<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_09_1655213</id>
	<title>AT&T Dropping Usenet Netnews; Low-Cost Alternatives?</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1244568060000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:nagy@fnal.gov" rel="nofollow">franknagy</a> writes <i>"This announcement message has appeared in all the news groups on
the AT&amp;T/SBC News Server: 'Please note that on or around July 15, 2009, AT&amp;T will no longer be
offering access to the Usenet netnews service.  If you wish to continue
reading Usenet newsgroups, access is available through third-party
vendors.' So what free or low-cost alternatives are available for Netnews and
the NNTP services for clients?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>franknagy writes " This announcement message has appeared in all the news groups on the AT&amp;T/SBC News Server : 'Please note that on or around July 15 , 2009 , AT&amp;T will no longer be offering access to the Usenet netnews service .
If you wish to continue reading Usenet newsgroups , access is available through third-party vendors .
' So what free or low-cost alternatives are available for Netnews and the NNTP services for clients ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>franknagy writes "This announcement message has appeared in all the news groups on
the AT&amp;T/SBC News Server: 'Please note that on or around July 15, 2009, AT&amp;T will no longer be
offering access to the Usenet netnews service.
If you wish to continue
reading Usenet newsgroups, access is available through third-party
vendors.
' So what free or low-cost alternatives are available for Netnews and
the NNTP services for clients?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270313</id>
	<title>My 2&#194;</title>
	<author>La Camiseta</author>
	<datestamp>1244579520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would recommend Easynews if you want a web interface to the binaries newsgroups. For retention Giganews can't be beat (&gt;300 days at last count). Google Groups is great for regular text newsgroups.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would recommend Easynews if you want a web interface to the binaries newsgroups .
For retention Giganews ca n't be beat ( &gt; 300 days at last count ) .
Google Groups is great for regular text newsgroups .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would recommend Easynews if you want a web interface to the binaries newsgroups.
For retention Giganews can't be beat (&gt;300 days at last count).
Google Groups is great for regular text newsgroups.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268983</id>
	<title>I just wanna say it's terrible</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244574660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd just like to say it's terrible when ISPs drop Usenet. Usenet is part of the Internet culture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd just like to say it 's terrible when ISPs drop Usenet .
Usenet is part of the Internet culture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd just like to say it's terrible when ISPs drop Usenet.
Usenet is part of the Internet culture.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269723</id>
	<title>Re:Just start torrenting.</title>
	<author>Inda</author>
	<datestamp>1244577180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, yeah. Get back to us when you can do 4.7gb in 30 minutes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , yeah .
Get back to us when you can do 4.7gb in 30 minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, yeah.
Get back to us when you can do 4.7gb in 30 minutes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28297393</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244747760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been using Newsguy for years and happy with their service. You can use an NNTP newsreader or use their website access, and their search engine is built into their web access also.</p><p>With the announcement from AT&amp;T they started a special promotion on their site that gets you 3 months for 1. In case anyone's looking for another option.</p><p>http://newsguy.com/3for1.asp</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using Newsguy for years and happy with their service .
You can use an NNTP newsreader or use their website access , and their search engine is built into their web access also.With the announcement from AT&amp;T they started a special promotion on their site that gets you 3 months for 1 .
In case anyone 's looking for another option.http : //newsguy.com/3for1.asp</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using Newsguy for years and happy with their service.
You can use an NNTP newsreader or use their website access, and their search engine is built into their web access also.With the announcement from AT&amp;T they started a special promotion on their site that gets you 3 months for 1.
In case anyone's looking for another option.http://newsguy.com/3for1.asp</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268539</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272377</id>
	<title>Usenet also needs some bigger changes</title>
	<author>Colin Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1244545800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1: Distributed discovery mechanism for new servers. Servers could simply announce on a control group and automatically be added as peers for nearby (by hop) systems.<br>2: Automatic peer reputation system. Automatically drop peers which spew crap.<br>3: User reputation system, which feeds the peer reputation system.<br>4: All non signed messages are considered spam and dropped immediately by everyone. Non dropping affects reputation.</p><p>Reputation system being the important feature required to reduce the junk on usenet and make it actually usable again. Any reputation system is going to have to identify individuals, servers *and networks*.</p><p>Something like Credence: <a href="http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/credence/" title="cornell.edu">http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/credence/</a> [cornell.edu]</p><p>NNTP on it's own is useless on an unregulated and untrustworthy network.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 : Distributed discovery mechanism for new servers .
Servers could simply announce on a control group and automatically be added as peers for nearby ( by hop ) systems.2 : Automatic peer reputation system .
Automatically drop peers which spew crap.3 : User reputation system , which feeds the peer reputation system.4 : All non signed messages are considered spam and dropped immediately by everyone .
Non dropping affects reputation.Reputation system being the important feature required to reduce the junk on usenet and make it actually usable again .
Any reputation system is going to have to identify individuals , servers * and networks * .Something like Credence : http : //www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/credence/ [ cornell.edu ] NNTP on it 's own is useless on an unregulated and untrustworthy network .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>1: Distributed discovery mechanism for new servers.
Servers could simply announce on a control group and automatically be added as peers for nearby (by hop) systems.2: Automatic peer reputation system.
Automatically drop peers which spew crap.3: User reputation system, which feeds the peer reputation system.4: All non signed messages are considered spam and dropped immediately by everyone.
Non dropping affects reputation.Reputation system being the important feature required to reduce the junk on usenet and make it actually usable again.
Any reputation system is going to have to identify individuals, servers *and networks*.Something like Credence: http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/credence/ [cornell.edu]NNTP on it's own is useless on an unregulated and untrustworthy network.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272883</id>
	<title>What is it?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244549160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So um.... what is Usenet and how is it any different from the Internet?</p><p>I've stumbled across some stuff that I think was from it when looking up fan groups for the Wheel of Time/Robert Jordan (R.I.P.), and it just seemed convoluted and hard to find information/talk to people/post stuff/find information that had already been posted.</p><p>Why not just use the internet/P2P/standard forums now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So um.... what is Usenet and how is it any different from the Internet ? I 've stumbled across some stuff that I think was from it when looking up fan groups for the Wheel of Time/Robert Jordan ( R.I.P .
) , and it just seemed convoluted and hard to find information/talk to people/post stuff/find information that had already been posted.Why not just use the internet/P2P/standard forums now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So um.... what is Usenet and how is it any different from the Internet?I've stumbled across some stuff that I think was from it when looking up fan groups for the Wheel of Time/Robert Jordan (R.I.P.
), and it just seemed convoluted and hard to find information/talk to people/post stuff/find information that had already been posted.Why not just use the internet/P2P/standard forums now?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268813</id>
	<title>Astraweb</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244574060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Astraweb.  They have a "Limited Time Offer" running, 11$/mo for unlimited access, but it's been going for months, so who knows how limited it really is.  They currently have 295 days retention (working their way to 365), offer 20 SSL connections, and I max out my 20mbit cable line with them.</p><p>http://www.news.astraweb.com/specials/kleverig-11.multicards.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Astraweb .
They have a " Limited Time Offer " running , 11 $ /mo for unlimited access , but it 's been going for months , so who knows how limited it really is .
They currently have 295 days retention ( working their way to 365 ) , offer 20 SSL connections , and I max out my 20mbit cable line with them.http : //www.news.astraweb.com/specials/kleverig-11.multicards.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Astraweb.
They have a "Limited Time Offer" running, 11$/mo for unlimited access, but it's been going for months, so who knows how limited it really is.
They currently have 295 days retention (working their way to 365), offer 20 SSL connections, and I max out my 20mbit cable line with them.http://www.news.astraweb.com/specials/kleverig-11.multicards.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269277</id>
	<title>usenet?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244575620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's that?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267</id>
	<title>Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244572080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you actually want to READ and POST text news, then I don't know why anyone would use an NNTP client nowadays. Google Groups is a far superior gateway.</p><p>If you are interested in binaries, then I would point you to Astraweb. They have great price plans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you actually want to READ and POST text news , then I do n't know why anyone would use an NNTP client nowadays .
Google Groups is a far superior gateway.If you are interested in binaries , then I would point you to Astraweb .
They have great price plans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you actually want to READ and POST text news, then I don't know why anyone would use an NNTP client nowadays.
Google Groups is a far superior gateway.If you are interested in binaries, then I would point you to Astraweb.
They have great price plans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175</id>
	<title>The web</title>
	<author>gilgongo</author>
	<datestamp>1244571780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It depends what you mean by "alternative" - but (sadly in my opinion), most people will just say "the web" and mean HTML-based bulletin board discussions eg Facebook.</p><p>Oh well. I loved Usenet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It depends what you mean by " alternative " - but ( sadly in my opinion ) , most people will just say " the web " and mean HTML-based bulletin board discussions eg Facebook.Oh well .
I loved Usenet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It depends what you mean by "alternative" - but (sadly in my opinion), most people will just say "the web" and mean HTML-based bulletin board discussions eg Facebook.Oh well.
I loved Usenet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270505</id>
	<title>News.Individual.Net</title>
	<author>Chessucat</author>
	<datestamp>1244580240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or use SDF!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or use SDF !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or use SDF!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269023</id>
	<title>Re:R.I.P.</title>
	<author>N3Roaster</author>
	<datestamp>1244574780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>20 line sigs? I take it you never saw some of Eyeglazer's sigs. Typical example here: <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.final-fantasy/msg/60d7eecf20b2e63d?hl=en" title="google.com">http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.final-fantasy/msg/60d7eecf20b2e63d?hl=en</a> [google.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>20 line sigs ?
I take it you never saw some of Eyeglazer 's sigs .
Typical example here : http : //groups.google.com/group/alt.games.final-fantasy/msg/60d7eecf20b2e63d ? hl = en [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>20 line sigs?
I take it you never saw some of Eyeglazer's sigs.
Typical example here: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.final-fantasy/msg/60d7eecf20b2e63d?hl=en [google.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272793</id>
	<title>I use NewsHosting...</title>
	<author>glitch23</author>
	<datestamp>1244548560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>ever since TimeWarner RoadRunner no longer hosts their own usenet service. I went with NewsHosting because I get 12 connections, unlimited downloading, and my retention is about 250 days. That package was the middle ground between limited downloading and unlimited downloading that cost over $20. That package is only $15 a month. The $20 package costs more because it allows 20 connections and SSL which I don't need. I use the binary groups as well as text-only groups such as the linux, programming, windows, and home repair groups. It's been a year since I started with NewsHosting and I'm happy with them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>ever since TimeWarner RoadRunner no longer hosts their own usenet service .
I went with NewsHosting because I get 12 connections , unlimited downloading , and my retention is about 250 days .
That package was the middle ground between limited downloading and unlimited downloading that cost over $ 20 .
That package is only $ 15 a month .
The $ 20 package costs more because it allows 20 connections and SSL which I do n't need .
I use the binary groups as well as text-only groups such as the linux , programming , windows , and home repair groups .
It 's been a year since I started with NewsHosting and I 'm happy with them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ever since TimeWarner RoadRunner no longer hosts their own usenet service.
I went with NewsHosting because I get 12 connections, unlimited downloading, and my retention is about 250 days.
That package was the middle ground between limited downloading and unlimited downloading that cost over $20.
That package is only $15 a month.
The $20 package costs more because it allows 20 connections and SSL which I don't need.
I use the binary groups as well as text-only groups such as the linux, programming, windows, and home repair groups.
It's been a year since I started with NewsHosting and I'm happy with them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270529</id>
	<title>Re:I just wanna say it's terrible</title>
	<author>frank\_adrian314159</author>
	<datestamp>1244580300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Usenet is part of the Internet culture.</i> </p><p>So's goatse, but I'm glad it's not around (much) anymore.  There are some parts of internet <i>culture</i> that deserve to die.</p><p>However, on the internet, nothing is really ever dead... it just gets shifted to a new URL.  I'm pretty sure you can find all the spam you get on usenet somewhere else.</p><p>Not that I was sad to see usenet decay - I started being attached to it in the early 80's.  But time and technology has moved on and it's time to let it fade away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Usenet is part of the Internet culture .
So 's goatse , but I 'm glad it 's not around ( much ) anymore .
There are some parts of internet culture that deserve to die.However , on the internet , nothing is really ever dead... it just gets shifted to a new URL .
I 'm pretty sure you can find all the spam you get on usenet somewhere else.Not that I was sad to see usenet decay - I started being attached to it in the early 80 's .
But time and technology has moved on and it 's time to let it fade away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Usenet is part of the Internet culture.
So's goatse, but I'm glad it's not around (much) anymore.
There are some parts of internet culture that deserve to die.However, on the internet, nothing is really ever dead... it just gets shifted to a new URL.
I'm pretty sure you can find all the spam you get on usenet somewhere else.Not that I was sad to see usenet decay - I started being attached to it in the early 80's.
But time and technology has moved on and it's time to let it fade away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268277</id>
	<title>alternatives</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244572080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never found a free one that was worth a damn, but there are several pay alternatives that are quite good. I'm currently with easynews.com.</p><p>If you don't need the binary groups, I'd bet the chances of finding a usable free one will be much higher, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never found a free one that was worth a damn , but there are several pay alternatives that are quite good .
I 'm currently with easynews.com.If you do n't need the binary groups , I 'd bet the chances of finding a usable free one will be much higher , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never found a free one that was worth a damn, but there are several pay alternatives that are quite good.
I'm currently with easynews.com.If you don't need the binary groups, I'd bet the chances of finding a usable free one will be much higher, though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270127</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>UnknownSoldier</author>
	<datestamp>1244578860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who works on emulators, three words: comp.emulators.apple2</p><p>but yeah, i miss rec.games.programmer</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who works on emulators , three words : comp.emulators.apple2but yeah , i miss rec.games.programmer</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who works on emulators, three words: comp.emulators.apple2but yeah, i miss rec.games.programmer</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268229</id>
	<title>Text-only, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244571960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Usenet/Public\_News\_Servers/" title="dmoz.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Usenet/Public\_News\_Servers/</a> [dmoz.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.dmoz.org/Computers/Usenet/Public \ _News \ _Servers/ [ dmoz.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Usenet/Public\_News\_Servers/ [dmoz.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272757</id>
	<title>Re:Usenet Story</title>
	<author>Knara</author>
	<datestamp>1244548320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apparently the groups you subscribe to are dead.  Sucks for you, but (in spite of the indeed-omnipresent spam) it isn't quite dead yet.  Just resting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently the groups you subscribe to are dead .
Sucks for you , but ( in spite of the indeed-omnipresent spam ) it is n't quite dead yet .
Just resting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently the groups you subscribe to are dead.
Sucks for you, but (in spite of the indeed-omnipresent spam) it isn't quite dead yet.
Just resting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28288753</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>DeVilla</author>
	<datestamp>1244649900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A number of lispers still direct people to their usenet groups.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A number of lispers still direct people to their usenet groups .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A number of lispers still direct people to their usenet groups.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268841</id>
	<title>Usenet</title>
	<author>ronfuller</author>
	<datestamp>1244574120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>i have been using motzarella for several months now.  i started when some of the other big isp's began dropping usenet.  my isp still carries it but now i have a back-up plan.

<a href="http://news.motzarella.org/" title="motzarella.org" rel="nofollow">http://news.motzarella.org/</a> [motzarella.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>i have been using motzarella for several months now .
i started when some of the other big isp 's began dropping usenet .
my isp still carries it but now i have a back-up plan .
http : //news.motzarella.org/ [ motzarella.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i have been using motzarella for several months now.
i started when some of the other big isp's began dropping usenet.
my isp still carries it but now i have a back-up plan.
http://news.motzarella.org/ [motzarella.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268771</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244573880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use giganews, of course I pirate 360 and wii games, along with ds and psp games too. TB hard drives are a must. 1.2 TB grabbed last month. Oh and movies too, I never rent them anymore. Yes I pirate, don't like it, tough shit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use giganews , of course I pirate 360 and wii games , along with ds and psp games too .
TB hard drives are a must .
1.2 TB grabbed last month .
Oh and movies too , I never rent them anymore .
Yes I pirate , do n't like it , tough shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use giganews, of course I pirate 360 and wii games, along with ds and psp games too.
TB hard drives are a must.
1.2 TB grabbed last month.
Oh and movies too, I never rent them anymore.
Yes I pirate, don't like it, tough shit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268455</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>mjackson14609</author>
	<datestamp>1244572800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depends entirely on the individual.  There are several newsgroups I personally find worthwhile, and I much prefer dealihg with them through a regular newsgroup client.  When Roadrunner dropped netnews last year I went with individual.net - 10 Euros/year - and have been quite satisfied.  YMMV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends entirely on the individual .
There are several newsgroups I personally find worthwhile , and I much prefer dealihg with them through a regular newsgroup client .
When Roadrunner dropped netnews last year I went with individual.net - 10 Euros/year - and have been quite satisfied .
YMMV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends entirely on the individual.
There are several newsgroups I personally find worthwhile, and I much prefer dealihg with them through a regular newsgroup client.
When Roadrunner dropped netnews last year I went with individual.net - 10 Euros/year - and have been quite satisfied.
YMMV.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274129</id>
	<title>USENET is the future of the internet.</title>
	<author>Solarhands</author>
	<datestamp>1244558940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As internet traffic continues to increase, ISPs will remember the purpose of USENET.  By hosting files locally, USENET cuts down on internet traffic over long distances.  I would be willing to bet that at least a few ISPs start toying with the idea of hosting popular bittorrent traffic locally and then preventing that traffic from going outside their local network.  This will obviously not happen in the current US marketplace, but perhaps some other countries will start doing it, and our corporations will see the profits that it makes for those involved. <br> <br>

Honestly the perfect place to start this geographically would have been Australia, but from all the Australian ISP horror stories I have read on Slashdot, I'm guessing that's not going to happen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As internet traffic continues to increase , ISPs will remember the purpose of USENET .
By hosting files locally , USENET cuts down on internet traffic over long distances .
I would be willing to bet that at least a few ISPs start toying with the idea of hosting popular bittorrent traffic locally and then preventing that traffic from going outside their local network .
This will obviously not happen in the current US marketplace , but perhaps some other countries will start doing it , and our corporations will see the profits that it makes for those involved .
Honestly the perfect place to start this geographically would have been Australia , but from all the Australian ISP horror stories I have read on Slashdot , I 'm guessing that 's not going to happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As internet traffic continues to increase, ISPs will remember the purpose of USENET.
By hosting files locally, USENET cuts down on internet traffic over long distances.
I would be willing to bet that at least a few ISPs start toying with the idea of hosting popular bittorrent traffic locally and then preventing that traffic from going outside their local network.
This will obviously not happen in the current US marketplace, but perhaps some other countries will start doing it, and our corporations will see the profits that it makes for those involved.
Honestly the perfect place to start this geographically would have been Australia, but from all the Australian ISP horror stories I have read on Slashdot, I'm guessing that's not going to happen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268371</id>
	<title>newshosting.com</title>
	<author>spinkham</author>
	<datestamp>1244572500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use the aptly named <a href="http://www.newshosting.com/" title="newshosting.com">newshosting</a> [newshosting.com], and have been quite impressed.<br>Cheaper then giganews, and has excellent retention and completion.  Speed is only limited by my connection, and SSL and compression are available for even more speed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use the aptly named newshosting [ newshosting.com ] , and have been quite impressed.Cheaper then giganews , and has excellent retention and completion .
Speed is only limited by my connection , and SSL and compression are available for even more speed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use the aptly named newshosting [newshosting.com], and have been quite impressed.Cheaper then giganews, and has excellent retention and completion.
Speed is only limited by my connection, and SSL and compression are available for even more speed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268781</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D</author>
	<datestamp>1244573940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I still love it. I check a few comp.*, soc.* and rec.* groups daily and they're still active and interesting. There is the odd bit of spam, but that's just easily dealt with as it is on web forums or emails. For binaries I find it useful too (I'm more interested in TV shows and movies than music and pr0n, but either way). My ISP doesn't throttle it like it does Torrents. It doesn't use any significant amount of my upload speed. I never get any less than 95\% of my Internet connection's possible bandwidth. Why not use it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I still love it .
I check a few comp .
* , soc .
* and rec .
* groups daily and they 're still active and interesting .
There is the odd bit of spam , but that 's just easily dealt with as it is on web forums or emails .
For binaries I find it useful too ( I 'm more interested in TV shows and movies than music and pr0n , but either way ) .
My ISP does n't throttle it like it does Torrents .
It does n't use any significant amount of my upload speed .
I never get any less than 95 \ % of my Internet connection 's possible bandwidth .
Why not use it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still love it.
I check a few comp.
*, soc.
* and rec.
* groups daily and they're still active and interesting.
There is the odd bit of spam, but that's just easily dealt with as it is on web forums or emails.
For binaries I find it useful too (I'm more interested in TV shows and movies than music and pr0n, but either way).
My ISP doesn't throttle it like it does Torrents.
It doesn't use any significant amount of my upload speed.
I never get any less than 95\% of my Internet connection's possible bandwidth.
Why not use it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269051</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244574900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>
Do they have a way to securely and anonymously subscribe and connect to them? Can you send them cash, use a nym server for email contacts...and maybe somehow route your transactions with the server through something like TOR?</i> </p></div><p>Why? Do you think the Usenet server AT&amp;T was providing was somehow any more anonymous than signing up for a Giganews account?

If you wanted a "super-sekrit", anonymous usenet access to download your kiddie-porn, I fervently hope you *were* using AT&amp;Ts servers. It'll be easier to find you that way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do they have a way to securely and anonymously subscribe and connect to them ?
Can you send them cash , use a nym server for email contacts...and maybe somehow route your transactions with the server through something like TOR ?
Why ? Do you think the Usenet server AT&amp;T was providing was somehow any more anonymous than signing up for a Giganews account ?
If you wanted a " super-sekrit " , anonymous usenet access to download your kiddie-porn , I fervently hope you * were * using AT&amp;Ts servers .
It 'll be easier to find you that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 
Do they have a way to securely and anonymously subscribe and connect to them?
Can you send them cash, use a nym server for email contacts...and maybe somehow route your transactions with the server through something like TOR?
Why? Do you think the Usenet server AT&amp;T was providing was somehow any more anonymous than signing up for a Giganews account?
If you wanted a "super-sekrit", anonymous usenet access to download your kiddie-porn, I fervently hope you *were* using AT&amp;Ts servers.
It'll be easier to find you that way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270169</id>
	<title>Re:This is going to sound like an advertisement...</title>
	<author>momikey</author>
	<datestamp>1244579040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another vote for Astraweb here. I signed up with them when AT&amp;T started dropping binary groups last year, and I haven't had any problems. I went with the pay-as-you-go plan, though, since it comes out cheaper if you're using mostly text groups. Right now it's 25GB for $10, or 180GB for $25, headers don't count, and you still get SSL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another vote for Astraweb here .
I signed up with them when AT&amp;T started dropping binary groups last year , and I have n't had any problems .
I went with the pay-as-you-go plan , though , since it comes out cheaper if you 're using mostly text groups .
Right now it 's 25GB for $ 10 , or 180GB for $ 25 , headers do n't count , and you still get SSL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another vote for Astraweb here.
I signed up with them when AT&amp;T started dropping binary groups last year, and I haven't had any problems.
I went with the pay-as-you-go plan, though, since it comes out cheaper if you're using mostly text groups.
Right now it's 25GB for $10, or 180GB for $25, headers don't count, and you still get SSL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268355</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28275685</id>
	<title>Dissapointed...</title>
	<author>Reservoir Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1244572080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On a geek BBS no one suggested running your own.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On a geek BBS no one suggested running your own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On a geek BBS no one suggested running your own.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272533</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>frisket</author>
	<datestamp>1244547060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It depends what you mean by "alternative" - but (sadly in my opinion), most people will just say "the web" and mean HTML-based bulletin board discussions eg Facebook.</p><p>Oh well. I loved Usenet.</p></div><p>No need to lose it. I've been using news.individual.de for years and it's fine. EUR10 a year.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It depends what you mean by " alternative " - but ( sadly in my opinion ) , most people will just say " the web " and mean HTML-based bulletin board discussions eg Facebook.Oh well .
I loved Usenet.No need to lose it .
I 've been using news.individual.de for years and it 's fine .
EUR10 a year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It depends what you mean by "alternative" - but (sadly in my opinion), most people will just say "the web" and mean HTML-based bulletin board discussions eg Facebook.Oh well.
I loved Usenet.No need to lose it.
I've been using news.individual.de for years and it's fine.
EUR10 a year.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274715</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>cayenne8</author>
	<datestamp>1244564100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"Looks like we got ourselves a kiddie porn downloader."</i> <p>
Goodness...just because someone is interested in guarding their privacy as much as possible, possibly out of pure interest of such things, lends you and others to assume the worst??</p><p>
There are other reasons you know? Keeping your political views and rants anon....possibly you are into some content that some groups MIGHT be interested in? (*IAA). </p><p>
I'm really surprised so many people on the thread automatically seemed to think the worst. Is slashdot starting now to lean towards the "if you have nothing to hide" type mentality?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Looks like we got ourselves a kiddie porn downloader .
" Goodness...just because someone is interested in guarding their privacy as much as possible , possibly out of pure interest of such things , lends you and others to assume the worst ? ?
There are other reasons you know ?
Keeping your political views and rants anon....possibly you are into some content that some groups MIGHT be interested in ?
( * IAA ) . I 'm really surprised so many people on the thread automatically seemed to think the worst .
Is slashdot starting now to lean towards the " if you have nothing to hide " type mentality ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Looks like we got ourselves a kiddie porn downloader.
" 
Goodness...just because someone is interested in guarding their privacy as much as possible, possibly out of pure interest of such things, lends you and others to assume the worst??
There are other reasons you know?
Keeping your political views and rants anon....possibly you are into some content that some groups MIGHT be interested in?
(*IAA). 
I'm really surprised so many people on the thread automatically seemed to think the worst.
Is slashdot starting now to lean towards the "if you have nothing to hide" type mentality?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269547</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268653</id>
	<title>usenetserver, newshosting</title>
	<author>ezelkow1</author>
	<datestamp>1244573580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you just want text only then there are plenty of free servers out there, just google for them.  You can also use the google interface or any other number of free web interfaces.  If you need binary access then Id suggest looking at either newshosting or usenetserver.  I started out on newshosting and its pretty good all around, I just switched to usenetserver a year ago because their pricing for 3 months of service at a time was cheaper and they also had longer retention.  Both support ssl at this point and I think they both have pretty much the same retention and speed as well.  Either way those 2 are cheaper than most, though im not sure how good they are for posting, if your posting I think most use giganews or astraweb.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you just want text only then there are plenty of free servers out there , just google for them .
You can also use the google interface or any other number of free web interfaces .
If you need binary access then Id suggest looking at either newshosting or usenetserver .
I started out on newshosting and its pretty good all around , I just switched to usenetserver a year ago because their pricing for 3 months of service at a time was cheaper and they also had longer retention .
Both support ssl at this point and I think they both have pretty much the same retention and speed as well .
Either way those 2 are cheaper than most , though im not sure how good they are for posting , if your posting I think most use giganews or astraweb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you just want text only then there are plenty of free servers out there, just google for them.
You can also use the google interface or any other number of free web interfaces.
If you need binary access then Id suggest looking at either newshosting or usenetserver.
I started out on newshosting and its pretty good all around, I just switched to usenetserver a year ago because their pricing for 3 months of service at a time was cheaper and they also had longer retention.
Both support ssl at this point and I think they both have pretty much the same retention and speed as well.
Either way those 2 are cheaper than most, though im not sure how good they are for posting, if your posting I think most use giganews or astraweb.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272531</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244547060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still read alt.fan.pratchett - and yes, it does get spam, but not nearly as much as you'd think. It still has quite lively, relevant (and irrelevant) discussions.</p><p>Many of the other newsgroups I read are now dormant and spam-filled, but AFP lives on, quite strongly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still read alt.fan.pratchett - and yes , it does get spam , but not nearly as much as you 'd think .
It still has quite lively , relevant ( and irrelevant ) discussions.Many of the other newsgroups I read are now dormant and spam-filled , but AFP lives on , quite strongly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still read alt.fan.pratchett - and yes, it does get spam, but not nearly as much as you'd think.
It still has quite lively, relevant (and irrelevant) discussions.Many of the other newsgroups I read are now dormant and spam-filled, but AFP lives on, quite strongly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268341</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270017</id>
	<title>rec.games.pinball, for one.</title>
	<author>S-100</author>
	<datestamp>1244578500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, there are a few places where Usenet is the main place for discussions.  One such place is rec.games.pinball, which often has over 1000 posts per day.  There is no web-based forum that reaches anywhere near as many people as RGP.  There's a thread there today about the very subject of AT&amp;T dropping Usenet.  Many people use web-based Google Groups, but there are often interruptions in service and the web-based interface is much clunkier than most dedicated newsreaders.<br> <br>The newbies on RGP are almost always coming in through Google Groups (as is virtually all of the spam), and the newbies rarely have any concept of Usenet at all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , there are a few places where Usenet is the main place for discussions .
One such place is rec.games.pinball , which often has over 1000 posts per day .
There is no web-based forum that reaches anywhere near as many people as RGP .
There 's a thread there today about the very subject of AT&amp;T dropping Usenet .
Many people use web-based Google Groups , but there are often interruptions in service and the web-based interface is much clunkier than most dedicated newsreaders .
The newbies on RGP are almost always coming in through Google Groups ( as is virtually all of the spam ) , and the newbies rarely have any concept of Usenet at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, there are a few places where Usenet is the main place for discussions.
One such place is rec.games.pinball, which often has over 1000 posts per day.
There is no web-based forum that reaches anywhere near as many people as RGP.
There's a thread there today about the very subject of AT&amp;T dropping Usenet.
Many people use web-based Google Groups, but there are often interruptions in service and the web-based interface is much clunkier than most dedicated newsreaders.
The newbies on RGP are almost always coming in through Google Groups (as is virtually all of the spam), and the newbies rarely have any concept of Usenet at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28280965</id>
	<title>Free Website Idea</title>
	<author>schmiddy</author>
	<datestamp>1244654220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had this idea for a website some time ago. I'm too lazy to implement it myself, so I'm offering it up here in the hopes someone will actually implement it. Heck, I might even help you for free<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)
</p><p>The website would be called "Popular Usenet Binaries" or something similar. What would draw people in would be front-page links to direct, fast downloads <b>over HTTP</b> of the top 20-50 movies/etc. posted to Usenet over the past few days. The average warez-loving user who has been stripped of Usenet access by his ISP, and is afraid of uploading on bittorrent would <b>love</b> this site. How would this work?
</p><p> On the front page, you would have an index of the various alt.binaries.* groups, ordered by post counts. Users could click on the different groups, and see a collapsed selection of the movies that had been posted. Most movies have obfuscated titles and filenames (e.g. "raxip-pu" for Pixar's "Up"), so you would let users enter their own un-obfuscated titles which would be displayed prominently alongside. Users would vote for which titles interested them. Your server would then automatically download these files, recombine the posts, resplit into 100MB or 250MB chunks, and upload to rapidshare, megaupload, and the few dozen other similar large file hosting services. For hosting sites that require captcha response, your server would simply pass the captchas on down to your users, and reward them with karma for answering the captchas. When the uploading was finished, a front-page link on your site would appear to the file, along with the unobfuscated title.
</p><p>
To stay legal, you'd of course honor DMCA safe-harbor takedown notices. Of course, the files would already have been uploaded to the dozen file-hosting sites, so your users could still fetch them with cached copies of your link pages. This idea is free for anyone to implement.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had this idea for a website some time ago .
I 'm too lazy to implement it myself , so I 'm offering it up here in the hopes someone will actually implement it .
Heck , I might even help you for free : - ) The website would be called " Popular Usenet Binaries " or something similar .
What would draw people in would be front-page links to direct , fast downloads over HTTP of the top 20-50 movies/etc .
posted to Usenet over the past few days .
The average warez-loving user who has been stripped of Usenet access by his ISP , and is afraid of uploading on bittorrent would love this site .
How would this work ?
On the front page , you would have an index of the various alt.binaries .
* groups , ordered by post counts .
Users could click on the different groups , and see a collapsed selection of the movies that had been posted .
Most movies have obfuscated titles and filenames ( e.g .
" raxip-pu " for Pixar 's " Up " ) , so you would let users enter their own un-obfuscated titles which would be displayed prominently alongside .
Users would vote for which titles interested them .
Your server would then automatically download these files , recombine the posts , resplit into 100MB or 250MB chunks , and upload to rapidshare , megaupload , and the few dozen other similar large file hosting services .
For hosting sites that require captcha response , your server would simply pass the captchas on down to your users , and reward them with karma for answering the captchas .
When the uploading was finished , a front-page link on your site would appear to the file , along with the unobfuscated title .
To stay legal , you 'd of course honor DMCA safe-harbor takedown notices .
Of course , the files would already have been uploaded to the dozen file-hosting sites , so your users could still fetch them with cached copies of your link pages .
This idea is free for anyone to implement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had this idea for a website some time ago.
I'm too lazy to implement it myself, so I'm offering it up here in the hopes someone will actually implement it.
Heck, I might even help you for free :-)
The website would be called "Popular Usenet Binaries" or something similar.
What would draw people in would be front-page links to direct, fast downloads over HTTP of the top 20-50 movies/etc.
posted to Usenet over the past few days.
The average warez-loving user who has been stripped of Usenet access by his ISP, and is afraid of uploading on bittorrent would love this site.
How would this work?
On the front page, you would have an index of the various alt.binaries.
* groups, ordered by post counts.
Users could click on the different groups, and see a collapsed selection of the movies that had been posted.
Most movies have obfuscated titles and filenames (e.g.
"raxip-pu" for Pixar's "Up"), so you would let users enter their own un-obfuscated titles which would be displayed prominently alongside.
Users would vote for which titles interested them.
Your server would then automatically download these files, recombine the posts, resplit into 100MB or 250MB chunks, and upload to rapidshare, megaupload, and the few dozen other similar large file hosting services.
For hosting sites that require captcha response, your server would simply pass the captchas on down to your users, and reward them with karma for answering the captchas.
When the uploading was finished, a front-page link on your site would appear to the file, along with the unobfuscated title.
To stay legal, you'd of course honor DMCA safe-harbor takedown notices.
Of course, the files would already have been uploaded to the dozen file-hosting sites, so your users could still fetch them with cached copies of your link pages.
This idea is free for anyone to implement.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268859</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>Pinky's Brain</author>
	<datestamp>1244574180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Access to advise from crotchety old engineers for the price of a little bad manners and spam is in the end a very good deal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Access to advise from crotchety old engineers for the price of a little bad manners and spam is in the end a very good deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Access to advise from crotchety old engineers for the price of a little bad manners and spam is in the end a very good deal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270709</id>
	<title>GigaNews and $9.95 for unlimited!</title>
	<author>antdude</author>
	<datestamp>1244581140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But GigaNews has ONE year (365 days) retention!</p><p>EarthLink used SuperNew that was bought out by Giganews, so you can get 10 hours dial-up plan (useful if your broadband goes down and if you still have a dial-up modem) that comes with unlimited Giganews access (EarthLink's SuperNews servers). No SSL and only two connections at once though.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But GigaNews has ONE year ( 365 days ) retention ! EarthLink used SuperNew that was bought out by Giganews , so you can get 10 hours dial-up plan ( useful if your broadband goes down and if you still have a dial-up modem ) that comes with unlimited Giganews access ( EarthLink 's SuperNews servers ) .
No SSL and only two connections at once though .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But GigaNews has ONE year (365 days) retention!EarthLink used SuperNew that was bought out by Giganews, so you can get 10 hours dial-up plan (useful if your broadband goes down and if you still have a dial-up modem) that comes with unlimited Giganews access (EarthLink's SuperNews servers).
No SSL and only two connections at once though.
:(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268355</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269595</id>
	<title>Looking for smth outside the US and Western Europe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244576640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone know of providers outside the US and the Western Europe?</p><p>(If lived in one of those tiny islands/countries, I would specialize in servicing content outside the US/UK/Germany/etc. Big Brother societies).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone know of providers outside the US and the Western Europe ?
( If lived in one of those tiny islands/countries , I would specialize in servicing content outside the US/UK/Germany/etc .
Big Brother societies ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone know of providers outside the US and the Western Europe?
(If lived in one of those tiny islands/countries, I would specialize in servicing content outside the US/UK/Germany/etc.
Big Brother societies).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271831</id>
	<title>Re:GigaNews and $9.95 for unlimited!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244543160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Where do you get $9.95? When I go to their website it's $24.99/mo for unlimited, which is quite a difference.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where do you get $ 9.95 ?
When I go to their website it 's $ 24.99/mo for unlimited , which is quite a difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where do you get $9.95?
When I go to their website it's $24.99/mo for unlimited, which is quite a difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268593</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>Qwrk</author>
	<datestamp>1244573280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is there any life after <a href="news:alt.slack" title="alt.slack" rel="nofollow">news:alt.slack</a> [alt.slack] and <a href="news:alt.binaries.slack" title="alt.binaries.slack" rel="nofollow">news:alt.binaries.slack</a> [alt.binaries.slack]?  Hardly!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there any life after news : alt.slack [ alt.slack ] and news : alt.binaries.slack [ alt.binaries.slack ] ?
Hardly !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there any life after news:alt.slack [alt.slack] and news:alt.binaries.slack [alt.binaries.slack]?
Hardly!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269763</id>
	<title>news.individual.net</title>
	<author>David E. Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1244577420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're one of those rare souls interested in discussion, sign up at individual.net. It's ten Euro a year (twelve US dollars or so), decent spam filtering. No binaries groups, but some of us view this as a bonus, rather than a shortcoming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're one of those rare souls interested in discussion , sign up at individual.net .
It 's ten Euro a year ( twelve US dollars or so ) , decent spam filtering .
No binaries groups , but some of us view this as a bonus , rather than a shortcoming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're one of those rare souls interested in discussion, sign up at individual.net.
It's ten Euro a year (twelve US dollars or so), decent spam filtering.
No binaries groups, but some of us view this as a bonus, rather than a shortcoming.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268787</id>
	<title>Can we let the secret out now?</title>
	<author>lemur3</author>
	<datestamp>1244573940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK.. Now that USENET is dead.. is it safe to let the secret out?</p><p>USENET WAS GREAT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK.. Now that USENET is dead.. is it safe to let the secret out ? USENET WAS GREAT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK.. Now that USENET is dead.. is it safe to let the secret out?USENET WAS GREAT.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268181</id>
	<title>easynews</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244571780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sleazynews</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sleazynews</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sleazynews</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270351</id>
	<title>Just asked a friend a similar question...</title>
	<author>lazyforker</author>
	<datestamp>1244579640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He uses Newsguy, and recommends them: <a href="http://www.newsguy.com/overview.htm" title="newsguy.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.newsguy.com/overview.htm</a> [newsguy.com]
<p>Unlimited plans $20 per month, but all the plans offer SSL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He uses Newsguy , and recommends them : http : //www.newsguy.com/overview.htm [ newsguy.com ] Unlimited plans $ 20 per month , but all the plans offer SSL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He uses Newsguy, and recommends them: http://www.newsguy.com/overview.htm [newsguy.com]
Unlimited plans $20 per month, but all the plans offer SSL.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274439</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>Koutarou</author>
	<datestamp>1244561640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When a reasonable percentage of the content is actually used this may be true.  However USENET works on a flood-fill mechanism, and (in theory) every site has every article sent to it at least once (and sometimes multiple times and duplicates are tossed depending on the feed type).</p><p>When under 0.1\% of the content is actually then getting touched by an end-user that bandwidth-savings rapidly turns into a bandwidth money-pit.</p><p>Only the Giganewses/largest carriers/etc. have a big enough economy of scale that it might being to make sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When a reasonable percentage of the content is actually used this may be true .
However USENET works on a flood-fill mechanism , and ( in theory ) every site has every article sent to it at least once ( and sometimes multiple times and duplicates are tossed depending on the feed type ) .When under 0.1 \ % of the content is actually then getting touched by an end-user that bandwidth-savings rapidly turns into a bandwidth money-pit.Only the Giganewses/largest carriers/etc .
have a big enough economy of scale that it might being to make sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When a reasonable percentage of the content is actually used this may be true.
However USENET works on a flood-fill mechanism, and (in theory) every site has every article sent to it at least once (and sometimes multiple times and duplicates are tossed depending on the feed type).When under 0.1\% of the content is actually then getting touched by an end-user that bandwidth-savings rapidly turns into a bandwidth money-pit.Only the Giganewses/largest carriers/etc.
have a big enough economy of scale that it might being to make sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271247</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269547</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>harryandthehenderson</author>
	<datestamp>1244576460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Looks like we got ourselves a kiddie porn downloader.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like we got ourselves a kiddie porn downloader .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like we got ourselves a kiddie porn downloader.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271035</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244539380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, Google is a publicly owned company and therefore belongs to many. That should not stop your ignorant rantings though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , Google is a publicly owned company and therefore belongs to many .
That should not stop your ignorant rantings though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, Google is a publicly owned company and therefore belongs to many.
That should not stop your ignorant rantings though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269615</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>Inda</author>
	<datestamp>1244576700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You have to subscribe to a.b.something.something.latex for that sort of stuff... so, I'm told.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to subscribe to a.b.something.something.latex for that sort of stuff... so , I 'm told .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to subscribe to a.b.something.something.latex for that sort of stuff... so, I'm told.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271205</id>
	<title>Re:reports of usenet's death exaggerated?</title>
	<author>Plekto</author>
	<datestamp>1244540100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find it interesting that was the new fads of Facebook and the like come and go, UseNet is still there and likely will still be around forever.  Because it's the quickest, fastest way to discuss and deal with stuff that isn't loaded down with blogs and useless "me too" posts.   The signal-to-noise ratio is very good if you're not in binary groups and if the feed filters spam.(or it's moderated)</p><p>And there's the physical speed issue.  As the net and browsers get slower and slower, simpler is becoming a useful thing.  I can get information and scan through my 30 or so groups in 5 minutes every day.  Post a couple of things, maybe.  Move on.  All before I go to work.</p><p>For those who don't use UseNet, it is quite possible to do several pages of text a second at near instant speeds - faster in some cases than your email program.  Forums seem hopelessly slow by comparison.  Google groups is an exercise in self-torture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it interesting that was the new fads of Facebook and the like come and go , UseNet is still there and likely will still be around forever .
Because it 's the quickest , fastest way to discuss and deal with stuff that is n't loaded down with blogs and useless " me too " posts .
The signal-to-noise ratio is very good if you 're not in binary groups and if the feed filters spam .
( or it 's moderated ) And there 's the physical speed issue .
As the net and browsers get slower and slower , simpler is becoming a useful thing .
I can get information and scan through my 30 or so groups in 5 minutes every day .
Post a couple of things , maybe .
Move on .
All before I go to work.For those who do n't use UseNet , it is quite possible to do several pages of text a second at near instant speeds - faster in some cases than your email program .
Forums seem hopelessly slow by comparison .
Google groups is an exercise in self-torture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it interesting that was the new fads of Facebook and the like come and go, UseNet is still there and likely will still be around forever.
Because it's the quickest, fastest way to discuss and deal with stuff that isn't loaded down with blogs and useless "me too" posts.
The signal-to-noise ratio is very good if you're not in binary groups and if the feed filters spam.
(or it's moderated)And there's the physical speed issue.
As the net and browsers get slower and slower, simpler is becoming a useful thing.
I can get information and scan through my 30 or so groups in 5 minutes every day.
Post a couple of things, maybe.
Move on.
All before I go to work.For those who don't use UseNet, it is quite possible to do several pages of text a second at near instant speeds - faster in some cases than your email program.
Forums seem hopelessly slow by comparison.
Google groups is an exercise in self-torture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268543</id>
	<title>Best Usenet Providers</title>
	<author>CrashNBrn</author>
	<datestamp>1244573100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>It really depends on what you need it for, the best place to go is here: <a href="http://www.newsgroupreviews.com/usenet-providers.html" title="newsgroupreviews.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.newsgroupreviews.com/usenet-providers.html</a> [newsgroupreviews.com]
<br>
<br>
Out of the list I liked binverse.com and usenetserver.com, generally if you go thru the links provided by newsgroupreviews you'll get discounts that may or may not be "obvious" from just going directly to the sites in question.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It really depends on what you need it for , the best place to go is here : http : //www.newsgroupreviews.com/usenet-providers.html [ newsgroupreviews.com ] Out of the list I liked binverse.com and usenetserver.com , generally if you go thru the links provided by newsgroupreviews you 'll get discounts that may or may not be " obvious " from just going directly to the sites in question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It really depends on what you need it for, the best place to go is here: http://www.newsgroupreviews.com/usenet-providers.html [newsgroupreviews.com]


Out of the list I liked binverse.com and usenetserver.com, generally if you go thru the links provided by newsgroupreviews you'll get discounts that may or may not be "obvious" from just going directly to the sites in question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269167</id>
	<title>individual.net</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244575260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>individual.net is ideal.

<ul>
<li>Cheap</li><li>Correct response to XHDR requests</li><li>No Binaries</li><li>Good spam filtering</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>individual.net is ideal .
CheapCorrect response to XHDR requestsNo BinariesGood spam filtering</tokentext>
<sentencetext>individual.net is ideal.
CheapCorrect response to XHDR requestsNo BinariesGood spam filtering</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271749</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>Master of Transhuman</author>
	<datestamp>1244542680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"And as for NNTP binary groups, Bittorrent and Redtube have them covered."</p><p>Not hardly, dude. Getting a Bittorrent file down takes hours - assuming the last little bit isn't missing or you can find an active torrent for whatever specific thing you want. GigaNews is direct file download right now, no waiting. Not even close. Only problem is finding what you want. I don't bother with that. I just take what is interesting and available on my usual weeknight for downloading Usenet stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" And as for NNTP binary groups , Bittorrent and Redtube have them covered .
" Not hardly , dude .
Getting a Bittorrent file down takes hours - assuming the last little bit is n't missing or you can find an active torrent for whatever specific thing you want .
GigaNews is direct file download right now , no waiting .
Not even close .
Only problem is finding what you want .
I do n't bother with that .
I just take what is interesting and available on my usual weeknight for downloading Usenet stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"And as for NNTP binary groups, Bittorrent and Redtube have them covered.
"Not hardly, dude.
Getting a Bittorrent file down takes hours - assuming the last little bit isn't missing or you can find an active torrent for whatever specific thing you want.
GigaNews is direct file download right now, no waiting.
Not even close.
Only problem is finding what you want.
I don't bother with that.
I just take what is interesting and available on my usual weeknight for downloading Usenet stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268947</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269321</id>
	<title>To those who favor forums: what about the clients?</title>
	<author>QuoteMstr</author>
	<datestamp>1244575800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of discourse that used to travel over Usenet now happens on web forums, which are frustrating for people who remember what Usenet was like. The worst part about web forums is that they effective have only one client. I miss being able to choose from among the huge variety of news readers, each of which competed for features and users. News clients did everything imaginable, from automatically threading and searching messages to maintaining customer scoring rules. Even when forum software implements these features, support is often fragmentary. I've yet to see a system besides Slash that gives me something approaching slrn's scorefiles.</p><p>On Usenet, a user choosing a poor client doesn't affect anyone else. You used different clients to read the same messages. But on a web forum, your only choice is to move to a completely different forum if you don't like the single hard-coded "client" built into the forum software. The messages to too closely bound to the software used to read them, and we suffer for it.</p><p>Usenet also has advantages like a single group hierarchy, the offline message queuing, efficient crossposting, and message cancellation, but these are minor next to the ability to use my own damn client.</p><p>But I suppose web forums have one advantage over usenet, from a certain point of view: you can slap ads on a forum.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of discourse that used to travel over Usenet now happens on web forums , which are frustrating for people who remember what Usenet was like .
The worst part about web forums is that they effective have only one client .
I miss being able to choose from among the huge variety of news readers , each of which competed for features and users .
News clients did everything imaginable , from automatically threading and searching messages to maintaining customer scoring rules .
Even when forum software implements these features , support is often fragmentary .
I 've yet to see a system besides Slash that gives me something approaching slrn 's scorefiles.On Usenet , a user choosing a poor client does n't affect anyone else .
You used different clients to read the same messages .
But on a web forum , your only choice is to move to a completely different forum if you do n't like the single hard-coded " client " built into the forum software .
The messages to too closely bound to the software used to read them , and we suffer for it.Usenet also has advantages like a single group hierarchy , the offline message queuing , efficient crossposting , and message cancellation , but these are minor next to the ability to use my own damn client.But I suppose web forums have one advantage over usenet , from a certain point of view : you can slap ads on a forum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of discourse that used to travel over Usenet now happens on web forums, which are frustrating for people who remember what Usenet was like.
The worst part about web forums is that they effective have only one client.
I miss being able to choose from among the huge variety of news readers, each of which competed for features and users.
News clients did everything imaginable, from automatically threading and searching messages to maintaining customer scoring rules.
Even when forum software implements these features, support is often fragmentary.
I've yet to see a system besides Slash that gives me something approaching slrn's scorefiles.On Usenet, a user choosing a poor client doesn't affect anyone else.
You used different clients to read the same messages.
But on a web forum, your only choice is to move to a completely different forum if you don't like the single hard-coded "client" built into the forum software.
The messages to too closely bound to the software used to read them, and we suffer for it.Usenet also has advantages like a single group hierarchy, the offline message queuing, efficient crossposting, and message cancellation, but these are minor next to the ability to use my own damn client.But I suppose web forums have one advantage over usenet, from a certain point of view: you can slap ads on a forum.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268567</id>
	<title>R.I.P.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244573220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Usenet was my first encounter with electronic forum - questions asked and answered, flame wars, trolls, kooks, some grass-roots projects, etc.
</p><p>
I remember the flame war about people's sig.  Some dudes had this gigantic ASCII art sig files, and people were complaining about one-line posts with 20-line sigs, how the bandwidth were wasted, etc.
</p><p>
A trick to have one's question answered rather than ignored:  Post the question, and from a second account, post a completely bogus answer with extra dose of condescension.  People are so eager to pounce on the bogus answer with full-on indignation.
</p><p>
Oh well.  Move on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Usenet was my first encounter with electronic forum - questions asked and answered , flame wars , trolls , kooks , some grass-roots projects , etc .
I remember the flame war about people 's sig .
Some dudes had this gigantic ASCII art sig files , and people were complaining about one-line posts with 20-line sigs , how the bandwidth were wasted , etc .
A trick to have one 's question answered rather than ignored : Post the question , and from a second account , post a completely bogus answer with extra dose of condescension .
People are so eager to pounce on the bogus answer with full-on indignation .
Oh well .
Move on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Usenet was my first encounter with electronic forum - questions asked and answered, flame wars, trolls, kooks, some grass-roots projects, etc.
I remember the flame war about people's sig.
Some dudes had this gigantic ASCII art sig files, and people were complaining about one-line posts with 20-line sigs, how the bandwidth were wasted, etc.
A trick to have one's question answered rather than ignored:  Post the question, and from a second account, post a completely bogus answer with extra dose of condescension.
People are so eager to pounce on the bogus answer with full-on indignation.
Oh well.
Move on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28278075</id>
	<title>Re:I just wanna say it's terrible</title>
	<author>Col. Panic</author>
	<datestamp>1244641260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>our internet culture, you mean. tons of people have no idea what usenet is</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>our internet culture , you mean .
tons of people have no idea what usenet is</tokentext>
<sentencetext>our internet culture, you mean.
tons of people have no idea what usenet is</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268489</id>
	<title>Speed, speed, speed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244572920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The good thing about your ISP providing Usenet is speed.  The connection is strictly between your home and the ISP.  You don't go across "the wild Internet."</p><p>With the 3rd party providers, you're going across any number of connections and the speed is MUCH slower.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The good thing about your ISP providing Usenet is speed .
The connection is strictly between your home and the ISP .
You do n't go across " the wild Internet .
" With the 3rd party providers , you 're going across any number of connections and the speed is MUCH slower .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The good thing about your ISP providing Usenet is speed.
The connection is strictly between your home and the ISP.
You don't go across "the wild Internet.
"With the 3rd party providers, you're going across any number of connections and the speed is MUCH slower.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244573760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"I've been a Giganews subscriber and a Newsleecher + Super Search user for well over a year now... It's worth the money for instant access to just about everything."</i> <p>
Do they have a way to securely and anonymously subscribe and connect to them? Can you send them cash, use a nym server for email contacts...and maybe somehow route your transactions with the server through something like TOR?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I 've been a Giganews subscriber and a Newsleecher + Super Search user for well over a year now... It 's worth the money for instant access to just about everything .
" Do they have a way to securely and anonymously subscribe and connect to them ?
Can you send them cash , use a nym server for email contacts...and maybe somehow route your transactions with the server through something like TOR ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I've been a Giganews subscriber and a Newsleecher + Super Search user for well over a year now... It's worth the money for instant access to just about everything.
" 
Do they have a way to securely and anonymously subscribe and connect to them?
Can you send them cash, use a nym server for email contacts...and maybe somehow route your transactions with the server through something like TOR?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268539</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269405</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>Darinbob</author>
	<datestamp>1244575920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unless you are using binaries groups for music or pr0n, is Usenet even worth accessing anymore?</p></div><p>It has gone downhill.  Most of that is due to incessant spam though.  I have slowly gotten down to just checking a couple of groups once a week.<br> <br>
However, it still beats the pants off of any "web based forum" out there, almost all of which are clumsy to navigate, require subscription, and compete with others for the same subject matter.  Usenet was sort of a one-stop-shop for finding experts in a particular area - best local mechanics, history of medieval music, page replacement strategies, computer games, talking to Terry Pratchett or J. Michael Straczynski, etc.  It had more community than any other online entity.  There really is no substitute.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless you are using binaries groups for music or pr0n , is Usenet even worth accessing anymore ? It has gone downhill .
Most of that is due to incessant spam though .
I have slowly gotten down to just checking a couple of groups once a week .
However , it still beats the pants off of any " web based forum " out there , almost all of which are clumsy to navigate , require subscription , and compete with others for the same subject matter .
Usenet was sort of a one-stop-shop for finding experts in a particular area - best local mechanics , history of medieval music , page replacement strategies , computer games , talking to Terry Pratchett or J. Michael Straczynski , etc .
It had more community than any other online entity .
There really is no substitute .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless you are using binaries groups for music or pr0n, is Usenet even worth accessing anymore?It has gone downhill.
Most of that is due to incessant spam though.
I have slowly gotten down to just checking a couple of groups once a week.
However, it still beats the pants off of any "web based forum" out there, almost all of which are clumsy to navigate, require subscription, and compete with others for the same subject matter.
Usenet was sort of a one-stop-shop for finding experts in a particular area - best local mechanics, history of medieval music, page replacement strategies, computer games, talking to Terry Pratchett or J. Michael Straczynski, etc.
It had more community than any other online entity.
There really is no substitute.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271415</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1244541060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who has worked PC repair for more years than I care to admit, I can say that the most paranoid ones are usually after, in order of appearance-Fat chicks, B&amp;D/S&amp;M, Shemales. Don't ask me why, but guys act like they are going to get their doors kicked in because they like something they consider 'kinky". I don't know how many times I have had to explain to a guy "Look, nobody on the web really gives a crap if you like chubby girls in stockings, okay? Hell they got forums and everything just for guys like you. Nobody cares dude.".</p><p>

 Maybe it is because they are repressed, who the hell knows. But usually the kiddie pervs don't even have enough sense not to leave it on the freaking desktop, much less try to hide shit. That is why my buddy at the state crime lab said they are the easy ones to catch. What he said were the hard ones are the actual child molesters, as they pass encrypted DVDs through the mail to each other and when you catch one he is already looking at a bazillion years so good luck on getting him to squeal. But most likely the above poster likes fat chicks, shemales, or whips and chains and thinks that somehow it is going to end up in the paper or something. Don't ask me why, but the paranoid ones are usually paranoid over dumb shit that nobody cares about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who has worked PC repair for more years than I care to admit , I can say that the most paranoid ones are usually after , in order of appearance-Fat chicks , B&amp;D/S&amp;M , Shemales .
Do n't ask me why , but guys act like they are going to get their doors kicked in because they like something they consider 'kinky " .
I do n't know how many times I have had to explain to a guy " Look , nobody on the web really gives a crap if you like chubby girls in stockings , okay ?
Hell they got forums and everything just for guys like you .
Nobody cares dude. " .
Maybe it is because they are repressed , who the hell knows .
But usually the kiddie pervs do n't even have enough sense not to leave it on the freaking desktop , much less try to hide shit .
That is why my buddy at the state crime lab said they are the easy ones to catch .
What he said were the hard ones are the actual child molesters , as they pass encrypted DVDs through the mail to each other and when you catch one he is already looking at a bazillion years so good luck on getting him to squeal .
But most likely the above poster likes fat chicks , shemales , or whips and chains and thinks that somehow it is going to end up in the paper or something .
Do n't ask me why , but the paranoid ones are usually paranoid over dumb shit that nobody cares about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who has worked PC repair for more years than I care to admit, I can say that the most paranoid ones are usually after, in order of appearance-Fat chicks, B&amp;D/S&amp;M, Shemales.
Don't ask me why, but guys act like they are going to get their doors kicked in because they like something they consider 'kinky".
I don't know how many times I have had to explain to a guy "Look, nobody on the web really gives a crap if you like chubby girls in stockings, okay?
Hell they got forums and everything just for guys like you.
Nobody cares dude.".
Maybe it is because they are repressed, who the hell knows.
But usually the kiddie pervs don't even have enough sense not to leave it on the freaking desktop, much less try to hide shit.
That is why my buddy at the state crime lab said they are the easy ones to catch.
What he said were the hard ones are the actual child molesters, as they pass encrypted DVDs through the mail to each other and when you catch one he is already looking at a bazillion years so good luck on getting him to squeal.
But most likely the above poster likes fat chicks, shemales, or whips and chains and thinks that somehow it is going to end up in the paper or something.
Don't ask me why, but the paranoid ones are usually paranoid over dumb shit that nobody cares about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269547</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269759</id>
	<title>Here you go</title>
	<author>metamatic</author>
	<datestamp>1244577420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/#newsservers" title="sixxs.net">http://www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/#newsservers</a> [sixxs.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/ # newsservers [ sixxs.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/#newsservers [sixxs.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271247</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244540340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>But if you are using binaries groups for music or prON you are pulling from the downstream only as 'leechers' are 99\% of users. From an ISP perspective the Upstream bandwidth seems to be what causes the most challenges.</i></p><p>Also worth noting, if the ISP runs its own news server it only has to download an article once.  Since traffic on the ISPs network is free, every user can download the article at no cost to the ISP.</p><p>Compare this to torrenting, when each user opens up several connections to peers across the world.  It's a horrible waste of bandwidth, ISPs would be well served to encourage USENET use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But if you are using binaries groups for music or prON you are pulling from the downstream only as 'leechers ' are 99 \ % of users .
From an ISP perspective the Upstream bandwidth seems to be what causes the most challenges.Also worth noting , if the ISP runs its own news server it only has to download an article once .
Since traffic on the ISPs network is free , every user can download the article at no cost to the ISP.Compare this to torrenting , when each user opens up several connections to peers across the world .
It 's a horrible waste of bandwidth , ISPs would be well served to encourage USENET use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But if you are using binaries groups for music or prON you are pulling from the downstream only as 'leechers' are 99\% of users.
From an ISP perspective the Upstream bandwidth seems to be what causes the most challenges.Also worth noting, if the ISP runs its own news server it only has to download an article once.
Since traffic on the ISPs network is free, every user can download the article at no cost to the ISP.Compare this to torrenting, when each user opens up several connections to peers across the world.
It's a horrible waste of bandwidth, ISPs would be well served to encourage USENET use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269603</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270879</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>wiredlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1244538780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The one thing Google Groups does being to the table is the power to search the entire archive (minus binaries). This beats having to download a ton of message bodies to a client.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The one thing Google Groups does being to the table is the power to search the entire archive ( minus binaries ) .
This beats having to download a ton of message bodies to a client .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The one thing Google Groups does being to the table is the power to search the entire archive (minus binaries).
This beats having to download a ton of message bodies to a client.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270495</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>S-100</author>
	<datestamp>1244580240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are a large number of people who have been forced into Google Groups by losing their ISP's Usenet service who are not satisfied with Google Groups and are looking for "low-cost alternatives".  If Google Groups was so superior, this thread would not exist.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a large number of people who have been forced into Google Groups by losing their ISP 's Usenet service who are not satisfied with Google Groups and are looking for " low-cost alternatives " .
If Google Groups was so superior , this thread would not exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a large number of people who have been forced into Google Groups by losing their ISP's Usenet service who are not satisfied with Google Groups and are looking for "low-cost alternatives".
If Google Groups was so superior, this thread would not exist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272409</id>
	<title>Re:GigaNews and $9.95 for unlimited!</title>
	<author>Knara</author>
	<datestamp>1244546160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>$9.99?  Errrr, where did you get that idea?

Giganews is great, but not cheap.</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 9.99 ?
Errrr , where did you get that idea ?
Giganews is great , but not cheap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$9.99?
Errrr, where did you get that idea?
Giganews is great, but not cheap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>synthespian</author>
	<datestamp>1244574420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google is not USENET. Google is a privately owned company. USENET belongs to no-one and to all. Do you see the difference? NNTP was very well thought out. It's distributed.</p><p>I'm quite aware that there's a generation out there that thinks Google can uncover any info you want (try something from 3 years ago and see how well you fare) and that think that PHP forums are the *best* way to store info. However, a simple examination will reveal how unfounded these opinions are. Google will own your info. PHP forums come and go. That's not reliable information.</p><p>OTOH, I would like USENET posting to allow for mark-up text, such as LaTeX or MathML. That would be very useful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google is not USENET .
Google is a privately owned company .
USENET belongs to no-one and to all .
Do you see the difference ?
NNTP was very well thought out .
It 's distributed.I 'm quite aware that there 's a generation out there that thinks Google can uncover any info you want ( try something from 3 years ago and see how well you fare ) and that think that PHP forums are the * best * way to store info .
However , a simple examination will reveal how unfounded these opinions are .
Google will own your info .
PHP forums come and go .
That 's not reliable information.OTOH , I would like USENET posting to allow for mark-up text , such as LaTeX or MathML .
That would be very useful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google is not USENET.
Google is a privately owned company.
USENET belongs to no-one and to all.
Do you see the difference?
NNTP was very well thought out.
It's distributed.I'm quite aware that there's a generation out there that thinks Google can uncover any info you want (try something from 3 years ago and see how well you fare) and that think that PHP forums are the *best* way to store info.
However, a simple examination will reveal how unfounded these opinions are.
Google will own your info.
PHP forums come and go.
That's not reliable information.OTOH, I would like USENET posting to allow for mark-up text, such as LaTeX or MathML.
That would be very useful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274643</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>King\_TJ</author>
	<datestamp>1244563500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to love Usenet as well, but I think it really has gotten to where downloading binaries is the most useful purpose for it.  That's the *real* reason the paid "premium Usenet" services make money.  People aren't getting so much value from Usenet text postings that they want to pay $10 or more per month for a subscription to a paid service.  They want the high bandwidth, high-speed downloads for binaries.</p><p>Many years ago, most ISPs started heavily throttling the bandwidth to the Usenet servers they provided (not to mention having horrible retention rates), so they effectively rendered them useless for binaries.  It became a "pay for premium services, or forget it" situation.</p><p>Ability to search old Usenet message archives is still pretty handy.  A lot of great information passed through it over the years.  But presently?  I think you're going to do far better with web-based forums devoted to whatever topic you're interested in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to love Usenet as well , but I think it really has gotten to where downloading binaries is the most useful purpose for it .
That 's the * real * reason the paid " premium Usenet " services make money .
People are n't getting so much value from Usenet text postings that they want to pay $ 10 or more per month for a subscription to a paid service .
They want the high bandwidth , high-speed downloads for binaries.Many years ago , most ISPs started heavily throttling the bandwidth to the Usenet servers they provided ( not to mention having horrible retention rates ) , so they effectively rendered them useless for binaries .
It became a " pay for premium services , or forget it " situation.Ability to search old Usenet message archives is still pretty handy .
A lot of great information passed through it over the years .
But presently ?
I think you 're going to do far better with web-based forums devoted to whatever topic you 're interested in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to love Usenet as well, but I think it really has gotten to where downloading binaries is the most useful purpose for it.
That's the *real* reason the paid "premium Usenet" services make money.
People aren't getting so much value from Usenet text postings that they want to pay $10 or more per month for a subscription to a paid service.
They want the high bandwidth, high-speed downloads for binaries.Many years ago, most ISPs started heavily throttling the bandwidth to the Usenet servers they provided (not to mention having horrible retention rates), so they effectively rendered them useless for binaries.
It became a "pay for premium services, or forget it" situation.Ability to search old Usenet message archives is still pretty handy.
A lot of great information passed through it over the years.
But presently?
I think you're going to do far better with web-based forums devoted to whatever topic you're interested in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28279609</id>
	<title>low-cost</title>
	<author>cstacy</author>
	<datestamp>1244648460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>So what free or low-cost alternatives are available for Netnews and the NNTP services for clients?"</p></div></blockquote><p>

Cox</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So what free or low-cost alternatives are available for Netnews and the NNTP services for clients ?
" Cox</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what free or low-cost alternatives are available for Netnews and the NNTP services for clients?
"

Cox
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268687</id>
	<title>FatWallet thread</title>
	<author>steveshaw</author>
	<datestamp>1244573640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is a <a href="http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/hot-deals/792418" title="fatwallet.com">nice thread at FatWallet</a> [fatwallet.com] compiling lots of deals. While the main post hasn't been updated in a while, there are some recent posts with good deals.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a nice thread at FatWallet [ fatwallet.com ] compiling lots of deals .
While the main post has n't been updated in a while , there are some recent posts with good deals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a nice thread at FatWallet [fatwallet.com] compiling lots of deals.
While the main post hasn't been updated in a while, there are some recent posts with good deals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272167</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244544540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What exactly are you trying to say? Do you even know what Google Groups is?</p><p>Here's a little snippet for you from Wikipedia:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Google Groups also includes an archive of Usenet newsgroup postings dating back to 1981 and supports reading and posting to Usenet groups.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What exactly are you trying to say ?
Do you even know what Google Groups is ? Here 's a little snippet for you from Wikipedia : Google Groups also includes an archive of Usenet newsgroup postings dating back to 1981 and supports reading and posting to Usenet groups .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What exactly are you trying to say?
Do you even know what Google Groups is?Here's a little snippet for you from Wikipedia:Google Groups also includes an archive of Usenet newsgroup postings dating back to 1981 and supports reading and posting to Usenet groups.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</id>
	<title>Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>CRCulver</author>
	<datestamp>1244571900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unless you are using binaries groups for music or pr0n, is Usenet even worth accessing anymore? I remained dedicated to the network long after most nerds departed because there was still a fairly decent amount of educated discourse on sci.lang and rec.music.classical, but even those groups are no innundated by spambots and most of the most worthwhile conversation partners have moved while only the crotchety remain.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless you are using binaries groups for music or pr0n , is Usenet even worth accessing anymore ?
I remained dedicated to the network long after most nerds departed because there was still a fairly decent amount of educated discourse on sci.lang and rec.music.classical , but even those groups are no innundated by spambots and most of the most worthwhile conversation partners have moved while only the crotchety remain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless you are using binaries groups for music or pr0n, is Usenet even worth accessing anymore?
I remained dedicated to the network long after most nerds departed because there was still a fairly decent amount of educated discourse on sci.lang and rec.music.classical, but even those groups are no innundated by spambots and most of the most worthwhile conversation partners have moved while only the crotchety remain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268967</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>GigaHurtsMyRobot</author>
	<datestamp>1244574600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not that paranoid...  If my Giganews logs were to be used against me, almost 2 years of very heavy downloading (unlimited + ssl plan), I'd be put away forever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not that paranoid... If my Giganews logs were to be used against me , almost 2 years of very heavy downloading ( unlimited + ssl plan ) , I 'd be put away forever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not that paranoid...  If my Giganews logs were to be used against me, almost 2 years of very heavy downloading (unlimited + ssl plan), I'd be put away forever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269327</id>
	<title>Re:alternatives</title>
	<author>eulernet</author>
	<datestamp>1244575800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try <a href="http://newzbot.com/" title="newzbot.com">http://newzbot.com/</a> [newzbot.com]<br>It's a search engine for finding free newsgroups server.<br>Just enter the group you'd like to grab, and it will provide you some servers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try http : //newzbot.com/ [ newzbot.com ] It 's a search engine for finding free newsgroups server.Just enter the group you 'd like to grab , and it will provide you some servers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try http://newzbot.com/ [newzbot.com]It's a search engine for finding free newsgroups server.Just enter the group you'd like to grab, and it will provide you some servers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268277</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268307</id>
	<title>Run your own server</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1244572200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whack a copy of INN on your Colo and hook up a feed with your BOFH friends.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whack a copy of INN on your Colo and hook up a feed with your BOFH friends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whack a copy of INN on your Colo and hook up a feed with your BOFH friends.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270897</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>burns210</author>
	<datestamp>1244538840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is it so hard to have decent spam filters for usenet? Seems like email has been solving this problem nicely for years and the News servers never copied any of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it so hard to have decent spam filters for usenet ?
Seems like email has been solving this problem nicely for years and the News servers never copied any of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it so hard to have decent spam filters for usenet?
Seems like email has been solving this problem nicely for years and the News servers never copied any of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271465</id>
	<title>Just use piratebay</title>
	<author>strangeattraction</author>
	<datestamp>1244541300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use piratebay to replace all my porn and software pirating needs. An it's FREE!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use piratebay to replace all my porn and software pirating needs .
An it 's FREE ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use piratebay to replace all my porn and software pirating needs.
An it's FREE!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28277591</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>iainl</author>
	<datestamp>1244636700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you don't want to distribute and store others' warez, I suggest not carrying the relevant alt.binaries subgroups, then.</p><p>They do indeed make up a massive proportion of Usenet's bandwidth, for a purpose completely different to what it was originally designed for. But they're nowhere near as bad as spammers, since they (usually) keep to their alloted group. As a Usenet provider it's reasonably simple to only carry those groups you think appropriate.</p><p>On a boringly practical basis, I'd have thought all that "leeching" happening on a single server you can control the downstream demand on was a lot less hassle for an ISP than having bittorrent saturate your users upload bandwidth all the time, mind you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't want to distribute and store others ' warez , I suggest not carrying the relevant alt.binaries subgroups , then.They do indeed make up a massive proportion of Usenet 's bandwidth , for a purpose completely different to what it was originally designed for .
But they 're nowhere near as bad as spammers , since they ( usually ) keep to their alloted group .
As a Usenet provider it 's reasonably simple to only carry those groups you think appropriate.On a boringly practical basis , I 'd have thought all that " leeching " happening on a single server you can control the downstream demand on was a lot less hassle for an ISP than having bittorrent saturate your users upload bandwidth all the time , mind you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't want to distribute and store others' warez, I suggest not carrying the relevant alt.binaries subgroups, then.They do indeed make up a massive proportion of Usenet's bandwidth, for a purpose completely different to what it was originally designed for.
But they're nowhere near as bad as spammers, since they (usually) keep to their alloted group.
As a Usenet provider it's reasonably simple to only carry those groups you think appropriate.On a boringly practical basis, I'd have thought all that "leeching" happening on a single server you can control the downstream demand on was a lot less hassle for an ISP than having bittorrent saturate your users upload bandwidth all the time, mind you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269439</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268783</id>
	<title>Newsguy.com</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244573940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Newsguy.com is an excellent service.  Compared to many other USENET services, Newsguy actually has very little spam because of this really clever program they developed called SpamHippo.  I also like them because you can buy bandwidth on demand if you want it and the bandwidth balance rolls over each month.  The online readers are very focused on the USENET usage experience, with automatic binary downloaders for those binaries with hundreds of parts (and you download the binary version, not the encoded 7-bit version).  Of course port 119 is there, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Newsguy.com is an excellent service .
Compared to many other USENET services , Newsguy actually has very little spam because of this really clever program they developed called SpamHippo .
I also like them because you can buy bandwidth on demand if you want it and the bandwidth balance rolls over each month .
The online readers are very focused on the USENET usage experience , with automatic binary downloaders for those binaries with hundreds of parts ( and you download the binary version , not the encoded 7-bit version ) .
Of course port 119 is there , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Newsguy.com is an excellent service.
Compared to many other USENET services, Newsguy actually has very little spam because of this really clever program they developed called SpamHippo.
I also like them because you can buy bandwidth on demand if you want it and the bandwidth balance rolls over each month.
The online readers are very focused on the USENET usage experience, with automatic binary downloaders for those binaries with hundreds of parts (and you download the binary version, not the encoded 7-bit version).
Of course port 119 is there, too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268191</id>
	<title>Haven't read usenet in years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244571840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No great loss</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No great loss</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No great loss</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28275825</id>
	<title>Re:Where will we get the porn?</title>
	<author>CrashNBrn</author>
	<datestamp>1244573280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From my experience on Usenet til a little over a year ago. If it truely does die, the underground distribution channels will be severely impacted. <br>
Which depending on your outlook/views might be a good thing. A quick perusal of a majority of Torrents is stuff that has previously been distributed thru NNTP. Usenews content gets stuffed all over the place in less convenient forms. The same content can be seen popping up on lots of the "pay for access download sites". Yet in all these cases NNTP is superior. <br>
* Easily browse NZB (NewsBin) servers that index usenet.<br>
* View individual files right in a newsreader (Xnews)<br>
* Get your maxSpeed download, 1+MB/s on a half-decent cable line. <br>
* Flat-rate monthly fee. <br>
<br>
Comparitively torrents can be agonizingly slow, you are lucky to get 10-30kb/s, and I've yet to see a speed reach above 200-300kb/s and that rate doesn't last long. File sizes are climbing into the multi-GB range and seeds on older torrents tend to disappear. Whereas some usenet servers are maintaining 99.9\% of their data for upwards of a year - which actually made it easy to filter out duplicate content. A one byte change in a given torrent changes the MD5 and makes it incompatible and almost impossible to filter duplicate content.<br>
<br>
Porn is pretty poor quality in general. There's very little class anymore. The farther we get from the 80s the more vulgar. I really cringe to think what will be considered "porn" in 10 more years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From my experience on Usenet til a little over a year ago .
If it truely does die , the underground distribution channels will be severely impacted .
Which depending on your outlook/views might be a good thing .
A quick perusal of a majority of Torrents is stuff that has previously been distributed thru NNTP .
Usenews content gets stuffed all over the place in less convenient forms .
The same content can be seen popping up on lots of the " pay for access download sites " .
Yet in all these cases NNTP is superior .
* Easily browse NZB ( NewsBin ) servers that index usenet .
* View individual files right in a newsreader ( Xnews ) * Get your maxSpeed download , 1 + MB/s on a half-decent cable line .
* Flat-rate monthly fee .
Comparitively torrents can be agonizingly slow , you are lucky to get 10-30kb/s , and I 've yet to see a speed reach above 200-300kb/s and that rate does n't last long .
File sizes are climbing into the multi-GB range and seeds on older torrents tend to disappear .
Whereas some usenet servers are maintaining 99.9 \ % of their data for upwards of a year - which actually made it easy to filter out duplicate content .
A one byte change in a given torrent changes the MD5 and makes it incompatible and almost impossible to filter duplicate content .
Porn is pretty poor quality in general .
There 's very little class anymore .
The farther we get from the 80s the more vulgar .
I really cringe to think what will be considered " porn " in 10 more years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From my experience on Usenet til a little over a year ago.
If it truely does die, the underground distribution channels will be severely impacted.
Which depending on your outlook/views might be a good thing.
A quick perusal of a majority of Torrents is stuff that has previously been distributed thru NNTP.
Usenews content gets stuffed all over the place in less convenient forms.
The same content can be seen popping up on lots of the "pay for access download sites".
Yet in all these cases NNTP is superior.
* Easily browse NZB (NewsBin) servers that index usenet.
* View individual files right in a newsreader (Xnews)
* Get your maxSpeed download, 1+MB/s on a half-decent cable line.
* Flat-rate monthly fee.
Comparitively torrents can be agonizingly slow, you are lucky to get 10-30kb/s, and I've yet to see a speed reach above 200-300kb/s and that rate doesn't last long.
File sizes are climbing into the multi-GB range and seeds on older torrents tend to disappear.
Whereas some usenet servers are maintaining 99.9\% of their data for upwards of a year - which actually made it easy to filter out duplicate content.
A one byte change in a given torrent changes the MD5 and makes it incompatible and almost impossible to filter duplicate content.
Porn is pretty poor quality in general.
There's very little class anymore.
The farther we get from the 80s the more vulgar.
I really cringe to think what will be considered "porn" in 10 more years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269863</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28282331</id>
	<title>Re:Just start torrenting.</title>
	<author>djrosen</author>
	<datestamp>1244659560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You've not heard of NZB's eh? I can fill my pipe just as I can with a torrent and I don't have to worry about how many seeders there are. Easynews allows unlimited connections and bandwidth and the even have a global web search if you need it.</p><p>For text there are a number of free or almost free NNTP servers you can connect to (news.motzarella.org). Google is worthless. Web forums and torrents will never compare to the awesomenenss that is/was USENET.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 've not heard of NZB 's eh ?
I can fill my pipe just as I can with a torrent and I do n't have to worry about how many seeders there are .
Easynews allows unlimited connections and bandwidth and the even have a global web search if you need it.For text there are a number of free or almost free NNTP servers you can connect to ( news.motzarella.org ) .
Google is worthless .
Web forums and torrents will never compare to the awesomenenss that is/was USENET .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You've not heard of NZB's eh?
I can fill my pipe just as I can with a torrent and I don't have to worry about how many seeders there are.
Easynews allows unlimited connections and bandwidth and the even have a global web search if you need it.For text there are a number of free or almost free NNTP servers you can connect to (news.motzarella.org).
Google is worthless.
Web forums and torrents will never compare to the awesomenenss that is/was USENET.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270235</id>
	<title>Re:Back in the day...</title>
	<author>Capt.DrumkenBum</author>
	<datestamp>1244579220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you suddnly feeling really old? Because I am.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you suddnly feeling really old ?
Because I am .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you suddnly feeling really old?
Because I am.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269285</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270395</id>
	<title>Altopia.com</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244579820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Altopia is just $6/month for unlimited usage with SSL.  Long history of protecting free speech.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Altopia is just $ 6/month for unlimited usage with SSL .
Long history of protecting free speech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Altopia is just $6/month for unlimited usage with SSL.
Long history of protecting free speech.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269163</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>Whitemice</author>
	<datestamp>1244575260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It isn't.  That is just google fanboy-ism (very prevalent here these days).  Simply nothing that thread, filter, sort, slice and dice like a modern e-mail client - which explains the dominance of mailists for real conversation and debate.  But then you'll get the people who use hotmail or whatever complaining mailists are sooo hard to use and we should all use web forums - which are just about the worst form of communication ever invented.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't .
That is just google fanboy-ism ( very prevalent here these days ) .
Simply nothing that thread , filter , sort , slice and dice like a modern e-mail client - which explains the dominance of mailists for real conversation and debate .
But then you 'll get the people who use hotmail or whatever complaining mailists are sooo hard to use and we should all use web forums - which are just about the worst form of communication ever invented .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't.
That is just google fanboy-ism (very prevalent here these days).
Simply nothing that thread, filter, sort, slice and dice like a modern e-mail client - which explains the dominance of mailists for real conversation and debate.
But then you'll get the people who use hotmail or whatever complaining mailists are sooo hard to use and we should all use web forums - which are just about the worst form of communication ever invented.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268461</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>gilgongo</author>
	<datestamp>1244572800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you actually want to READ and POST text news, then I don't know why anyone would use an NNTP client nowadays. Google Groups is a far superior gateway.</p></div><p>What?? How is the Google groups UI even remotely better at threading, marking, filtering and generally managing long conversations? Compared to even something like Free Agent it's utterly shit!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you actually want to READ and POST text news , then I do n't know why anyone would use an NNTP client nowadays .
Google Groups is a far superior gateway.What ? ?
How is the Google groups UI even remotely better at threading , marking , filtering and generally managing long conversations ?
Compared to even something like Free Agent it 's utterly shit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you actually want to READ and POST text news, then I don't know why anyone would use an NNTP client nowadays.
Google Groups is a far superior gateway.What??
How is the Google groups UI even remotely better at threading, marking, filtering and generally managing long conversations?
Compared to even something like Free Agent it's utterly shit!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268231</id>
	<title>Giganews.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244571960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Low-cost is a subjective term, and it really depends on how much you use it, but Giganews is rock solid.  Super fast (I can get 20Mb sustained -- that's my connection max) and over a year retention on binaries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Low-cost is a subjective term , and it really depends on how much you use it , but Giganews is rock solid .
Super fast ( I can get 20Mb sustained -- that 's my connection max ) and over a year retention on binaries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Low-cost is a subjective term, and it really depends on how much you use it, but Giganews is rock solid.
Super fast (I can get 20Mb sustained -- that's my connection max) and over a year retention on binaries.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28275267</id>
	<title>Re:Newsguy.com</title>
	<author>jabelli</author>
	<datestamp>1244568900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Note also that unused bandwidth on metered plans rolls over perpetually. I don't know of anyone else who does that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Note also that unused bandwidth on metered plans rolls over perpetually .
I do n't know of anyone else who does that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note also that unused bandwidth on metered plans rolls over perpetually.
I don't know of anyone else who does that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268783</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268745</id>
	<title>Not just on AT&amp;T's servers</title>
	<author>parkrrrr</author>
	<datestamp>1244573820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The announcement showed up on Newsguy's servers, too.  Seriously, if AT&amp;T sucked so bad at Usenet that they couldn't keep their 'private' announcements in-house, maybe it's just as well.</p><p>Speaking of which, Newsguy is pretty darned awesome, in my experience (which is admittedly limited, in that I've only had an account with them since Scumcast dropped their Usenet service a little under a year ago.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The announcement showed up on Newsguy 's servers , too .
Seriously , if AT&amp;T sucked so bad at Usenet that they could n't keep their 'private ' announcements in-house , maybe it 's just as well.Speaking of which , Newsguy is pretty darned awesome , in my experience ( which is admittedly limited , in that I 've only had an account with them since Scumcast dropped their Usenet service a little under a year ago .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The announcement showed up on Newsguy's servers, too.
Seriously, if AT&amp;T sucked so bad at Usenet that they couldn't keep their 'private' announcements in-house, maybe it's just as well.Speaking of which, Newsguy is pretty darned awesome, in my experience (which is admittedly limited, in that I've only had an account with them since Scumcast dropped their Usenet service a little under a year ago.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268355</id>
	<title>This is going to sound like an advertisement...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244572440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Astraweb as its currently the best unlimited monthly payment going</p><p><a href="http://www.news.astraweb.com/specials/kleverig-11.html" title="astraweb.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.news.astraweb.com/specials/kleverig-11.html</a> [astraweb.com]</p><p>$11/mo<br>SSL<br>Unlimited downloads</p><p>I've never had a problem capping my connection's bandwidth or with the service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Astraweb as its currently the best unlimited monthly payment goinghttp : //www.news.astraweb.com/specials/kleverig-11.html [ astraweb.com ] $ 11/moSSLUnlimited downloadsI 've never had a problem capping my connection 's bandwidth or with the service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Astraweb as its currently the best unlimited monthly payment goinghttp://www.news.astraweb.com/specials/kleverig-11.html [astraweb.com]$11/moSSLUnlimited downloadsI've never had a problem capping my connection's bandwidth or with the service.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269439</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>jgrahn</author>
	<datestamp>1244576040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you are interested in binaries, then I would point you to Astraweb. They have great price plans.</p></div></blockquote><p>Or maybe he'd prefer not to feed the kind of parasites who helped destroy Usenet.
I have very little respect for people who make others distribute and store their warez for them,
using resources intended for learning and discussions. They are on the same level as spammers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are interested in binaries , then I would point you to Astraweb .
They have great price plans.Or maybe he 'd prefer not to feed the kind of parasites who helped destroy Usenet .
I have very little respect for people who make others distribute and store their warez for them , using resources intended for learning and discussions .
They are on the same level as spammers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are interested in binaries, then I would point you to Astraweb.
They have great price plans.Or maybe he'd prefer not to feed the kind of parasites who helped destroy Usenet.
I have very little respect for people who make others distribute and store their warez for them,
using resources intended for learning and discussions.
They are on the same level as spammers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270851</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244538660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>OTOH, I would like USENET posting to allow for mark-up text, such as LaTeX or MathML. That would be very useful.</p></div><p>Or HTML, everyone would *love* that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>OTOH , I would like USENET posting to allow for mark-up text , such as LaTeX or MathML .
That would be very useful.Or HTML , everyone would * love * that : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OTOH, I would like USENET posting to allow for mark-up text, such as LaTeX or MathML.
That would be very useful.Or HTML, everyone would *love* that :P
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268947</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>shrubya</author>
	<datestamp>1244574480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep. NNTP discussion groups have been rather thoroughly replaced by web-based discussion sites, like Slashdot. And if you really need Usenet there's Google Groups. (yeah, there's a couple newsgroups Google doesn't cover. I'd give you a URL but I'd rather not risk slashdotting them.)</p><p>And as for NNTP binary groups, Bittorrent and Redtube have them covered.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep .
NNTP discussion groups have been rather thoroughly replaced by web-based discussion sites , like Slashdot .
And if you really need Usenet there 's Google Groups .
( yeah , there 's a couple newsgroups Google does n't cover .
I 'd give you a URL but I 'd rather not risk slashdotting them .
) And as for NNTP binary groups , Bittorrent and Redtube have them covered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep.
NNTP discussion groups have been rather thoroughly replaced by web-based discussion sites, like Slashdot.
And if you really need Usenet there's Google Groups.
(yeah, there's a couple newsgroups Google doesn't cover.
I'd give you a URL but I'd rather not risk slashdotting them.
)And as for NNTP binary groups, Bittorrent and Redtube have them covered.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268341</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>argiedot</author>
	<datestamp>1244572320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I said "There's always alt.fan.pratchett" but then decided to go check if it was still around and found the Google Groups archive completely inundated by spam. Jesus.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I said " There 's always alt.fan.pratchett " but then decided to go check if it was still around and found the Google Groups archive completely inundated by spam .
Jesus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I said "There's always alt.fan.pratchett" but then decided to go check if it was still around and found the Google Groups archive completely inundated by spam.
Jesus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269021</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1244574780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to mention that Google Groups is a major source of spam.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to mention that Google Groups is a major source of spam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to mention that Google Groups is a major source of spam.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268435</id>
	<title>Depends on what you think is important</title>
	<author>davmoo</author>
	<datestamp>1244572680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use EasyNews to get my pr0...um...er...oh...make that 'I heard EasyNews is good'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use EasyNews to get my pr0...um...er...oh...make that 'I heard EasyNews is good' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use EasyNews to get my pr0...um...er...oh...make that 'I heard EasyNews is good'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271445</id>
	<title>Oh yes, another benefit...</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1244541180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a long time I was feeding ALL my mailing lists to local newsgroups.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a long time I was feeding ALL my mailing lists to local newsgroups .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a long time I was feeding ALL my mailing lists to local newsgroups.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269525</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244576340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Top post replies which contain OS-specific C++. Watch them explode.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Top post replies which contain OS-specific C + + .
Watch them explode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Top post replies which contain OS-specific C++.
Watch them explode.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268591</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268539</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>GigaHurtsMyRobot</author>
	<datestamp>1244573100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been a Giganews subscriber and a Newsleecher + Super Search user for well over a year now... It's worth the money for instant access to just about everything.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been a Giganews subscriber and a Newsleecher + Super Search user for well over a year now... It 's worth the money for instant access to just about everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been a Giganews subscriber and a Newsleecher + Super Search user for well over a year now... It's worth the money for instant access to just about everything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269673</id>
	<title>Re:Run your own server</title>
	<author>Rich0</author>
	<datestamp>1244576940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This does make me think about whether there is a better solution.  Here is what we have now:</p><p>1.  Usenet.  Pros - NNTP works great in that it separates content from presentation.  Cons - a lot of stuff gets sent all over the place "just in case", spam is a big problem, and archival is redundant (why store an artile in 50,000 places for six months?).</p><p>2.  Web Forums.  Pros - better control of spam and stewardship is clear (site owner controls site), purely on-demand transmission of data.  Cons - you're stuck with whatever presentation model the site offers, and you end up having accounts on 500 different sites.</p><p>3.  Mailing Lists.  Pros - mostly on-demand transmission of data, stewardship is clear, separation of content and presentation.  Con - needs to be coupled with an archival solution which isn't tightly integrated, administration is per-list but no need for "accounts."</p><p>The best of all worlds would have these properties:</p><p>1.  Spam is controlled.  This probably requires some kind of stewardship or at least a web-of-trust of some kind.<br>2.  Data only goes where it is needed.  An ISP shouldn't need a full news feed for their 10 customers who follow 5 newsgroups.<br>3.  Data is archived.  It need not be archived equally everywhere.<br>4.  Content and presentation are separated.  Users use the client of their choosing, which might include a web interface but need not do so.</p><p>To be honest, a mailing list combined with a newsreader-like client might be the best of all worlds.  Gmane may be a very good example of how to do this.  I'd really like to see something more peer-to-peer or distributed, but not at the ISP level like usenet.</p><p>I actually got annoyed trying to follow one of my high-volume lists that doesn't allow gmane to archive them.  I set up my own innd and am piping the mailing list into my own newsgroup.  It seems like this is a mostly-solved problem that just needs a little refinement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This does make me think about whether there is a better solution .
Here is what we have now : 1 .
Usenet. Pros - NNTP works great in that it separates content from presentation .
Cons - a lot of stuff gets sent all over the place " just in case " , spam is a big problem , and archival is redundant ( why store an artile in 50,000 places for six months ? ) .2 .
Web Forums .
Pros - better control of spam and stewardship is clear ( site owner controls site ) , purely on-demand transmission of data .
Cons - you 're stuck with whatever presentation model the site offers , and you end up having accounts on 500 different sites.3 .
Mailing Lists .
Pros - mostly on-demand transmission of data , stewardship is clear , separation of content and presentation .
Con - needs to be coupled with an archival solution which is n't tightly integrated , administration is per-list but no need for " accounts .
" The best of all worlds would have these properties : 1 .
Spam is controlled .
This probably requires some kind of stewardship or at least a web-of-trust of some kind.2 .
Data only goes where it is needed .
An ISP should n't need a full news feed for their 10 customers who follow 5 newsgroups.3 .
Data is archived .
It need not be archived equally everywhere.4 .
Content and presentation are separated .
Users use the client of their choosing , which might include a web interface but need not do so.To be honest , a mailing list combined with a newsreader-like client might be the best of all worlds .
Gmane may be a very good example of how to do this .
I 'd really like to see something more peer-to-peer or distributed , but not at the ISP level like usenet.I actually got annoyed trying to follow one of my high-volume lists that does n't allow gmane to archive them .
I set up my own innd and am piping the mailing list into my own newsgroup .
It seems like this is a mostly-solved problem that just needs a little refinement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This does make me think about whether there is a better solution.
Here is what we have now:1.
Usenet.  Pros - NNTP works great in that it separates content from presentation.
Cons - a lot of stuff gets sent all over the place "just in case", spam is a big problem, and archival is redundant (why store an artile in 50,000 places for six months?).2.
Web Forums.
Pros - better control of spam and stewardship is clear (site owner controls site), purely on-demand transmission of data.
Cons - you're stuck with whatever presentation model the site offers, and you end up having accounts on 500 different sites.3.
Mailing Lists.
Pros - mostly on-demand transmission of data, stewardship is clear, separation of content and presentation.
Con - needs to be coupled with an archival solution which isn't tightly integrated, administration is per-list but no need for "accounts.
"The best of all worlds would have these properties:1.
Spam is controlled.
This probably requires some kind of stewardship or at least a web-of-trust of some kind.2.
Data only goes where it is needed.
An ISP shouldn't need a full news feed for their 10 customers who follow 5 newsgroups.3.
Data is archived.
It need not be archived equally everywhere.4.
Content and presentation are separated.
Users use the client of their choosing, which might include a web interface but need not do so.To be honest, a mailing list combined with a newsreader-like client might be the best of all worlds.
Gmane may be a very good example of how to do this.
I'd really like to see something more peer-to-peer or distributed, but not at the ISP level like usenet.I actually got annoyed trying to follow one of my high-volume lists that doesn't allow gmane to archive them.
I set up my own innd and am piping the mailing list into my own newsgroup.
It seems like this is a mostly-solved problem that just needs a little refinement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268307</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270593</id>
	<title>Re:Speed, speed, speed</title>
	<author>RulerOf</author>
	<datestamp>1244580600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The good thing about your ISP providing Usenet is speed. The connection is strictly between your home and the ISP.</p> </div><p>ISP's outsourced their NNTP offerings to the big boys (Giganews, Newshosting, etc.) years ago because it was cheaper to pay them for access to their servers than it was to keep them in house.   It did, however, mean that the connections between the ISP and those particular news providers got <i>way</i> better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The good thing about your ISP providing Usenet is speed .
The connection is strictly between your home and the ISP .
ISP 's outsourced their NNTP offerings to the big boys ( Giganews , Newshosting , etc .
) years ago because it was cheaper to pay them for access to their servers than it was to keep them in house .
It did , however , mean that the connections between the ISP and those particular news providers got way better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The good thing about your ISP providing Usenet is speed.
The connection is strictly between your home and the ISP.
ISP's outsourced their NNTP offerings to the big boys (Giganews, Newshosting, etc.
) years ago because it was cheaper to pay them for access to their servers than it was to keep them in house.
It did, however, mean that the connections between the ISP and those particular news providers got way better.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269603</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244576640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>But if you are using binaries groups for music or prON you are pulling from the downstream only as 'leechers' are 99\% of users.  From an ISP perspective the Upstream bandwidth seems to be what causes the most challenges.<br><br>ISP's often say that it is something like 5\% of users who uses 90\% of bandwidth.  To be honest, I am not sure how this will advantage AT &amp; T.<br><br>I also imagine that any dsl users under contract would be able to cancel their contract without an ETF (early termination fee).  I do not know what percentage of users are under contract - but when the services offered are reduced and the customer is expected to pay a 3rd party provider to add them back that is clearly a break in the contract.<br><br>I do know that with T-Mobile a few years back a change was implemented that altered service and on each bill,  - in the fine print at the bottom -, you were advised that you could cancel your services (with no ETF) or continue with services which would mean you agreed to any changes.  Would be interesting to see an AT &amp; T bill over the next bit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But if you are using binaries groups for music or prON you are pulling from the downstream only as 'leechers ' are 99 \ % of users .
From an ISP perspective the Upstream bandwidth seems to be what causes the most challenges.ISP 's often say that it is something like 5 \ % of users who uses 90 \ % of bandwidth .
To be honest , I am not sure how this will advantage AT &amp; T.I also imagine that any dsl users under contract would be able to cancel their contract without an ETF ( early termination fee ) .
I do not know what percentage of users are under contract - but when the services offered are reduced and the customer is expected to pay a 3rd party provider to add them back that is clearly a break in the contract.I do know that with T-Mobile a few years back a change was implemented that altered service and on each bill , - in the fine print at the bottom - , you were advised that you could cancel your services ( with no ETF ) or continue with services which would mean you agreed to any changes .
Would be interesting to see an AT &amp; T bill over the next bit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But if you are using binaries groups for music or prON you are pulling from the downstream only as 'leechers' are 99\% of users.
From an ISP perspective the Upstream bandwidth seems to be what causes the most challenges.ISP's often say that it is something like 5\% of users who uses 90\% of bandwidth.
To be honest, I am not sure how this will advantage AT &amp; T.I also imagine that any dsl users under contract would be able to cancel their contract without an ETF (early termination fee).
I do not know what percentage of users are under contract - but when the services offered are reduced and the customer is expected to pay a 3rd party provider to add them back that is clearly a break in the contract.I do know that with T-Mobile a few years back a change was implemented that altered service and on each bill,  - in the fine print at the bottom -, you were advised that you could cancel your services (with no ETF) or continue with services which would mean you agreed to any changes.
Would be interesting to see an AT &amp; T bill over the next bit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268443</id>
	<title>I use Astraweb.com</title>
	<author>KraftDinner</author>
	<datestamp>1244572680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're especially cheap(I pay $11 US per month for unlimited 20 connections) and they're upgrading their retention to 360 days, right now it's at 295. I don't work for Astraweb, I'm just a very satisfied customer. The only downfall, if you consider this a downfall, is to get the $11 a month deal you have to pay through PayPal's subscription service, which isn't all that bad.

Here's the link: <a href="http://www.news.astraweb.com/specials/kleverig-11.html" title="astraweb.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.news.astraweb.com/specials/kleverig-11.html</a> [astraweb.com]

Click the "Now Accepting PayPal" button.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're especially cheap ( I pay $ 11 US per month for unlimited 20 connections ) and they 're upgrading their retention to 360 days , right now it 's at 295 .
I do n't work for Astraweb , I 'm just a very satisfied customer .
The only downfall , if you consider this a downfall , is to get the $ 11 a month deal you have to pay through PayPal 's subscription service , which is n't all that bad .
Here 's the link : http : //www.news.astraweb.com/specials/kleverig-11.html [ astraweb.com ] Click the " Now Accepting PayPal " button .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're especially cheap(I pay $11 US per month for unlimited 20 connections) and they're upgrading their retention to 360 days, right now it's at 295.
I don't work for Astraweb, I'm just a very satisfied customer.
The only downfall, if you consider this a downfall, is to get the $11 a month deal you have to pay through PayPal's subscription service, which isn't all that bad.
Here's the link: http://www.news.astraweb.com/specials/kleverig-11.html [astraweb.com]

Click the "Now Accepting PayPal" button.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268977</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1244574600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find comp.sys.apple2 well worth reading. Many past and current Apple II developers still post in there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find comp.sys.apple2 well worth reading .
Many past and current Apple II developers still post in there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find comp.sys.apple2 well worth reading.
Many past and current Apple II developers still post in there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268317</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244572260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should investigate talkorigins.org</p><p>Although that website is ancient, its a collection of a vast amount of material on the evolution/creationism debate that was held exclusively on usenet. It serves as an amazing reference so that if you see the same conversation starting for the nth time you can post the link and close the thread.</p><p>Now that may seem dismissive, but you would be amazed how many times you will see creationists copy and paste first posts from anti-evolution websites, which have detailed answers that would be a pain to type out each time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should investigate talkorigins.orgAlthough that website is ancient , its a collection of a vast amount of material on the evolution/creationism debate that was held exclusively on usenet .
It serves as an amazing reference so that if you see the same conversation starting for the nth time you can post the link and close the thread.Now that may seem dismissive , but you would be amazed how many times you will see creationists copy and paste first posts from anti-evolution websites , which have detailed answers that would be a pain to type out each time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should investigate talkorigins.orgAlthough that website is ancient, its a collection of a vast amount of material on the evolution/creationism debate that was held exclusively on usenet.
It serves as an amazing reference so that if you see the same conversation starting for the nth time you can post the link and close the thread.Now that may seem dismissive, but you would be amazed how many times you will see creationists copy and paste first posts from anti-evolution websites, which have detailed answers that would be a pain to type out each time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269179</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244575320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They support anonymous SSL connections. It's not fullproof, but it's a fairly secure transfer protocol. Certainly safer than bittorrent. I've been a Usenetserver.com customer for years. Can't complain about them at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They support anonymous SSL connections .
It 's not fullproof , but it 's a fairly secure transfer protocol .
Certainly safer than bittorrent .
I 've been a Usenetserver.com customer for years .
Ca n't complain about them at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They support anonymous SSL connections.
It's not fullproof, but it's a fairly secure transfer protocol.
Certainly safer than bittorrent.
I've been a Usenetserver.com customer for years.
Can't complain about them at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272955</id>
	<title>Megabitz!</title>
	<author>seebs</author>
	<datestamp>1244549640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use <a href="http://www.megabitz.net/" title="megabitz.net">http://www.megabitz.net/</a> [megabitz.net] -- been with them for a year or two, service has been decent.  There have been a couple of outages, but they were pretty brief.</p><p>I don't use Usenet as much as I used to, but when I want Usenet, it is useful to me that I have access to a good Usenet service.  I've been liking it better than relying on my upstream ISP, which I used to do.</p><p>Key points:<br>* Flexible pricing (you can choose whether to pay by total bandwidth or by instantaneous bandwidth)<br>* Supports multiple simultaneous connections<br>* Good support for binary groups (only occasionally significant, but when it is, it's pretty useful)<br>* Competent techies<br>* Responsive support</p><p>Full disclosure moment:  I did some work for them once.  Specifically, I helped with cleaning up some of the text describing their service at one point.  Here's the thing:  That's not written by marketers.  When they say "We listen!", that doesn't mean that some marketer determined that 37.6\% of a key target demographic liked companies that claim to listen.  It means they really do, and they think you'll care.  And yes, they really do.  Quick responses to emailed questions have been the norm.</p><p>So, basically, I'm a big fan, and I'm not a current employee and don't expect to be one again (too busy, if nothing else), but I really like the service, and happily pay for it.  (I could probably get by with a cheaper plan, but the one I'm one is useful on the occasions when I want to try to grab an ISO and for some reason torrents aren't my first choice.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use http : //www.megabitz.net/ [ megabitz.net ] -- been with them for a year or two , service has been decent .
There have been a couple of outages , but they were pretty brief.I do n't use Usenet as much as I used to , but when I want Usenet , it is useful to me that I have access to a good Usenet service .
I 've been liking it better than relying on my upstream ISP , which I used to do.Key points : * Flexible pricing ( you can choose whether to pay by total bandwidth or by instantaneous bandwidth ) * Supports multiple simultaneous connections * Good support for binary groups ( only occasionally significant , but when it is , it 's pretty useful ) * Competent techies * Responsive supportFull disclosure moment : I did some work for them once .
Specifically , I helped with cleaning up some of the text describing their service at one point .
Here 's the thing : That 's not written by marketers .
When they say " We listen !
" , that does n't mean that some marketer determined that 37.6 \ % of a key target demographic liked companies that claim to listen .
It means they really do , and they think you 'll care .
And yes , they really do .
Quick responses to emailed questions have been the norm.So , basically , I 'm a big fan , and I 'm not a current employee and do n't expect to be one again ( too busy , if nothing else ) , but I really like the service , and happily pay for it .
( I could probably get by with a cheaper plan , but the one I 'm one is useful on the occasions when I want to try to grab an ISO and for some reason torrents are n't my first choice .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use http://www.megabitz.net/ [megabitz.net] -- been with them for a year or two, service has been decent.
There have been a couple of outages, but they were pretty brief.I don't use Usenet as much as I used to, but when I want Usenet, it is useful to me that I have access to a good Usenet service.
I've been liking it better than relying on my upstream ISP, which I used to do.Key points:* Flexible pricing (you can choose whether to pay by total bandwidth or by instantaneous bandwidth)* Supports multiple simultaneous connections* Good support for binary groups (only occasionally significant, but when it is, it's pretty useful)* Competent techies* Responsive supportFull disclosure moment:  I did some work for them once.
Specifically, I helped with cleaning up some of the text describing their service at one point.
Here's the thing:  That's not written by marketers.
When they say "We listen!
", that doesn't mean that some marketer determined that 37.6\% of a key target demographic liked companies that claim to listen.
It means they really do, and they think you'll care.
And yes, they really do.
Quick responses to emailed questions have been the norm.So, basically, I'm a big fan, and I'm not a current employee and don't expect to be one again (too busy, if nothing else), but I really like the service, and happily pay for it.
(I could probably get by with a cheaper plan, but the one I'm one is useful on the occasions when I want to try to grab an ISO and for some reason torrents aren't my first choice.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270293</id>
	<title>Re:I just wanna say it's terrible</title>
	<author>HikingStick</author>
	<datestamp>1244579400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know whether you were being sincere or cheeky with your comment, but I tend to agree.  Usenet had its uses (and no, pr0n was not one of them for me).  I liked the various reader options--it was just easier to follow (and navigate) threaded discussions.  I lamented the loss when it first started getting dropped years ago (I was teaching a class that used NNTP for threaded discussions and had a student on AOL who no longer could access the discussions), but was honestly surprised to see that some major players had not cut it off yet.  I'd already moved on to lesser platforms.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know whether you were being sincere or cheeky with your comment , but I tend to agree .
Usenet had its uses ( and no , pr0n was not one of them for me ) .
I liked the various reader options--it was just easier to follow ( and navigate ) threaded discussions .
I lamented the loss when it first started getting dropped years ago ( I was teaching a class that used NNTP for threaded discussions and had a student on AOL who no longer could access the discussions ) , but was honestly surprised to see that some major players had not cut it off yet .
I 'd already moved on to lesser platforms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know whether you were being sincere or cheeky with your comment, but I tend to agree.
Usenet had its uses (and no, pr0n was not one of them for me).
I liked the various reader options--it was just easier to follow (and navigate) threaded discussions.
I lamented the loss when it first started getting dropped years ago (I was teaching a class that used NNTP for threaded discussions and had a student on AOL who no longer could access the discussions), but was honestly surprised to see that some major players had not cut it off yet.
I'd already moved on to lesser platforms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269805</id>
	<title>Re:I just wanna say it's terrible</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244577540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tell me about it. Do you know how hard it is to find an ISP that will still act as a UUCP gateway?!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell me about it .
Do you know how hard it is to find an ISP that will still act as a UUCP gateway ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell me about it.
Do you know how hard it is to find an ISP that will still act as a UUCP gateway?
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268793</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>mattack2</author>
	<datestamp>1244574000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you actually want to READ and POST text news, then I don't know why anyone would use an NNTP client nowadays. Google Groups is a far superior gateway.</p></div></blockquote><p>Disclaimer: I haven't actually had a Usenet feed for many years, though articles like this one actually make me want to try one again.  I should try one of the free ones (if they still exist) and see if they have even a decent feed for the very few groups I'd want to keep up on.  (I really wish Google News had an NNTP feed, even if it charged a low fee.)</p><p>I think the reason why anyone would use an NNTP client were actually elaborated very well in Brad Templeton's history of Clarinet article that was posted yesterday..<br><a href="http://www.templetons.com/brad/clarinet-history.html#m5" title="templetons.com">http://www.templetons.com/brad/clarinet-history.html#m5</a> [templetons.com] in the section "Eventual fate".</p><p>(Though I have used it for very infrequent uses, Google News didn't seem to keep track of which articles I read, and the interface certainly wasn't as good as the browser I use(d), trn..)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you actually want to READ and POST text news , then I do n't know why anyone would use an NNTP client nowadays .
Google Groups is a far superior gateway.Disclaimer : I have n't actually had a Usenet feed for many years , though articles like this one actually make me want to try one again .
I should try one of the free ones ( if they still exist ) and see if they have even a decent feed for the very few groups I 'd want to keep up on .
( I really wish Google News had an NNTP feed , even if it charged a low fee .
) I think the reason why anyone would use an NNTP client were actually elaborated very well in Brad Templeton 's history of Clarinet article that was posted yesterday..http : //www.templetons.com/brad/clarinet-history.html # m5 [ templetons.com ] in the section " Eventual fate " .
( Though I have used it for very infrequent uses , Google News did n't seem to keep track of which articles I read , and the interface certainly was n't as good as the browser I use ( d ) , trn.. )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you actually want to READ and POST text news, then I don't know why anyone would use an NNTP client nowadays.
Google Groups is a far superior gateway.Disclaimer: I haven't actually had a Usenet feed for many years, though articles like this one actually make me want to try one again.
I should try one of the free ones (if they still exist) and see if they have even a decent feed for the very few groups I'd want to keep up on.
(I really wish Google News had an NNTP feed, even if it charged a low fee.
)I think the reason why anyone would use an NNTP client were actually elaborated very well in Brad Templeton's history of Clarinet article that was posted yesterday..http://www.templetons.com/brad/clarinet-history.html#m5 [templetons.com] in the section "Eventual fate".
(Though I have used it for very infrequent uses, Google News didn't seem to keep track of which articles I read, and the interface certainly wasn't as good as the browser I use(d), trn..)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28277877</id>
	<title>ITS A TRAP!!!</title>
	<author>xtracto</author>
	<datestamp>1244639700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*puts tinfoil hat</p><p>Don't you see guys? this "franknagy" (nagy@fnal.gov) post is just a cheap MAFIAA attempt to get to know the U-know what-  services that we use to warez^H^H^H^H download our Linux ISOs!!</p><p>And at this time, you have provided a very comprehensive list of service providers to sue...</p><p>remember... the FIRST rule of U-know-what is... you DO NOT talk about it!</p><p>*removes tinfoil hat</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* puts tinfoil hatDo n't you see guys ?
this " franknagy " ( nagy @ fnal.gov ) post is just a cheap MAFIAA attempt to get to know the U-know what- services that we use to warez ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H download our Linux ISOs !
! And at this time , you have provided a very comprehensive list of service providers to sue...remember... the FIRST rule of U-know-what is... you DO NOT talk about it !
* removes tinfoil hat</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*puts tinfoil hatDon't you see guys?
this "franknagy" (nagy@fnal.gov) post is just a cheap MAFIAA attempt to get to know the U-know what-  services that we use to warez^H^H^H^H download our Linux ISOs!
!And at this time, you have provided a very comprehensive list of service providers to sue...remember... the FIRST rule of U-know-what is... you DO NOT talk about it!
*removes tinfoil hat</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272763</id>
	<title>Re:Haven't read usenet in years</title>
	<author>SETIGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1244548320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember when the "Imminent death of the net predicted!" thread started back in the mid-80s.  The threats were increased traffic, college students, the great renaming, fidonet, AOL and spam.  Somehow it's still there if you want it.  And it'll still be there tomorrow.  I don't even have a newsreader installed at this point.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember when the " Imminent death of the net predicted !
" thread started back in the mid-80s .
The threats were increased traffic , college students , the great renaming , fidonet , AOL and spam .
Somehow it 's still there if you want it .
And it 'll still be there tomorrow .
I do n't even have a newsreader installed at this point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember when the "Imminent death of the net predicted!
" thread started back in the mid-80s.
The threats were increased traffic, college students, the great renaming, fidonet, AOL and spam.
Somehow it's still there if you want it.
And it'll still be there tomorrow.
I don't even have a newsreader installed at this point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268191</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269863</id>
	<title>Where will we get the porn?</title>
	<author>Theovon</author>
	<datestamp>1244577780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There goes our ability to suck down terabyte after terabyte of really lousy UUencoded porn.</p><p>(I find it more erotic in base64.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There goes our ability to suck down terabyte after terabyte of really lousy UUencoded porn .
( I find it more erotic in base64 .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There goes our ability to suck down terabyte after terabyte of really lousy UUencoded porn.
(I find it more erotic in base64.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270301</id>
	<title>Another vote for Easynews.com</title>
	<author>plazman30</author>
	<datestamp>1244579460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Easynews.com for my Usenet access.  Been a happy customer for well over 7 years now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Easynews.com for my Usenet access .
Been a happy customer for well over 7 years now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Easynews.com for my Usenet access.
Been a happy customer for well over 7 years now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28273067</id>
	<title>I use aioe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244550300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>aioe is a free Usenet server that also allows posting.</p><p>Simply use your own Usenet client (like Pan) and use "nntp.aioe.org" as the news server.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>aioe is a free Usenet server that also allows posting.Simply use your own Usenet client ( like Pan ) and use " nntp.aioe.org " as the news server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>aioe is a free Usenet server that also allows posting.Simply use your own Usenet client (like Pan) and use "nntp.aioe.org" as the news server.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28280049</id>
	<title>Newsguy</title>
	<author>whitroth</author>
	<datestamp>1244650380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm quite happy with newsguy. It was cheap, and I have no problems.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; mark</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm quite happy with newsguy .
It was cheap , and I have no problems .
        mark</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm quite happy with newsguy.
It was cheap, and I have no problems.
        mark</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269641</id>
	<title>IPv6</title>
	<author>ofc</author>
	<datestamp>1244576820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've never found a free one that was worth a damn</p></div><p>Enable IPv6 and use these free ones:<br><a href="http://www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/#newsservers" title="sixxs.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/#newsservers</a> [sixxs.net]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never found a free one that was worth a damnEnable IPv6 and use these free ones : http : //www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/ # newsservers [ sixxs.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never found a free one that was worth a damnEnable IPv6 and use these free ones:http://www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/#newsservers [sixxs.net]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268277</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268189</id>
	<title>Just start torrenting.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244571840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's better anyway<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-P</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's better anyway : -P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's better anyway :-P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269907</id>
	<title>reports of usenet's death exaggerated?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244578020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are still conversations on Usenet.<br>
There is still pr0n.<br>
There is still a boatload of warez.<br>
There is still a ton of spam.<br>
There are still many, many groups and messages.<br>
There are still plenty of Usenet access providers and willing customers.<br>
There is still plenty of software to access Usenet.<br>
ISPs are still reducing services while raising prices.<br> <br>So what's new and why is Usenet apparently dead?</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are still conversations on Usenet .
There is still pr0n .
There is still a boatload of warez .
There is still a ton of spam .
There are still many , many groups and messages .
There are still plenty of Usenet access providers and willing customers .
There is still plenty of software to access Usenet .
ISPs are still reducing services while raising prices .
So what 's new and why is Usenet apparently dead ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are still conversations on Usenet.
There is still pr0n.
There is still a boatload of warez.
There is still a ton of spam.
There are still many, many groups and messages.
There are still plenty of Usenet access providers and willing customers.
There is still plenty of software to access Usenet.
ISPs are still reducing services while raising prices.
So what's new and why is Usenet apparently dead?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274389</id>
	<title>Re:This is going to sound like an advertisement...</title>
	<author>Stormie</author>
	<datestamp>1244561220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I use Astraweb as its currently the best unlimited monthly payment going</p></div></blockquote><p>If you want to actually use Usenet for conversation, Astraweb's NON-unlimited plan is the way to go. 25 GB costs $10 and will probably last you the rest of your life. I know I haven't made much of a dent in the 25 GB I bought <i>years</i> ago.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Astraweb as its currently the best unlimited monthly payment goingIf you want to actually use Usenet for conversation , Astraweb 's NON-unlimited plan is the way to go .
25 GB costs $ 10 and will probably last you the rest of your life .
I know I have n't made much of a dent in the 25 GB I bought years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Astraweb as its currently the best unlimited monthly payment goingIf you want to actually use Usenet for conversation, Astraweb's NON-unlimited plan is the way to go.
25 GB costs $10 and will probably last you the rest of your life.
I know I haven't made much of a dent in the 25 GB I bought years ago.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268355</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28273933</id>
	<title>Another easynews supporter</title>
	<author>Civil\_Disobedient</author>
	<datestamp>1244556960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Their retention is nearly as good as GigaNews, and I like being able to support a place with a leftist/pro-civil liberties stance on access logs.</p><p>If you're looking for some exceptionally esoteric porn you're probably better-off with a different server.  But if you just need the basics, with long post-retention and no random pain-in-the-ass post purging, EasyNews should definitely be on your short list of candidates.</p><p>Other things I like about EasyNews:</p><ul><li>Unused monthly transfer capacity rolls over to the next month.</li><li>If you ever stop subscribing with them, but later on decide you want to come back, you can create a new account that retains the gigs of transfer credits from your old account.  Awesome.  (Just re-register with your old username &amp; password)</li><li>Web downloading (specifically, <b>port 80</b> downloading.  Much lower likelihood of having your bandwidth throttled.</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Their retention is nearly as good as GigaNews , and I like being able to support a place with a leftist/pro-civil liberties stance on access logs.If you 're looking for some exceptionally esoteric porn you 're probably better-off with a different server .
But if you just need the basics , with long post-retention and no random pain-in-the-ass post purging , EasyNews should definitely be on your short list of candidates.Other things I like about EasyNews : Unused monthly transfer capacity rolls over to the next month.If you ever stop subscribing with them , but later on decide you want to come back , you can create a new account that retains the gigs of transfer credits from your old account .
Awesome. ( Just re-register with your old username &amp; password ) Web downloading ( specifically , port 80 downloading .
Much lower likelihood of having your bandwidth throttled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their retention is nearly as good as GigaNews, and I like being able to support a place with a leftist/pro-civil liberties stance on access logs.If you're looking for some exceptionally esoteric porn you're probably better-off with a different server.
But if you just need the basics, with long post-retention and no random pain-in-the-ass post purging, EasyNews should definitely be on your short list of candidates.Other things I like about EasyNews:Unused monthly transfer capacity rolls over to the next month.If you ever stop subscribing with them, but later on decide you want to come back, you can create a new account that retains the gigs of transfer credits from your old account.
Awesome.  (Just re-register with your old username &amp; password)Web downloading (specifically, port 80 downloading.
Much lower likelihood of having your bandwidth throttled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268277</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270117</id>
	<title>There are free news servers on IPv6.</title>
	<author>molo</author>
	<datestamp>1244578860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/#newsservers" title="sixxs.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/#newsservers</a> [sixxs.net]</p><p>Public:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; news.ipv6.eweka.nl<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; newszilla6.xs4all.nl</p><p>Requires signup:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; reader.ipv6.xsnews.nl</p><p>-molo</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/ # newsservers [ sixxs.net ] Public :     news.ipv6.eweka.nl     newszilla6.xs4all.nlRequires signup :     reader.ipv6.xsnews.nl-molo</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.sixxs.net/misc/coolstuff/#newsservers [sixxs.net]Public:
    news.ipv6.eweka.nl
    newszilla6.xs4all.nlRequires signup:
    reader.ipv6.xsnews.nl-molo</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268755</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>AvitarX</author>
	<datestamp>1244573820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Usenet-news.net</p><p>They sell by the GB, but it never expires.</p><p>They are not an alternative to a good search and provide no client though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Usenet-news.netThey sell by the GB , but it never expires.They are not an alternative to a good search and provide no client though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Usenet-news.netThey sell by the GB, but it never expires.They are not an alternative to a good search and provide no client though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269769</id>
	<title>Re:R.I.P.</title>
	<author>rhizome</author>
	<datestamp>1244577420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're probably thinking of <a href="http://www.birdhouse.org/etc/kibosig.txt" title="birdhouse.org">Kibo's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.sig</a> [birdhouse.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're probably thinking of Kibo 's .sig [ birdhouse.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're probably thinking of Kibo's .sig [birdhouse.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269689</id>
	<title>Not quite as "internal" as they'd intended</title>
	<author>Bruce Stephens</author>
	<datestamp>1244577060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The story suggests the article appeared "in all the news groups on the AT&amp;T/SBC News Server".  It also appeared throughout the world,<br>due to a typo: "Distributrion: internal".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The story suggests the article appeared " in all the news groups on the AT&amp;T/SBC News Server " .
It also appeared throughout the world,due to a typo : " Distributrion : internal " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The story suggests the article appeared "in all the news groups on the AT&amp;T/SBC News Server".
It also appeared throughout the world,due to a typo: "Distributrion: internal".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269299</id>
	<title>Hoax (to be determined)</title>
	<author>Hieronymus Hero</author>
	<datestamp>1244575740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Various AT&amp;T employees at various levels have yet to confirm to various customers that this <i>isn't</i> a <b>hoax</b>.  The <b>one</b> person who occasionally posts to AT&amp;T's fire-walled internal help groups and actually is <b>responsible</b> for maintaining the company's nntp servers has yet to comment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Various AT&amp;T employees at various levels have yet to confirm to various customers that this is n't a hoax .
The one person who occasionally posts to AT&amp;T 's fire-walled internal help groups and actually is responsible for maintaining the company 's nntp servers has yet to comment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Various AT&amp;T employees at various levels have yet to confirm to various customers that this isn't a hoax.
The one person who occasionally posts to AT&amp;T's fire-walled internal help groups and actually is responsible for maintaining the company's nntp servers has yet to comment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270039</id>
	<title>alt.binaries.bestiality.ductape.hamsters</title>
	<author>Mobius Ring</author>
	<datestamp>1244578560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you sure you need NNTP to get your kitty pr0n?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you sure you need NNTP to get your kitty pr0n ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you sure you need NNTP to get your kitty pr0n?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269285</id>
	<title>Back in the day...</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1244575680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I ran a little ISP, we kept a 7-day Usenet feed.  It came off MCI, took almost 10GB, and was a pain to manage.  We got a satellite link and cut back to 3 days, then back up to 7 when some users howled.  My boss said to cut back to 3 days unless users had 'legitimate' needs, not ABPE for instance.</p><p>Users dutifully provided legitimate uses.  Comp.* was the favorite.</p><p>Well, it grew to the point that storage was becoming a pain, and an hour's delay overnight got my pager whining from the ABPE fanbois going apeshit over not having the next day's segments to download over their modem link.  Please.</p><p>SO we abandoned it, and got users going to MCI's Usenet feed directly.  Not better, but I saved a whole server.</p><p>Some day day we will be sitting around a nice fire, beverages in hand, and waxking poetic about the demise of SMTP.  How in the old days, email was so simple, except for the spam and phishing.</p><p>We are close to the end of an era.  The kinder, gentler, family Internet.  It hasn't been that way for a while, of course, but dammit I miss Jon Postel, and getting things done with an RFC and three guys saying "Hell yeah, it SHOULD work like that!".  And being able to call someone and get a spammer shut down for a few weeks, until they found a new MCI rep. And people who's purpose was just to figure something out, not to ruin your service and strip your bank account.</p><p>Ah, the days...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I ran a little ISP , we kept a 7-day Usenet feed .
It came off MCI , took almost 10GB , and was a pain to manage .
We got a satellite link and cut back to 3 days , then back up to 7 when some users howled .
My boss said to cut back to 3 days unless users had 'legitimate ' needs , not ABPE for instance.Users dutifully provided legitimate uses .
Comp. * was the favorite.Well , it grew to the point that storage was becoming a pain , and an hour 's delay overnight got my pager whining from the ABPE fanbois going apeshit over not having the next day 's segments to download over their modem link .
Please.SO we abandoned it , and got users going to MCI 's Usenet feed directly .
Not better , but I saved a whole server.Some day day we will be sitting around a nice fire , beverages in hand , and waxking poetic about the demise of SMTP .
How in the old days , email was so simple , except for the spam and phishing.We are close to the end of an era .
The kinder , gentler , family Internet .
It has n't been that way for a while , of course , but dammit I miss Jon Postel , and getting things done with an RFC and three guys saying " Hell yeah , it SHOULD work like that ! " .
And being able to call someone and get a spammer shut down for a few weeks , until they found a new MCI rep. And people who 's purpose was just to figure something out , not to ruin your service and strip your bank account.Ah , the days.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I ran a little ISP, we kept a 7-day Usenet feed.
It came off MCI, took almost 10GB, and was a pain to manage.
We got a satellite link and cut back to 3 days, then back up to 7 when some users howled.
My boss said to cut back to 3 days unless users had 'legitimate' needs, not ABPE for instance.Users dutifully provided legitimate uses.
Comp.* was the favorite.Well, it grew to the point that storage was becoming a pain, and an hour's delay overnight got my pager whining from the ABPE fanbois going apeshit over not having the next day's segments to download over their modem link.
Please.SO we abandoned it, and got users going to MCI's Usenet feed directly.
Not better, but I saved a whole server.Some day day we will be sitting around a nice fire, beverages in hand, and waxking poetic about the demise of SMTP.
How in the old days, email was so simple, except for the spam and phishing.We are close to the end of an era.
The kinder, gentler, family Internet.
It hasn't been that way for a while, of course, but dammit I miss Jon Postel, and getting things done with an RFC and three guys saying "Hell yeah, it SHOULD work like that!".
And being able to call someone and get a spammer shut down for a few weeks, until they found a new MCI rep. And people who's purpose was just to figure something out, not to ruin your service and strip your bank account.Ah, the days...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268699</id>
	<title>Usenet Story</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244573700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I subscribed to a variety of Usenet groups. I used that nice Freeagent software for year. Still do on my Museum PC (Packard Bell running Windows 95 with a tape drive and 128 MB of RAM).</p><p>I have a spam filter on my gateway so spam messages vanish.</p><p>I haven't gotten a new post in 3 years...</p><p>Usenet isn't dying. It's dead with nothing but ghosts left...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I subscribed to a variety of Usenet groups .
I used that nice Freeagent software for year .
Still do on my Museum PC ( Packard Bell running Windows 95 with a tape drive and 128 MB of RAM ) .I have a spam filter on my gateway so spam messages vanish.I have n't gotten a new post in 3 years...Usenet is n't dying .
It 's dead with nothing but ghosts left.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I subscribed to a variety of Usenet groups.
I used that nice Freeagent software for year.
Still do on my Museum PC (Packard Bell running Windows 95 with a tape drive and 128 MB of RAM).I have a spam filter on my gateway so spam messages vanish.I haven't gotten a new post in 3 years...Usenet isn't dying.
It's dead with nothing but ghosts left...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271591</id>
	<title>Re:Google Groups or Astraweb</title>
	<author>sillybilly</author>
	<datestamp>1244541900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Internet is owned by a company too. Maybe not today. Not yet. Eventually though... u have to deph1ne 0wn3rsh1p - if someone kontrolz da browsa market, and there is no other choice, if someone kontrolz all axxece 2 da Internet, do dey 0wn da Internet?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Internet is owned by a company too .
Maybe not today .
Not yet .
Eventually though... u have to deph1ne 0wn3rsh1p - if someone kontrolz da browsa market , and there is no other choice , if someone kontrolz all axxece 2 da Internet , do dey 0wn da Internet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Internet is owned by a company too.
Maybe not today.
Not yet.
Eventually though... u have to deph1ne 0wn3rsh1p - if someone kontrolz da browsa market, and there is no other choice, if someone kontrolz all axxece 2 da Internet, do dey 0wn da Internet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270049</id>
	<title>Re:The web</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244578620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some providers have SSL point-to-point encryption meaning your connection transfers can't be intercepted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some providers have SSL point-to-point encryption meaning your connection transfers ca n't be intercepted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some providers have SSL point-to-point encryption meaning your connection transfers can't be intercepted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269031</id>
	<title>Re:This is going to sound like an advertisement...</title>
	<author>dedazo</author>
	<datestamp>1244574780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep, second the Astraweb recommendation. I was going to post about them as well. I started using them a few years ago when a move from one city to another left me with an ISP whose retention of some of the comp.* groups was terrible. And you can't beat the speed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , second the Astraweb recommendation .
I was going to post about them as well .
I started using them a few years ago when a move from one city to another left me with an ISP whose retention of some of the comp .
* groups was terrible .
And you ca n't beat the speed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, second the Astraweb recommendation.
I was going to post about them as well.
I started using them a few years ago when a move from one city to another left me with an ISP whose retention of some of the comp.
* groups was terrible.
And you can't beat the speed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268355</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268855</id>
	<title>Re:R.I.P.</title>
	<author>lahvak</author>
	<datestamp>1244574180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I remember the flame war about people's sig. Some dudes had this gigantic ASCII art sig files, and people were complaining about one-line posts with 20-line sigs, how the bandwidth were wasted, etc. </i></p><p>Yeah, the old days of warlording...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember the flame war about people 's sig .
Some dudes had this gigantic ASCII art sig files , and people were complaining about one-line posts with 20-line sigs , how the bandwidth were wasted , etc .
Yeah , the old days of warlording.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember the flame war about people's sig.
Some dudes had this gigantic ASCII art sig files, and people were complaining about one-line posts with 20-line sigs, how the bandwidth were wasted, etc.
Yeah, the old days of warlording...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270389</id>
	<title>Datemas</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244579760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you don't need access to binaries then try <a href="http://news.datemas.de/" title="datemas.de" rel="nofollow">Datemas</a> [datemas.de].  It's free of charge.  Just send them an email and they'll set up an account for you.  It's based in Germany and you know them Germans always make good stuff.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't need access to binaries then try Datemas [ datemas.de ] .
It 's free of charge .
Just send them an email and they 'll set up an account for you .
It 's based in Germany and you know them Germans always make good stuff .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't need access to binaries then try Datemas [datemas.de].
It's free of charge.
Just send them an email and they'll set up an account for you.
It's based in Germany and you know them Germans always make good stuff.
:-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268591</id>
	<title>Re:Is it worth it anymore?</title>
	<author>suso</author>
	<datestamp>1244573280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Want to make it worth it?</p><p>Let's all go into comp.lang.c and start top posting to threads. They LOVE IT when you do that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Want to make it worth it ? Let 's all go into comp.lang.c and start top posting to threads .
They LOVE IT when you do that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Want to make it worth it?Let's all go into comp.lang.c and start top posting to threads.
They LOVE IT when you do that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268907</id>
	<title>Easynews</title>
	<author>DigitalCrackPipe</author>
	<datestamp>1244574360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Try easynews.com  I used them years ago, and they had cool features such as downloading files by http/ftp as a zip file, as well as fast speeds and good completion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try easynews.com I used them years ago , and they had cool features such as downloading files by http/ftp as a zip file , as well as fast speeds and good completion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try easynews.com  I used them years ago, and they had cool features such as downloading files by http/ftp as a zip file, as well as fast speeds and good completion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270213</id>
	<title>Re:reports of usenet's death exaggerated?</title>
	<author>nogginthenog</author>
	<datestamp>1244579160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...and you can still max out your bandwidth without uploading, unlike bittorrent etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and you can still max out your bandwidth without uploading , unlike bittorrent etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and you can still max out your bandwidth without uploading, unlike bittorrent etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269907</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28277717</id>
	<title>Free Newsproviders</title>
	<author>Crass Spektakel</author>
	<datestamp>1244638200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have been using arcor.de for decades.</p><p>They are free like in free beer, have no limits, no binaries, just create an account on arcor.de and use the account and password to join their nntp-server. They are professional, doing it for over ten years, their servers are powerfull, what else do you want?</p><p>Besides you'll find more free providers at <a href="http://www.google.de/search?q=free+nntp" title="google.de" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.de/search?q=free+nntp</a> [google.de]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been using arcor.de for decades.They are free like in free beer , have no limits , no binaries , just create an account on arcor.de and use the account and password to join their nntp-server .
They are professional , doing it for over ten years , their servers are powerfull , what else do you want ? Besides you 'll find more free providers at http : //www.google.de/search ? q = free + nntp [ google.de ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been using arcor.de for decades.They are free like in free beer, have no limits, no binaries, just create an account on arcor.de and use the account and password to join their nntp-server.
They are professional, doing it for over ten years, their servers are powerfull, what else do you want?Besides you'll find more free providers at http://www.google.de/search?q=free+nntp [google.de]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269555</id>
	<title>BinTube Usenet Access</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244576520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BinTube Usenet Access (http://www.bintube.com) offers a great unlimited package for only $10.99 a month and includes a copy of their streaming Usenet software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BinTube Usenet Access ( http : //www.bintube.com ) offers a great unlimited package for only $ 10.99 a month and includes a copy of their streaming Usenet software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BinTube Usenet Access (http://www.bintube.com) offers a great unlimited package for only $10.99 a month and includes a copy of their streaming Usenet software.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268783
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28275267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272757
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268355
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274389
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268977
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269051
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270593
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268967
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269805
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270495
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268355
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270169
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268567
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269023
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268793
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270879
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269439
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28277591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28278075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269327
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269163
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269547
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271415
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268567
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269769
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28273933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268355
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272377
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268567
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268341
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272531
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271445
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268859
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268355
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272409
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270529
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28288753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269285
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28275825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268355
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269031
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270017
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269179
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28282331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270127
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28297393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268755
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269641
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269907
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271205
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270897
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274439
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_09_1655213_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268593
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268307
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269673
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271445
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269167
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272763
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268355
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270709
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272409
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271831
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274389
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270169
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269031
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271465
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268231
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268443
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268267
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268461
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270879
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269163
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269021
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268933
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271035
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271591
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272167
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269615
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272377
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270851
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268793
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269439
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28277591
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268539
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268723
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269179
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269547
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271415
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274715
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270049
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268967
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269051
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28297393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268755
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268947
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271749
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269769
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269023
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268855
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269285
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270235
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268217
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274643
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268593
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270897
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268591
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269405
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28288753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270017
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269603
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271247
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28274439
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268859
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270127
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268341
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272531
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268781
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268317
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268983
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269805
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28278075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270293
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268783
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28275267
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28273933
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269327
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268787
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269723
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28282331
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272757
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270117
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269907
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28271205
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28269863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28275825
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28268489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28270593
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28273067
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_09_1655213.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_09_1655213.28272955
</commentlist>
</conversation>
