<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_09_1711238</id>
	<title>Recovery.gov To Get $18 Million Redesign</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1247159700000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:biverson@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">barbarai</a> notes a report by ABC News's Rick Klein:  <i>"For those concerned about stimulus spending, the General Services Administration sends word tonight that <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/07/18m-being-spent-to-redesign-recoverygov-web-site.html">$18 million in additional funds are being spent to redesign the Recovery.gov Web site</a>. "Recovery.gov 2.0 will use innovative and interactive technologies to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent," James A. Williams, commissioner of GSA's Federal Acquisition Service, says in a press release announcing the contract awarded to Maryland-based Smartronix Inc. according to the ABC news blog."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>barbarai notes a report by ABC News 's Rick Klein : " For those concerned about stimulus spending , the General Services Administration sends word tonight that $ 18 million in additional funds are being spent to redesign the Recovery.gov Web site .
" Recovery.gov 2.0 will use innovative and interactive technologies to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent , " James A. Williams , commissioner of GSA 's Federal Acquisition Service , says in a press release announcing the contract awarded to Maryland-based Smartronix Inc. according to the ABC news blog .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>barbarai notes a report by ABC News's Rick Klein:  "For those concerned about stimulus spending, the General Services Administration sends word tonight that $18 million in additional funds are being spent to redesign the Recovery.gov Web site.
"Recovery.gov 2.0 will use innovative and interactive technologies to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent," James A. Williams, commissioner of GSA's Federal Acquisition Service, says in a press release announcing the contract awarded to Maryland-based Smartronix Inc. according to the ABC news blog.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639805</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247167140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no relationship between voting and campaign contributions. Why would any individual give money to a candidate? It's simply to push their cause.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no relationship between voting and campaign contributions .
Why would any individual give money to a candidate ?
It 's simply to push their cause .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no relationship between voting and campaign contributions.
Why would any individual give money to a candidate?
It's simply to push their cause.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899</id>
	<title>WTF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247163780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$18 million to redesign a website? WTF are they doing with it?</p><p>From TFA, they're going to spend $9.5 million over the next 6 months or so. Assuming $75k salaries for the web developers/DBAs/etc (generous), they'd be hiring 250 people to design a website.</p><p>And Americans wonder why they have such a big deficit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 18 million to redesign a website ?
WTF are they doing with it ? From TFA , they 're going to spend $ 9.5 million over the next 6 months or so .
Assuming $ 75k salaries for the web developers/DBAs/etc ( generous ) , they 'd be hiring 250 people to design a website.And Americans wonder why they have such a big deficit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$18 million to redesign a website?
WTF are they doing with it?From TFA, they're going to spend $9.5 million over the next 6 months or so.
Assuming $75k salaries for the web developers/DBAs/etc (generous), they'd be hiring 250 people to design a website.And Americans wonder why they have such a big deficit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640237</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>bartwol</author>
	<datestamp>1247168760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>OTH mabey we should look at this as stimulus spending for programmers.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Yeah. So???</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>OTH mabey we should look at this as stimulus spending for programmers .
Yeah. So ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OTH mabey we should look at this as stimulus spending for programmers.
Yeah. So??
?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639409</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640223</id>
	<title>Transparency?</title>
	<author>Anoo</author>
	<datestamp>1247168700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They've got a social media connection, they get it. <a href="http://twitter.com/Smartronix" title="twitter.com" rel="nofollow">http://twitter.com/Smartronix</a> [twitter.com] Oh, wait.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 've got a social media connection , they get it .
http : //twitter.com/Smartronix [ twitter.com ] Oh , wait .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They've got a social media connection, they get it.
http://twitter.com/Smartronix [twitter.com] Oh, wait.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640567</id>
	<title>10 Workers</title>
	<author>Elwar123</author>
	<datestamp>1247169960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a defense contractor I can see how something can go for $18 million over 5 years, I've had similar projects along those lines.

Figure an average salary of $75k over 5 years gives you 240...but a rule of thumb in the industry is that the salary is actually about a third of what it costs per person...you figure in the equipment cost per person plus overhead, that gives you 80...spread that over 5 years, you have 16 workers for the website. Take about 6 of those workers out and replace them with server cost/network cost/software licenses and that leaves you with a small office of 10 people working on the site from hardware guys keeping the server running to developers and system admins to managers, Human Resources and marketing guys.

So in the end...probably 2 web developers, 1 database guy, 1 hardware guy, 1 system admin, 1 HR person, 1 project lead, 1 manager, 1 secretary and one big boss that got the contract and is working on others.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a defense contractor I can see how something can go for $ 18 million over 5 years , I 've had similar projects along those lines .
Figure an average salary of $ 75k over 5 years gives you 240...but a rule of thumb in the industry is that the salary is actually about a third of what it costs per person...you figure in the equipment cost per person plus overhead , that gives you 80...spread that over 5 years , you have 16 workers for the website .
Take about 6 of those workers out and replace them with server cost/network cost/software licenses and that leaves you with a small office of 10 people working on the site from hardware guys keeping the server running to developers and system admins to managers , Human Resources and marketing guys .
So in the end...probably 2 web developers , 1 database guy , 1 hardware guy , 1 system admin , 1 HR person , 1 project lead , 1 manager , 1 secretary and one big boss that got the contract and is working on others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a defense contractor I can see how something can go for $18 million over 5 years, I've had similar projects along those lines.
Figure an average salary of $75k over 5 years gives you 240...but a rule of thumb in the industry is that the salary is actually about a third of what it costs per person...you figure in the equipment cost per person plus overhead, that gives you 80...spread that over 5 years, you have 16 workers for the website.
Take about 6 of those workers out and replace them with server cost/network cost/software licenses and that leaves you with a small office of 10 people working on the site from hardware guys keeping the server running to developers and system admins to managers, Human Resources and marketing guys.
So in the end...probably 2 web developers, 1 database guy, 1 hardware guy, 1 system admin, 1 HR person, 1 project lead, 1 manager, 1 secretary and one big boss that got the contract and is working on others.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28686409</id>
	<title>What Kind of Website Does This Get You?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.nabber.org/mytake/index.php?entry=entry090713-194931" title="nabber.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.nabber.org/mytake/index.php?entry=entry090713-194931</a> [nabber.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.nabber.org/mytake/index.php ? entry = entry090713-194931 [ nabber.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.nabber.org/mytake/index.php?entry=entry090713-194931 [nabber.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640141</id>
	<title>oh lord...</title>
	<author>that IT girl</author>
	<datestamp>1247168400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Recovery.gov 2.0 will use innovative and interactive technologies to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent,"</p></div><p>Yeah, to see where they are being spent... ON THIS WEBSITE.<br>-head asplode-</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Recovery.gov 2.0 will use innovative and interactive technologies to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent , " Yeah , to see where they are being spent... ON THIS WEBSITE.-head asplode-</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Recovery.gov 2.0 will use innovative and interactive technologies to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent,"Yeah, to see where they are being spent... ON THIS WEBSITE.-head asplode-
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644113</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>multimed</author>
	<datestamp>1247142240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Two things:</p><p>1) Corporate personhood: the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person, or some subset of those rights (e.g. due process, free speech, etc.)</p></div><p>Agreed, that's led to awful things. Until people can get all the rights of corporations - namely live forever - corporations shouldn't get the rights of people</p><p><div class="quote"><p>2) Money as free speech: the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speech</p></div><p>Much as we hate the results, money IS speech in this context. The idea of giving money to support a candidate whose positions you agree with is absolutely in line with an individual's right express himself. In fact, I think any limitation on an individual's right to contribute is against the intent. BUT...there is a logical and reasonable solution to this. There is no absolute and limitless right of a <b>candidate</b> to <b> <i>spend</i> </b> said contributions. In this way, we can severely limit the spending of the contributions and effectively reduce the influence of money without the need to take away free speech rights of the individuals. I'm just not sure why this problem is so difficult.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Two things : 1 ) Corporate personhood : the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person , or some subset of those rights ( e.g .
due process , free speech , etc .
) Agreed , that 's led to awful things .
Until people can get all the rights of corporations - namely live forever - corporations should n't get the rights of people2 ) Money as free speech : the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speechMuch as we hate the results , money IS speech in this context .
The idea of giving money to support a candidate whose positions you agree with is absolutely in line with an individual 's right express himself .
In fact , I think any limitation on an individual 's right to contribute is against the intent .
BUT...there is a logical and reasonable solution to this .
There is no absolute and limitless right of a candidate to spend said contributions .
In this way , we can severely limit the spending of the contributions and effectively reduce the influence of money without the need to take away free speech rights of the individuals .
I 'm just not sure why this problem is so difficult .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two things:1) Corporate personhood: the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person, or some subset of those rights (e.g.
due process, free speech, etc.
)Agreed, that's led to awful things.
Until people can get all the rights of corporations - namely live forever - corporations shouldn't get the rights of people2) Money as free speech: the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speechMuch as we hate the results, money IS speech in this context.
The idea of giving money to support a candidate whose positions you agree with is absolutely in line with an individual's right express himself.
In fact, I think any limitation on an individual's right to contribute is against the intent.
BUT...there is a logical and reasonable solution to this.
There is no absolute and limitless right of a candidate to  spend  said contributions.
In this way, we can severely limit the spending of the contributions and effectively reduce the influence of money without the need to take away free speech rights of the individuals.
I'm just not sure why this problem is so difficult.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639161</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>aengblom</author>
	<datestamp>1247164740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>$18 million to redesign a website? WTF are they doing with it?</p><p>From TFA, they're going to spend $9.5 million over the next 6 months or so. Assuming $75k salaries for the web developers/DBAs/etc (generous), they'd be hiring 250 people to design a website.</p><p>And Americans wonder why they have such a big deficit.</p></div><p>I'm guessing this isn't just build the web site, it's to build and run it through January 2014 (See the GSA press release). Remember, they have to buy equipment and bandwidth too, although I'm betting the biggest issue is <i>collecting, entering and sorting the massive amounts of data</i> related to all the projects. Still sounds like a lot of money.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 18 million to redesign a website ?
WTF are they doing with it ? From TFA , they 're going to spend $ 9.5 million over the next 6 months or so .
Assuming $ 75k salaries for the web developers/DBAs/etc ( generous ) , they 'd be hiring 250 people to design a website.And Americans wonder why they have such a big deficit.I 'm guessing this is n't just build the web site , it 's to build and run it through January 2014 ( See the GSA press release ) .
Remember , they have to buy equipment and bandwidth too , although I 'm betting the biggest issue is collecting , entering and sorting the massive amounts of data related to all the projects .
Still sounds like a lot of money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$18 million to redesign a website?
WTF are they doing with it?From TFA, they're going to spend $9.5 million over the next 6 months or so.
Assuming $75k salaries for the web developers/DBAs/etc (generous), they'd be hiring 250 people to design a website.And Americans wonder why they have such a big deficit.I'm guessing this isn't just build the web site, it's to build and run it through January 2014 (See the GSA press release).
Remember, they have to buy equipment and bandwidth too, although I'm betting the biggest issue is collecting, entering and sorting the massive amounts of data related to all the projects.
Still sounds like a lot of money.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639037</id>
	<title>We could save them about 17.9 million</title>
	<author>xednieht</author>
	<datestamp>1247164260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>row\_id , capital\_account, account\_name, date\_paid, amount\_paid, scum\_sucking\_leech\_getting\_my\_tax\_dollars, address
<br> <br>
That's about all taxpayers really need.  The other 17.9 million is pretty expensive lipstick for that pig.</htmltext>
<tokenext>row \ _id , capital \ _account , account \ _name , date \ _paid , amount \ _paid , scum \ _sucking \ _leech \ _getting \ _my \ _tax \ _dollars , address That 's about all taxpayers really need .
The other 17.9 million is pretty expensive lipstick for that pig .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>row\_id , capital\_account, account\_name, date\_paid, amount\_paid, scum\_sucking\_leech\_getting\_my\_tax\_dollars, address
 
That's about all taxpayers really need.
The other 17.9 million is pretty expensive lipstick for that pig.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639643</id>
	<title>Transparency ain't free</title>
	<author>psychicninja</author>
	<datestamp>1247166540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not saying $18M is cheap, but if you really want transparency about where tax dollars go it'll cost you. It costs even more if you want something that is simple and straightforward enough for "average" Americans to use and understand...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not saying $ 18M is cheap , but if you really want transparency about where tax dollars go it 'll cost you .
It costs even more if you want something that is simple and straightforward enough for " average " Americans to use and understand.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not saying $18M is cheap, but if you really want transparency about where tax dollars go it'll cost you.
It costs even more if you want something that is simple and straightforward enough for "average" Americans to use and understand...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638925</id>
	<title>How they should do it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247163900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"will use innovative and interactive technologies to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent"</p><p>My advise? Set up a page with an animated GIF showing an odometer counting up with blurry numbers, and just take the $18 million.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" will use innovative and interactive technologies to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent " My advise ?
Set up a page with an animated GIF showing an odometer counting up with blurry numbers , and just take the $ 18 million .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"will use innovative and interactive technologies to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent"My advise?
Set up a page with an animated GIF showing an odometer counting up with blurry numbers, and just take the $18 million.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640017</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1247167920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The word "donation" is often used to refer to giving money to a person or organization in need- basically it has the notion of charity. Therefore I prefer to just call these corporate spending patterns legalized bribes like they are.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The word " donation " is often used to refer to giving money to a person or organization in need- basically it has the notion of charity .
Therefore I prefer to just call these corporate spending patterns legalized bribes like they are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The word "donation" is often used to refer to giving money to a person or organization in need- basically it has the notion of charity.
Therefore I prefer to just call these corporate spending patterns legalized bribes like they are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640097</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>GodfatherofSoul</author>
	<datestamp>1247168220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You must crunch numbers for Bill O'Reilly's anti-government rants.  Firstly, there are a ton of government agencies generating relevant stats.  It's going to take a large number of people to coordinate and <b>validate</b> figures for these agencies.  Maybe you've never worked in the real world, but not every software project can be built by one person and run on the Linux box you have in your closet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You must crunch numbers for Bill O'Reilly 's anti-government rants .
Firstly , there are a ton of government agencies generating relevant stats .
It 's going to take a large number of people to coordinate and validate figures for these agencies .
Maybe you 've never worked in the real world , but not every software project can be built by one person and run on the Linux box you have in your closet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You must crunch numbers for Bill O'Reilly's anti-government rants.
Firstly, there are a ton of government agencies generating relevant stats.
It's going to take a large number of people to coordinate and validate figures for these agencies.
Maybe you've never worked in the real world, but not every software project can be built by one person and run on the Linux box you have in your closet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642077</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247133240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $18 million price tag!</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.google.com/" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">Found</a> [google.com] one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $ 18 million price tag !
Found [ google.com ] one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $18 million price tag!
Found [google.com] one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640741</id>
	<title>I Spent $18 Million</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247170680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And all I got was a clone of Fark.com with a Red, White &amp; Blue color scheme that requires Silverlight and IE8 to function.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And all I got was a clone of Fark.com with a Red , White &amp; Blue color scheme that requires Silverlight and IE8 to function .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And all I got was a clone of Fark.com with a Red, White &amp; Blue color scheme that requires Silverlight and IE8 to function.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640103</id>
	<title>These guys are worth $18 million??????</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247168220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Somebody take a look at the source for the Smartronix careers page and tell me why we're giving these people $18 million for anything.  They use fucking tables for layout for God's sake!  http://www.smartronix.com/CAREERS/CurrentOpenings/tabid/78/Default.aspx</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Somebody take a look at the source for the Smartronix careers page and tell me why we 're giving these people $ 18 million for anything .
They use fucking tables for layout for God 's sake !
http : //www.smartronix.com/CAREERS/CurrentOpenings/tabid/78/Default.aspx</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somebody take a look at the source for the Smartronix careers page and tell me why we're giving these people $18 million for anything.
They use fucking tables for layout for God's sake!
http://www.smartronix.com/CAREERS/CurrentOpenings/tabid/78/Default.aspx</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640037</id>
	<title>Under Construction</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247167980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think a large portion of the budget is for the Website Under Construction image that uses the "Putting America to Work" and "Funded by the ARRA" verbiage</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think a large portion of the budget is for the Website Under Construction image that uses the " Putting America to Work " and " Funded by the ARRA " verbiage</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think a large portion of the budget is for the Website Under Construction image that uses the "Putting America to Work" and "Funded by the ARRA" verbiage</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28647995</id>
	<title>The Government Knows Very Well</title>
	<author>v(*\_*)vvvv</author>
	<datestamp>1247231460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Armed with easy access to this information, taxpayers can make government more accountable for its decisions.</p></div><p>The gov't knows very well that taxpayers CANNOT make them accountable for anything. Proof? Will anyone make them accountable for THIS decision? No. Never. Nadda.</p><p>It's also no surprise their web site SUCKS: <a href="http://www.smartronix.com/" title="smartronix.com">http://www.smartronix.com/</a> [smartronix.com]</p><p>They might as well spit in our face.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Armed with easy access to this information , taxpayers can make government more accountable for its decisions.The gov't knows very well that taxpayers CAN NOT make them accountable for anything .
Proof ? Will anyone make them accountable for THIS decision ?
No. Never .
Nadda.It 's also no surprise their web site SUCKS : http : //www.smartronix.com/ [ smartronix.com ] They might as well spit in our face .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Armed with easy access to this information, taxpayers can make government more accountable for its decisions.The gov't knows very well that taxpayers CANNOT make them accountable for anything.
Proof? Will anyone make them accountable for THIS decision?
No. Never.
Nadda.It's also no surprise their web site SUCKS: http://www.smartronix.com/ [smartronix.com]They might as well spit in our face.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641771</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Billly Gates</author>
	<datestamp>1247131800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"2) Money as free speech: the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speech."</i></p><p>Riiigghht. So if a police man pulls me over for drunk driving and I just happen to practice my free speech by giving him a free dinner and a wealthy country club membership as well as his bosses boss (precinct captain) a campaign contribution for re-election then its perfectly legal?</p><p>More than likely, a judge would throw me in jail for bribery so fast I would not even have time to get my checkbook out.</p><p>I am a private citizen with full constitutional rights. Why doe corporations be treated <b>better</b> than myself? After all like the example above I would get thrown in prison but corporations do this all the time and its simply business as usual.</p><p>I am not disagreeing with your view that this is how the courts interpret things but its hypocritical and it needs to end.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" 2 ) Money as free speech : the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speech. " Riiigghht .
So if a police man pulls me over for drunk driving and I just happen to practice my free speech by giving him a free dinner and a wealthy country club membership as well as his bosses boss ( precinct captain ) a campaign contribution for re-election then its perfectly legal ? More than likely , a judge would throw me in jail for bribery so fast I would not even have time to get my checkbook out.I am a private citizen with full constitutional rights .
Why doe corporations be treated better than myself ?
After all like the example above I would get thrown in prison but corporations do this all the time and its simply business as usual.I am not disagreeing with your view that this is how the courts interpret things but its hypocritical and it needs to end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"2) Money as free speech: the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speech."Riiigghht.
So if a police man pulls me over for drunk driving and I just happen to practice my free speech by giving him a free dinner and a wealthy country club membership as well as his bosses boss (precinct captain) a campaign contribution for re-election then its perfectly legal?More than likely, a judge would throw me in jail for bribery so fast I would not even have time to get my checkbook out.I am a private citizen with full constitutional rights.
Why doe corporations be treated better than myself?
After all like the example above I would get thrown in prison but corporations do this all the time and its simply business as usual.I am not disagreeing with your view that this is how the courts interpret things but its hypocritical and it needs to end.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641795</id>
	<title>Its already available</title>
	<author>yishai</author>
	<datestamp>1247131860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can get all the info on <a href="http://recovery.org/" title="recovery.org" rel="nofollow">recovery.org</a> [recovery.org] for free. You would think the government could redirect their DNS name for a lot less $18 million. I'd do it for $18 for them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can get all the info on recovery.org [ recovery.org ] for free .
You would think the government could redirect their DNS name for a lot less $ 18 million .
I 'd do it for $ 18 for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can get all the info on recovery.org [recovery.org] for free.
You would think the government could redirect their DNS name for a lot less $18 million.
I'd do it for $18 for them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644667</id>
	<title>What does 18 million buy?</title>
	<author>specific\_pacific</author>
	<datestamp>1247145780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I run a webshop, and im wondering what the 18 million includes? What would they write this in? Is there 17 million in testing and contracts and 1 million in production? Maintenance agreements? SLA's? Just curious.. 18 million is more than most webs hops earn in a year doing hundreds of jobs probably much bigger than this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I run a webshop , and im wondering what the 18 million includes ?
What would they write this in ?
Is there 17 million in testing and contracts and 1 million in production ?
Maintenance agreements ?
SLA 's ? Just curious.. 18 million is more than most webs hops earn in a year doing hundreds of jobs probably much bigger than this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I run a webshop, and im wondering what the 18 million includes?
What would they write this in?
Is there 17 million in testing and contracts and 1 million in production?
Maintenance agreements?
SLA's? Just curious.. 18 million is more than most webs hops earn in a year doing hundreds of jobs probably much bigger than this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642943</id>
	<title>Re:Read the RFP</title>
	<author>layer3switch</author>
	<datestamp>1247136600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the website;
<i>Recovery.gov version 1.0 is currently hosted on a Linux server and Drupal is used for the content management system (CMS) and a MySQL database. RATB is open to recommendations for technology improvements for version 2.0 and beyond, including the hosting platform, database technology, CMS, programming languages, etc. that facilitate satisfaction of the requirements described in this SOO.</i>
<br>
<br>
Yeah, because everyone in Slashdot all here have single handedly managed, built and hosted a system that gathers/collects and tracks information that is worth <b>400</b> billion dollars under 20 bucks an hour within a week, drinking 6 packs of Mountain Dew.<br>
18 million is really nothing even in this economy which needs to serve up the expected number of traffic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the website ; Recovery.gov version 1.0 is currently hosted on a Linux server and Drupal is used for the content management system ( CMS ) and a MySQL database .
RATB is open to recommendations for technology improvements for version 2.0 and beyond , including the hosting platform , database technology , CMS , programming languages , etc .
that facilitate satisfaction of the requirements described in this SOO .
Yeah , because everyone in Slashdot all here have single handedly managed , built and hosted a system that gathers/collects and tracks information that is worth 400 billion dollars under 20 bucks an hour within a week , drinking 6 packs of Mountain Dew .
18 million is really nothing even in this economy which needs to serve up the expected number of traffic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the website;
Recovery.gov version 1.0 is currently hosted on a Linux server and Drupal is used for the content management system (CMS) and a MySQL database.
RATB is open to recommendations for technology improvements for version 2.0 and beyond, including the hosting platform, database technology, CMS, programming languages, etc.
that facilitate satisfaction of the requirements described in this SOO.
Yeah, because everyone in Slashdot all here have single handedly managed, built and hosted a system that gathers/collects and tracks information that is worth 400 billion dollars under 20 bucks an hour within a week, drinking 6 packs of Mountain Dew.
18 million is really nothing even in this economy which needs to serve up the expected number of traffic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639921</id>
	<title>and it will likely be .Net</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247167560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no wonder it's time and materials and they need $18 million</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no wonder it 's time and materials and they need $ 18 million</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no wonder it's time and materials and they need $18 million</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642447</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247134800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Freedom of "Money Talk", it's in the Constitution really.  It's all the way down in fine print.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Freedom of " Money Talk " , it 's in the Constitution really .
It 's all the way down in fine print .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Freedom of "Money Talk", it's in the Constitution really.
It's all the way down in fine print.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640157</id>
	<title>Re:Drupal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247168400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would guess<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net based on other projects that Smatronix has worked on.  Scary stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would guess .Net based on other projects that Smatronix has worked on .
Scary stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would guess .Net based on other projects that Smatronix has worked on.
Scary stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639649</id>
	<title>Innovative and Interactive...</title>
	<author>nickruiz</author>
	<datestamp>1247166540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Recovery.gov 2.0 will use <i>innovative and interactive technologies</i> to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent,"</p></div><p>Sounds pretty vague. Perhaps they're looking to design their site like <a href="http://www.zombo.com/" title="zombo.com" rel="nofollow">Zombo.com</a> [zombo.com]. A most innovative way to spend $18 million.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Recovery.gov 2.0 will use innovative and interactive technologies to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent , " Sounds pretty vague .
Perhaps they 're looking to design their site like Zombo.com [ zombo.com ] .
A most innovative way to spend $ 18 million .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Recovery.gov 2.0 will use innovative and interactive technologies to help taxpayers see where their dollars are being spent,"Sounds pretty vague.
Perhaps they're looking to design their site like Zombo.com [zombo.com].
A most innovative way to spend $18 million.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641989</id>
	<title>WTF</title>
	<author>OrangeMonkey11</author>
	<datestamp>1247132820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't clearly see how spending $18 millions on a website really would help people understand where the tax dollar are being spent.

Wait I just got it, this is where part of it is going; to a fucking website</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't clearly see how spending $ 18 millions on a website really would help people understand where the tax dollar are being spent .
Wait I just got it , this is where part of it is going ; to a fucking website</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't clearly see how spending $18 millions on a website really would help people understand where the tax dollar are being spent.
Wait I just got it, this is where part of it is going; to a fucking website</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639359</id>
	<title>Re:The Definition of "Design"</title>
	<author>basementman</author>
	<datestamp>1247165460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>$18 million to overhaul the whole thing is still a ripoff. Unless they are burning money to power their webserver it's incredibly overpriced.</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 18 million to overhaul the whole thing is still a ripoff .
Unless they are burning money to power their webserver it 's incredibly overpriced .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$18 million to overhaul the whole thing is still a ripoff.
Unless they are burning money to power their webserver it's incredibly overpriced.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641031</id>
	<title>I called Smartronix's PR department...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247171820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They wouldn't give many details (of course), other than they are planning on hiring *a lot* of subcontractors for this, and that they will be releasing a public statement supposedly justifying the cost in a week or so.</p><p>So while it's an insane price for any site, maybe this is more like a "web development industry stimulus package".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They would n't give many details ( of course ) , other than they are planning on hiring * a lot * of subcontractors for this , and that they will be releasing a public statement supposedly justifying the cost in a week or so.So while it 's an insane price for any site , maybe this is more like a " web development industry stimulus package " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They wouldn't give many details (of course), other than they are planning on hiring *a lot* of subcontractors for this, and that they will be releasing a public statement supposedly justifying the cost in a week or so.So while it's an insane price for any site, maybe this is more like a "web development industry stimulus package".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639409</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247165700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cut your number of people in 1/2.  The total cost of employing someone (benefits, facilities, management, HR,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...) is about 2X his or her salary.</p><p>OTH mabey we should look at this as stimulus spending for programmers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cut your number of people in 1/2 .
The total cost of employing someone ( benefits , facilities , management , HR , ... ) is about 2X his or her salary.OTH mabey we should look at this as stimulus spending for programmers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cut your number of people in 1/2.
The total cost of employing someone (benefits, facilities, management, HR, ...) is about 2X his or her salary.OTH mabey we should look at this as stimulus spending for programmers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28654883</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Millenniumman</author>
	<datestamp>1247219940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This isn't really the case. No one remotely credible really believes that political donations by corporations are a protected form of freedom of expression. Some moronic commentators and the like spin it that way, but the political reality is that despite the obvious corruptions of the system few politicians want to change it because they rely on it, and, indeed, they wouldn't be in their position if they didn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't really the case .
No one remotely credible really believes that political donations by corporations are a protected form of freedom of expression .
Some moronic commentators and the like spin it that way , but the political reality is that despite the obvious corruptions of the system few politicians want to change it because they rely on it , and , indeed , they would n't be in their position if they did n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't really the case.
No one remotely credible really believes that political donations by corporations are a protected form of freedom of expression.
Some moronic commentators and the like spin it that way, but the political reality is that despite the obvious corruptions of the system few politicians want to change it because they rely on it, and, indeed, they wouldn't be in their position if they didn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641643</id>
	<title>Put it in perspective.</title>
	<author>copponex</author>
	<datestamp>1247131200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I get tired of these stories. You could claim it's a waste of money to spend 18 million for setting up a transparency website and then running it for a few years. But put these stories into perspective by visiting DefenseLink every day to view how much of your tax dollars are being "invested."</p><p><a href="http://www.defenselink.mil/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=4067" title="defenselink.mil">http://www.defenselink.mil/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=4067</a> [defenselink.mil]</p><p>Yesterday alone we awarded over 120 million dollars. The day before that we awarded over 500 million dollars in contracts - I got too disgusted to continue adding the numbers.</p><p>So, would I rather not waste 18 million dollars? Sure. But I'd rather spend it on something constructive than destructive. A website about government spending is way more valuable to me than another novel way to hunt and kill humans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I get tired of these stories .
You could claim it 's a waste of money to spend 18 million for setting up a transparency website and then running it for a few years .
But put these stories into perspective by visiting DefenseLink every day to view how much of your tax dollars are being " invested .
" http : //www.defenselink.mil/contracts/contract.aspx ? contractid = 4067 [ defenselink.mil ] Yesterday alone we awarded over 120 million dollars .
The day before that we awarded over 500 million dollars in contracts - I got too disgusted to continue adding the numbers.So , would I rather not waste 18 million dollars ?
Sure. But I 'd rather spend it on something constructive than destructive .
A website about government spending is way more valuable to me than another novel way to hunt and kill humans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get tired of these stories.
You could claim it's a waste of money to spend 18 million for setting up a transparency website and then running it for a few years.
But put these stories into perspective by visiting DefenseLink every day to view how much of your tax dollars are being "invested.
"http://www.defenselink.mil/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=4067 [defenselink.mil]Yesterday alone we awarded over 120 million dollars.
The day before that we awarded over 500 million dollars in contracts - I got too disgusted to continue adding the numbers.So, would I rather not waste 18 million dollars?
Sure. But I'd rather spend it on something constructive than destructive.
A website about government spending is way more valuable to me than another novel way to hunt and kill humans.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639475</id>
	<title>Re:The Definition of "Design"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247166000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bet you get your panties in a knot over the alleged misuse of the word "hacker" too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet you get your panties in a knot over the alleged misuse of the word " hacker " too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet you get your panties in a knot over the alleged misuse of the word "hacker" too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639369</id>
	<title>First pass</title>
	<author>evil\_aar0n</author>
	<datestamp>1247165520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget: this is only the first pass.  I'm sure there will be overruns, missed deadlines, re-designs, etc.  This $18 mil is just the start.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget : this is only the first pass .
I 'm sure there will be overruns , missed deadlines , re-designs , etc .
This $ 18 mil is just the start .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget: this is only the first pass.
I'm sure there will be overruns, missed deadlines, re-designs, etc.
This $18 mil is just the start.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641903</id>
	<title>LOL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247132460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>18 million for a bunch of point n click peon developers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>18 million for a bunch of point n click peon developers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>18 million for a bunch of point n click peon developers?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642293</id>
	<title>$9 Million...</title>
	<author>Drone69</author>
	<datestamp>1247134200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...and I'll do it. Got a copy of Dreamweaver &amp; Photoshop ready to go!</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and I 'll do it .
Got a copy of Dreamweaver &amp; Photoshop ready to go !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and I'll do it.
Got a copy of Dreamweaver &amp; Photoshop ready to go!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641893</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247132400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because they are all crooks we should always make sure the government stays as small as possible.  Or how about slightly less than possible.  Growing the government is like asking to be robbed.</p><p>Everyone should be fiscal conservatives (libertarians, small government conservatives, etc) because we cannot control the impulse of people to figure out how to get rich on our hard earned money.  It is not like we can spend our taxes on another government like we can when choosing what store we shop at.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they are all crooks we should always make sure the government stays as small as possible .
Or how about slightly less than possible .
Growing the government is like asking to be robbed.Everyone should be fiscal conservatives ( libertarians , small government conservatives , etc ) because we can not control the impulse of people to figure out how to get rich on our hard earned money .
It is not like we can spend our taxes on another government like we can when choosing what store we shop at .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they are all crooks we should always make sure the government stays as small as possible.
Or how about slightly less than possible.
Growing the government is like asking to be robbed.Everyone should be fiscal conservatives (libertarians, small government conservatives, etc) because we cannot control the impulse of people to figure out how to get rich on our hard earned money.
It is not like we can spend our taxes on another government like we can when choosing what store we shop at.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642155</id>
	<title>Re:WTF? We're doomed</title>
	<author>alphakappa</author>
	<datestamp>1247133540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's easy to overlook costs - the main cost will not be for actually making the website, but for maintaining it. By maintaining it, I mean, actually having useful data in the website. The whole trillion dollar stimulus will generate humongous amounts of data which will have to be processed so that we can make sense of it. Collecting it from all the various agencies around the country, processing it and then putting it up on the website will require a lot of employees and that's where the $18 million tag for 5 years comes from. Don't underestimate the cost of data collection.

<br> <br>
I could code up a website that looks like Google Maps pretty easily, but it would take a lot of money and time to get all the data that actually makes it useful.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's easy to overlook costs - the main cost will not be for actually making the website , but for maintaining it .
By maintaining it , I mean , actually having useful data in the website .
The whole trillion dollar stimulus will generate humongous amounts of data which will have to be processed so that we can make sense of it .
Collecting it from all the various agencies around the country , processing it and then putting it up on the website will require a lot of employees and that 's where the $ 18 million tag for 5 years comes from .
Do n't underestimate the cost of data collection .
I could code up a website that looks like Google Maps pretty easily , but it would take a lot of money and time to get all the data that actually makes it useful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's easy to overlook costs - the main cost will not be for actually making the website, but for maintaining it.
By maintaining it, I mean, actually having useful data in the website.
The whole trillion dollar stimulus will generate humongous amounts of data which will have to be processed so that we can make sense of it.
Collecting it from all the various agencies around the country, processing it and then putting it up on the website will require a lot of employees and that's where the $18 million tag for 5 years comes from.
Don't underestimate the cost of data collection.
I could code up a website that looks like Google Maps pretty easily, but it would take a lot of money and time to get all the data that actually makes it useful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28658611</id>
	<title>Re:Death and Taxes Poster</title>
	<author>thomasdn</author>
	<datestamp>1247307480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow! That is a great idea.
I would like such an overview over my country's (Denmark) spendings.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow !
That is a great idea .
I would like such an overview over my country 's ( Denmark ) spendings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow!
That is a great idea.
I would like such an overview over my country's (Denmark) spendings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247164860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;This is just another example of a fundamental flaw in how campaign finance works in the US, and the current party in power shares the culpability with the prior party in power.</p><p>Out of curiosity, since corporations can't vote, why should they be allowed to donate money to campaigns at all?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; This is just another example of a fundamental flaw in how campaign finance works in the US , and the current party in power shares the culpability with the prior party in power.Out of curiosity , since corporations ca n't vote , why should they be allowed to donate money to campaigns at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;This is just another example of a fundamental flaw in how campaign finance works in the US, and the current party in power shares the culpability with the prior party in power.Out of curiosity, since corporations can't vote, why should they be allowed to donate money to campaigns at all?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641847</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>discord5</author>
	<datestamp>1247132160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $18 million price tag!</p></div><p>Give me a week, and you will have it. It will be the biggest, most badass "Under Construction" sign you've ever seen, 2 billion pixels wide, 1.5 billion pixels high. The traffic from the banner alone will bring routers to their knees, have network admins screaming at their traffic statistics, and mere mortals shall weep in the magnificent glory of 18 million dollars worth of under\_construction.png<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</p><p>FYI, this most excellent sign will also require a broadband stimulus package, complete with a massive infrastructure upgrade on the governments serverfarm and job certainty for hundreds of admins who'll have to toil in slave labor to be able to serve up that monstrosity.</p><p>Can I have my check now please?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $ 18 million price tag ! Give me a week , and you will have it .
It will be the biggest , most badass " Under Construction " sign you 've ever seen , 2 billion pixels wide , 1.5 billion pixels high .
The traffic from the banner alone will bring routers to their knees , have network admins screaming at their traffic statistics , and mere mortals shall weep in the magnificent glory of 18 million dollars worth of under \ _construction.png .FYI , this most excellent sign will also require a broadband stimulus package , complete with a massive infrastructure upgrade on the governments serverfarm and job certainty for hundreds of admins who 'll have to toil in slave labor to be able to serve up that monstrosity.Can I have my check now please ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $18 million price tag!Give me a week, and you will have it.
It will be the biggest, most badass "Under Construction" sign you've ever seen, 2 billion pixels wide, 1.5 billion pixels high.
The traffic from the banner alone will bring routers to their knees, have network admins screaming at their traffic statistics, and mere mortals shall weep in the magnificent glory of 18 million dollars worth of under\_construction.png .FYI, this most excellent sign will also require a broadband stimulus package, complete with a massive infrastructure upgrade on the governments serverfarm and job certainty for hundreds of admins who'll have to toil in slave labor to be able to serve up that monstrosity.Can I have my check now please?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641189</id>
	<title>OT- your sig</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1247172360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://slashdot.org/~mcgrew/journal/226339" title="slashdot.org">"A world without walls"</a> [slashdot.org]<br>"A world without walls? I know people who have lived in a world without walls. If you have no walls, you're homeless!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" A world without walls " [ slashdot.org ] " A world without walls ?
I know people who have lived in a world without walls .
If you have no walls , you 're homeless !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A world without walls" [slashdot.org]"A world without walls?
I know people who have lived in a world without walls.
If you have no walls, you're homeless!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639437</id>
	<title>Well, for free...</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1247165820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can go here: <a href="http://www.treatyist.com/issue1/mystimulus.aspx" title="treatyist.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.treatyist.com/issue1/mystimulus.aspx</a> [treatyist.com]</p><p>It's a cheesy ASP.NET app that lets you build your own stimulus package.  You can pick out all sorts of cool stuff like windmill farms, nuclear power plants, fiestaware for everybody, camaros and the country of iceland.</p><p>It's not much more than a day's labor... but, if you want to imagine what could have been done with 800 billion dollars of stimulus money, it's kinda fun.  It's my own stupid page but its relevant to the discussion and besides, its almost amusing to see how hopelessly confused Google is at it serving ads when trying to match text with iceland, fiestaware, and assault rifles...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can go here : http : //www.treatyist.com/issue1/mystimulus.aspx [ treatyist.com ] It 's a cheesy ASP.NET app that lets you build your own stimulus package .
You can pick out all sorts of cool stuff like windmill farms , nuclear power plants , fiestaware for everybody , camaros and the country of iceland.It 's not much more than a day 's labor... but , if you want to imagine what could have been done with 800 billion dollars of stimulus money , it 's kinda fun .
It 's my own stupid page but its relevant to the discussion and besides , its almost amusing to see how hopelessly confused Google is at it serving ads when trying to match text with iceland , fiestaware , and assault rifles.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can go here: http://www.treatyist.com/issue1/mystimulus.aspx [treatyist.com]It's a cheesy ASP.NET app that lets you build your own stimulus package.
You can pick out all sorts of cool stuff like windmill farms, nuclear power plants, fiestaware for everybody, camaros and the country of iceland.It's not much more than a day's labor... but, if you want to imagine what could have been done with 800 billion dollars of stimulus money, it's kinda fun.
It's my own stupid page but its relevant to the discussion and besides, its almost amusing to see how hopelessly confused Google is at it serving ads when trying to match text with iceland, fiestaware, and assault rifles...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640367</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>HeavyDevelopment</author>
	<datestamp>1247169240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well considering the $170 million the government spent on FBI software that didn't work (<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/17/AR2006081701485.html" title="washingtonpost.com" rel="nofollow">The FBI Software Upgrade That Wasn't</a> [washingtonpost.com]), $18 million is par for the course. I'll be surprised if this recovery.gov get completed for $18 million. The FBI fiasco is an example of how government tech contractors reap millions in overruns. The contractors let the government clients run amok with their requests allowing huge scope creep, and when the project doesn't get completed within budget or on time, the contractor points to the client and blames them--knowing all the while the project was headed for disaster. It's a good paying gig if you can get it. The contractor for the FBI, Science Applications International Corp., had <b>$7 BILLION</b> in annual gross revenues as of 2006 when the Washington Post article was published. And you thought AIG had a good racket<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well considering the $ 170 million the government spent on FBI software that did n't work ( The FBI Software Upgrade That Was n't [ washingtonpost.com ] ) , $ 18 million is par for the course .
I 'll be surprised if this recovery.gov get completed for $ 18 million .
The FBI fiasco is an example of how government tech contractors reap millions in overruns .
The contractors let the government clients run amok with their requests allowing huge scope creep , and when the project does n't get completed within budget or on time , the contractor points to the client and blames them--knowing all the while the project was headed for disaster .
It 's a good paying gig if you can get it .
The contractor for the FBI , Science Applications International Corp. , had $ 7 BILLION in annual gross revenues as of 2006 when the Washington Post article was published .
And you thought AIG had a good racket ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well considering the $170 million the government spent on FBI software that didn't work (The FBI Software Upgrade That Wasn't [washingtonpost.com]), $18 million is par for the course.
I'll be surprised if this recovery.gov get completed for $18 million.
The FBI fiasco is an example of how government tech contractors reap millions in overruns.
The contractors let the government clients run amok with their requests allowing huge scope creep, and when the project doesn't get completed within budget or on time, the contractor points to the client and blames them--knowing all the while the project was headed for disaster.
It's a good paying gig if you can get it.
The contractor for the FBI, Science Applications International Corp., had $7 BILLION in annual gross revenues as of 2006 when the Washington Post article was published.
And you thought AIG had a good racket ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639927</id>
	<title>Oracle anyone?</title>
	<author>JLavezzo</author>
	<datestamp>1247167620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Web 2.0 implies that it's more than just showing some web pages on a domain.  They have to design the way the data they display gets into and is stored in their database.</p><p>Like most government contracts, it's probably going to use Oracle instead of MySQL or PostgreSQL. That means several mandatory over-paid Oracle consultants to keep Oracle running and navigate the labyrinthine system for setting up Oracle.  They'll probably use other Oracle middleware for "security" reasons, though security in this case means job security for Oracle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Web 2.0 implies that it 's more than just showing some web pages on a domain .
They have to design the way the data they display gets into and is stored in their database.Like most government contracts , it 's probably going to use Oracle instead of MySQL or PostgreSQL .
That means several mandatory over-paid Oracle consultants to keep Oracle running and navigate the labyrinthine system for setting up Oracle .
They 'll probably use other Oracle middleware for " security " reasons , though security in this case means job security for Oracle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Web 2.0 implies that it's more than just showing some web pages on a domain.
They have to design the way the data they display gets into and is stored in their database.Like most government contracts, it's probably going to use Oracle instead of MySQL or PostgreSQL.
That means several mandatory over-paid Oracle consultants to keep Oracle running and navigate the labyrinthine system for setting up Oracle.
They'll probably use other Oracle middleware for "security" reasons, though security in this case means job security for Oracle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639751</id>
	<title>The bureaucracy is expanding..</title>
	<author>jayme0227</author>
	<datestamp>1247166960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640093</id>
	<title>Outsource it!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247168220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hello Sirs,</p><p>We are interested a</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hello Sirs,We are interested a</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hello Sirs,We are interested a</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641693</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>antdude</author>
	<datestamp>1247131440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does that costs also include securing the Web sites/servers since recent news showed cyberattacks?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does that costs also include securing the Web sites/servers since recent news showed cyberattacks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does that costs also include securing the Web sites/servers since recent news showed cyberattacks?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644419</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>multimed</author>
	<datestamp>1247143860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Only persons who can vote should be allowed to donate to campaigns.  Can corporations vote?  Nope - so no donations from them.</p></div><p>If you can't vote for a particular candidate, then you can't give them money. Seems awfully reasonable to me. Where this would have the most dramatic effect would be on state and local elections. I can see an argument, that while Congress critters are elected to represent a district, the clearly make laws that apply nationally. However, tell me why an individual, corporation or organization from say Georgia, should be able to contribute to the campaign of the governor of Minnesota. Or those from another county or even city.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only persons who can vote should be allowed to donate to campaigns .
Can corporations vote ?
Nope - so no donations from them.If you ca n't vote for a particular candidate , then you ca n't give them money .
Seems awfully reasonable to me .
Where this would have the most dramatic effect would be on state and local elections .
I can see an argument , that while Congress critters are elected to represent a district , the clearly make laws that apply nationally .
However , tell me why an individual , corporation or organization from say Georgia , should be able to contribute to the campaign of the governor of Minnesota .
Or those from another county or even city .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only persons who can vote should be allowed to donate to campaigns.
Can corporations vote?
Nope - so no donations from them.If you can't vote for a particular candidate, then you can't give them money.
Seems awfully reasonable to me.
Where this would have the most dramatic effect would be on state and local elections.
I can see an argument, that while Congress critters are elected to represent a district, the clearly make laws that apply nationally.
However, tell me why an individual, corporation or organization from say Georgia, should be able to contribute to the campaign of the governor of Minnesota.
Or those from another county or even city.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639581</id>
	<title>We are f***ed</title>
	<author>gogowater</author>
	<datestamp>1247166360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Spending 18 millions on the Recovery site is one of the reason our economy will never recover!

--
God please help us.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Spending 18 millions on the Recovery site is one of the reason our economy will never recover !
-- God please help us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spending 18 millions on the Recovery site is one of the reason our economy will never recover!
--
God please help us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638953</id>
	<title>"Interactive"</title>
	<author>Nerdposeur</author>
	<datestamp>1247163960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't like that word "interactive." <b>All</b> web sites are interactive - this ain't TV. Usually "interactive" means "uses fancy animations via Flash and/or Silverlight." Which means "is slow and not very accessible."</p><p>If they went with someone like <a href="http://www.happycog.com/" title="happycog.com">Happy Cog</a> [happycog.com] they would have a standards-based design that would be fast and accessible and look shiny too. I guess we'll see what they come up with.</p><p>(Of course, I haven't discussed the server side, which no doubt will be the heavy lifting.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't like that word " interactive .
" All web sites are interactive - this ai n't TV .
Usually " interactive " means " uses fancy animations via Flash and/or Silverlight .
" Which means " is slow and not very accessible .
" If they went with someone like Happy Cog [ happycog.com ] they would have a standards-based design that would be fast and accessible and look shiny too .
I guess we 'll see what they come up with .
( Of course , I have n't discussed the server side , which no doubt will be the heavy lifting .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't like that word "interactive.
" All web sites are interactive - this ain't TV.
Usually "interactive" means "uses fancy animations via Flash and/or Silverlight.
" Which means "is slow and not very accessible.
"If they went with someone like Happy Cog [happycog.com] they would have a standards-based design that would be fast and accessible and look shiny too.
I guess we'll see what they come up with.
(Of course, I haven't discussed the server side, which no doubt will be the heavy lifting.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28645515</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>DigiShaman</author>
	<datestamp>1247153160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Every member of Congress who voted for Spendulous <b>without reading it</b> should be recalled or impeached!</p></div></blockquote><p>Personally, I would prefer those guilty of this act to be summarily executed! Such an extreme punishment would serve as a lesson to future congress members to not be derelict in their duty.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every member of Congress who voted for Spendulous without reading it should be recalled or impeached ! Personally , I would prefer those guilty of this act to be summarily executed !
Such an extreme punishment would serve as a lesson to future congress members to not be derelict in their duty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every member of Congress who voted for Spendulous without reading it should be recalled or impeached!Personally, I would prefer those guilty of this act to be summarily executed!
Such an extreme punishment would serve as a lesson to future congress members to not be derelict in their duty.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638977</id>
	<title>Drupal</title>
	<author>Eddy Luten</author>
	<datestamp>1247164080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder if they're going to replace Drupal or if they are cashing out $18 million for an interface/theme overhaul.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if they 're going to replace Drupal or if they are cashing out $ 18 million for an interface/theme overhaul .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if they're going to replace Drupal or if they are cashing out $18 million for an interface/theme overhaul.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642299</id>
	<title>.. and they want a 2nd stimulus?</title>
	<author>Billly Gates</author>
	<datestamp>1247134200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They can't even run a simple website without spending tens of millions of dollars and this is the same government that bankrupted social security. How many people would someone need to hire for $18,000,000 to run a simple website?</p><p>Now they want to put our great grandchildren further in debt <a href="http://www.boom2bust.com/2008/07/15/house-speaker-pelosi-announces-second-stimulus-package/" title="boom2bust.com">by a second stimulus</a> [boom2bust.com]?</p><p>I admitted I voted for Obama because I assumed he would balance the budget like Clinton. In addition, I figured anyone could be more fiscally responsible than Bush and Hannity and Rush's fanatic complaints about him being a big spending liberal would be way off. I was proven wrong. Instead I have another idea if you want to help the economy. Cut government spending. After we have lower interest rates from less panicy government bond holders we will have a revenue increase and once books are balanced the need to hire again will return. If no one wants something a big check wont help the economy. The market needs to fix it and the government needs to help the market rather than prohibit it by making them pay for socialistic recovery schemes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They ca n't even run a simple website without spending tens of millions of dollars and this is the same government that bankrupted social security .
How many people would someone need to hire for $ 18,000,000 to run a simple website ? Now they want to put our great grandchildren further in debt by a second stimulus [ boom2bust.com ] ? I admitted I voted for Obama because I assumed he would balance the budget like Clinton .
In addition , I figured anyone could be more fiscally responsible than Bush and Hannity and Rush 's fanatic complaints about him being a big spending liberal would be way off .
I was proven wrong .
Instead I have another idea if you want to help the economy .
Cut government spending .
After we have lower interest rates from less panicy government bond holders we will have a revenue increase and once books are balanced the need to hire again will return .
If no one wants something a big check wont help the economy .
The market needs to fix it and the government needs to help the market rather than prohibit it by making them pay for socialistic recovery schemes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They can't even run a simple website without spending tens of millions of dollars and this is the same government that bankrupted social security.
How many people would someone need to hire for $18,000,000 to run a simple website?Now they want to put our great grandchildren further in debt by a second stimulus [boom2bust.com]?I admitted I voted for Obama because I assumed he would balance the budget like Clinton.
In addition, I figured anyone could be more fiscally responsible than Bush and Hannity and Rush's fanatic complaints about him being a big spending liberal would be way off.
I was proven wrong.
Instead I have another idea if you want to help the economy.
Cut government spending.
After we have lower interest rates from less panicy government bond holders we will have a revenue increase and once books are balanced the need to hire again will return.
If no one wants something a big check wont help the economy.
The market needs to fix it and the government needs to help the market rather than prohibit it by making them pay for socialistic recovery schemes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644161</id>
	<title>Makes no sense</title>
	<author>snowwrestler</author>
	<datestamp>1247142480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The purpose of a government is to make and enforce laws, thus any government will have the power to impact the future earnings of a business. It's impossible to imagine a government so small that no business would ever feel threatened by its decisions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The purpose of a government is to make and enforce laws , thus any government will have the power to impact the future earnings of a business .
It 's impossible to imagine a government so small that no business would ever feel threatened by its decisions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The purpose of a government is to make and enforce laws, thus any government will have the power to impact the future earnings of a business.
It's impossible to imagine a government so small that no business would ever feel threatened by its decisions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639613</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638987</id>
	<title>So let me get this straight..</title>
	<author>HerculesMO</author>
	<datestamp>1247164080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are spending money to show where they are spending money, and still keeping the Fed and the way it handles monetary policy under wraps?</p><p>If they aren't showing us how they are creating inflation, they aren't showing us anything important.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are spending money to show where they are spending money , and still keeping the Fed and the way it handles monetary policy under wraps ? If they are n't showing us how they are creating inflation , they are n't showing us anything important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are spending money to show where they are spending money, and still keeping the Fed and the way it handles monetary policy under wraps?If they aren't showing us how they are creating inflation, they aren't showing us anything important.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641215</id>
	<title>Recovery.org</title>
	<author>Miros</author>
	<datestamp>1247172540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's sad about this is how much of a waste it clearly already is.  Recovery.org, which is run by a private company, already has a lot more up to date and useful information about how the stimulus money is being spent than Recovery.gov does.  Somehow I doubt their site cost 18M to develop.  Furthermore, what use is an oversight website that is entirely controlled by the POTUS?  The GAO should run it not the white house.

<p> of course that point is moot already, as the final version of the act did not actually include the provisions necessary to actually establish any guidelines at all for recovery.gov, they were all struck from the final version (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:8:./temp/~c111J3zW8Z:e39246:).  I suppose that someone out there realized that the whitehouse had the power to setup a website, and indeed, find 18M to redesign a website, without having to involve anyone else.  it's really a very cleaver system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's sad about this is how much of a waste it clearly already is .
Recovery.org , which is run by a private company , already has a lot more up to date and useful information about how the stimulus money is being spent than Recovery.gov does .
Somehow I doubt their site cost 18M to develop .
Furthermore , what use is an oversight website that is entirely controlled by the POTUS ?
The GAO should run it not the white house .
of course that point is moot already , as the final version of the act did not actually include the provisions necessary to actually establish any guidelines at all for recovery.gov , they were all struck from the final version ( http : //www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F ? c111 : 8 : ./temp/ ~ c111J3zW8Z : e39246 : ) .
I suppose that someone out there realized that the whitehouse had the power to setup a website , and indeed , find 18M to redesign a website , without having to involve anyone else .
it 's really a very cleaver system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's sad about this is how much of a waste it clearly already is.
Recovery.org, which is run by a private company, already has a lot more up to date and useful information about how the stimulus money is being spent than Recovery.gov does.
Somehow I doubt their site cost 18M to develop.
Furthermore, what use is an oversight website that is entirely controlled by the POTUS?
The GAO should run it not the white house.
of course that point is moot already, as the final version of the act did not actually include the provisions necessary to actually establish any guidelines at all for recovery.gov, they were all struck from the final version (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:8:./temp/~c111J3zW8Z:e39246:).
I suppose that someone out there realized that the whitehouse had the power to setup a website, and indeed, find 18M to redesign a website, without having to involve anyone else.
it's really a very cleaver system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247163840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>$18 mil for a website and in a total coincidence the contract goes to a company run by people who have given tens of thousands of dollars to house majority leader Steny Hoyer (D)</p></div></blockquote><p>And the same company gave tens of thousands of dollars to the House majority leader when the House was controlled by Republicans.<br> <br>This is not a partisan issue, I hope you weren't trying to make it into one.  Because that would dodge the core issue.<br> <br>This is just another example of a fundamental flaw in how campaign finance works in the US, and the current party in power shares the culpability with the prior party in power.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 18 mil for a website and in a total coincidence the contract goes to a company run by people who have given tens of thousands of dollars to house majority leader Steny Hoyer ( D ) And the same company gave tens of thousands of dollars to the House majority leader when the House was controlled by Republicans .
This is not a partisan issue , I hope you were n't trying to make it into one .
Because that would dodge the core issue .
This is just another example of a fundamental flaw in how campaign finance works in the US , and the current party in power shares the culpability with the prior party in power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$18 mil for a website and in a total coincidence the contract goes to a company run by people who have given tens of thousands of dollars to house majority leader Steny Hoyer (D)And the same company gave tens of thousands of dollars to the House majority leader when the House was controlled by Republicans.
This is not a partisan issue, I hope you weren't trying to make it into one.
Because that would dodge the core issue.
This is just another example of a fundamental flaw in how campaign finance works in the US, and the current party in power shares the culpability with the prior party in power.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639345</id>
	<title>well...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247165400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My guess is that its not 18 million on just developing the site. To get that high of a numer they are probably redoing their entire infrastructure. You're talking licensing which in a corporate envioronment can hit 10 million easy.</p><p>Then you're also talking paying developers to create custom applications, build databases, etc..</p><p>If you've ever worked in a corporate environment dropping 10 million on an infrastructure is nothing. Not saying its right or ok, just saying most people probably have no idea the cost of things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My guess is that its not 18 million on just developing the site .
To get that high of a numer they are probably redoing their entire infrastructure .
You 're talking licensing which in a corporate envioronment can hit 10 million easy.Then you 're also talking paying developers to create custom applications , build databases , etc..If you 've ever worked in a corporate environment dropping 10 million on an infrastructure is nothing .
Not saying its right or ok , just saying most people probably have no idea the cost of things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My guess is that its not 18 million on just developing the site.
To get that high of a numer they are probably redoing their entire infrastructure.
You're talking licensing which in a corporate envioronment can hit 10 million easy.Then you're also talking paying developers to create custom applications, build databases, etc..If you've ever worked in a corporate environment dropping 10 million on an infrastructure is nothing.
Not saying its right or ok, just saying most people probably have no idea the cost of things.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001</id>
	<title>The Definition of "Design"</title>
	<author>waldoj</author>
	<datestamp>1247164140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those of us who are website developers will recognize the misuse of "design" committed by ABC News here. To a layperson, "design" means "make" when it comes to websites. They're not spending $18M to redesign the website (presumably), but presumably on a total overhaul of the thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those of us who are website developers will recognize the misuse of " design " committed by ABC News here .
To a layperson , " design " means " make " when it comes to websites .
They 're not spending $ 18M to redesign the website ( presumably ) , but presumably on a total overhaul of the thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those of us who are website developers will recognize the misuse of "design" committed by ABC News here.
To a layperson, "design" means "make" when it comes to websites.
They're not spending $18M to redesign the website (presumably), but presumably on a total overhaul of the thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903</id>
	<title>WTF? We're doomed</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1247163780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And I was so hopeful this administration wasn't going to be full of idiots like the last one was. Jesus, I could probably code their whole damned site in a day, I'm sure I could do it in a week (and it would be standards-compliant and work on your phone, too). Can I get millions?</p><p>I'm starting to understand the teabaggers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I was so hopeful this administration was n't going to be full of idiots like the last one was .
Jesus , I could probably code their whole damned site in a day , I 'm sure I could do it in a week ( and it would be standards-compliant and work on your phone , too ) .
Can I get millions ? I 'm starting to understand the teabaggers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I was so hopeful this administration wasn't going to be full of idiots like the last one was.
Jesus, I could probably code their whole damned site in a day, I'm sure I could do it in a week (and it would be standards-compliant and work on your phone, too).
Can I get millions?I'm starting to understand the teabaggers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640633</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1247170260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"There's no difference between Democrats and Republicans" - The Governator</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" There 's no difference between Democrats and Republicans " - The Governator</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"There's no difference between Democrats and Republicans" - The Governator</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640979</id>
	<title>Re:WTF? We're doomed</title>
	<author>4D6963</author>
	<datestamp>1247171700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>God damn Slashdot, seeing doom, gloom and whatever else you want to see in the badly spun Slashdot summaries. As other commenters noted, it's $18 million to make the whole site and run it for 5 years.</p><p>Guess what, the administration is actually not full of idiots, people who write Slashdot summaries are, and people like you who've been there for so long should know that by now.

</p><p>Here's how Slashdot works :

</p><p>1. Summary misrepresents what TFA says by giving its claims a sensationalist spin
<br>2. Slashdotters read the summary and go "OMG WE'RE DOOOOOMED"
<br>3. Someone actually reads the article and goes "no wait actually that's not what the article says at all"
<br>4. Most don't get to hear that and just keep on predicting the fascist Armageddon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>God damn Slashdot , seeing doom , gloom and whatever else you want to see in the badly spun Slashdot summaries .
As other commenters noted , it 's $ 18 million to make the whole site and run it for 5 years.Guess what , the administration is actually not full of idiots , people who write Slashdot summaries are , and people like you who 've been there for so long should know that by now .
Here 's how Slashdot works : 1 .
Summary misrepresents what TFA says by giving its claims a sensationalist spin 2 .
Slashdotters read the summary and go " OMG WE 'RE DOOOOOMED " 3 .
Someone actually reads the article and goes " no wait actually that 's not what the article says at all " 4 .
Most do n't get to hear that and just keep on predicting the fascist Armageddon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God damn Slashdot, seeing doom, gloom and whatever else you want to see in the badly spun Slashdot summaries.
As other commenters noted, it's $18 million to make the whole site and run it for 5 years.Guess what, the administration is actually not full of idiots, people who write Slashdot summaries are, and people like you who've been there for so long should know that by now.
Here's how Slashdot works :

1.
Summary misrepresents what TFA says by giving its claims a sensationalist spin
2.
Slashdotters read the summary and go "OMG WE'RE DOOOOOMED"
3.
Someone actually reads the article and goes "no wait actually that's not what the article says at all"
4.
Most don't get to hear that and just keep on predicting the fascist Armageddon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28646475</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>tyrione</author>
	<datestamp>1247168040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>$18 million to redesign a website? WTF are they doing with it?</p><p>From TFA, they're going to spend $9.5 million over the next 6 months or so. Assuming $75k salaries for the web developers/DBAs/etc (generous), they'd be hiring 250 people to design a website.</p><p>And Americans wonder why they have such a big deficit.</p></div><p>I'm guessing this isn't just build the web site, it's to build and run it through January 2014 (See the GSA press release). Remember, they have to buy equipment and bandwidth too, although I'm betting the biggest issue is <i>collecting, entering and sorting the massive amounts of data</i> related to all the projects. Still sounds like a lot of money.</p></div><p>Add to the fact it's going to be a distributed center app that will pull information from various databases, utilize CRM and will most certainly go through a series of sign-off tiers before updates are published in an automated fashion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 18 million to redesign a website ?
WTF are they doing with it ? From TFA , they 're going to spend $ 9.5 million over the next 6 months or so .
Assuming $ 75k salaries for the web developers/DBAs/etc ( generous ) , they 'd be hiring 250 people to design a website.And Americans wonder why they have such a big deficit.I 'm guessing this is n't just build the web site , it 's to build and run it through January 2014 ( See the GSA press release ) .
Remember , they have to buy equipment and bandwidth too , although I 'm betting the biggest issue is collecting , entering and sorting the massive amounts of data related to all the projects .
Still sounds like a lot of money.Add to the fact it 's going to be a distributed center app that will pull information from various databases , utilize CRM and will most certainly go through a series of sign-off tiers before updates are published in an automated fashion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$18 million to redesign a website?
WTF are they doing with it?From TFA, they're going to spend $9.5 million over the next 6 months or so.
Assuming $75k salaries for the web developers/DBAs/etc (generous), they'd be hiring 250 people to design a website.And Americans wonder why they have such a big deficit.I'm guessing this isn't just build the web site, it's to build and run it through January 2014 (See the GSA press release).
Remember, they have to buy equipment and bandwidth too, although I'm betting the biggest issue is collecting, entering and sorting the massive amounts of data related to all the projects.
Still sounds like a lot of money.Add to the fact it's going to be a distributed center app that will pull information from various databases, utilize CRM and will most certainly go through a series of sign-off tiers before updates are published in an automated fashion.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639161</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640489</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>NeutronCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1247169600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Corporate personhood: the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person, or some subset of those rights (e.g. due process, free speech, etc.)</p></div><p>Correct. However, I think if we give corporations personhood and all rights that come with it (or at least the significant parts), we ought to realize what kind of person corporations are: sociopaths. In other words, they would be the kind of person that would throw their grandmother down the stairs to collect insurance, cry many tears in court over their beloved grandma, then on the way home from court run a red light and drive over a blind girlscout because it got them home 10 seconds faster.</p><p>As such, I would like to propose that if corporations are given personhood, they are also slapped with the label "menace to society" the first time they are caught doing something illegal.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporate personhood : the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person , or some subset of those rights ( e.g .
due process , free speech , etc. ) Correct .
However , I think if we give corporations personhood and all rights that come with it ( or at least the significant parts ) , we ought to realize what kind of person corporations are : sociopaths .
In other words , they would be the kind of person that would throw their grandmother down the stairs to collect insurance , cry many tears in court over their beloved grandma , then on the way home from court run a red light and drive over a blind girlscout because it got them home 10 seconds faster.As such , I would like to propose that if corporations are given personhood , they are also slapped with the label " menace to society " the first time they are caught doing something illegal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporate personhood: the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person, or some subset of those rights (e.g.
due process, free speech, etc.)Correct.
However, I think if we give corporations personhood and all rights that come with it (or at least the significant parts), we ought to realize what kind of person corporations are: sociopaths.
In other words, they would be the kind of person that would throw their grandmother down the stairs to collect insurance, cry many tears in court over their beloved grandma, then on the way home from court run a red light and drive over a blind girlscout because it got them home 10 seconds faster.As such, I would like to propose that if corporations are given personhood, they are also slapped with the label "menace to society" the first time they are caught doing something illegal.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28646337</id>
	<title>Re:well...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247166000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"You're talking licensing which in a corporate envioronment can hit 10 million easy."</p><p>No. Or rather not in any infrastructure meant to run a single web stack. No need for:<br>- Microsoft<br>- Office<br>- Adobe<br>- Oracle<br>etc, etc, etc</p><p>Hell, this is the perfect thing to put on a cloud service like Google's App Engine - the information is supposed to be public anyway right ? The bulk of the costs here should fall into:<br>- Hardware (cheap throw away 1U's, decent storage and security devices)<br>- Bandwidth<br>- Technical People</p><p>Assume you need 84 servers (you dont) at 10k each  = 1.3m<br>Assume you need Storage thats worth a damn = 1.5m<br>Assume you need Security and Network kit thats worth a damn = 2.0m<br>(the above assumes 5 year service plans)<br>Bandwidth is relative, the government already has tons of it so something around 100k/mo  = 6m<br>Thats 10.8m in infrastructure leaving 7.2 for staffing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... which comes out to around 13-20 solid people for 5-7 years.</p><p>So yeah this ain't cheap. Granted the hardware budgets above are drastic overkill but this stuff aint going on a hosted VM with html frames circa GeoCities. Of course it wont get any real traffic either so what we have above is overkill.</p><p>Of course this will likely have a 50 person team that has 5 technical people on it, resulting in 20m in proprietary software that doesnt work for shit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" You 're talking licensing which in a corporate envioronment can hit 10 million easy. " No .
Or rather not in any infrastructure meant to run a single web stack .
No need for : - Microsoft- Office- Adobe- Oracleetc , etc , etcHell , this is the perfect thing to put on a cloud service like Google 's App Engine - the information is supposed to be public anyway right ?
The bulk of the costs here should fall into : - Hardware ( cheap throw away 1U 's , decent storage and security devices ) - Bandwidth- Technical PeopleAssume you need 84 servers ( you dont ) at 10k each = 1.3mAssume you need Storage thats worth a damn = 1.5mAssume you need Security and Network kit thats worth a damn = 2.0m ( the above assumes 5 year service plans ) Bandwidth is relative , the government already has tons of it so something around 100k/mo = 6mThats 10.8m in infrastructure leaving 7.2 for staffing .... which comes out to around 13-20 solid people for 5-7 years.So yeah this ai n't cheap .
Granted the hardware budgets above are drastic overkill but this stuff aint going on a hosted VM with html frames circa GeoCities .
Of course it wont get any real traffic either so what we have above is overkill.Of course this will likely have a 50 person team that has 5 technical people on it , resulting in 20m in proprietary software that doesnt work for shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You're talking licensing which in a corporate envioronment can hit 10 million easy."No.
Or rather not in any infrastructure meant to run a single web stack.
No need for:- Microsoft- Office- Adobe- Oracleetc, etc, etcHell, this is the perfect thing to put on a cloud service like Google's App Engine - the information is supposed to be public anyway right ?
The bulk of the costs here should fall into:- Hardware (cheap throw away 1U's, decent storage and security devices)- Bandwidth- Technical PeopleAssume you need 84 servers (you dont) at 10k each  = 1.3mAssume you need Storage thats worth a damn = 1.5mAssume you need Security and Network kit thats worth a damn = 2.0m(the above assumes 5 year service plans)Bandwidth is relative, the government already has tons of it so something around 100k/mo  = 6mThats 10.8m in infrastructure leaving 7.2 for staffing .... which comes out to around 13-20 solid people for 5-7 years.So yeah this ain't cheap.
Granted the hardware budgets above are drastic overkill but this stuff aint going on a hosted VM with html frames circa GeoCities.
Of course it wont get any real traffic either so what we have above is overkill.Of course this will likely have a 50 person team that has 5 technical people on it, resulting in 20m in proprietary software that doesnt work for shit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639345</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639895</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>city</author>
	<datestamp>1247167500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>god damn it, dont give them any ideas!
<br>
<br>
I mean...
<br>
<br>
I, for one, welcome our new suffrage yielding corporate overlords.</htmltext>
<tokenext>god damn it , dont give them any ideas !
I mean.. . I , for one , welcome our new suffrage yielding corporate overlords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>god damn it, dont give them any ideas!
I mean...


I, for one, welcome our new suffrage yielding corporate overlords.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639811</id>
	<title>Better than most recovery spending</title>
	<author>one2wonder</author>
	<datestamp>1247167200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Still - its not billions flushed down the toilet on something that the taxpayers will see NO return on  (coughGMcough).  At least now our DC leaders will have many more people criticizing this spending.  However - the truly corrupt spending will still be well hidden.  Like by how 2014 this will be a 100 mil project.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Still - its not billions flushed down the toilet on something that the taxpayers will see NO return on ( coughGMcough ) .
At least now our DC leaders will have many more people criticizing this spending .
However - the truly corrupt spending will still be well hidden .
Like by how 2014 this will be a 100 mil project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Still - its not billions flushed down the toilet on something that the taxpayers will see NO return on  (coughGMcough).
At least now our DC leaders will have many more people criticizing this spending.
However - the truly corrupt spending will still be well hidden.
Like by how 2014 this will be a 100 mil project.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640099</id>
	<title>What site costs $18 million exactly?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1247168220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean, even if I do a really big site project, I can't imagine going over $100,000 for programming, *ever*. (But more likely something like $10,000.) Including designing the database layer, backend, template system, business logic, structure, content and design!</p><p>Can anyone enlighten me on the possible server costs for such a project?</p><p>How much would be a realistic price range for such a project?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , even if I do a really big site project , I ca n't imagine going over $ 100,000 for programming , * ever * .
( But more likely something like $ 10,000 .
) Including designing the database layer , backend , template system , business logic , structure , content and design ! Can anyone enlighten me on the possible server costs for such a project ? How much would be a realistic price range for such a project ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, even if I do a really big site project, I can't imagine going over $100,000 for programming, *ever*.
(But more likely something like $10,000.
) Including designing the database layer, backend, template system, business logic, structure, content and design!Can anyone enlighten me on the possible server costs for such a project?How much would be a realistic price range for such a project?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639273</id>
	<title>Re:$18 million for a website</title>
	<author>cthulhuology</author>
	<datestamp>1247165160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't wait until the website is complete and consists of a single JPEG with the CEO grabbing his nut sack to a caption of, "Come and see where you tax money is being wasted! I gots it right here bitches!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't wait until the website is complete and consists of a single JPEG with the CEO grabbing his nut sack to a caption of , " Come and see where you tax money is being wasted !
I gots it right here bitches !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't wait until the website is complete and consists of a single JPEG with the CEO grabbing his nut sack to a caption of, "Come and see where you tax money is being wasted!
I gots it right here bitches!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641663</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>jmorris42</author>
	<datestamp>1247131260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So which is it?</p><p>&gt; Party doesn't matter,</p><p>and</p><p>&gt; Every member of Congress who voted for Spendulous without reading it should be recalled or impeached!</p><p>You do know how the votes went on Porkulus, right?  Or could you be bothered to actually, ya know, know what the hell you are talking about?</p><p>Porkulus got zero Republican votes in the House and three RINOs in the Senate.  Senator Arlen Specter received so much heat from his vote he finally came out of the closet and became the moderate Democrat he has always voted as.  Senators Collins and Snowe are both from Maine, and aren't really Republicans in any modern meaning of the word.  So yes, Party did matter.</p><p>I'm with ya as far as wishing a pox on both their houses, but it is for very different reasons.  Democrats are essentially an enemy of liberty these days, period.  Republicans are wishy washy, unprincipled and frightened of their shadows.   However, except for the old country club Republicans and east coast RINOs, most Republicans would like to do the right thing, at least when first elected.... but they need some balls... and to avoid the temptations of Washington.  That is an easier problem to fix than making Democrats not be evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So which is it ? &gt; Party does n't matter,and &gt; Every member of Congress who voted for Spendulous without reading it should be recalled or impeached ! You do know how the votes went on Porkulus , right ?
Or could you be bothered to actually , ya know , know what the hell you are talking about ? Porkulus got zero Republican votes in the House and three RINOs in the Senate .
Senator Arlen Specter received so much heat from his vote he finally came out of the closet and became the moderate Democrat he has always voted as .
Senators Collins and Snowe are both from Maine , and are n't really Republicans in any modern meaning of the word .
So yes , Party did matter.I 'm with ya as far as wishing a pox on both their houses , but it is for very different reasons .
Democrats are essentially an enemy of liberty these days , period .
Republicans are wishy washy , unprincipled and frightened of their shadows .
However , except for the old country club Republicans and east coast RINOs , most Republicans would like to do the right thing , at least when first elected.... but they need some balls... and to avoid the temptations of Washington .
That is an easier problem to fix than making Democrats not be evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So which is it?&gt; Party doesn't matter,and&gt; Every member of Congress who voted for Spendulous without reading it should be recalled or impeached!You do know how the votes went on Porkulus, right?
Or could you be bothered to actually, ya know, know what the hell you are talking about?Porkulus got zero Republican votes in the House and three RINOs in the Senate.
Senator Arlen Specter received so much heat from his vote he finally came out of the closet and became the moderate Democrat he has always voted as.
Senators Collins and Snowe are both from Maine, and aren't really Republicans in any modern meaning of the word.
So yes, Party did matter.I'm with ya as far as wishing a pox on both their houses, but it is for very different reasons.
Democrats are essentially an enemy of liberty these days, period.
Republicans are wishy washy, unprincipled and frightened of their shadows.
However, except for the old country club Republicans and east coast RINOs, most Republicans would like to do the right thing, at least when first elected.... but they need some balls... and to avoid the temptations of Washington.
That is an easier problem to fix than making Democrats not be evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641525</id>
	<title>Low Expectations</title>
	<author>circj</author>
	<datestamp>1247130600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The current Recovery.gov site is running Drupal on Apache/Linux, and the site designers made at least a token effort to support current Web standards in the markup (while it is XHTML with a tableless layout, the W3C's validator did flag many problems when I checked it so it isn't perfect). :
</p><ul>
<li> <a href="http://buytaert.net/obama-using-drupal" title="buytaert.net" rel="nofollow">http://buytaert.net/obama-using-drupal</a> [buytaert.net] </li><li> <a href="http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site\_report?url=http://www.recovery.gov" title="netcraft.com" rel="nofollow">http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site\_report?url=http://www.recovery.gov</a> [netcraft.com] </li></ul><p>
On the other hand, the new prime contractor's Web site www.smartronix.com is running on Microsoft-IIS/6.0.  They do not appear to be making much of an effort to support current Web standards (fixed, table based layout).

</p><ul>
<li> <a href="http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site\_report?url=http://www.smartronix.com/" title="netcraft.com" rel="nofollow">http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site\_report?url=http://www.smartronix.com/</a> [netcraft.com] </li></ul><p>
So who knows, maybe they will build a beautiful new site for that $18m,  but I like the old site and will be sad to see it go.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The current Recovery.gov site is running Drupal on Apache/Linux , and the site designers made at least a token effort to support current Web standards in the markup ( while it is XHTML with a tableless layout , the W3C 's validator did flag many problems when I checked it so it is n't perfect ) .
: http : //buytaert.net/obama-using-drupal [ buytaert.net ] http : //toolbar.netcraft.com/site \ _report ? url = http : //www.recovery.gov [ netcraft.com ] On the other hand , the new prime contractor 's Web site www.smartronix.com is running on Microsoft-IIS/6.0 .
They do not appear to be making much of an effort to support current Web standards ( fixed , table based layout ) .
http : //toolbar.netcraft.com/site \ _report ? url = http : //www.smartronix.com/ [ netcraft.com ] So who knows , maybe they will build a beautiful new site for that $ 18m , but I like the old site and will be sad to see it go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The current Recovery.gov site is running Drupal on Apache/Linux, and the site designers made at least a token effort to support current Web standards in the markup (while it is XHTML with a tableless layout, the W3C's validator did flag many problems when I checked it so it isn't perfect).
:

 http://buytaert.net/obama-using-drupal [buytaert.net]  http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site\_report?url=http://www.recovery.gov [netcraft.com] 
On the other hand, the new prime contractor's Web site www.smartronix.com is running on Microsoft-IIS/6.0.
They do not appear to be making much of an effort to support current Web standards (fixed, table based layout).
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site\_report?url=http://www.smartronix.com/ [netcraft.com] 
So who knows, maybe they will build a beautiful new site for that $18m,  but I like the old site and will be sad to see it go.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641449</id>
	<title>wake up call</title>
	<author>token\_username</author>
	<datestamp>1247130300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In case those of you who are a fan of increased government spending missed it, here's an excellent picture of the efficiency of the federal government.  $18 million for a single website.  Wow.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In case those of you who are a fan of increased government spending missed it , here 's an excellent picture of the efficiency of the federal government .
$ 18 million for a single website .
Wow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In case those of you who are a fan of increased government spending missed it, here's an excellent picture of the efficiency of the federal government.
$18 million for a single website.
Wow.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640039</id>
	<title>18 million$ website redesign</title>
	<author>Capt.DrumkenBum</author>
	<datestamp>1247168040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, my WTF meter just went right off the top of the scale.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , my WTF meter just went right off the top of the scale .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, my WTF meter just went right off the top of the scale.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639597</id>
	<title>Same old crap.</title>
	<author>MaWeiTao</author>
	<datestamp>1247166360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Holy crap, is my company seriously undercharging for the work we do. What in the hell is it with companies that take government contracts that get away with charging such an absurd amount of money for work?</p><p>This is what we get when idiots in government don't ever shop around like any sensible person at any company would. Although what reason do they have to care what these projects cost when it's not their own money? They'll just raise taxes on us. And then I'm supposed to feel good about the taxes I pay.</p><p>Like being assessed a full year of taxes on a car I sold barely one month into this tax period. I look forward to seeing my tax money spent having snow plows running all night to clear a dusting of snow. Or having the city overpay for a crappy website that looks unprofessional and barely functions properly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Holy crap , is my company seriously undercharging for the work we do .
What in the hell is it with companies that take government contracts that get away with charging such an absurd amount of money for work ? This is what we get when idiots in government do n't ever shop around like any sensible person at any company would .
Although what reason do they have to care what these projects cost when it 's not their own money ?
They 'll just raise taxes on us .
And then I 'm supposed to feel good about the taxes I pay.Like being assessed a full year of taxes on a car I sold barely one month into this tax period .
I look forward to seeing my tax money spent having snow plows running all night to clear a dusting of snow .
Or having the city overpay for a crappy website that looks unprofessional and barely functions properly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Holy crap, is my company seriously undercharging for the work we do.
What in the hell is it with companies that take government contracts that get away with charging such an absurd amount of money for work?This is what we get when idiots in government don't ever shop around like any sensible person at any company would.
Although what reason do they have to care what these projects cost when it's not their own money?
They'll just raise taxes on us.
And then I'm supposed to feel good about the taxes I pay.Like being assessed a full year of taxes on a car I sold barely one month into this tax period.
I look forward to seeing my tax money spent having snow plows running all night to clear a dusting of snow.
Or having the city overpay for a crappy website that looks unprofessional and barely functions properly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641431</id>
	<title>Re:Drupal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247130240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's a good question. I was looking at the recovery website this morning, and it was giving the default Drupal error page when you hit the copyright information link.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a good question .
I was looking at the recovery website this morning , and it was giving the default Drupal error page when you hit the copyright information link .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a good question.
I was looking at the recovery website this morning, and it was giving the default Drupal error page when you hit the copyright information link.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640675</id>
	<title>Re:The Definition of "Design"</title>
	<author>Guspaz</author>
	<datestamp>1247170380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For those of us who are professional web developers, $18M is still a large amount of money to spend on a web app.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For those of us who are professional web developers , $ 18M is still a large amount of money to spend on a web app .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those of us who are professional web developers, $18M is still a large amount of money to spend on a web app.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638931</id>
	<title>This is idiotic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247163900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whomever is purchasing this is a plain idiot: there is NO WAY a site costs that much.</p><p>I mean, guys, the horrid system for paying taxes in Mexico is only two million more expensive than what they are attempting here and hey, the mexican system sort-of works (it has to: gov only takes taxes through the site nowdays).</p><p>That one is also hugely overpriced, but also my country has very poor transparency in government spending: we expect this kind of things to happen here in thirdworldland: are you guys heading this way?</p><p>If so, as a fellow citizen of the world, I bid you: TURN AROUND NOW.</p><p>Demand, regardless of partisanship, to know exactly how and in what is all that and all other money being spent.</p><p>Demos did it very well with halliburton (and now THATS money: 20 mil is chump change for those guys), reps should drive this one to the last consequences accordingly: without a vigilant opposition, democratic governments  cannot be called that anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whomever is purchasing this is a plain idiot : there is NO WAY a site costs that much.I mean , guys , the horrid system for paying taxes in Mexico is only two million more expensive than what they are attempting here and hey , the mexican system sort-of works ( it has to : gov only takes taxes through the site nowdays ) .That one is also hugely overpriced , but also my country has very poor transparency in government spending : we expect this kind of things to happen here in thirdworldland : are you guys heading this way ? If so , as a fellow citizen of the world , I bid you : TURN AROUND NOW.Demand , regardless of partisanship , to know exactly how and in what is all that and all other money being spent.Demos did it very well with halliburton ( and now THATS money : 20 mil is chump change for those guys ) , reps should drive this one to the last consequences accordingly : without a vigilant opposition , democratic governments can not be called that anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whomever is purchasing this is a plain idiot: there is NO WAY a site costs that much.I mean, guys, the horrid system for paying taxes in Mexico is only two million more expensive than what they are attempting here and hey, the mexican system sort-of works (it has to: gov only takes taxes through the site nowdays).That one is also hugely overpriced, but also my country has very poor transparency in government spending: we expect this kind of things to happen here in thirdworldland: are you guys heading this way?If so, as a fellow citizen of the world, I bid you: TURN AROUND NOW.Demand, regardless of partisanship, to know exactly how and in what is all that and all other money being spent.Demos did it very well with halliburton (and now THATS money: 20 mil is chump change for those guys), reps should drive this one to the last consequences accordingly: without a vigilant opposition, democratic governments  cannot be called that anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640925</id>
	<title>Re:WTF? We're doomed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247171460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With that zeal spend few more days, hire few more guys and build a new web browser or OS.<br>Theoretically it is all possible. No one does it. There are shit load of other stuff and people you have to deal with. Otherwise we will not be living with only three OSes, about five browsers and two web servers in 2009.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With that zeal spend few more days , hire few more guys and build a new web browser or OS.Theoretically it is all possible .
No one does it .
There are shit load of other stuff and people you have to deal with .
Otherwise we will not be living with only three OSes , about five browsers and two web servers in 2009 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With that zeal spend few more days, hire few more guys and build a new web browser or OS.Theoretically it is all possible.
No one does it.
There are shit load of other stuff and people you have to deal with.
Otherwise we will not be living with only three OSes, about five browsers and two web servers in 2009.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639221</id>
	<title>Worth it??</title>
	<author>SpacePenguin98</author>
	<datestamp>1247164920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does anyone know how the government entities that are spending our money are required to report and how that will figure into our new Recovery Internet Portal Official Funds Finder?<br>
<br>
Twitter?: $5MIL for bulldzng forest - make way for prgrss! 90\/3r|\|/\/\3|\|7 rUL3$<br>
Facebook?: Transportation Dept has a fat pocket book thanks to the stimulus.<br>
<br>
I'm sure someone will say it's far too much work and too much optimism to expect a referencing system with unique job numbers for each project eligible for stimulus funds that could then be tracked by those taxpayers that actually care about where their money is going and not just vague promises about more jobs to battle unemployment (although, the jobs have to end sometime, which will put us back to square-one). If I could track exactly where my money is going, I wouldn't be so upset about $18MIL to update a website with whatever buzzwords/Web 2.0 BS that the government is trying to throw at us to appease the masses that are addicted to it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone know how the government entities that are spending our money are required to report and how that will figure into our new Recovery Internet Portal Official Funds Finder ?
Twitter ? : $ 5MIL for bulldzng forest - make way for prgrss !
90 \ /3r | \ | / \ / \ 3 | \ | 7 rUL3 $ Facebook ?
: Transportation Dept has a fat pocket book thanks to the stimulus .
I 'm sure someone will say it 's far too much work and too much optimism to expect a referencing system with unique job numbers for each project eligible for stimulus funds that could then be tracked by those taxpayers that actually care about where their money is going and not just vague promises about more jobs to battle unemployment ( although , the jobs have to end sometime , which will put us back to square-one ) .
If I could track exactly where my money is going , I would n't be so upset about $ 18MIL to update a website with whatever buzzwords/Web 2.0 BS that the government is trying to throw at us to appease the masses that are addicted to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone know how the government entities that are spending our money are required to report and how that will figure into our new Recovery Internet Portal Official Funds Finder?
Twitter?: $5MIL for bulldzng forest - make way for prgrss!
90\/3r|\|/\/\3|\|7 rUL3$
Facebook?
: Transportation Dept has a fat pocket book thanks to the stimulus.
I'm sure someone will say it's far too much work and too much optimism to expect a referencing system with unique job numbers for each project eligible for stimulus funds that could then be tracked by those taxpayers that actually care about where their money is going and not just vague promises about more jobs to battle unemployment (although, the jobs have to end sometime, which will put us back to square-one).
If I could track exactly where my money is going, I wouldn't be so upset about $18MIL to update a website with whatever buzzwords/Web 2.0 BS that the government is trying to throw at us to appease the masses that are addicted to it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640273</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247168880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only persons who can vote should be allowed to donate to campaigns.  Can corporations vote?  Nope - so no donations from them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only persons who can vote should be allowed to donate to campaigns .
Can corporations vote ?
Nope - so no donations from them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only persons who can vote should be allowed to donate to campaigns.
Can corporations vote?
Nope - so no donations from them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28664723</id>
	<title>Re:WTF? We're doomed</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1247322300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>and it would be standards-compliant and work on your phone, too</p></div></blockquote><p>That's the excuse Slashdot used for their notorious CSS-based mess. Please, God, noooooooo...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and it would be standards-compliant and work on your phone , tooThat 's the excuse Slashdot used for their notorious CSS-based mess .
Please , God , noooooooo.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and it would be standards-compliant and work on your phone, tooThat's the excuse Slashdot used for their notorious CSS-based mess.
Please, God, noooooooo...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638941</id>
	<title>Irony</title>
	<author>kevinNCSU</author>
	<datestamp>1247163960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You have to wonder if these people have either a wonderful sense of irony or no understanding of the word at all.  To pay 18 million to create a website that will show where our money is going is so ludicrous I thought I had clicked the bookmark to go to The Onion instead.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to wonder if these people have either a wonderful sense of irony or no understanding of the word at all .
To pay 18 million to create a website that will show where our money is going is so ludicrous I thought I had clicked the bookmark to go to The Onion instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to wonder if these people have either a wonderful sense of irony or no understanding of the word at all.
To pay 18 million to create a website that will show where our money is going is so ludicrous I thought I had clicked the bookmark to go to The Onion instead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28655561</id>
	<title>Waste of cash</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1247224740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For 18million, I would have a 3rd party <b>independent</b> (i.e. watchdog) group audit what is being posted on recovery.gov for what? the next 10yrs!
<p>
As for recovery.gov. <b>Just show me who is spending what and how much</b>. Not innovative ways to slice and dice taxpayer money. Not everyone has hours in the day and an accounting degree to go investigate why agency X is spending an extra 1K on parking meters.
</p><p>
This is gov't following the FOX NEWS model: "We report our data in the way we want it, and you decided" vs "here's the important information, now lets start a discussion about it".
</p><p>.
</p><p>
Waste, waste, waste.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For 18million , I would have a 3rd party independent ( i.e .
watchdog ) group audit what is being posted on recovery.gov for what ?
the next 10yrs !
As for recovery.gov .
Just show me who is spending what and how much .
Not innovative ways to slice and dice taxpayer money .
Not everyone has hours in the day and an accounting degree to go investigate why agency X is spending an extra 1K on parking meters .
This is gov't following the FOX NEWS model : " We report our data in the way we want it , and you decided " vs " here 's the important information , now lets start a discussion about it " .
. Waste , waste , waste .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For 18million, I would have a 3rd party independent (i.e.
watchdog) group audit what is being posted on recovery.gov for what?
the next 10yrs!
As for recovery.gov.
Just show me who is spending what and how much.
Not innovative ways to slice and dice taxpayer money.
Not everyone has hours in the day and an accounting degree to go investigate why agency X is spending an extra 1K on parking meters.
This is gov't following the FOX NEWS model: "We report our data in the way we want it, and you decided" vs "here's the important information, now lets start a discussion about it".
.

Waste, waste, waste.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639007</id>
	<title>Heaven's Gate folks could have done it cheaper</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247164140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They may be crazy, but not crazy enough to take dollars on the mothership.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They may be crazy , but not crazy enough to take dollars on the mothership .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They may be crazy, but not crazy enough to take dollars on the mothership.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640297</id>
	<title>That's nothing...</title>
	<author>tool462</author>
	<datestamp>1247169000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>According to their Q1 earnings report, Google spent $1.52 <strong>BILLION</strong> in just one quarter and their website is just a logo, text box, and a couple of buttons, right?<br> <br>

They're not spending the $18 million on a CSS template and a Ruby script to access a MySQL database.  There're going to be costs associated with the servers and bandwidth necessary to both search and serve up the information.  There're going to be huge costs just in getting all of the data together into some kind of format that is parseable.  I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the data isn't even in any electronic form yet.  Then there're the costs to maintain and support the whole thing over the next 5+ years.  $18 million may still be a rip-off, I don't know, but this is not a small project by any means.</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to their Q1 earnings report , Google spent $ 1.52 BILLION in just one quarter and their website is just a logo , text box , and a couple of buttons , right ?
They 're not spending the $ 18 million on a CSS template and a Ruby script to access a MySQL database .
There 're going to be costs associated with the servers and bandwidth necessary to both search and serve up the information .
There 're going to be huge costs just in getting all of the data together into some kind of format that is parseable .
I would n't be surprised if a lot of the data is n't even in any electronic form yet .
Then there 're the costs to maintain and support the whole thing over the next 5 + years .
$ 18 million may still be a rip-off , I do n't know , but this is not a small project by any means .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to their Q1 earnings report, Google spent $1.52 BILLION in just one quarter and their website is just a logo, text box, and a couple of buttons, right?
They're not spending the $18 million on a CSS template and a Ruby script to access a MySQL database.
There're going to be costs associated with the servers and bandwidth necessary to both search and serve up the information.
There're going to be huge costs just in getting all of the data together into some kind of format that is parseable.
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the data isn't even in any electronic form yet.
Then there're the costs to maintain and support the whole thing over the next 5+ years.
$18 million may still be a rip-off, I don't know, but this is not a small project by any means.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639549</id>
	<title>Read the RFP</title>
	<author>gorbachev</author>
	<datestamp>1247166240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&amp;mode=form&amp;id=9745fb34e48a36a32b4fc589c3e371cb&amp;tab=core&amp;\_cview=1&amp;cck=1&amp;au=&amp;ck=</p><p>The Federal Business Opportunities website listed this opportunity a few weeks ago (could've been up longer than that, who knows).</p><p>It's not "just a website". It's a bit of a cluster**** in terms of number of data sources, what they expect to do with the data, etc.</p><p>I've done my time (never again!) with sorting through data from various data sources and while the actual programming part is *usually* not that difficult (assuming the data is not too badly malformed), but there are so many problems with processes, dealing with crap data, exceptions, etc. that if I were bidding for this work, I'd inflate my estimates quite a bit, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>https : //www.fbo.gov/index ? s = opportunity&amp;mode = form&amp;id = 9745fb34e48a36a32b4fc589c3e371cb&amp;tab = core&amp; \ _cview = 1&amp;cck = 1&amp;au = &amp;ck = The Federal Business Opportunities website listed this opportunity a few weeks ago ( could 've been up longer than that , who knows ) .It 's not " just a website " .
It 's a bit of a cluster * * * * in terms of number of data sources , what they expect to do with the data , etc.I 've done my time ( never again !
) with sorting through data from various data sources and while the actual programming part is * usually * not that difficult ( assuming the data is not too badly malformed ) , but there are so many problems with processes , dealing with crap data , exceptions , etc .
that if I were bidding for this work , I 'd inflate my estimates quite a bit , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&amp;mode=form&amp;id=9745fb34e48a36a32b4fc589c3e371cb&amp;tab=core&amp;\_cview=1&amp;cck=1&amp;au=&amp;ck=The Federal Business Opportunities website listed this opportunity a few weeks ago (could've been up longer than that, who knows).It's not "just a website".
It's a bit of a cluster**** in terms of number of data sources, what they expect to do with the data, etc.I've done my time (never again!
) with sorting through data from various data sources and while the actual programming part is *usually* not that difficult (assuming the data is not too badly malformed), but there are so many problems with processes, dealing with crap data, exceptions, etc.
that if I were bidding for this work, I'd inflate my estimates quite a bit, too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639867</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>fishbowl</author>
	<datestamp>1247167380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;$18 million to redesign a website? WTF are they doing with it?</p><p>Connecting it to the most complex accounting system ever created.</p><p>How is your ERP experience?  How about your familiarity with financial systems used by the Federal Government?  Are you in a credible position to make a competing bid, or are you just complaining because you've got some idea that the price is too high?  Are you saying you'd bid lower, without knowing the actual scope of the project?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; $ 18 million to redesign a website ?
WTF are they doing with it ? Connecting it to the most complex accounting system ever created.How is your ERP experience ?
How about your familiarity with financial systems used by the Federal Government ?
Are you in a credible position to make a competing bid , or are you just complaining because you 've got some idea that the price is too high ?
Are you saying you 'd bid lower , without knowing the actual scope of the project ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;$18 million to redesign a website?
WTF are they doing with it?Connecting it to the most complex accounting system ever created.How is your ERP experience?
How about your familiarity with financial systems used by the Federal Government?
Are you in a credible position to make a competing bid, or are you just complaining because you've got some idea that the price is too high?
Are you saying you'd bid lower, without knowing the actual scope of the project?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639535</id>
	<title>Re:$18 million for a website</title>
	<author>JiffyPop</author>
	<datestamp>1247166180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It reminds me of a road sign (that a friend subsequently stole, and which still resides in his garage).  Around ten years ago the Michigan government had just finished spending money to fix up a pretty rural road.  When they were done they put up the round, brown sign featuring a dollar bill in a hard hat with a shovel.  It read "Your tax dollars at work".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It reminds me of a road sign ( that a friend subsequently stole , and which still resides in his garage ) .
Around ten years ago the Michigan government had just finished spending money to fix up a pretty rural road .
When they were done they put up the round , brown sign featuring a dollar bill in a hard hat with a shovel .
It read " Your tax dollars at work " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It reminds me of a road sign (that a friend subsequently stole, and which still resides in his garage).
Around ten years ago the Michigan government had just finished spending money to fix up a pretty rural road.
When they were done they put up the round, brown sign featuring a dollar bill in a hard hat with a shovel.
It read "Your tax dollars at work".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>cml4524</author>
	<datestamp>1247165880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Two things:</p><p>1) Corporate personhood: the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person, or some subset of those rights (e.g. due process, free speech, etc.)</p><p>2) Money as free speech: the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speech</p><p>Therefore, a person - or company legally recognized as a person - cannot be restricted from donating money to a campaign because that would be an infringement on their constitutionally-recognized right to free political speech.</p><p>The legitimacy of this position, and either of its two components individually, has been and continues to be a matter of substantial debate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Two things : 1 ) Corporate personhood : the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person , or some subset of those rights ( e.g .
due process , free speech , etc .
) 2 ) Money as free speech : the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speechTherefore , a person - or company legally recognized as a person - can not be restricted from donating money to a campaign because that would be an infringement on their constitutionally-recognized right to free political speech.The legitimacy of this position , and either of its two components individually , has been and continues to be a matter of substantial debate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two things:1) Corporate personhood: the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person, or some subset of those rights (e.g.
due process, free speech, etc.
)2) Money as free speech: the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speechTherefore, a person - or company legally recognized as a person - cannot be restricted from donating money to a campaign because that would be an infringement on their constitutionally-recognized right to free political speech.The legitimacy of this position, and either of its two components individually, has been and continues to be a matter of substantial debate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639477</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>locallyunscene</author>
	<datestamp>1247166000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I really wish I had mod points right now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really wish I had mod points right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really wish I had mod points right now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28646143</id>
	<title>How much did it cost to cybersquat recovery.org</title>
	<author>MWDrexel</author>
	<datestamp>1247162880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>for six months?</htmltext>
<tokenext>for six months ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for six months?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639569</id>
	<title>The current recovery.gov site sucks, it needs it..</title>
	<author>2obvious4u</author>
	<datestamp>1247166300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just went to the site.  It is hard to navigate and I couldn't find anything I was looking for.  I don't know if 18 million is enough to fix it...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just went to the site .
It is hard to navigate and I could n't find anything I was looking for .
I do n't know if 18 million is enough to fix it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just went to the site.
It is hard to navigate and I couldn't find anything I was looking for.
I don't know if 18 million is enough to fix it...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639279</id>
	<title>Wait, what?!?!!</title>
	<author>revjtanton</author>
	<datestamp>1247165220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So they're spending $18mil on a site to tell you they spent $18mil on a site to tell you they spent $18mil on a site to tell you they spent $18mil...on and on.  Seriously...WTF?!</htmltext>
<tokenext>So they 're spending $ 18mil on a site to tell you they spent $ 18mil on a site to tell you they spent $ 18mil on a site to tell you they spent $ 18mil...on and on .
Seriously...WTF ? !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they're spending $18mil on a site to tell you they spent $18mil on a site to tell you they spent $18mil on a site to tell you they spent $18mil...on and on.
Seriously...WTF?!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639487</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>MozeeToby</author>
	<datestamp>1247166060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most large corporations rely on Political Action Committees to raise money which is then donated to one of two groups.</p><p>1)  Politicians who support that business sector, geographical area, or tax breaks.  I really don't have a huge problem with that, essentially this is individuals donating money to people who will work to improve conditions for the business they work for.  Though I would prefer to see a system where you can only donate if you can vote in the election, with the current situation of national and multinational interests that may not be possible.  For example, the company I work for has offices all over the US but the main office is in Iowa, if taxes go up in Iowa that would effect all the employees no matter where they work.</p><p>2)  Politicians who are willing to grant 'favors' in exchange for contributions.  This is where the real problems begin.  Pork barrel spending, pet projects, and downright bribes.  The only way I can foresee this going away is to make all campaign contributions anonymous which at best would be an accounting nightmare.  Either that or outlaw PACs and other groups that pool contributions into a single fund, but there would be nothing to prevent an unofficial system from springing up to replace them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most large corporations rely on Political Action Committees to raise money which is then donated to one of two groups.1 ) Politicians who support that business sector , geographical area , or tax breaks .
I really do n't have a huge problem with that , essentially this is individuals donating money to people who will work to improve conditions for the business they work for .
Though I would prefer to see a system where you can only donate if you can vote in the election , with the current situation of national and multinational interests that may not be possible .
For example , the company I work for has offices all over the US but the main office is in Iowa , if taxes go up in Iowa that would effect all the employees no matter where they work.2 ) Politicians who are willing to grant 'favors ' in exchange for contributions .
This is where the real problems begin .
Pork barrel spending , pet projects , and downright bribes .
The only way I can foresee this going away is to make all campaign contributions anonymous which at best would be an accounting nightmare .
Either that or outlaw PACs and other groups that pool contributions into a single fund , but there would be nothing to prevent an unofficial system from springing up to replace them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most large corporations rely on Political Action Committees to raise money which is then donated to one of two groups.1)  Politicians who support that business sector, geographical area, or tax breaks.
I really don't have a huge problem with that, essentially this is individuals donating money to people who will work to improve conditions for the business they work for.
Though I would prefer to see a system where you can only donate if you can vote in the election, with the current situation of national and multinational interests that may not be possible.
For example, the company I work for has offices all over the US but the main office is in Iowa, if taxes go up in Iowa that would effect all the employees no matter where they work.2)  Politicians who are willing to grant 'favors' in exchange for contributions.
This is where the real problems begin.
Pork barrel spending, pet projects, and downright bribes.
The only way I can foresee this going away is to make all campaign contributions anonymous which at best would be an accounting nightmare.
Either that or outlaw PACs and other groups that pool contributions into a single fund, but there would be nothing to prevent an unofficial system from springing up to replace them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638913</id>
	<title>$18 million for a website</title>
	<author>frovingslosh</author>
	<datestamp>1247163840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, they can certainly say "come and see where you tax money is being wasted", one needs look no farther than the website.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , they can certainly say " come and see where you tax money is being wasted " , one needs look no farther than the website .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, they can certainly say "come and see where you tax money is being wasted", one needs look no farther than the website.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642409</id>
	<title>Wait a minute....</title>
	<author>dwiget001</author>
	<datestamp>1247134680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The U.S. government is spending $18 MILLION DOLLARS to redesign a website for U.S. citizens to track how the TARP, Stimulus, Etc-us money is being spent.</p><p>Oh, that's just swell.</p><p>I wonder if the first item on the list is going to be:</p><p>$18 Million spent on re-designing the web site you are currently viewing. Money well spent, huh? SUCKERS!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The U.S. government is spending $ 18 MILLION DOLLARS to redesign a website for U.S. citizens to track how the TARP , Stimulus , Etc-us money is being spent.Oh , that 's just swell.I wonder if the first item on the list is going to be : $ 18 Million spent on re-designing the web site you are currently viewing .
Money well spent , huh ?
SUCKERS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The U.S. government is spending $18 MILLION DOLLARS to redesign a website for U.S. citizens to track how the TARP, Stimulus, Etc-us money is being spent.Oh, that's just swell.I wonder if the first item on the list is going to be:$18 Million spent on re-designing the web site you are currently viewing.
Money well spent, huh?
SUCKERS!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28652351</id>
	<title>$18million + gov't orgs + contractors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247251740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Geez. Craigslist was built with a few hundred bucks and it catches criminals...
<p>
Imagine, if craigslists was built that way, we would all be using yahoo! classifieds...
</p><p>
FAIL!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Geez .
Craigslist was built with a few hundred bucks and it catches criminals.. . Imagine , if craigslists was built that way , we would all be using yahoo !
classifieds.. . FAIL !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Geez.
Craigslist was built with a few hundred bucks and it catches criminals...

Imagine, if craigslists was built that way, we would all be using yahoo!
classifieds...

FAIL!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638937</id>
	<title>Already exists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247163960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's already a website that clearly illustrates where the tax dollars towards stimulus are going, in innovative and exciting ways!</p><p>I think it's called goatse.cx, or something like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's already a website that clearly illustrates where the tax dollars towards stimulus are going , in innovative and exciting ways ! I think it 's called goatse.cx , or something like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's already a website that clearly illustrates where the tax dollars towards stimulus are going, in innovative and exciting ways!I think it's called goatse.cx, or something like that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640609</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247170140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Corporate personhood: the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person, or some subset of those rights (e.g. due process, free speech, etc.)</i></p><p>Then why don't they have the right to vote? If we can restrict someone's right to vote, why can't we restrict their right to bribe legislators?</p><p><i>Money as free speech: the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speech</i></p><p>Almost as illogical as calling a corporation a "person" or calling a 175 year copyright "limnited time". Spending money is NOT speech.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporate personhood : the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person , or some subset of those rights ( e.g .
due process , free speech , etc .
) Then why do n't they have the right to vote ?
If we can restrict someone 's right to vote , why ca n't we restrict their right to bribe legislators ? Money as free speech : the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speechAlmost as illogical as calling a corporation a " person " or calling a 175 year copyright " limnited time " .
Spending money is NOT speech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporate personhood: the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person, or some subset of those rights (e.g.
due process, free speech, etc.
)Then why don't they have the right to vote?
If we can restrict someone's right to vote, why can't we restrict their right to bribe legislators?Money as free speech: the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speechAlmost as illogical as calling a corporation a "person" or calling a 175 year copyright "limnited time".
Spending money is NOT speech.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639747</id>
	<title>The type contract is important.</title>
	<author>ashenkin</author>
	<datestamp>1247166900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just-as or more important than the stated cost is whether this will be a cost-plus contract, where the contractor can spend willy-nilly and be assured of compensation and profit whilst over-running the budget wildly? Or will they be held, like all other businesses, to deliver the product within the quoted budget?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just-as or more important than the stated cost is whether this will be a cost-plus contract , where the contractor can spend willy-nilly and be assured of compensation and profit whilst over-running the budget wildly ?
Or will they be held , like all other businesses , to deliver the product within the quoted budget ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just-as or more important than the stated cost is whether this will be a cost-plus contract, where the contractor can spend willy-nilly and be assured of compensation and profit whilst over-running the budget wildly?
Or will they be held, like all other businesses, to deliver the product within the quoted budget?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639905</id>
	<title>Re:WTF? We're doomed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247167500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was hoping that your "Jesus, I could probably code their whole damned site in a day" was sarcasm, but you are getting modded as insightful so I am thinking that perhaps you were being serious.  I have met a depressingly low number of developers who don't think that they can do something "in a day" without thinking about how large the actual problem is.  You could write an application that is a) highly accessible, b) useable, c) clean (talking about the data here<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... lots of numbers and whatnot that are coming from various sources), d) secure, e) stable, with the ability to handle a high number of simultaneous connections (including folks who will likely be using automation to mine the datasets) and an uptime in the upper 99th percentile while dealing with the requirements shifting in a largely bureaucratic environment?  In one day?
<br>
<br>
Atwood wrote a blog about this same thing the other day<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... <a href="http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001284.html" title="codinghorror.com">you should check it out</a> [codinghorror.com].  I could be wrong, and you could be a total ninja programmer, but I have a strange feeling that the hyperbole is strong in this one.  Everything is trivial to those who don't have to do the work.
<br>
<br>
All that being said, $9.5 million in six months does seem to be a lot of cash.  I am curious how much of it will be spent on hardware / connectivity / data-cleansing, etc, and how much of it is going to programmers and dba folks, and how much is going to project managers (is everyone in their company's management stack getting billed out as a "consultant" or PM?)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was hoping that your " Jesus , I could probably code their whole damned site in a day " was sarcasm , but you are getting modded as insightful so I am thinking that perhaps you were being serious .
I have met a depressingly low number of developers who do n't think that they can do something " in a day " without thinking about how large the actual problem is .
You could write an application that is a ) highly accessible , b ) useable , c ) clean ( talking about the data here ... lots of numbers and whatnot that are coming from various sources ) , d ) secure , e ) stable , with the ability to handle a high number of simultaneous connections ( including folks who will likely be using automation to mine the datasets ) and an uptime in the upper 99th percentile while dealing with the requirements shifting in a largely bureaucratic environment ?
In one day ?
Atwood wrote a blog about this same thing the other day ... you should check it out [ codinghorror.com ] .
I could be wrong , and you could be a total ninja programmer , but I have a strange feeling that the hyperbole is strong in this one .
Everything is trivial to those who do n't have to do the work .
All that being said , $ 9.5 million in six months does seem to be a lot of cash .
I am curious how much of it will be spent on hardware / connectivity / data-cleansing , etc , and how much of it is going to programmers and dba folks , and how much is going to project managers ( is everyone in their company 's management stack getting billed out as a " consultant " or PM ?
) .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was hoping that your "Jesus, I could probably code their whole damned site in a day" was sarcasm, but you are getting modded as insightful so I am thinking that perhaps you were being serious.
I have met a depressingly low number of developers who don't think that they can do something "in a day" without thinking about how large the actual problem is.
You could write an application that is a) highly accessible, b) useable, c) clean (talking about the data here ... lots of numbers and whatnot that are coming from various sources), d) secure, e) stable, with the ability to handle a high number of simultaneous connections (including folks who will likely be using automation to mine the datasets) and an uptime in the upper 99th percentile while dealing with the requirements shifting in a largely bureaucratic environment?
In one day?
Atwood wrote a blog about this same thing the other day ... you should check it out [codinghorror.com].
I could be wrong, and you could be a total ninja programmer, but I have a strange feeling that the hyperbole is strong in this one.
Everything is trivial to those who don't have to do the work.
All that being said, $9.5 million in six months does seem to be a lot of cash.
I am curious how much of it will be spent on hardware / connectivity / data-cleansing, etc, and how much of it is going to programmers and dba folks, and how much is going to project managers (is everyone in their company's management stack getting billed out as a "consultant" or PM?
) ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28648739</id>
	<title>We're from the government and we're here to help..</title>
	<author>technomom</author>
	<datestamp>1247236500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this isn't a facepalm of a story, I don't know what is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this is n't a facepalm of a story , I do n't know what is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this isn't a facepalm of a story, I don't know what is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640515</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1247169780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>1) Corporate personhood: the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person, or some subset of those rights (e.g. due process, free speech, etc.)</p></div></blockquote><p>That's largely a myth.  Corporations do have legal rights, but by no means is there "personhood" attached to coporations legal status.  Especially in regards to campaign finance --  Corporations are very limited with regards to donations to political campaigns.  Instead, individuals at corporations make the contributions.  While it's similar to the corporation making the donation, this is why listings of contributions include the employer of the person who makes the contribution.  Case in point, the company awarded this contract made -zero- contributions to anyone's campaign.  The president, and other employees of the company, did.  I worded my previous post poorly when I said that the corporation made contributions.</p><blockquote><div><p>2) Money as free speech: the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speech</p></div></blockquote><p>While this point definitely has merit, it has to be balanced against the cost of allowing cash to determine our elections, and the effect the cash has on awarding of contracts, drafting of legislation, etc.  This is a big reason why we have restrictions on campaign finance.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Corporate personhood : the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person , or some subset of those rights ( e.g .
due process , free speech , etc .
) That 's largely a myth .
Corporations do have legal rights , but by no means is there " personhood " attached to coporations legal status .
Especially in regards to campaign finance -- Corporations are very limited with regards to donations to political campaigns .
Instead , individuals at corporations make the contributions .
While it 's similar to the corporation making the donation , this is why listings of contributions include the employer of the person who makes the contribution .
Case in point , the company awarded this contract made -zero- contributions to anyone 's campaign .
The president , and other employees of the company , did .
I worded my previous post poorly when I said that the corporation made contributions.2 ) Money as free speech : the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speechWhile this point definitely has merit , it has to be balanced against the cost of allowing cash to determine our elections , and the effect the cash has on awarding of contracts , drafting of legislation , etc .
This is a big reason why we have restrictions on campaign finance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Corporate personhood: the notion that a corporation is a person entitled to the same rights as a natural person, or some subset of those rights (e.g.
due process, free speech, etc.
)That's largely a myth.
Corporations do have legal rights, but by no means is there "personhood" attached to coporations legal status.
Especially in regards to campaign finance --  Corporations are very limited with regards to donations to political campaigns.
Instead, individuals at corporations make the contributions.
While it's similar to the corporation making the donation, this is why listings of contributions include the employer of the person who makes the contribution.
Case in point, the company awarded this contract made -zero- contributions to anyone's campaign.
The president, and other employees of the company, did.
I worded my previous post poorly when I said that the corporation made contributions.2) Money as free speech: the notion that campaign donations are a form of constitutionally protected speechWhile this point definitely has merit, it has to be balanced against the cost of allowing cash to determine our elections, and the effect the cash has on awarding of contracts, drafting of legislation, etc.
This is a big reason why we have restrictions on campaign finance.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642407</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Sean0michael</author>
	<datestamp>1247134680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Only persons who can vote should be allowed to donate to campaigns.  Can corporations vote?  Nope - so no donations from them.</p></div><p>Then we ought not to tax corporations either. No taxation without representation!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only persons who can vote should be allowed to donate to campaigns .
Can corporations vote ?
Nope - so no donations from them.Then we ought not to tax corporations either .
No taxation without representation !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only persons who can vote should be allowed to donate to campaigns.
Can corporations vote?
Nope - so no donations from them.Then we ought not to tax corporations either.
No taxation without representation!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640095</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247168220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah totally.  Last time I did a site redesign it was for a friend and I made only about $5000 for 3 weeks of work.  It was an online sales system I slapped together with some JSP and a couple of Servlets, so it wasn't just basic HTML.  If I had realized I could charge her $18,000,000 for it, I would have cut her a friendly break and only charger $10,000,000 for it.  Man was I cheated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah totally .
Last time I did a site redesign it was for a friend and I made only about $ 5000 for 3 weeks of work .
It was an online sales system I slapped together with some JSP and a couple of Servlets , so it was n't just basic HTML .
If I had realized I could charge her $ 18,000,000 for it , I would have cut her a friendly break and only charger $ 10,000,000 for it .
Man was I cheated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah totally.
Last time I did a site redesign it was for a friend and I made only about $5000 for 3 weeks of work.
It was an online sales system I slapped together with some JSP and a couple of Servlets, so it wasn't just basic HTML.
If I had realized I could charge her $18,000,000 for it, I would have cut her a friendly break and only charger $10,000,000 for it.
Man was I cheated.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639361</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247165460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$75k is a little low.</p><p>Let's go for $750k.  Multiply by 10.  Divide number of people by 10, 25.  You could hire 25 developers at $750k each for 6 months.</p><p>Ridiculous...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 75k is a little low.Let 's go for $ 750k .
Multiply by 10 .
Divide number of people by 10 , 25 .
You could hire 25 developers at $ 750k each for 6 months.Ridiculous.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$75k is a little low.Let's go for $750k.
Multiply by 10.
Divide number of people by 10, 25.
You could hire 25 developers at $750k each for 6 months.Ridiculous...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640011</id>
	<title>Advertising</title>
	<author>mr.bri</author>
	<datestamp>1247167920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would not be surprised to find that a sizable chunk of the money goes to buying TV spots to remind people the website is there.  Marketing marketing marketing!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would not be surprised to find that a sizable chunk of the money goes to buying TV spots to remind people the website is there .
Marketing marketing marketing !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would not be surprised to find that a sizable chunk of the money goes to buying TV spots to remind people the website is there.
Marketing marketing marketing!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639421</id>
	<title>Re:The Definition of "Design"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247165760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>EXACTLY, I posted a similar message, 18 million doesn't go to the developers like people are saying. 18 million goes towards, infrastructure - servers, licensing, databases, employees. Licensing alone can hit well into the millions, easily. An internal IBM license can cost a business over 10 million without thinking twice.</p><p>People that aren't web developers probably have no idea what it takes to build a site.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>EXACTLY , I posted a similar message , 18 million does n't go to the developers like people are saying .
18 million goes towards , infrastructure - servers , licensing , databases , employees .
Licensing alone can hit well into the millions , easily .
An internal IBM license can cost a business over 10 million without thinking twice.People that are n't web developers probably have no idea what it takes to build a site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>EXACTLY, I posted a similar message, 18 million doesn't go to the developers like people are saying.
18 million goes towards, infrastructure - servers, licensing, databases, employees.
Licensing alone can hit well into the millions, easily.
An internal IBM license can cost a business over 10 million without thinking twice.People that aren't web developers probably have no idea what it takes to build a site.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28645577</id>
	<title>Re:Read the RFP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247153700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep from reading the details I don't think that there's a snowball's chance in hell of getting this done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep from reading the details I do n't think that there 's a snowball 's chance in hell of getting this done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep from reading the details I don't think that there's a snowball's chance in hell of getting this done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639939</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247167620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is why here in the States we have traditionally referred to corporations in the singular not the plural:  "Apple is" versus "Apple are".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is why here in the States we have traditionally referred to corporations in the singular not the plural : " Apple is " versus " Apple are " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is why here in the States we have traditionally referred to corporations in the singular not the plural:  "Apple is" versus "Apple are".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247165880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Proves what I have said for years: Party doesn't matter, they are all crooks and only worthy of our contempt!<br><br>You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $18 million price tag!<br><br>Every member of Congress who voted for Spendulous without reading it should be recalled or impeached!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Proves what I have said for years : Party does n't matter , they are all crooks and only worthy of our contempt ! You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $ 18 million price tag ! Every member of Congress who voted for Spendulous without reading it should be recalled or impeached !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Proves what I have said for years: Party doesn't matter, they are all crooks and only worthy of our contempt!You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $18 million price tag!Every member of Congress who voted for Spendulous without reading it should be recalled or impeached!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640923</id>
	<title>The effect</title>
	<author>anonymousNR</author>
	<datestamp>1247171400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>..of using proprietary products is that you can convince anybody that it will take that much cost to build a software product.</htmltext>
<tokenext>..of using proprietary products is that you can convince anybody that it will take that much cost to build a software product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..of using proprietary products is that you can convince anybody that it will take that much cost to build a software product.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640705</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1247170500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>For example, the company I work for has offices all over the US but the main office is in Iowa, if taxes go up in Iowa that would effect all the employees no matter where they work.</i></p><p>You don't HAVE to work for that company, you know. Your corporation should have no say in your government, and its CEO should have no more say in government than you do.</p><p>Living in Illinois I can't vote Fred Thompson out of office, why should your Iowa corporation be able to?</p><p><i>The only way I can foresee this going away is to make all campaign contributions anonymous</i></p><p>How about outlawing campaign contributions altogether ahnd have all elections pubically funded? Or at least, make it illegal to contribute to more than one candidate in any given race?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For example , the company I work for has offices all over the US but the main office is in Iowa , if taxes go up in Iowa that would effect all the employees no matter where they work.You do n't HAVE to work for that company , you know .
Your corporation should have no say in your government , and its CEO should have no more say in government than you do.Living in Illinois I ca n't vote Fred Thompson out of office , why should your Iowa corporation be able to ? The only way I can foresee this going away is to make all campaign contributions anonymousHow about outlawing campaign contributions altogether ahnd have all elections pubically funded ?
Or at least , make it illegal to contribute to more than one candidate in any given race ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For example, the company I work for has offices all over the US but the main office is in Iowa, if taxes go up in Iowa that would effect all the employees no matter where they work.You don't HAVE to work for that company, you know.
Your corporation should have no say in your government, and its CEO should have no more say in government than you do.Living in Illinois I can't vote Fred Thompson out of office, why should your Iowa corporation be able to?The only way I can foresee this going away is to make all campaign contributions anonymousHow about outlawing campaign contributions altogether ahnd have all elections pubically funded?
Or at least, make it illegal to contribute to more than one candidate in any given race?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28648457</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>cml4524</author>
	<datestamp>1247234760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>That's largely a myth. Corporations do have legal rights, but by no means is there "personhood" attached to coporations legal status.</p></div></blockquote><p>Absolutely and unequivocally false:</p><blockquote><div><p> <a href="http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1/1.html" title="cornell.edu">the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals; </a> [cornell.edu]</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's largely a myth .
Corporations do have legal rights , but by no means is there " personhood " attached to coporations legal status.Absolutely and unequivocally false : the words " person " and " whoever " include corporations , companies , associations , firms , partnerships , societies , and joint stock companies , as well as individuals ; [ cornell.edu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's largely a myth.
Corporations do have legal rights, but by no means is there "personhood" attached to coporations legal status.Absolutely and unequivocally false: the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;  [cornell.edu]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639063</id>
	<title>A better funding scheme</title>
	<author>Palestrina</author>
	<datestamp>1247164320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Give them $1 now and then 1\% of any savings the taxpayers receive from identifying wasteful spending using this new innovative and interactive web site.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Give them $ 1 now and then 1 \ % of any savings the taxpayers receive from identifying wasteful spending using this new innovative and interactive web site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Give them $1 now and then 1\% of any savings the taxpayers receive from identifying wasteful spending using this new innovative and interactive web site.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639613</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>jmorris42</author>
	<datestamp>1247166420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; This is not a partisan issue, I hope you weren't trying to make it into one.</p><p>Agreed.  It is a general problem.</p><p>&gt; This is just another example of a fundamental flaw in how campaign finance works in the US,</p><p>Here is where we part company.  It has exactly zero with campaign finance.  You are upset about a symptom of the problem.  The problem is the size and scope of government.  A Congresscritter makes a lot more than an average slob but compare the 535 members of the legislative branch with the 500 leaders of the 'corporate branch' (CEOs of the Fortune 500) of our society and ponder.  But at those levels it is about POWER as much as MONEY.  Which group has more power?  Now you begin to understand why a seat that pays so little is worth spending several million every two years to keep.  And why the corporations will invest so much into politicians.</p><p>When the corporations very survival depends on the whims of political class it would be stupid not to invest as much time and energy into controlling that factor as they spend on any other aspect of success with so much potential to affect the bottom line.  Take the example everyone here loves to hate, MSFT.  Until the government took such an intense interest in their operations their Washington DC office was vestigial, now it is a major presence.  Just like every other major corporation, they either want to deflect the government's gaze or get their snout into the public treasury.</p><p>And it will be ever thus until we put the government back into it's proper place.  Make the government small enough that a House seat isn't worth millions and the money will go away.  Nothing else will work, no law will stop clever people who have so much at stake.  At least no law that leaves the 1st Amendment intact and do we really want to go there?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; This is not a partisan issue , I hope you were n't trying to make it into one.Agreed .
It is a general problem. &gt; This is just another example of a fundamental flaw in how campaign finance works in the US,Here is where we part company .
It has exactly zero with campaign finance .
You are upset about a symptom of the problem .
The problem is the size and scope of government .
A Congresscritter makes a lot more than an average slob but compare the 535 members of the legislative branch with the 500 leaders of the 'corporate branch ' ( CEOs of the Fortune 500 ) of our society and ponder .
But at those levels it is about POWER as much as MONEY .
Which group has more power ?
Now you begin to understand why a seat that pays so little is worth spending several million every two years to keep .
And why the corporations will invest so much into politicians.When the corporations very survival depends on the whims of political class it would be stupid not to invest as much time and energy into controlling that factor as they spend on any other aspect of success with so much potential to affect the bottom line .
Take the example everyone here loves to hate , MSFT .
Until the government took such an intense interest in their operations their Washington DC office was vestigial , now it is a major presence .
Just like every other major corporation , they either want to deflect the government 's gaze or get their snout into the public treasury.And it will be ever thus until we put the government back into it 's proper place .
Make the government small enough that a House seat is n't worth millions and the money will go away .
Nothing else will work , no law will stop clever people who have so much at stake .
At least no law that leaves the 1st Amendment intact and do we really want to go there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; This is not a partisan issue, I hope you weren't trying to make it into one.Agreed.
It is a general problem.&gt; This is just another example of a fundamental flaw in how campaign finance works in the US,Here is where we part company.
It has exactly zero with campaign finance.
You are upset about a symptom of the problem.
The problem is the size and scope of government.
A Congresscritter makes a lot more than an average slob but compare the 535 members of the legislative branch with the 500 leaders of the 'corporate branch' (CEOs of the Fortune 500) of our society and ponder.
But at those levels it is about POWER as much as MONEY.
Which group has more power?
Now you begin to understand why a seat that pays so little is worth spending several million every two years to keep.
And why the corporations will invest so much into politicians.When the corporations very survival depends on the whims of political class it would be stupid not to invest as much time and energy into controlling that factor as they spend on any other aspect of success with so much potential to affect the bottom line.
Take the example everyone here loves to hate, MSFT.
Until the government took such an intense interest in their operations their Washington DC office was vestigial, now it is a major presence.
Just like every other major corporation, they either want to deflect the government's gaze or get their snout into the public treasury.And it will be ever thus until we put the government back into it's proper place.
Make the government small enough that a House seat isn't worth millions and the money will go away.
Nothing else will work, no law will stop clever people who have so much at stake.
At least no law that leaves the 1st Amendment intact and do we really want to go there?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28643199</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>microbee</author>
	<datestamp>1247137860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $18 million price tag!</p></div><p>Whoa, slow down. Could you get Google to sell its website to me for that price, please?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $ 18 million price tag ! Whoa , slow down .
Could you get Google to sell its website to me for that price , please ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can not come up with a website complicated enough to justify an $18 million price tag!Whoa, slow down.
Could you get Google to sell its website to me for that price, please?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28645425</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247152200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That means everyone who voted for the bill. It was so big and so long that no one even had time to actually read it before they voted on it. The same thing happened with the cap and trade bill in the House. There might have been some aides who read most or even all of it but probably only after it was passed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That means everyone who voted for the bill .
It was so big and so long that no one even had time to actually read it before they voted on it .
The same thing happened with the cap and trade bill in the House .
There might have been some aides who read most or even all of it but probably only after it was passed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That means everyone who voted for the bill.
It was so big and so long that no one even had time to actually read it before they voted on it.
The same thing happened with the cap and trade bill in the House.
There might have been some aides who read most or even all of it but probably only after it was passed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799</id>
	<title>cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247163420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$18 mil for a website and in a total coincidence the contract goes to a company run by people who have given tens of thousands of dollars to house majority leader Steny Hoyer (D)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 18 mil for a website and in a total coincidence the contract goes to a company run by people who have given tens of thousands of dollars to house majority leader Steny Hoyer ( D )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$18 mil for a website and in a total coincidence the contract goes to a company run by people who have given tens of thousands of dollars to house majority leader Steny Hoyer (D)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639087</id>
	<title>Death and Taxes Poster</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247164440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For that kind of money they could put a copy of the ``Death and Taxes'' poster:</p><p><a href="http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/" title="wallstats.com">http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/</a> [wallstats.com]</p><p>in almost every schoolroom and courtroom and courthouse in the country.</p><p>William</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For that kind of money they could put a copy of the ` ` Death and Taxes' ' poster : http : //www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/ [ wallstats.com ] in almost every schoolroom and courtroom and courthouse in the country.William</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For that kind of money they could put a copy of the ``Death and Taxes'' poster:http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/ [wallstats.com]in almost every schoolroom and courtroom and courthouse in the country.William</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639109</id>
	<title>Counterexample</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1247164560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>They've better not "improve" it like they are doing it to slashdot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 've better not " improve " it like they are doing it to slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They've better not "improve" it like they are doing it to slashdot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639333</id>
	<title>I can hardly wait</title>
	<author>jimmydevice</author>
	<datestamp>1247165400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to see how their "innovative and interactive technologies" plays on dialup.</p><p>Still waiting for *ANY* high speed services that isn't satellite in my rural area.<br>Didn't *WE* (USGOV) pay the telecoms to provide this to rural areas?<br>Oh Right, If anyone in the county can get broadband, you have it in the eyes of the telecoms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to see how their " innovative and interactive technologies " plays on dialup.Still waiting for * ANY * high speed services that is n't satellite in my rural area.Did n't * WE * ( USGOV ) pay the telecoms to provide this to rural areas ? Oh Right , If anyone in the county can get broadband , you have it in the eyes of the telecoms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to see how their "innovative and interactive technologies" plays on dialup.Still waiting for *ANY* high speed services that isn't satellite in my rural area.Didn't *WE* (USGOV) pay the telecoms to provide this to rural areas?Oh Right, If anyone in the county can get broadband, you have it in the eyes of the telecoms.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639863</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>deadkennedy</author>
	<datestamp>1247167380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Our design team is a fraction of that size and can easily handle a project of half that size, including all the back-end logic.  If our team were twice the size, we could realistically take on a project like this for half alloted grant amount.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our design team is a fraction of that size and can easily handle a project of half that size , including all the back-end logic .
If our team were twice the size , we could realistically take on a project like this for half alloted grant amount .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our design team is a fraction of that size and can easily handle a project of half that size, including all the back-end logic.
If our team were twice the size, we could realistically take on a project like this for half alloted grant amount.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28655673</id>
	<title>Re:The Definition of "Design"</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1247225580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it's a overhaul, remember the:<ul>
<li>IRS overhaul?</li><li>USPS overhaul?</li><li>NSA (on going!!!) overhaul?</li><li>Census overhaul?</li></ul><p>
Now look at the importance of those agencies and this. This is just recovery.gov. This is not the GAO (which it <b>should be</b>). I doubt this 18M will be well spent and yes, more will be 'needed'. If this effort is really a EAI, DataMining, or modernization exercise, it's not going to be cheap and 18M is chump change.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it 's a overhaul , remember the : IRS overhaul ? USPS overhaul ? NSA ( on going ! ! !
) overhaul ? Census overhaul ?
Now look at the importance of those agencies and this .
This is just recovery.gov .
This is not the GAO ( which it should be ) .
I doubt this 18M will be well spent and yes , more will be 'needed' .
If this effort is really a EAI , DataMining , or modernization exercise , it 's not going to be cheap and 18M is chump change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it's a overhaul, remember the:
IRS overhaul?USPS overhaul?NSA (on going!!!
) overhaul?Census overhaul?
Now look at the importance of those agencies and this.
This is just recovery.gov.
This is not the GAO (which it should be).
I doubt this 18M will be well spent and yes, more will be 'needed'.
If this effort is really a EAI, DataMining, or modernization exercise, it's not going to be cheap and 18M is chump change.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641561</id>
	<title>Inflation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247130780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>18 million dollars for a website. Looks like Zimbwaean economics finally hit the US</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>18 million dollars for a website .
Looks like Zimbwaean economics finally hit the US</tokentext>
<sentencetext>18 million dollars for a website.
Looks like Zimbwaean economics finally hit the US</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28653981</id>
	<title>18 Million?? Wish I was that company</title>
	<author>pyrothebouncer</author>
	<datestamp>1247258520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a lot of things I could do with  18 mil. I surely hope that this company was chosen because they reviewed several bids from several companies and found that this company was able to offer what they wanted for the least amount of cost compared to the other companies that put in a bid. Not because they contribute to the Majority Party.

I hope, but am afraid as most politics go that this is not the case.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a lot of things I could do with 18 mil .
I surely hope that this company was chosen because they reviewed several bids from several companies and found that this company was able to offer what they wanted for the least amount of cost compared to the other companies that put in a bid .
Not because they contribute to the Majority Party .
I hope , but am afraid as most politics go that this is not the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a lot of things I could do with  18 mil.
I surely hope that this company was chosen because they reviewed several bids from several companies and found that this company was able to offer what they wanted for the least amount of cost compared to the other companies that put in a bid.
Not because they contribute to the Majority Party.
I hope, but am afraid as most politics go that this is not the case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640003</id>
	<title>"use innovative and interactive technologies"</title>
	<author>a2wflc</author>
	<datestamp>1247167920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they want "innovative and interactive technologies" they should make publicly available web services with the data, and let anyone make sites using "innovative and interactive technologies".  Whatever UI technologies they use will not appeal to some people and will be outdated soon (and require another $18mil).  Letting any of us make any site we want will really provide "innovative and interactive technologies".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they want " innovative and interactive technologies " they should make publicly available web services with the data , and let anyone make sites using " innovative and interactive technologies " .
Whatever UI technologies they use will not appeal to some people and will be outdated soon ( and require another $ 18mil ) .
Letting any of us make any site we want will really provide " innovative and interactive technologies " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they want "innovative and interactive technologies" they should make publicly available web services with the data, and let anyone make sites using "innovative and interactive technologies".
Whatever UI technologies they use will not appeal to some people and will be outdated soon (and require another $18mil).
Letting any of us make any site we want will really provide "innovative and interactive technologies".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28650181</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>dunkelfalke</author>
	<datestamp>1247242200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bullshit. non-citizens cannot vote and still can get taxed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bullshit .
non-citizens can not vote and still can get taxed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bullshit.
non-citizens cannot vote and still can get taxed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642407</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639285</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>fishbowl</author>
	<datestamp>1247165220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you only trust corporations that are politically indifferent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you only trust corporations that are politically indifferent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you only trust corporations that are politically indifferent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641269</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>gizmo\_mathboy</author>
	<datestamp>1247172720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While corporations have personhood, I think it was the pesky 14th Amendment that brought this about, that does not mean they should have the right to vote. Yes, they have free speech rights but not necessarily participation in the electoral process.</p><p>I would go further and say that no organization should be able to contribute to a campaign, only individuals. So the DNC, nor the RNC nor any other body of people can give money. Sure it sucks for your favorite interest group but the power of groups is rotting our system.</p><p>Now, money as free speech has bothered me ever since the Supreme Court ruled it as such. Can one person be allowed to have more free speech than another? Does Bill Gates have a right to more free speech than a school teacher?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While corporations have personhood , I think it was the pesky 14th Amendment that brought this about , that does not mean they should have the right to vote .
Yes , they have free speech rights but not necessarily participation in the electoral process.I would go further and say that no organization should be able to contribute to a campaign , only individuals .
So the DNC , nor the RNC nor any other body of people can give money .
Sure it sucks for your favorite interest group but the power of groups is rotting our system.Now , money as free speech has bothered me ever since the Supreme Court ruled it as such .
Can one person be allowed to have more free speech than another ?
Does Bill Gates have a right to more free speech than a school teacher ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While corporations have personhood, I think it was the pesky 14th Amendment that brought this about, that does not mean they should have the right to vote.
Yes, they have free speech rights but not necessarily participation in the electoral process.I would go further and say that no organization should be able to contribute to a campaign, only individuals.
So the DNC, nor the RNC nor any other body of people can give money.
Sure it sucks for your favorite interest group but the power of groups is rotting our system.Now, money as free speech has bothered me ever since the Supreme Court ruled it as such.
Can one person be allowed to have more free speech than another?
Does Bill Gates have a right to more free speech than a school teacher?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639675</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1247166660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"This is not a partisan issue,"</p><p>Politicians in general manage to turn it into a partisan issue.  The minority party is always trying to "clean things up", but the majority party blocks the effort.  But, you're right, it isn't truly partisan.  Both sides know the steps to this silly dance, and they keep time remarkably well.  It's the putzes who continue to vote for career politicians who don't "get it".  They actually believe the partisan noise contained in the soundbites from Fox, NBC, and all the rest.  Total morons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" This is not a partisan issue , " Politicians in general manage to turn it into a partisan issue .
The minority party is always trying to " clean things up " , but the majority party blocks the effort .
But , you 're right , it is n't truly partisan .
Both sides know the steps to this silly dance , and they keep time remarkably well .
It 's the putzes who continue to vote for career politicians who do n't " get it " .
They actually believe the partisan noise contained in the soundbites from Fox , NBC , and all the rest .
Total morons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This is not a partisan issue,"Politicians in general manage to turn it into a partisan issue.
The minority party is always trying to "clean things up", but the majority party blocks the effort.
But, you're right, it isn't truly partisan.
Both sides know the steps to this silly dance, and they keep time remarkably well.
It's the putzes who continue to vote for career politicians who don't "get it".
They actually believe the partisan noise contained in the soundbites from Fox, NBC, and all the rest.
Total morons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640891</id>
	<title>I can do it</title>
	<author>jDeepbeep</author>
	<datestamp>1247171340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can do it, at a paltry 14 million.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can do it , at a paltry 14 million .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can do it, at a paltry 14 million.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640285</id>
	<title>Well...</title>
	<author>marco.antonio.costa</author>
	<datestamp>1247168940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're boosting aggregate demand!

Government must make up for the money the people aren't spending to speed US to recovery.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're boosting aggregate demand !
Government must make up for the money the people are n't spending to speed US to recovery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're boosting aggregate demand!
Government must make up for the money the people aren't spending to speed US to recovery.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641727</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247131560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is this considered insightful? Seems it's a pretty clear example of trolling to me.</p><p>I do agree, though, that $18 million for a website is absurd. However, if there are upkeep, hardware, and software costs that require constant attention, then $18 million is probably not all that much. If they want to make it interactive, I would assume that the site is going to be individually responsive, which would require some hefty database infrastructure to handle hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people wanting to use it.</p><p>Then again, it might be a total flop and no one will ever care and we've wasted another $18 million on failure. Such is our legacy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is this considered insightful ?
Seems it 's a pretty clear example of trolling to me.I do agree , though , that $ 18 million for a website is absurd .
However , if there are upkeep , hardware , and software costs that require constant attention , then $ 18 million is probably not all that much .
If they want to make it interactive , I would assume that the site is going to be individually responsive , which would require some hefty database infrastructure to handle hundreds of thousands , if not millions of people wanting to use it.Then again , it might be a total flop and no one will ever care and we 've wasted another $ 18 million on failure .
Such is our legacy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is this considered insightful?
Seems it's a pretty clear example of trolling to me.I do agree, though, that $18 million for a website is absurd.
However, if there are upkeep, hardware, and software costs that require constant attention, then $18 million is probably not all that much.
If they want to make it interactive, I would assume that the site is going to be individually responsive, which would require some hefty database infrastructure to handle hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people wanting to use it.Then again, it might be a total flop and no one will ever care and we've wasted another $18 million on failure.
Such is our legacy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28654035</id>
	<title>Re:.. and they want a 2nd stimulus?</title>
	<author>pyrothebouncer</author>
	<datestamp>1247258820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"I figured anyone could be more fiscally responsible than Bush and Hannity and Rush's fanatic complaints about him being a big spending liberal would be way off. I was proven wrong. Instead I have another idea if you want to help the economy. Cut government spending. After we have lower interest rates from less panicy government bond holders we will have a revenue increase and once books are balanced the need to hire again will return. If no one wants something a big check wont help the economy. The market needs to fix it and the government needs to help the market rather than prohibit it by making them pay for socialistic recovery schemes."

Does this mean that you have adopted the RIght's conservative ideas of less government, less government spending, fewer "elites" who know what is right for you and will govern you accoringly by spending all YOUR MONEY and telling you they are just "SPREADING THE WEALTH"?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I figured anyone could be more fiscally responsible than Bush and Hannity and Rush 's fanatic complaints about him being a big spending liberal would be way off .
I was proven wrong .
Instead I have another idea if you want to help the economy .
Cut government spending .
After we have lower interest rates from less panicy government bond holders we will have a revenue increase and once books are balanced the need to hire again will return .
If no one wants something a big check wont help the economy .
The market needs to fix it and the government needs to help the market rather than prohibit it by making them pay for socialistic recovery schemes .
" Does this mean that you have adopted the RIght 's conservative ideas of less government , less government spending , fewer " elites " who know what is right for you and will govern you accoringly by spending all YOUR MONEY and telling you they are just " SPREADING THE WEALTH " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I figured anyone could be more fiscally responsible than Bush and Hannity and Rush's fanatic complaints about him being a big spending liberal would be way off.
I was proven wrong.
Instead I have another idea if you want to help the economy.
Cut government spending.
After we have lower interest rates from less panicy government bond holders we will have a revenue increase and once books are balanced the need to hire again will return.
If no one wants something a big check wont help the economy.
The market needs to fix it and the government needs to help the market rather than prohibit it by making them pay for socialistic recovery schemes.
"

Does this mean that you have adopted the RIght's conservative ideas of less government, less government spending, fewer "elites" who know what is right for you and will govern you accoringly by spending all YOUR MONEY and telling you they are just "SPREADING THE WEALTH"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639455</id>
	<title>smartronix is obviously the right choice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247165880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>for the implementation of innovative technologies and up to date standards on the web, what with their <a href="http://smartronix.com/" title="smartronix.com" rel="nofollow">own homepage's</a> [smartronix.com] use of a table-based design, inline javascript, and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET with an <a href="http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&amp;uri=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fsmartronix.com\%2F" title="w3.org" rel="nofollow">utter lack of validation</a> [w3.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>for the implementation of innovative technologies and up to date standards on the web , what with their own homepage 's [ smartronix.com ] use of a table-based design , inline javascript , and .NET with an utter lack of validation [ w3.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for the implementation of innovative technologies and up to date standards on the web, what with their own homepage's [smartronix.com] use of a table-based design, inline javascript, and .NET with an utter lack of validation [w3.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640819</id>
	<title>Re:The Definition of "Design"</title>
	<author>value\_added</author>
	<datestamp>1247170920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They're not spending $18M to redesign the website (presumably), but presumably on a total overhaul of the thing.</i></p><p>It's probably even more complicated than that.</p><p>To use a car analogy, you can hire unemployed Mexican labourers in California to pave a mile of road for a few thousand dollars.  But if you want a freeway, expect the cost to be tens of millions for each and every mile.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're not spending $ 18M to redesign the website ( presumably ) , but presumably on a total overhaul of the thing.It 's probably even more complicated than that.To use a car analogy , you can hire unemployed Mexican labourers in California to pave a mile of road for a few thousand dollars .
But if you want a freeway , expect the cost to be tens of millions for each and every mile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're not spending $18M to redesign the website (presumably), but presumably on a total overhaul of the thing.It's probably even more complicated than that.To use a car analogy, you can hire unemployed Mexican labourers in California to pave a mile of road for a few thousand dollars.
But if you want a freeway, expect the cost to be tens of millions for each and every mile.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640457</id>
	<title>I am in the wrong business</title>
	<author>Efialtis</author>
	<datestamp>1247169480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it really takes that much money to redesign a web site, I'LL TAKE IT!
I have a small group of people who could have this done in phases throughout a year, for a heck of a lot less (we do it all the time) so this would be an incredible UPGRADE!</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it really takes that much money to redesign a web site , I 'LL TAKE IT !
I have a small group of people who could have this done in phases throughout a year , for a heck of a lot less ( we do it all the time ) so this would be an incredible UPGRADE !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it really takes that much money to redesign a web site, I'LL TAKE IT!
I have a small group of people who could have this done in phases throughout a year, for a heck of a lot less (we do it all the time) so this would be an incredible UPGRADE!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28744709</id>
	<title>RE: Obama and the assination of US representatives</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247926620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Dir. of CIA cancelled a top securet program.</p><p>The media are reporting that the program was an assination prorgram aimed at Al Quada.</p><p>The Assination Program was aimed at US Congressman, Governers, Mayors and Civic Leaders, not sympithetic to the Chief Executive of the United States of America.</p><p>Mr. Barak Hussien Obama was briefed on the program in late-January 2009.</p><p>Mr Leon Penate was briefed in late-June 2009, and at-once orderd the program halted.</p><p>He then informed representatives of Congress of the program.</p><p>Why did Mr. Obama choose to remain silent of the program to assinate US Congressmen, Governers, Mayors and Civic Leaders?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Dir .
of CIA cancelled a top securet program.The media are reporting that the program was an assination prorgram aimed at Al Quada.The Assination Program was aimed at US Congressman , Governers , Mayors and Civic Leaders , not sympithetic to the Chief Executive of the United States of America.Mr .
Barak Hussien Obama was briefed on the program in late-January 2009.Mr Leon Penate was briefed in late-June 2009 , and at-once orderd the program halted.He then informed representatives of Congress of the program.Why did Mr. Obama choose to remain silent of the program to assinate US Congressmen , Governers , Mayors and Civic Leaders ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Dir.
of CIA cancelled a top securet program.The media are reporting that the program was an assination prorgram aimed at Al Quada.The Assination Program was aimed at US Congressman, Governers, Mayors and Civic Leaders, not sympithetic to the Chief Executive of the United States of America.Mr.
Barak Hussien Obama was briefed on the program in late-January 2009.Mr Leon Penate was briefed in late-June 2009, and at-once orderd the program halted.He then informed representatives of Congress of the program.Why did Mr. Obama choose to remain silent of the program to assinate US Congressmen, Governers, Mayors and Civic Leaders?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638889</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247163720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder if I could subcontract to them for about 1/3 of that? Leave 2/3 to them for 'overhead'??</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if I could subcontract to them for about 1/3 of that ?
Leave 2/3 to them for 'overhead ' ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if I could subcontract to them for about 1/3 of that?
Leave 2/3 to them for 'overhead'?
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640805</id>
	<title>Re:cash4cronies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247170860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The idea of anonymous contributions is ridiculous. The benefactor and contributor will always be able to identify the contribution by the amount, date/time etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The idea of anonymous contributions is ridiculous .
The benefactor and contributor will always be able to identify the contribution by the amount , date/time etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The idea of anonymous contributions is ridiculous.
The benefactor and contributor will always be able to identify the contribution by the amount, date/time etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644335</id>
	<title>This is insightful?</title>
	<author>snowwrestler</author>
	<datestamp>1247143380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you one of those guys who looks at the Google homepage and say "pffff, I could that easy"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you one of those guys who looks at the Google homepage and say " pffff , I could that easy " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you one of those guys who looks at the Google homepage and say "pffff, I could that easy"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639797</id>
	<title>Re:The Definition of "Design"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247167140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Figure $1mil a year in operating costs alone (bandwidth+maintenance), add another $1mil for startup equipment and costs, that still leaves... about $10 million dollars to build the system (which is probably that $9.5 million permitted for the next 6 months).<br> <br>
So yea, even taking all aspects of building and maintainin a site into account, it still seems way too expensive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Figure $ 1mil a year in operating costs alone ( bandwidth + maintenance ) , add another $ 1mil for startup equipment and costs , that still leaves... about $ 10 million dollars to build the system ( which is probably that $ 9.5 million permitted for the next 6 months ) .
So yea , even taking all aspects of building and maintainin a site into account , it still seems way too expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Figure $1mil a year in operating costs alone (bandwidth+maintenance), add another $1mil for startup equipment and costs, that still leaves... about $10 million dollars to build the system (which is probably that $9.5 million permitted for the next 6 months).
So yea, even taking all aspects of building and maintainin a site into account, it still seems way too expensive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28646475
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640367
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28654035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639805
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639421
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641771
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642155
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28645577
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640675
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640819
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639927
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639939
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639675
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639345
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28646337
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28645425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640157
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641269
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28654883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639863
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640805
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640097
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640095
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28648457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28645515
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639895
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639285
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639797
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640489
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644113
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639477
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28655673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644335
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641663
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640017
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639361
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640705
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642447
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639475
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28664723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639905
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642077
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640237
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642407
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28650181
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28643199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28658611
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641693
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641893
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639273
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_09_1711238_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639649
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639345
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28646337
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639643
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638931
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639455
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640003
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638889
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640095
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638917
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639195
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639805
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639487
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640805
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640705
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639477
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639895
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640017
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639453
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644113
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640273
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644419
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642407
------http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28650181
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641771
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641269
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639939
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640489
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640515
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28648457
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28654883
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642447
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640609
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639459
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642077
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28643199
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641727
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640633
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641893
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641847
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28645425
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28645515
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641663
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639285
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639613
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644161
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639675
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638913
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641643
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639273
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641215
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639063
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639087
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28658611
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638941
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28645577
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642943
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640157
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641431
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638937
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28644335
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642155
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639905
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28664723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640979
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642409
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639581
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28655561
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638925
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639421
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28655673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640819
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640675
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639475
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639359
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638953
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28638899
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639867
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639649
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639361
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640097
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640367
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639409
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28640237
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639161
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28641693
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28639927
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28646475
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28642299
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28654035
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_09_1711238.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_09_1711238.28647995
</commentlist>
</conversation>
