn't have the same ring to it, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604826</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>geniusj</author>
	<datestamp>1269430380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think people are confused on what moderation is for on Slashdot.  This isn't digg.  Moderation isn't based on whether you agree or disagree with a post.  I fail to see how this post is informative in any way, it's just a statement of opinion.  That's not to say it should necessarily be modded down, but it definitely shouldn't have been modded Informative.  Oh well, hopefully there are still people that meta-moderate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think people are confused on what moderation is for on Slashdot .
This is n't digg .
Moderation is n't based on whether you agree or disagree with a post .
I fail to see how this post is informative in any way , it 's just a statement of opinion .
That 's not to say it should necessarily be modded down , but it definitely should n't have been modded Informative .
Oh well , hopefully there are still people that meta-moderate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think people are confused on what moderation is for on Slashdot.
This isn't digg.
Moderation isn't based on whether you agree or disagree with a post.
I fail to see how this post is informative in any way, it's just a statement of opinion.
That's not to say it should necessarily be modded down, but it definitely shouldn't have been modded Informative.
Oh well, hopefully there are still people that meta-moderate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603786</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1269425700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flame me but can't we just let individuals choose their own path? There is no reason the Chinese government needs to force their world view down their citizens' throats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flame me but ca n't we just let individuals choose their own path ?
There is no reason the Chinese government needs to force their world view down their citizens ' throats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flame me but can't we just let individuals choose their own path?
There is no reason the Chinese government needs to force their world view down their citizens' throats.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604994</id>
	<title>Re: to hell with China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269431520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WTF? There is no 'Chinese Threat', nor is there an 'Indian Threat', nor a 'Mexican Threat' for that matter.</p><p>If you are concerned about why a lot of jobs are moving to China, then look at why it is happening.</p><p>China currently has a supply of willing workers that can produce goods, and services, less expensively than we are willing to produce them. They can do this because each worker benefits by increasing their own quality of life. Sure, their quality of life doesn't seem to be as good as ours, but it is a net improvement, and that is all that matters to them.</p><p>It's that simple, and the organizations that need these workers, will always seek them at least cost. The only possible reason that they would spend more elsewhere is if there were added value in doing so. For jobs that require little more than the basic labor, what value can you add?</p><p>Frankly, through inflation, and greed, we've priced ourselves right out of the market. We (in the USA) are not competitive, and our perceived 'added value' does not make up the difference.</p><p>When Chinese labor proves less economical in comparison to say, Canadian labor, the jobs will move to Canada. Then labor becomes more economical somewhere else, and the jobs will move there. Lather, rinse, repeat.</p><p>I only see two ways to 'FIX' this:</p><p>1. Adopt Protectionism.  (That means that no nation, other than your own, is granted 'most favored' status. This is a hugely political process, and is never going to be consistent.)</p><p>2. Form a Global Labor Union which sets the cost of labor to an equal level for everyone. (This labor union has to somehow be incorruptible. I'm not sure how well that is going to work.)</p><p>Calling this a 'Chinese Threat' is disingenuous, at best, and really shows a lack of understanding of the nature of the problem.</p><p>The only threats that exist are ignorance, and entitlement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WTF ?
There is no 'Chinese Threat ' , nor is there an 'Indian Threat ' , nor a 'Mexican Threat ' for that matter.If you are concerned about why a lot of jobs are moving to China , then look at why it is happening.China currently has a supply of willing workers that can produce goods , and services , less expensively than we are willing to produce them .
They can do this because each worker benefits by increasing their own quality of life .
Sure , their quality of life does n't seem to be as good as ours , but it is a net improvement , and that is all that matters to them.It 's that simple , and the organizations that need these workers , will always seek them at least cost .
The only possible reason that they would spend more elsewhere is if there were added value in doing so .
For jobs that require little more than the basic labor , what value can you add ? Frankly , through inflation , and greed , we 've priced ourselves right out of the market .
We ( in the USA ) are not competitive , and our perceived 'added value ' does not make up the difference.When Chinese labor proves less economical in comparison to say , Canadian labor , the jobs will move to Canada .
Then labor becomes more economical somewhere else , and the jobs will move there .
Lather , rinse , repeat.I only see two ways to 'FIX ' this : 1 .
Adopt Protectionism .
( That means that no nation , other than your own , is granted 'most favored ' status .
This is a hugely political process , and is never going to be consistent. ) 2 .
Form a Global Labor Union which sets the cost of labor to an equal level for everyone .
( This labor union has to somehow be incorruptible .
I 'm not sure how well that is going to work .
) Calling this a 'Chinese Threat ' is disingenuous , at best , and really shows a lack of understanding of the nature of the problem.The only threats that exist are ignorance , and entitlement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WTF?
There is no 'Chinese Threat', nor is there an 'Indian Threat', nor a 'Mexican Threat' for that matter.If you are concerned about why a lot of jobs are moving to China, then look at why it is happening.China currently has a supply of willing workers that can produce goods, and services, less expensively than we are willing to produce them.
They can do this because each worker benefits by increasing their own quality of life.
Sure, their quality of life doesn't seem to be as good as ours, but it is a net improvement, and that is all that matters to them.It's that simple, and the organizations that need these workers, will always seek them at least cost.
The only possible reason that they would spend more elsewhere is if there were added value in doing so.
For jobs that require little more than the basic labor, what value can you add?Frankly, through inflation, and greed, we've priced ourselves right out of the market.
We (in the USA) are not competitive, and our perceived 'added value' does not make up the difference.When Chinese labor proves less economical in comparison to say, Canadian labor, the jobs will move to Canada.
Then labor becomes more economical somewhere else, and the jobs will move there.
Lather, rinse, repeat.I only see two ways to 'FIX' this:1.
Adopt Protectionism.
(That means that no nation, other than your own, is granted 'most favored' status.
This is a hugely political process, and is never going to be consistent.)2.
Form a Global Labor Union which sets the cost of labor to an equal level for everyone.
(This labor union has to somehow be incorruptible.
I'm not sure how well that is going to work.
)Calling this a 'Chinese Threat' is disingenuous, at best, and really shows a lack of understanding of the nature of the problem.The only threats that exist are ignorance, and entitlement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603008</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603608</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269424920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>can't we just let countries choose their own path?</i></p><p>Can't China just let its citizens choose their own path?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ca n't we just let countries choose their own path ? Ca n't China just let its citizens choose their own path ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>can't we just let countries choose their own path?Can't China just let its citizens choose their own path?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602970</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>neonKow</author>
	<datestamp>1269422460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Last I checked, neither Google nor GoDaddy has a military, so I don't see how they're forcing anything. Both GoDaddy and Google are probably less concerned about the health of the US than about the health of the Internet, so I don't even think "American world view" and "supporting dictators vs democracies" has much to do with the issue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Last I checked , neither Google nor GoDaddy has a military , so I do n't see how they 're forcing anything .
Both GoDaddy and Google are probably less concerned about the health of the US than about the health of the Internet , so I do n't even think " American world view " and " supporting dictators vs democracies " has much to do with the issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last I checked, neither Google nor GoDaddy has a military, so I don't see how they're forcing anything.
Both GoDaddy and Google are probably less concerned about the health of the US than about the health of the Internet, so I don't even think "American world view" and "supporting dictators vs democracies" has much to do with the issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269424020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good.  Don't buy anything made in China.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good .
Do n't buy anything made in China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good.
Don't buy anything made in China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31612972</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>jschmitz</author>
	<datestamp>1269539460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just LMFAO - no kidding even with the hot chicks those commercials are annoying as hell -</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just LMFAO - no kidding even with the hot chicks those commercials are annoying as hell -</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just LMFAO - no kidding even with the hot chicks those commercials are annoying as hell -</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604764</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269430020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>            "almost everyone should agree that freedom of speech, women's rights, and freedom of self-determination are a good thing."</p><p>no one denies that. i tend to think many of us here in the west view the Chinese government officials or even occasionally the Chinese people don't believe in that. from what I know, that is not true.</p><p>however, this is a problem of looking at issues and solving them in a staged fashion. people in the developed countries, because of the developed status, tend to look at priorities a lot more differently than those "unprivileged" ones. There are many agendas, issues and problems the Chinese people and their government want to solve. And by their caculation at the *current point of time*, complete freedom of speech and complete freedom of self-determination are NOT ranked very high. so why so many of us automatically assume our priorities and values must be theirs and thus assuming their government is more evil beyond imagination?</p><p>people over there hold a hostile views against the west because deep in their mind they believe the purpose and goal of the west is NOT to see and foster a strong China to be able to challenge the west, whether it's of dictatorship or democracy. Thus many of these pro-democracy talks and actions done by the west governments and/or companies are viewed as conspiracy. I can't help but think they're mostly right. The US (both the government as well as the American people) wants to enjoy the unilateral single superpower status. Please enlighten me if I'm wrong here and the all those pushes and actions are sincere.</p><p>If people buy that arguments, and are willing to put themselves into the Chinese's shoes, lots of their behaviors and actions, such as GFW, censorships are making sense: because they don't want to see a color revolution and Afghan/Iraq style freedom imposed onto them and ultimately jeopardize their so called peaceful rise.</p><p>my 2c</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" almost everyone should agree that freedom of speech , women 's rights , and freedom of self-determination are a good thing .
" no one denies that .
i tend to think many of us here in the west view the Chinese government officials or even occasionally the Chinese people do n't believe in that .
from what I know , that is not true.however , this is a problem of looking at issues and solving them in a staged fashion .
people in the developed countries , because of the developed status , tend to look at priorities a lot more differently than those " unprivileged " ones .
There are many agendas , issues and problems the Chinese people and their government want to solve .
And by their caculation at the * current point of time * , complete freedom of speech and complete freedom of self-determination are NOT ranked very high .
so why so many of us automatically assume our priorities and values must be theirs and thus assuming their government is more evil beyond imagination ? people over there hold a hostile views against the west because deep in their mind they believe the purpose and goal of the west is NOT to see and foster a strong China to be able to challenge the west , whether it 's of dictatorship or democracy .
Thus many of these pro-democracy talks and actions done by the west governments and/or companies are viewed as conspiracy .
I ca n't help but think they 're mostly right .
The US ( both the government as well as the American people ) wants to enjoy the unilateral single superpower status .
Please enlighten me if I 'm wrong here and the all those pushes and actions are sincere.If people buy that arguments , and are willing to put themselves into the Chinese 's shoes , lots of their behaviors and actions , such as GFW , censorships are making sense : because they do n't want to see a color revolution and Afghan/Iraq style freedom imposed onto them and ultimately jeopardize their so called peaceful rise.my 2c</tokentext>
<sentencetext>            "almost everyone should agree that freedom of speech, women's rights, and freedom of self-determination are a good thing.
"no one denies that.
i tend to think many of us here in the west view the Chinese government officials or even occasionally the Chinese people don't believe in that.
from what I know, that is not true.however, this is a problem of looking at issues and solving them in a staged fashion.
people in the developed countries, because of the developed status, tend to look at priorities a lot more differently than those "unprivileged" ones.
There are many agendas, issues and problems the Chinese people and their government want to solve.
And by their caculation at the *current point of time*, complete freedom of speech and complete freedom of self-determination are NOT ranked very high.
so why so many of us automatically assume our priorities and values must be theirs and thus assuming their government is more evil beyond imagination?people over there hold a hostile views against the west because deep in their mind they believe the purpose and goal of the west is NOT to see and foster a strong China to be able to challenge the west, whether it's of dictatorship or democracy.
Thus many of these pro-democracy talks and actions done by the west governments and/or companies are viewed as conspiracy.
I can't help but think they're mostly right.
The US (both the government as well as the American people) wants to enjoy the unilateral single superpower status.
Please enlighten me if I'm wrong here and the all those pushes and actions are sincere.If people buy that arguments, and are willing to put themselves into the Chinese's shoes, lots of their behaviors and actions, such as GFW, censorships are making sense: because they don't want to see a color revolution and Afghan/Iraq style freedom imposed onto them and ultimately jeopardize their so called peaceful rise.my 2c</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474</id>
	<title>Good.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269463740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fuck China and its shit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck China and its shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck China and its shit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605500</id>
	<title>I am rather happy to see this!</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1269434760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I fell short of predicting "others would follow" when I posted this:</p><p><a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1592790&amp;cid=31591052" title="slashdot.org">http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1592790&amp;cid=31591052</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>Instead I expressed my hope that there would be others.  Now we just need to see a windfall of other companies prepared to follow these two.  I wonder if there is an easy way to list who is currently doing business in China so that we can lobby or petition them to also "do the right thing?"  After all, China won't hold up for long if people start leaving them.  If that were to keep up, China would have to capitulate if they would like to continue to grow.</p><p>We can't get the U.S. Government to take appropriate action, but maybe "the people" will do it anyway.  We all love our "walmart" prices, but it seems we love our ideals just a little more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I fell short of predicting " others would follow " when I posted this : http : //slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1592790&amp;cid = 31591052 [ slashdot.org ] Instead I expressed my hope that there would be others .
Now we just need to see a windfall of other companies prepared to follow these two .
I wonder if there is an easy way to list who is currently doing business in China so that we can lobby or petition them to also " do the right thing ?
" After all , China wo n't hold up for long if people start leaving them .
If that were to keep up , China would have to capitulate if they would like to continue to grow.We ca n't get the U.S. Government to take appropriate action , but maybe " the people " will do it anyway .
We all love our " walmart " prices , but it seems we love our ideals just a little more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fell short of predicting "others would follow" when I posted this:http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1592790&amp;cid=31591052 [slashdot.org]Instead I expressed my hope that there would be others.
Now we just need to see a windfall of other companies prepared to follow these two.
I wonder if there is an easy way to list who is currently doing business in China so that we can lobby or petition them to also "do the right thing?
"  After all, China won't hold up for long if people start leaving them.
If that were to keep up, China would have to capitulate if they would like to continue to grow.We can't get the U.S. Government to take appropriate action, but maybe "the people" will do it anyway.
We all love our "walmart" prices, but it seems we love our ideals just a little more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602772</id>
	<title>Die China Die</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269421740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only thing China should be allowed to do is host a war.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing China should be allowed to do is host a war .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing China should be allowed to do is host a war.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603144</id>
	<title>Me too</title>
	<author>Midnight Thunder</author>
	<datestamp>1269423180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I too will stop doing my business in China immediately. The fact I haven't started doing business there is irrelevant. The fact I might start again when nobody is paying attention is also irrelevant. All that matters now is that I grab some headlines and some free advertising<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I too will stop doing my business in China immediately .
The fact I have n't started doing business there is irrelevant .
The fact I might start again when nobody is paying attention is also irrelevant .
All that matters now is that I grab some headlines and some free advertising ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I too will stop doing my business in China immediately.
The fact I haven't started doing business there is irrelevant.
The fact I might start again when nobody is paying attention is also irrelevant.
All that matters now is that I grab some headlines and some free advertising ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603008</id>
	<title>to hell with China</title>
	<author>jsepeta</author>
	<datestamp>1269422580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>we need to take the growing chinese threat to america a lot more seriously than we have in the past. huzzah to google and godaddy for "getting it"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>we need to take the growing chinese threat to america a lot more seriously than we have in the past .
huzzah to google and godaddy for " getting it "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we need to take the growing chinese threat to america a lot more seriously than we have in the past.
huzzah to google and godaddy for "getting it"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603280</id>
	<title>Re:Good.</title>
	<author>clampolo</author>
	<datestamp>1269423660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're being too harsh.  This is all a misunderstanding.  They just wanted some Danica Patrick pics to wank off to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're being too harsh .
This is all a misunderstanding .
They just wanted some Danica Patrick pics to wank off to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're being too harsh.
This is all a misunderstanding.
They just wanted some Danica Patrick pics to wank off to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31608570</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269517860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, GoDaddy can offer to send out big-breasted women to photograph the registrants, I'm sure people will line up for that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , GoDaddy can offer to send out big-breasted women to photograph the registrants , I 'm sure people will line up for that : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, GoDaddy can offer to send out big-breasted women to photograph the registrants, I'm sure people will line up for that :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602566</id>
	<title>Obligatory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269464040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Soviet China, domain registers <b>you</b>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet China , domain registers you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet China, domain registers you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31612426</id>
	<title>Cold War 2.0</title>
	<author>wye43</author>
	<datestamp>1269537780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is not good. Too many tentions arise too fast.<br>
Smells like a new Cold War is starting. The optimist in me hopes that it will stay limited to Internet-based hostilities only.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not good .
Too many tentions arise too fast .
Smells like a new Cold War is starting .
The optimist in me hopes that it will stay limited to Internet-based hostilities only .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not good.
Too many tentions arise too fast.
Smells like a new Cold War is starting.
The optimist in me hopes that it will stay limited to Internet-based hostilities only.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602542</id>
	<title>pandemic?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269463980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not a big deal - godaddy isn't the only domain registry out there.  I wonder what other companies are going to follow suit though.  Endgame I see is china eventually unplugging from the rest of the world and inventing it's own set of 'tubes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a big deal - godaddy is n't the only domain registry out there .
I wonder what other companies are going to follow suit though .
Endgame I see is china eventually unplugging from the rest of the world and inventing it 's own set of 'tubes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a big deal - godaddy isn't the only domain registry out there.
I wonder what other companies are going to follow suit though.
Endgame I see is china eventually unplugging from the rest of the world and inventing it's own set of 'tubes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603574</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1269424800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I used to be really annoyed that the US has worked with so many kings and dictators, but then I realized the truth: 60 years ago, there was no one else really to do business with.</i></p><p>The US government has repeatedly overthrown democratically elected (usually socialist) governments and installed capitalist friendly dictators.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to be really annoyed that the US has worked with so many kings and dictators , but then I realized the truth : 60 years ago , there was no one else really to do business with.The US government has repeatedly overthrown democratically elected ( usually socialist ) governments and installed capitalist friendly dictators .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to be really annoyed that the US has worked with so many kings and dictators, but then I realized the truth: 60 years ago, there was no one else really to do business with.The US government has repeatedly overthrown democratically elected (usually socialist) governments and installed capitalist friendly dictators.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604078</id>
	<title>Re:What is their bottom line in China?</title>
	<author>d34dluk3</author>
	<datestamp>1269426960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Doesn't GoDaddy.com practice extreme control over their clients?</p></div><p>Extreme control over their clients' <b>boobs</b> is more like it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't GoDaddy.com practice extreme control over their clients ? Extreme control over their clients ' boobs is more like it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't GoDaddy.com practice extreme control over their clients?Extreme control over their clients' boobs is more like it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603944</id>
	<title>Re: to hell with China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269426300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about you shut the fuck up you fucking racist idiot?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about you shut the fuck up you fucking racist idiot ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about you shut the fuck up you fucking racist idiot?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603008</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605280</id>
	<title>You Google groupies must be smoking something good</title>
	<author>doug20r</author>
	<datestamp>1269433260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext> - I think Google management are immature, show a gross lack of understanding and tolerance, and I can assure all you Google groupies that you will not be getting much of a following.  This case is not even related to Google so how can they be 'following Google'?</htmltext>
<tokenext>- I think Google management are immature , show a gross lack of understanding and tolerance , and I can assure all you Google groupies that you will not be getting much of a following .
This case is not even related to Google so how can they be 'following Google ' ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> - I think Google management are immature, show a gross lack of understanding and tolerance, and I can assure all you Google groupies that you will not be getting much of a following.
This case is not even related to Google so how can they be 'following Google'?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603518</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>Eighty7</author>
	<datestamp>1269424560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wish they'd go ahead and pull out of America too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish they 'd go ahead and pull out of America too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish they'd go ahead and pull out of America too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602912</id>
	<title>Re:Hey, Me Too!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269422220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And I will not buy stuff from Walmart.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I will not buy stuff from Walmart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I will not buy stuff from Walmart.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603502</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269424500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it is now</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it is now</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it is now</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602848</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269422100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was going to post some thoughts along these lines.</p><p>For me, it boils down to this:  When corporations start
controlling policy (as happens in the USA all the time)
the corporations need to be controlled.</p><p>The opposite of that is when the government dictates, it needs to be controlled.</p><p>In the US, we plainly have some issues where government
needs to tackle the corporations.  In China, it's the opposite
in some cases (although they seem to have their share of crony
capitalism too).</p><p>Thus, I feel that I can cheer for the corporations vs. China
here, without being a hypocrite.</p><p>OTOH, when the US government actually takes steps to regulate
out-of-control corporations, I can cheer for that too.</p><p>I always get some flames when I tell people I'm a passionate
moderate.  They think passion and moderation are inconsistant
positions.  No, They AREN'T, and yes I'm SHOUTING MY PASSION
FOR MODERATION from the rooftop.  Moderate government.  Moderate
corporate influence.  BALANCE, DAMNIT.  See?  Passionate moderation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to post some thoughts along these lines.For me , it boils down to this : When corporations start controlling policy ( as happens in the USA all the time ) the corporations need to be controlled.The opposite of that is when the government dictates , it needs to be controlled.In the US , we plainly have some issues where government needs to tackle the corporations .
In China , it 's the opposite in some cases ( although they seem to have their share of crony capitalism too ) .Thus , I feel that I can cheer for the corporations vs. China here , without being a hypocrite.OTOH , when the US government actually takes steps to regulate out-of-control corporations , I can cheer for that too.I always get some flames when I tell people I 'm a passionate moderate .
They think passion and moderation are inconsistant positions .
No , They ARE N'T , and yes I 'm SHOUTING MY PASSION FOR MODERATION from the rooftop .
Moderate government .
Moderate corporate influence .
BALANCE , DAMNIT .
See ? Passionate moderation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to post some thoughts along these lines.For me, it boils down to this:  When corporations start
controlling policy (as happens in the USA all the time)
the corporations need to be controlled.The opposite of that is when the government dictates, it needs to be controlled.In the US, we plainly have some issues where government
needs to tackle the corporations.
In China, it's the opposite
in some cases (although they seem to have their share of crony
capitalism too).Thus, I feel that I can cheer for the corporations vs. China
here, without being a hypocrite.OTOH, when the US government actually takes steps to regulate
out-of-control corporations, I can cheer for that too.I always get some flames when I tell people I'm a passionate
moderate.
They think passion and moderation are inconsistant
positions.
No, They AREN'T, and yes I'm SHOUTING MY PASSION
FOR MODERATION from the rooftop.
Moderate government.
Moderate
corporate influence.
BALANCE, DAMNIT.
See?  Passionate moderation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603488</id>
	<title>Interesting</title>
	<author>WeeBit</author>
	<datestamp>1269424440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Smith has sponsored a bill that would make it a crime for U.S. companies to share personal user information with "Internet-restricting" countries. "<br><br>Actually if you think about it, that Bill would help companies like Google and GoDaddy.  Sorry China I can't help you in your quest to find out which of your citizens posted that content!  Problem solved thanks to the new Bill.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Smith has sponsored a bill that would make it a crime for U.S. companies to share personal user information with " Internet-restricting " countries .
" Actually if you think about it , that Bill would help companies like Google and GoDaddy .
Sorry China I ca n't help you in your quest to find out which of your citizens posted that content !
Problem solved thanks to the new Bill .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Smith has sponsored a bill that would make it a crime for U.S. companies to share personal user information with "Internet-restricting" countries.
"Actually if you think about it, that Bill would help companies like Google and GoDaddy.
Sorry China I can't help you in your quest to find out which of your citizens posted that content!
Problem solved thanks to the new Bill.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604822</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269430380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The universe is ruled by letting things take their course. It cannot be ruled by interfering. -- Chinese proverb</p><p>I wonder what the response would be use China's own wisdom in making arguments in regards to what they're doing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The universe is ruled by letting things take their course .
It can not be ruled by interfering .
-- Chinese proverbI wonder what the response would be use China 's own wisdom in making arguments in regards to what they 're doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The universe is ruled by letting things take their course.
It cannot be ruled by interfering.
-- Chinese proverbI wonder what the response would be use China's own wisdom in making arguments in regards to what they're doing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607214</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>ajs</author>
	<datestamp>1269450660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sometimes it's worth a reality check. Some companies are sexist asses, true, but that actually doesn't put them on the same playing field as a country that stomps on the freedoms of their citizens the way China does.</p><p>Granted, Godaddy didn't do this out of the goodness of their little, black hearts, but it's worth thinking about the relative scale of douchitude in the world, from time to time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes it 's worth a reality check .
Some companies are sexist asses , true , but that actually does n't put them on the same playing field as a country that stomps on the freedoms of their citizens the way China does.Granted , Godaddy did n't do this out of the goodness of their little , black hearts , but it 's worth thinking about the relative scale of douchitude in the world , from time to time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes it's worth a reality check.
Some companies are sexist asses, true, but that actually doesn't put them on the same playing field as a country that stomps on the freedoms of their citizens the way China does.Granted, Godaddy didn't do this out of the goodness of their little, black hearts, but it's worth thinking about the relative scale of douchitude in the world, from time to time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603446</id>
	<title>Hooray for rational behavior</title>
	<author>Un pobre guey</author>
	<datestamp>1269424260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Chinese government censors the Internet, thus screwing Chinese internet users. Google and GoDaddy find this offensive, so they cease serving Chinese internet users, thus screwing them again. Remind me how this makes sense?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chinese government censors the Internet , thus screwing Chinese internet users .
Google and GoDaddy find this offensive , so they cease serving Chinese internet users , thus screwing them again .
Remind me how this makes sense ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Chinese government censors the Internet, thus screwing Chinese internet users.
Google and GoDaddy find this offensive, so they cease serving Chinese internet users, thus screwing them again.
Remind me how this makes sense?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603834</id>
	<title>Re:inalienable rights</title>
	<author>Jenming</author>
	<datestamp>1269425880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, the cold-war didn't really bring out the best in the US, or Europe, or the USSR, or China, etc. At least nobody got nuked (sorry Japan).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , the cold-war did n't really bring out the best in the US , or Europe , or the USSR , or China , etc .
At least nobody got nuked ( sorry Japan ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, the cold-war didn't really bring out the best in the US, or Europe, or the USSR, or China, etc.
At least nobody got nuked (sorry Japan).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603796</id>
	<title>They still have a stranglehold...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269425700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This really does not hurt China much.</p><p>The western society is a 'servce culture', we exchange value by doing things for one another. The east culture is a manufacture culture. In the UK, our youth look up to playing instruments, video games, being footballers or engineers - doing service related things. In China, education is very important and cut throat. It's more about being a mathmatician, engineer or scientist. In my book about China and Microsoft (Gwanshee), the Chinese can get into university degrees as young as 13!</p><p>They are reducing our production capability - they manufacture a large number of things for us so we can do business cheaper. This is a massive stranglehold they have: we benefit because our businesses can do things for less. It's no longer profitable for us to run factories and production workshops in our own territories. This means we become dependent on them, like sucking from a teat.</p><p>What do they get from it?</p><p>Skills, knowledge, experience to bolster their own country. We get nothing. If we send an Apple engineer to overseer production of an iPod*, who is actually learning how the technology works? Do you think that it's really private from the native factory owners? We're essentially giving them technology and abilities. We have seen them building factories, power stations and transport links that put ours to shame, they are really building themselves an impressive infrastructure. They fund international scholarships to put the skills they learn to good news.</p><p>We're digging ourself into a roadblock. What if China cuts us off from manufacturing? It's not as though ALL THE businesses have absolute control, they could not avoid retribution from the government!</p><p>We would be screwed. The UK practically builds nothing by itself anymore, we just let China do it. If they stop, we're unemployed and opened for expansion. I think they are grinding us down slowly and surely.</p><p>What do you think of China? What can we do about it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This really does not hurt China much.The western society is a 'servce culture ' , we exchange value by doing things for one another .
The east culture is a manufacture culture .
In the UK , our youth look up to playing instruments , video games , being footballers or engineers - doing service related things .
In China , education is very important and cut throat .
It 's more about being a mathmatician , engineer or scientist .
In my book about China and Microsoft ( Gwanshee ) , the Chinese can get into university degrees as young as 13 ! They are reducing our production capability - they manufacture a large number of things for us so we can do business cheaper .
This is a massive stranglehold they have : we benefit because our businesses can do things for less .
It 's no longer profitable for us to run factories and production workshops in our own territories .
This means we become dependent on them , like sucking from a teat.What do they get from it ? Skills , knowledge , experience to bolster their own country .
We get nothing .
If we send an Apple engineer to overseer production of an iPod * , who is actually learning how the technology works ?
Do you think that it 's really private from the native factory owners ?
We 're essentially giving them technology and abilities .
We have seen them building factories , power stations and transport links that put ours to shame , they are really building themselves an impressive infrastructure .
They fund international scholarships to put the skills they learn to good news.We 're digging ourself into a roadblock .
What if China cuts us off from manufacturing ?
It 's not as though ALL THE businesses have absolute control , they could not avoid retribution from the government ! We would be screwed .
The UK practically builds nothing by itself anymore , we just let China do it .
If they stop , we 're unemployed and opened for expansion .
I think they are grinding us down slowly and surely.What do you think of China ?
What can we do about it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This really does not hurt China much.The western society is a 'servce culture', we exchange value by doing things for one another.
The east culture is a manufacture culture.
In the UK, our youth look up to playing instruments, video games, being footballers or engineers - doing service related things.
In China, education is very important and cut throat.
It's more about being a mathmatician, engineer or scientist.
In my book about China and Microsoft (Gwanshee), the Chinese can get into university degrees as young as 13!They are reducing our production capability - they manufacture a large number of things for us so we can do business cheaper.
This is a massive stranglehold they have: we benefit because our businesses can do things for less.
It's no longer profitable for us to run factories and production workshops in our own territories.
This means we become dependent on them, like sucking from a teat.What do they get from it?Skills, knowledge, experience to bolster their own country.
We get nothing.
If we send an Apple engineer to overseer production of an iPod*, who is actually learning how the technology works?
Do you think that it's really private from the native factory owners?
We're essentially giving them technology and abilities.
We have seen them building factories, power stations and transport links that put ours to shame, they are really building themselves an impressive infrastructure.
They fund international scholarships to put the skills they learn to good news.We're digging ourself into a roadblock.
What if China cuts us off from manufacturing?
It's not as though ALL THE businesses have absolute control, they could not avoid retribution from the government!We would be screwed.
The UK practically builds nothing by itself anymore, we just let China do it.
If they stop, we're unemployed and opened for expansion.
I think they are grinding us down slowly and surely.What do you think of China?
What can we do about it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603422</id>
	<title>I hate their ads</title>
	<author>HangingChad</author>
	<datestamp>1269424200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And their eye-bleed<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET web site, but I applaud this stand by GoDaddy.  They did the right thing and that always speaks louder than really tacky advertising to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And their eye-bleed .NET web site , but I applaud this stand by GoDaddy .
They did the right thing and that always speaks louder than really tacky advertising to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And their eye-bleed .NET web site, but I applaud this stand by GoDaddy.
They did the right thing and that always speaks louder than really tacky advertising to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604152</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269427260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it is now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it is now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it is now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605938</id>
	<title>Re:They still have a stranglehold...</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1269438000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What if China cuts us off from manufacturing?</p></div><p>Then we will move our manufacturing to other poor countries: Cambodia, Thailand, India, Latvia will all be happy to pick up the slack if China lets off.  They all want to learn the skills and technology, too.<br> <br>
China can't conquer by cutting off production of cheap manufactured goods.  If they stop producing stuff, yeah, there might be a shortage and deep recession for a number of years (mainly depending on how quickly they stop; remember that if they stop immediately it will really hurt them too, and if it is a long slow stop, it will be easy for us to adapt to), but it won't take long to get production back up in other places.<br> <br>
Also, I can't speak for the UK, but in the US there is still a manufacturing industry of $2.7 trillion.  So it isn't a hopeless case.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if China cuts us off from manufacturing ? Then we will move our manufacturing to other poor countries : Cambodia , Thailand , India , Latvia will all be happy to pick up the slack if China lets off .
They all want to learn the skills and technology , too .
China ca n't conquer by cutting off production of cheap manufactured goods .
If they stop producing stuff , yeah , there might be a shortage and deep recession for a number of years ( mainly depending on how quickly they stop ; remember that if they stop immediately it will really hurt them too , and if it is a long slow stop , it will be easy for us to adapt to ) , but it wo n't take long to get production back up in other places .
Also , I ca n't speak for the UK , but in the US there is still a manufacturing industry of $ 2.7 trillion .
So it is n't a hopeless case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if China cuts us off from manufacturing?Then we will move our manufacturing to other poor countries: Cambodia, Thailand, India, Latvia will all be happy to pick up the slack if China lets off.
They all want to learn the skills and technology, too.
China can't conquer by cutting off production of cheap manufactured goods.
If they stop producing stuff, yeah, there might be a shortage and deep recession for a number of years (mainly depending on how quickly they stop; remember that if they stop immediately it will really hurt them too, and if it is a long slow stop, it will be easy for us to adapt to), but it won't take long to get production back up in other places.
Also, I can't speak for the UK, but in the US there is still a manufacturing industry of $2.7 trillion.
So it isn't a hopeless case.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603796</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31608570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31612972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31606764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602766
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31610160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31606358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_24_198243_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31606358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605938
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602542
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603040
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607500
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602584
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603260
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602612
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603944
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603446
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604232
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603568
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602744
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603372
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603574
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603834
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604764
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602976
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603364
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604942
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607232
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604548
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605460
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31605126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602600
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_24_198243.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31604626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31608570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31602920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603100
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603492
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31610160
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31607214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31603518
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31606764
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_24_198243.31612972
</commentlist>
</conversation>
