<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_15_1820247</id>
	<title>12\% of E-mail Users Have Responded To Spam</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1247686200000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Meshach writes <i>"An article in Ars Technica claims that 12\% of internet users have <a href="http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2009/07/12-of-e-mail-users-try-to-buy-stuff-from-spam-e-mail.ars">actually responded to spam messages and tried to buy items</a>.  Although I find this hard to believe, it does explain why my spam folder is always full."</i> Also in spam news, wjousts links to a Technology Review article about <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/communications/23003/page1/">how spammers get your e-mail address</a>, writing "E-mail addresses in comments posted to a website had a high probability of getting spammed, while of the 70 e-mail addresses submitted during registration at various websites, only 4 got spammed."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Meshach writes " An article in Ars Technica claims that 12 \ % of internet users have actually responded to spam messages and tried to buy items .
Although I find this hard to believe , it does explain why my spam folder is always full .
" Also in spam news , wjousts links to a Technology Review article about how spammers get your e-mail address , writing " E-mail addresses in comments posted to a website had a high probability of getting spammed , while of the 70 e-mail addresses submitted during registration at various websites , only 4 got spammed .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meshach writes "An article in Ars Technica claims that 12\% of internet users have actually responded to spam messages and tried to buy items.
Although I find this hard to believe, it does explain why my spam folder is always full.
" Also in spam news, wjousts links to a Technology Review article about how spammers get your e-mail address, writing "E-mail addresses in comments posted to a website had a high probability of getting spammed, while of the 70 e-mail addresses submitted during registration at various websites, only 4 got spammed.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711071</id>
	<title>Re:They got my email</title>
	<author>CapnStank</author>
	<datestamp>1247667060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's why my @hotmail.com address is used for signing up to any forum/membership etc. that I never wish to see again. Those damn things where you need to sign up before viewing content or w/e. I set the account to only deliver messages from people on my contact list to my inbox. That way I get 300 spam messages a day and 0 in my inbox (unless hotmail spams me). If one of my friends email that address I direct them to my correct address.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why my @ hotmail.com address is used for signing up to any forum/membership etc .
that I never wish to see again .
Those damn things where you need to sign up before viewing content or w/e .
I set the account to only deliver messages from people on my contact list to my inbox .
That way I get 300 spam messages a day and 0 in my inbox ( unless hotmail spams me ) .
If one of my friends email that address I direct them to my correct address .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why my @hotmail.com address is used for signing up to any forum/membership etc.
that I never wish to see again.
Those damn things where you need to sign up before viewing content or w/e.
I set the account to only deliver messages from people on my contact list to my inbox.
That way I get 300 spam messages a day and 0 in my inbox (unless hotmail spams me).
If one of my friends email that address I direct them to my correct address.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707225</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28714015</id>
	<title>Re:no kidding?</title>
	<author>jimmypw</author>
	<datestamp>1247738100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you seem to be forgetting exactly how much 12\% of 1.4 billion people is. its almost 170 million people. Thats a very big market.
<br> <br>
<a href="http://www27.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=internet+users" title="wolframalpha.com" rel="nofollow">http://www27.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=internet+users</a> [wolframalpha.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>you seem to be forgetting exactly how much 12 \ % of 1.4 billion people is .
its almost 170 million people .
Thats a very big market .
http : //www27.wolframalpha.com/input/ ? i = internet + users [ wolframalpha.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you seem to be forgetting exactly how much 12\% of 1.4 billion people is.
its almost 170 million people.
Thats a very big market.
http://www27.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=internet+users [wolframalpha.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708243</id>
	<title>Re:Which sites sell addresses to spammers?</title>
	<author>Haoie</author>
	<datestamp>1247652180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget the usual bots that trawl message boards and the like.</p><p>I learnt that the hard way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget the usual bots that trawl message boards and the like.I learnt that the hard way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget the usual bots that trawl message boards and the like.I learnt that the hard way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707311</id>
	<title>Re:Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247690760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Replying to unsolicited offers is pretty dumb, as you probably don't want any more 'offers', and replying just verifies that your address is real. Seriously? Buy it from<br>A) A respectable website (don't click the link in some spam email)<br>B) A store</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Replying to unsolicited offers is pretty dumb , as you probably do n't want any more 'offers ' , and replying just verifies that your address is real .
Seriously ? Buy it fromA ) A respectable website ( do n't click the link in some spam email ) B ) A store</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Replying to unsolicited offers is pretty dumb, as you probably don't want any more 'offers', and replying just verifies that your address is real.
Seriously? Buy it fromA) A respectable website (don't click the link in some spam email)B) A store</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707325</id>
	<title>friendly spam</title>
	<author>mcfatboy93</author>
	<datestamp>1247690820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK first of all i would assume a small part that those 12\% of people have friends who have an infected machine.  and these machines are sending them spam. i am currently having this problem and it is very annoying but because it is from a friend it is not filtered so any idiot may just open it because it got to his/her inbox.</p><p>everyone else is just an idiot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK first of all i would assume a small part that those 12 \ % of people have friends who have an infected machine .
and these machines are sending them spam .
i am currently having this problem and it is very annoying but because it is from a friend it is not filtered so any idiot may just open it because it got to his/her inbox.everyone else is just an idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK first of all i would assume a small part that those 12\% of people have friends who have an infected machine.
and these machines are sending them spam.
i am currently having this problem and it is very annoying but because it is from a friend it is not filtered so any idiot may just open it because it got to his/her inbox.everyone else is just an idiot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708379</id>
	<title>Re:How come nobody shoots spammers?</title>
	<author>BubbaDoom</author>
	<datestamp>1247652780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If we can shoot the spammers, can we then go after the dolts on tv selling snake oil as well?<br>
<br>
I'd go after the guys who sell:<br>
Get Rich in Real-Estate books<br>
Medical Crap that people don't want you to know books<br>
Spray this crap in your dog dish to make them feel better<br>
FreeCreditReport.com<br>
FinallyFast.com<br>
Get-out-of-debt<br>
Send us your gold<br>
Class-action-law-suit for some health condition<br>
and any kind of exercise equipment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we can shoot the spammers , can we then go after the dolts on tv selling snake oil as well ?
I 'd go after the guys who sell : Get Rich in Real-Estate books Medical Crap that people do n't want you to know books Spray this crap in your dog dish to make them feel better FreeCreditReport.com FinallyFast.com Get-out-of-debt Send us your gold Class-action-law-suit for some health condition and any kind of exercise equipment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we can shoot the spammers, can we then go after the dolts on tv selling snake oil as well?
I'd go after the guys who sell:
Get Rich in Real-Estate books
Medical Crap that people don't want you to know books
Spray this crap in your dog dish to make them feel better
FreeCreditReport.com
FinallyFast.com
Get-out-of-debt
Send us your gold
Class-action-law-suit for some health condition
and any kind of exercise equipment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707161</id>
	<title>first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247689980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707433</id>
	<title>Re:Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>MrMista\_B</author>
	<datestamp>1247691300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um... 'a legitimate business' unsolicited email' - IS SPAM.</p><p>The legitimacy of the business is irrelevant.</p><p>If the email is from a business, and unsolicited (that is, UNWANTED), then, it is, by its very nature, SPAM.</p><p>To put it even more simply: UNSOLICITED BUSINESS EMAIL = SPAM.</p><p>And in my mind, if the business is sending spam, they're not legitimate, period.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um... 'a legitimate business ' unsolicited email ' - IS SPAM.The legitimacy of the business is irrelevant.If the email is from a business , and unsolicited ( that is , UNWANTED ) , then , it is , by its very nature , SPAM.To put it even more simply : UNSOLICITED BUSINESS EMAIL = SPAM.And in my mind , if the business is sending spam , they 're not legitimate , period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um... 'a legitimate business' unsolicited email' - IS SPAM.The legitimacy of the business is irrelevant.If the email is from a business, and unsolicited (that is, UNWANTED), then, it is, by its very nature, SPAM.To put it even more simply: UNSOLICITED BUSINESS EMAIL = SPAM.And in my mind, if the business is sending spam, they're not legitimate, period.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28712187</id>
	<title>Am I one of the only ones in the 12\%?</title>
	<author>piers\_downunder</author>
	<datestamp>1247675700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hell yes I've responded to spam. Or clicked links in emails. Or chatted to spambots. Surely any curious IT professional wants to know more about how spammers work or how far AI has come in making a profit for some lowlife. Sometimes it's just out of sheer boredom that I investigate or respond.<br> <br>
Here' a typical recent conversation on Skype:<br>
<br>
Lena: Hullo!! <br>
Lena: pretty girl looking for new friends<br>
Me: u look like a spambot to me<br>
Lena: Nice to meet you! How can I see Your photos and data? My photos placed at the www:***crappylinkdeleted***<br>
Me: well that was both boring &amp; predictable. Goodbye!<br>
Lena: oh.... sorry... my mom comming soon... see you later!<br>
Me: spambots don't have moms, liar!<br>
<br>
So yeah, 12\% does seem low to me too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell yes I 've responded to spam .
Or clicked links in emails .
Or chatted to spambots .
Surely any curious IT professional wants to know more about how spammers work or how far AI has come in making a profit for some lowlife .
Sometimes it 's just out of sheer boredom that I investigate or respond .
Here ' a typical recent conversation on Skype : Lena : Hullo ! !
Lena : pretty girl looking for new friends Me : u look like a spambot to me Lena : Nice to meet you !
How can I see Your photos and data ?
My photos placed at the www : * * * crappylinkdeleted * * * Me : well that was both boring &amp; predictable .
Goodbye ! Lena : oh.... sorry... my mom comming soon... see you later !
Me : spambots do n't have moms , liar !
So yeah , 12 \ % does seem low to me too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell yes I've responded to spam.
Or clicked links in emails.
Or chatted to spambots.
Surely any curious IT professional wants to know more about how spammers work or how far AI has come in making a profit for some lowlife.
Sometimes it's just out of sheer boredom that I investigate or respond.
Here' a typical recent conversation on Skype:

Lena: Hullo!!
Lena: pretty girl looking for new friends
Me: u look like a spambot to me
Lena: Nice to meet you!
How can I see Your photos and data?
My photos placed at the www:***crappylinkdeleted***
Me: well that was both boring &amp; predictable.
Goodbye!
Lena: oh.... sorry... my mom comming soon... see you later!
Me: spambots don't have moms, liar!
So yeah, 12\% does seem low to me too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28717273</id>
	<title>Does cursing at the spammers count?</title>
	<author>Quirkz</author>
	<datestamp>1247761020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Back in the old days, before I'd heard about the "they want to verify your email address is valid" I reacted pretty strongly to the first few phishing attempts that landed in my inbox. I'd see a "verify your bank email" and I'd go there and fill in the blanks with a veritable stream of cursing. At the time I assumed someone would actually see that message at some point and maybe feel a little insulted or ashamed. <p>

Later, as I caught on that clicking the link might be validating my address, I stopped that behavior and just started deleting everything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in the old days , before I 'd heard about the " they want to verify your email address is valid " I reacted pretty strongly to the first few phishing attempts that landed in my inbox .
I 'd see a " verify your bank email " and I 'd go there and fill in the blanks with a veritable stream of cursing .
At the time I assumed someone would actually see that message at some point and maybe feel a little insulted or ashamed .
Later , as I caught on that clicking the link might be validating my address , I stopped that behavior and just started deleting everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in the old days, before I'd heard about the "they want to verify your email address is valid" I reacted pretty strongly to the first few phishing attempts that landed in my inbox.
I'd see a "verify your bank email" and I'd go there and fill in the blanks with a veritable stream of cursing.
At the time I assumed someone would actually see that message at some point and maybe feel a little insulted or ashamed.
Later, as I caught on that clicking the link might be validating my address, I stopped that behavior and just started deleting everything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707603</id>
	<title>Re:Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>Threni</author>
	<datestamp>1247648880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; The entire premise of this article depends on the definition of "spam." One could mark a legitimate business' unsolicited email as<br>&gt; spam, but that doesn't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy.</p><p>From the very first piece of spam (look up the origins of the word) it's been clear what it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; The entire premise of this article depends on the definition of " spam .
" One could mark a legitimate business ' unsolicited email as &gt; spam , but that does n't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy.From the very first piece of spam ( look up the origins of the word ) it 's been clear what it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; The entire premise of this article depends on the definition of "spam.
" One could mark a legitimate business' unsolicited email as&gt; spam, but that doesn't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy.From the very first piece of spam (look up the origins of the word) it's been clear what it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28719373</id>
	<title>Forced spam filters!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247768760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Email providers should force spam filtering on their customers. This is the only way to keep those 12\% dumbfucks from making spam profitable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Email providers should force spam filtering on their customers .
This is the only way to keep those 12 \ % dumbfucks from making spam profitable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Email providers should force spam filtering on their customers.
This is the only way to keep those 12\% dumbfucks from making spam profitable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707873</id>
	<title>I thought of this immediately, as well!</title>
	<author>King\_TJ</author>
	<datestamp>1247650140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You'd be surprised how often people get upset about junk mail they're receiving, when in reality, they receive it because when they made a legitimate purchase a year or so previous, they left some option on the form check-marked that said "Allow us to contact you about our sales and other information."</p><p>It's also VERY often the case that once a legitimate business has your email address, they proceed to "spam" you with advertising on a regular basis, until you click someplace to opt out.  Unfortunately, so many spammers provide fake 'opt out" or "unsubscribe" links these days, people are afraid to even try to use them anymore.  (If it's a fake, clicking "unsubscribe" only confirms that a live human is still receiving and reading the mail they're spamming out -- so they can mark it as a "good" address to resell to others and keep using themselves.)</p><p>Lastly, I actually have been spammed by companies I never contacted before, yet they were selling legitimate products.  I think that practice is pretty unethical and shady, but it happens with such places as discount cellphone accessory dealers and inkjet cartridge and laser toner discounters.  Sometimes, they really *do* have pretty good deals on their products, and if you buy from them, you will receive what was advertised.  I can easily see how "John Q. Public" might get such a junk mail ad, discover he can get that replacement cellphone battery for his phone for only $9 instead of the $49 the local stores are asking, and takes them up on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'd be surprised how often people get upset about junk mail they 're receiving , when in reality , they receive it because when they made a legitimate purchase a year or so previous , they left some option on the form check-marked that said " Allow us to contact you about our sales and other information .
" It 's also VERY often the case that once a legitimate business has your email address , they proceed to " spam " you with advertising on a regular basis , until you click someplace to opt out .
Unfortunately , so many spammers provide fake 'opt out " or " unsubscribe " links these days , people are afraid to even try to use them anymore .
( If it 's a fake , clicking " unsubscribe " only confirms that a live human is still receiving and reading the mail they 're spamming out -- so they can mark it as a " good " address to resell to others and keep using themselves .
) Lastly , I actually have been spammed by companies I never contacted before , yet they were selling legitimate products .
I think that practice is pretty unethical and shady , but it happens with such places as discount cellphone accessory dealers and inkjet cartridge and laser toner discounters .
Sometimes , they really * do * have pretty good deals on their products , and if you buy from them , you will receive what was advertised .
I can easily see how " John Q. Public " might get such a junk mail ad , discover he can get that replacement cellphone battery for his phone for only $ 9 instead of the $ 49 the local stores are asking , and takes them up on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'd be surprised how often people get upset about junk mail they're receiving, when in reality, they receive it because when they made a legitimate purchase a year or so previous, they left some option on the form check-marked that said "Allow us to contact you about our sales and other information.
"It's also VERY often the case that once a legitimate business has your email address, they proceed to "spam" you with advertising on a regular basis, until you click someplace to opt out.
Unfortunately, so many spammers provide fake 'opt out" or "unsubscribe" links these days, people are afraid to even try to use them anymore.
(If it's a fake, clicking "unsubscribe" only confirms that a live human is still receiving and reading the mail they're spamming out -- so they can mark it as a "good" address to resell to others and keep using themselves.
)Lastly, I actually have been spammed by companies I never contacted before, yet they were selling legitimate products.
I think that practice is pretty unethical and shady, but it happens with such places as discount cellphone accessory dealers and inkjet cartridge and laser toner discounters.
Sometimes, they really *do* have pretty good deals on their products, and if you buy from them, you will receive what was advertised.
I can easily see how "John Q. Public" might get such a junk mail ad, discover he can get that replacement cellphone battery for his phone for only $9 instead of the $49 the local stores are asking, and takes them up on it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28710037</id>
	<title>Re:How come nobody shoots spammers?</title>
	<author>Lunzo</author>
	<datestamp>1247660520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why don't you go any carry out your duty and see what happens to you?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't you go any carry out your duty and see what happens to you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't you go any carry out your duty and see what happens to you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708265</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707775</id>
	<title>Dearest  Slashdot Reader:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247649780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Richard B. Cheney<br>No. 16 Kingsway Road<br>Ikoyi, Lagos<br>Nigeria.<br>Tel/Fax: 234-1-7747907</p><p>15th July, 2009.</p><p>First I must solicit your confidence in this transaction.This is by virtue of its nature as being utterly confidential and top secret. We are top officials of the Federal Government Contract Review Panel who are interested in importation of goods into our country with funds which are presently trapped in Nigeria. In order to commence this business we solicit your assistance to enable us RECIEVE the said trapped funds ABROAD.</p><p>The source of this fund is as follows : During the  regime of our late head of state, Gen. Sani Abacha, the government officials set up companies and awarded themselves contracts which were grossly over-invoiced in various Ministries. The NEW CIVILIAN  Government set up a Contract Review Panel (C.R.P) and we have identified a lot of inflated contract funds which are presently floating in the Central Bank of Nigeria (C.B.N).</p><p>However, due to our position as civil servants and members of this panel, we cannot acquire this money in our names. I have therefore, been delegated as a matter of trust by my colleagues of the panel to look for an Overseas partner INTO whose ACCOUNT the sum of US$31,000,000.00 (Thirty one Million United States Dollars) WILL BE PAID BY TELEGRAPHIC TRANSFER. Hence we are writing you this letter.We have agreed to share the money thus:</p><p>70\% for us (the officials)</p><p>20\% for the FOREIGN PARTNER (you)</p><p>10\% to be used in settling taxation and all local and foreign expenses.</p><p>It is from this 70\% that we wish to commence the importation business.</p><p>Please note that this transaction is 100\% safe and we hope THAT THE FUNDS CAN ARRIVE YOUR ACCOUNT in latest ten (10) banking days from the date of reciept of the following information  by TEL/FAX: 234-1-7747907: A SUITABLE NAME AND BANK ACCOUNT INTO WHICH THE FUNDS CAN BE PAID. PLEASE ENDEAVOUR TO RESPOND BY TELEPHONE OR FAX.</p><p>The above information will enable us write letters of claim and job description respectively. This way we will use your company's name to apply for payments and re-award the contract in your company name.We are looking forward to doing business with you and solicit your confidentiality in this transaction.</p><p>Please acknowledge receipt of this letter using the above Tel/Fax number. I will bring you into the complete picture of this pending project when I have heard from you.</p><p>Yours Faithfully,<br>Formerly President-VICE Richard B. Cheney</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Richard B. CheneyNo. 16 Kingsway RoadIkoyi , LagosNigeria.Tel/Fax : 234-1-774790715th July , 2009.First I must solicit your confidence in this transaction.This is by virtue of its nature as being utterly confidential and top secret .
We are top officials of the Federal Government Contract Review Panel who are interested in importation of goods into our country with funds which are presently trapped in Nigeria .
In order to commence this business we solicit your assistance to enable us RECIEVE the said trapped funds ABROAD.The source of this fund is as follows : During the regime of our late head of state , Gen. Sani Abacha , the government officials set up companies and awarded themselves contracts which were grossly over-invoiced in various Ministries .
The NEW CIVILIAN Government set up a Contract Review Panel ( C.R.P ) and we have identified a lot of inflated contract funds which are presently floating in the Central Bank of Nigeria ( C.B.N ) .However , due to our position as civil servants and members of this panel , we can not acquire this money in our names .
I have therefore , been delegated as a matter of trust by my colleagues of the panel to look for an Overseas partner INTO whose ACCOUNT the sum of US $ 31,000,000.00 ( Thirty one Million United States Dollars ) WILL BE PAID BY TELEGRAPHIC TRANSFER .
Hence we are writing you this letter.We have agreed to share the money thus : 70 \ % for us ( the officials ) 20 \ % for the FOREIGN PARTNER ( you ) 10 \ % to be used in settling taxation and all local and foreign expenses.It is from this 70 \ % that we wish to commence the importation business.Please note that this transaction is 100 \ % safe and we hope THAT THE FUNDS CAN ARRIVE YOUR ACCOUNT in latest ten ( 10 ) banking days from the date of reciept of the following information by TEL/FAX : 234-1-7747907 : A SUITABLE NAME AND BANK ACCOUNT INTO WHICH THE FUNDS CAN BE PAID .
PLEASE ENDEAVOUR TO RESPOND BY TELEPHONE OR FAX.The above information will enable us write letters of claim and job description respectively .
This way we will use your company 's name to apply for payments and re-award the contract in your company name.We are looking forward to doing business with you and solicit your confidentiality in this transaction.Please acknowledge receipt of this letter using the above Tel/Fax number .
I will bring you into the complete picture of this pending project when I have heard from you.Yours Faithfully,Formerly President-VICE Richard B. Cheney</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Richard B. CheneyNo. 16 Kingsway RoadIkoyi, LagosNigeria.Tel/Fax: 234-1-774790715th July, 2009.First I must solicit your confidence in this transaction.This is by virtue of its nature as being utterly confidential and top secret.
We are top officials of the Federal Government Contract Review Panel who are interested in importation of goods into our country with funds which are presently trapped in Nigeria.
In order to commence this business we solicit your assistance to enable us RECIEVE the said trapped funds ABROAD.The source of this fund is as follows : During the  regime of our late head of state, Gen. Sani Abacha, the government officials set up companies and awarded themselves contracts which were grossly over-invoiced in various Ministries.
The NEW CIVILIAN  Government set up a Contract Review Panel (C.R.P) and we have identified a lot of inflated contract funds which are presently floating in the Central Bank of Nigeria (C.B.N).However, due to our position as civil servants and members of this panel, we cannot acquire this money in our names.
I have therefore, been delegated as a matter of trust by my colleagues of the panel to look for an Overseas partner INTO whose ACCOUNT the sum of US$31,000,000.00 (Thirty one Million United States Dollars) WILL BE PAID BY TELEGRAPHIC TRANSFER.
Hence we are writing you this letter.We have agreed to share the money thus:70\% for us (the officials)20\% for the FOREIGN PARTNER (you)10\% to be used in settling taxation and all local and foreign expenses.It is from this 70\% that we wish to commence the importation business.Please note that this transaction is 100\% safe and we hope THAT THE FUNDS CAN ARRIVE YOUR ACCOUNT in latest ten (10) banking days from the date of reciept of the following information  by TEL/FAX: 234-1-7747907: A SUITABLE NAME AND BANK ACCOUNT INTO WHICH THE FUNDS CAN BE PAID.
PLEASE ENDEAVOUR TO RESPOND BY TELEPHONE OR FAX.The above information will enable us write letters of claim and job description respectively.
This way we will use your company's name to apply for payments and re-award the contract in your company name.We are looking forward to doing business with you and solicit your confidentiality in this transaction.Please acknowledge receipt of this letter using the above Tel/Fax number.
I will bring you into the complete picture of this pending project when I have heard from you.Yours Faithfully,Formerly President-VICE Richard B. Cheney</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707499</id>
	<title>Use otherinbox for unlimited disposable email adrs</title>
	<author>KarmaRundi</author>
	<datestamp>1247648400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.otherinbox.com/" title="otherinbox.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.otherinbox.com/</a> [otherinbox.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.otherinbox.com/ [ otherinbox.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.otherinbox.com/ [otherinbox.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707821</id>
	<title>Fail!  12\% of those who respond to phone polls....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247649900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The sample is skewed.</p><p>Responding to spam and responding to phone/internet polls are likely highly correlated traits, thus this sample is not of the general population, but of people who like responding to things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The sample is skewed.Responding to spam and responding to phone/internet polls are likely highly correlated traits , thus this sample is not of the general population , but of people who like responding to things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sample is skewed.Responding to spam and responding to phone/internet polls are likely highly correlated traits, thus this sample is not of the general population, but of people who like responding to things.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708799</id>
	<title>Re:Correction</title>
	<author>FlyingBishop</author>
	<datestamp>1247654820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, it also doesn't really quantify how often, or the circumstances of the responses. I mean, at one point I had my e-mail address hijacked because I entered my AOL address into a website in an email.</p><p>But that was over a decade ago, when I was about 10 years old, and had very little guidance on Internet use.</p><p>That could technically put me in the 12\% (though I've never tried to buy anything) but I am no longer a child, and now know not to even click on links if I have a suspicion that the source is not what it claims to be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , it also does n't really quantify how often , or the circumstances of the responses .
I mean , at one point I had my e-mail address hijacked because I entered my AOL address into a website in an email.But that was over a decade ago , when I was about 10 years old , and had very little guidance on Internet use.That could technically put me in the 12 \ % ( though I 've never tried to buy anything ) but I am no longer a child , and now know not to even click on links if I have a suspicion that the source is not what it claims to be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, it also doesn't really quantify how often, or the circumstances of the responses.
I mean, at one point I had my e-mail address hijacked because I entered my AOL address into a website in an email.But that was over a decade ago, when I was about 10 years old, and had very little guidance on Internet use.That could technically put me in the 12\% (though I've never tried to buy anything) but I am no longer a child, and now know not to even click on links if I have a suspicion that the source is not what it claims to be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707765</id>
	<title>Re:Correction</title>
	<author>NPerez</author>
	<datestamp>1247649720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That would mean that 88\% of internet users are not retarded..
<br> <br>
Not so sure about that, man.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That would mean that 88 \ % of internet users are not retarded. . Not so sure about that , man .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would mean that 88\% of internet users are not retarded..
 
Not so sure about that, man.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708265</id>
	<title>Re:How come nobody shoots spammers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247652240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's a great idea. Accept for the fact that the fucking liberals in this country have made it something to be ashamed of, or be afraid of at the very least.
<br> <br>
If that's not 100\% true, explain the completely <em> <strong>fucked-up</strong> </em> situation we have brewing here in the USA. The Federal Government is increasing it's power, bypassing the Constitution specifically to trample on your liberty and freedom.
<br> <br>
Gun laws were a provision to cast fear upon the members of our Government. For should they trample us too hard it's actually our <em> <strong>duty</strong> </em> to kill them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a great idea .
Accept for the fact that the fucking liberals in this country have made it something to be ashamed of , or be afraid of at the very least .
If that 's not 100 \ % true , explain the completely fucked-up situation we have brewing here in the USA .
The Federal Government is increasing it 's power , bypassing the Constitution specifically to trample on your liberty and freedom .
Gun laws were a provision to cast fear upon the members of our Government .
For should they trample us too hard it 's actually our duty to kill them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a great idea.
Accept for the fact that the fucking liberals in this country have made it something to be ashamed of, or be afraid of at the very least.
If that's not 100\% true, explain the completely  fucked-up  situation we have brewing here in the USA.
The Federal Government is increasing it's power, bypassing the Constitution specifically to trample on your liberty and freedom.
Gun laws were a provision to cast fear upon the members of our Government.
For should they trample us too hard it's actually our  duty  to kill them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707133</id>
	<title>That's why...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247689860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm posting as an anonymous coward, so they don't spam my e-mail address.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm posting as an anonymous coward , so they do n't spam my e-mail address .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm posting as an anonymous coward, so they don't spam my e-mail address.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707333</id>
	<title>The Spam Letters</title>
	<author>javacowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1247690820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a guy who responds to his spam and posts the letters on his site.   It's hilarious<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>I don't know if the site is still up, but I know it's blocked by my proxy at work, so it has been identified as a time waster by people who filter websites for a living.   You have been warned<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p><a href="http://thespamletters.com/" title="thespamletters.com" rel="nofollow">http://thespamletters.com/</a> [thespamletters.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a guy who responds to his spam and posts the letters on his site .
It 's hilarious : ) I do n't know if the site is still up , but I know it 's blocked by my proxy at work , so it has been identified as a time waster by people who filter websites for a living .
You have been warned ; ) http : //thespamletters.com/ [ thespamletters.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a guy who responds to his spam and posts the letters on his site.
It's hilarious :)I don't know if the site is still up, but I know it's blocked by my proxy at work, so it has been identified as a time waster by people who filter websites for a living.
You have been warned ;)http://thespamletters.com/ [thespamletters.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707179</id>
	<title>Dear 12\% of E-mail Users,</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1247690160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Please stop.

Thanks,
The Internet</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please stop .
Thanks , The Internet</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please stop.
Thanks,
The Internet</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708099</id>
	<title>Nothing to see here</title>
	<author>ground.zero.612</author>
	<datestamp>1247651340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would it be surprising to learn that some \% of people buy shit from snail-mail spam too?
<br> <br>
If so I've lost faith in humanity, or at least<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would it be surprising to learn that some \ % of people buy shit from snail-mail spam too ?
If so I 've lost faith in humanity , or at least / .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would it be surprising to learn that some \% of people buy shit from snail-mail spam too?
If so I've lost faith in humanity, or at least /.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28724423</id>
	<title>Gotta Hand it to the Nigerians</title>
	<author>gpronger</author>
	<datestamp>1247747040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now, I tend to receive a lot of spam, but the stuff that does not get deleted immediately is some of the great stories out of Nigeria. You've got your run of the mill Canadian pharmacy spam, the bank scam spam, the designer watch scam, the Viagra and their ilk spam, but the Nigerians are outright creative. Nice long stories of human suffering, or international intrigue (or both). So, though I'm not likely to respond (one was to have delivered to my front door gold bullion by armed Nigerian guards, which if it was real would simply have me sign, shoot me, and make off with the gold) but they're at least fun to read!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , I tend to receive a lot of spam , but the stuff that does not get deleted immediately is some of the great stories out of Nigeria .
You 've got your run of the mill Canadian pharmacy spam , the bank scam spam , the designer watch scam , the Viagra and their ilk spam , but the Nigerians are outright creative .
Nice long stories of human suffering , or international intrigue ( or both ) .
So , though I 'm not likely to respond ( one was to have delivered to my front door gold bullion by armed Nigerian guards , which if it was real would simply have me sign , shoot me , and make off with the gold ) but they 're at least fun to read !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, I tend to receive a lot of spam, but the stuff that does not get deleted immediately is some of the great stories out of Nigeria.
You've got your run of the mill Canadian pharmacy spam, the bank scam spam, the designer watch scam, the Viagra and their ilk spam, but the Nigerians are outright creative.
Nice long stories of human suffering, or international intrigue (or both).
So, though I'm not likely to respond (one was to have delivered to my front door gold bullion by armed Nigerian guards, which if it was real would simply have me sign, shoot me, and make off with the gold) but they're at least fun to read!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708331</id>
	<title>Re:Lately...</title>
	<author>julesh</author>
	<datestamp>1247652600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>For example, I received this yesterday:</i></p><p><i>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Forge your huge love sword</i></p><p><i>and that was it. No link, no pictures</i></p><p>This is because many spammers are totally incompetent.  Other symptoms:</p><p>* Messages with subject line '$SUBJECT'.<br>* Sender names made up from non-name words joined together 'Vivacious F. Baking'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For example , I received this yesterday :         Forge your huge love swordand that was it .
No link , no picturesThis is because many spammers are totally incompetent .
Other symptoms : * Messages with subject line ' $ SUBJECT' .
* Sender names made up from non-name words joined together 'Vivacious F. Baking'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For example, I received this yesterday:
        Forge your huge love swordand that was it.
No link, no picturesThis is because many spammers are totally incompetent.
Other symptoms:* Messages with subject line '$SUBJECT'.
* Sender names made up from non-name words joined together 'Vivacious F. Baking'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707263</id>
	<title>12\% of E-mail Users Have Responded To Spam</title>
	<author>GottliebPins</author>
	<datestamp>1247690580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And should be executed immediately!</htmltext>
<tokenext>And should be executed immediately !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And should be executed immediately!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707367</id>
	<title>Re:Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>azav</author>
	<datestamp>1247690940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HELLO OLD FRIEND IN JESUS!  I am Dotcor Barrister Stealfromyou and it is good to hear from you again!  (I could go on but you get my point.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HELLO OLD FRIEND IN JESUS !
I am Dotcor Barrister Stealfromyou and it is good to hear from you again !
( I could go on but you get my point .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HELLO OLD FRIEND IN JESUS!
I am Dotcor Barrister Stealfromyou and it is good to hear from you again!
(I could go on but you get my point.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707521</id>
	<title>Re:Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>skeeto</author>
	<datestamp>1247648520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess technically I have responded to spam, as I sometimes respond to 419 scams to mess with the scammer. I respond pretending to be interested in whatever they said, then delay as much as possible in order to waste time. Maybe even reply with obviously fake documents (if they look too real, they could be used again against an innocent person in another scam). The idea is to waste as much of their time as possible, but without wasting much of your own time.</p><p>Some people are really, really good at this, called scam baiting or 419 baiting, and they'll turn the scam around and get the scammer to do elaborate, expensive activities for everyone's amusement. Things like record an ebook, or paint a painting, then mail it in to the baiter, carve a replica of the baiter's head from a block of wood. It's really great stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess technically I have responded to spam , as I sometimes respond to 419 scams to mess with the scammer .
I respond pretending to be interested in whatever they said , then delay as much as possible in order to waste time .
Maybe even reply with obviously fake documents ( if they look too real , they could be used again against an innocent person in another scam ) .
The idea is to waste as much of their time as possible , but without wasting much of your own time.Some people are really , really good at this , called scam baiting or 419 baiting , and they 'll turn the scam around and get the scammer to do elaborate , expensive activities for everyone 's amusement .
Things like record an ebook , or paint a painting , then mail it in to the baiter , carve a replica of the baiter 's head from a block of wood .
It 's really great stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess technically I have responded to spam, as I sometimes respond to 419 scams to mess with the scammer.
I respond pretending to be interested in whatever they said, then delay as much as possible in order to waste time.
Maybe even reply with obviously fake documents (if they look too real, they could be used again against an innocent person in another scam).
The idea is to waste as much of their time as possible, but without wasting much of your own time.Some people are really, really good at this, called scam baiting or 419 baiting, and they'll turn the scam around and get the scammer to do elaborate, expensive activities for everyone's amusement.
Things like record an ebook, or paint a painting, then mail it in to the baiter, carve a replica of the baiter's head from a block of wood.
It's really great stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707567</id>
	<title>Re:no kidding?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247648700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The folks responding to the "enlarge your member" ads didn't want to fess up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The folks responding to the " enlarge your member " ads did n't want to fess up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The folks responding to the "enlarge your member" ads didn't want to fess up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28715711</id>
	<title>I reply to spam.</title>
	<author>markitect</author>
	<datestamp>1247754720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have an email account that has been riddled with lotteries and messages about my dead [some relation]'s estate.  So one day when I was bored at work I started replying to them.   It's lots of fun, but they always have trouble using the fake details I give them, who knew?
I think they caught on though, or I'm just unlucky cause I haven't won the international lottery in months.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an email account that has been riddled with lotteries and messages about my dead [ some relation ] 's estate .
So one day when I was bored at work I started replying to them .
It 's lots of fun , but they always have trouble using the fake details I give them , who knew ?
I think they caught on though , or I 'm just unlucky cause I have n't won the international lottery in months .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an email account that has been riddled with lotteries and messages about my dead [some relation]'s estate.
So one day when I was bored at work I started replying to them.
It's lots of fun, but they always have trouble using the fake details I give them, who knew?
I think they caught on though, or I'm just unlucky cause I haven't won the international lottery in months.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28714937</id>
	<title>Re:Correction</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1247749740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You underestimate the human stupidity, as usual.</p><p>At least 5\% of dumbest Internet users have not responded to spam. Because they didn't know how.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You underestimate the human stupidity , as usual.At least 5 \ % of dumbest Internet users have not responded to spam .
Because they did n't know how .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You underestimate the human stupidity, as usual.At least 5\% of dumbest Internet users have not responded to spam.
Because they didn't know how.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28712399</id>
	<title>Re:Of course people respond...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247678280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you know that unsubscribing lets them know your email is active &amp; the msg was read? They are happily sending your address to other lists for more spam to you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you know that unsubscribing lets them know your email is active &amp; the msg was read ?
They are happily sending your address to other lists for more spam to you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you know that unsubscribing lets them know your email is active &amp; the msg was read?
They are happily sending your address to other lists for more spam to you!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28710305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707543</id>
	<title>Found:</title>
	<author>B00KER</author>
	<datestamp>1247648640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cheapest V1agra ever!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cheapest V1agra ever !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cheapest V1agra ever!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708283</id>
	<title>Re:They got my email</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1247652360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>That's not irony, that's exactly what the study says</i></p><p>Well it's kinda ironic that they thought it was ironic, but it wasn't, right?</p><p>Just like I hope that this post is ironically unironic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not irony , that 's exactly what the study saysWell it 's kinda ironic that they thought it was ironic , but it was n't , right ? Just like I hope that this post is ironically unironic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not irony, that's exactly what the study saysWell it's kinda ironic that they thought it was ironic, but it wasn't, right?Just like I hope that this post is ironically unironic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707871</id>
	<title>Re:no kidding?</title>
	<author>bitt3n</author>
	<datestamp>1247650140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's a good thing breathing is an involuntary action, cause there are a lot of people out there who'd forget to.</p></div><p>that means it's a bad thing</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a good thing breathing is an involuntary action , cause there are a lot of people out there who 'd forget to.that means it 's a bad thing</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a good thing breathing is an involuntary action, cause there are a lot of people out there who'd forget to.that means it's a bad thing
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707651</id>
	<title>Should we be surprised by this for some reason?</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1247649180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>We've known for quite some time that spammers pick up email addresses by trolling the internet.  With spam so insanely cheap - and highly profitable - to send out, there is no incentive for the spammers to select for email addresses that are known to be read regularly (or ever).<br> <br>
If they can harvest 1,000 new addresses in a few minutes of bot-crawling the internet, versus a few dozen by buying them from someone with a form somewhere, the choice is pretty simple.<br> <br>
The take-home message of this is something we've known for quite some time - don't let your email address out on public pages.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've known for quite some time that spammers pick up email addresses by trolling the internet .
With spam so insanely cheap - and highly profitable - to send out , there is no incentive for the spammers to select for email addresses that are known to be read regularly ( or ever ) .
If they can harvest 1,000 new addresses in a few minutes of bot-crawling the internet , versus a few dozen by buying them from someone with a form somewhere , the choice is pretty simple .
The take-home message of this is something we 've known for quite some time - do n't let your email address out on public pages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've known for quite some time that spammers pick up email addresses by trolling the internet.
With spam so insanely cheap - and highly profitable - to send out, there is no incentive for the spammers to select for email addresses that are known to be read regularly (or ever).
If they can harvest 1,000 new addresses in a few minutes of bot-crawling the internet, versus a few dozen by buying them from someone with a form somewhere, the choice is pretty simple.
The take-home message of this is something we've known for quite some time - don't let your email address out on public pages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707497</id>
	<title>SPAM = SCAM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247648400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always hear people bitching that they had fallen for some spam offer and never actually received any items. Only once in a while you hear of someone having received some worthless or non-functional thing but never the actual merchandise they promised. It seems like for the most part you can equate spam with scam. It's just sad that so many people still fall victims to it and loose their money to the scammers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always hear people bitching that they had fallen for some spam offer and never actually received any items .
Only once in a while you hear of someone having received some worthless or non-functional thing but never the actual merchandise they promised .
It seems like for the most part you can equate spam with scam .
It 's just sad that so many people still fall victims to it and loose their money to the scammers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always hear people bitching that they had fallen for some spam offer and never actually received any items.
Only once in a while you hear of someone having received some worthless or non-functional thing but never the actual merchandise they promised.
It seems like for the most part you can equate spam with scam.
It's just sad that so many people still fall victims to it and loose their money to the scammers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28712501</id>
	<title>Re:The Best Solution</title>
	<author>david.given</author>
	<datestamp>1247679420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use <a href="http://spey.sf.net/" title="sf.net">a greylisting SMTP proxy</a> [sf.net] (that I wrote myself). It eliminates about 90\% of all spam before I even have to download it. Spamprobe takes care of the rest. It's only on very rare occasions that spam ever makes it to my inbox, and there are practically no fals positives; and I've been using my email address for close to a decade now, on Usenet, on mailing lists, on crappy forums (like this one), and have never bothered to shield it or cloak it. Spam just isn't a problem for me any more.

</p><p>Of course, that doesn't mean that it's not still <i>annoying</i>, and I think that public stocks should be reintroduced for this sort of abuse-of-the-commons crime...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use a greylisting SMTP proxy [ sf.net ] ( that I wrote myself ) .
It eliminates about 90 \ % of all spam before I even have to download it .
Spamprobe takes care of the rest .
It 's only on very rare occasions that spam ever makes it to my inbox , and there are practically no fals positives ; and I 've been using my email address for close to a decade now , on Usenet , on mailing lists , on crappy forums ( like this one ) , and have never bothered to shield it or cloak it .
Spam just is n't a problem for me any more .
Of course , that does n't mean that it 's not still annoying , and I think that public stocks should be reintroduced for this sort of abuse-of-the-commons crime.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use a greylisting SMTP proxy [sf.net] (that I wrote myself).
It eliminates about 90\% of all spam before I even have to download it.
Spamprobe takes care of the rest.
It's only on very rare occasions that spam ever makes it to my inbox, and there are practically no fals positives; and I've been using my email address for close to a decade now, on Usenet, on mailing lists, on crappy forums (like this one), and have never bothered to shield it or cloak it.
Spam just isn't a problem for me any more.
Of course, that doesn't mean that it's not still annoying, and I think that public stocks should be reintroduced for this sort of abuse-of-the-commons crime...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711613</id>
	<title>Re:no kidding?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1247671140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is it a good thing that idiots survive, instead of naturally being selected to not be selected. ^^</p><p>I actually think the spammers and doing something good, by weeding out the idiots.</p><p>It's very similar to a lion catching the weakest individual of his prey, keeping the herd as a whole stronger.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is it a good thing that idiots survive , instead of naturally being selected to not be selected .
^ ^ I actually think the spammers and doing something good , by weeding out the idiots.It 's very similar to a lion catching the weakest individual of his prey , keeping the herd as a whole stronger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is it a good thing that idiots survive, instead of naturally being selected to not be selected.
^^I actually think the spammers and doing something good, by weeding out the idiots.It's very similar to a lion catching the weakest individual of his prey, keeping the herd as a whole stronger.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707787</id>
	<title>Banned for replying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247649780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I responded once with an account on mail2world.com and then my account got suspended for supposedly sending spam.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I responded once with an account on mail2world.com and then my account got suspended for supposedly sending spam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I responded once with an account on mail2world.com and then my account got suspended for supposedly sending spam.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708263</id>
	<title>Still doesn't..</title>
	<author>Setral</author>
	<datestamp>1247652240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>cover how a brand new email account, never posted or used as a login anywhere, got spammed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>cover how a brand new email account , never posted or used as a login anywhere , got spammed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cover how a brand new email account, never posted or used as a login anywhere, got spammed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707177</id>
	<title>Easy Fix</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247690160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quick somebody build a program that causes the users computer to explode when they answer yes on the survey. Plaster it all over the web and in one stroke spam becomes a thing of the past and the bell curve for the whole race improves drastically.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quick somebody build a program that causes the users computer to explode when they answer yes on the survey .
Plaster it all over the web and in one stroke spam becomes a thing of the past and the bell curve for the whole race improves drastically .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quick somebody build a program that causes the users computer to explode when they answer yes on the survey.
Plaster it all over the web and in one stroke spam becomes a thing of the past and the bell curve for the whole race improves drastically.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707331</id>
	<title>How</title>
	<author>azav</author>
	<datestamp>1247690820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I get a crapload of spam from the UAE (Dubai) and the only way I can think about how my email got harvested was that I once wrote a letter on an Al-Jazeera forum mentioning that not all Americans want to invade Iraq when the current Gulf War started.</p><p>I've noticed multiple resellers have my email now are are even soliciting me to buy their spam list as they are spamming me.</p><p>What is most annoying is that I am now getting emails that state that "this is not a spam email because is it from blah blah".</p><p>Spammers simply need to die.  It's that simple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I get a crapload of spam from the UAE ( Dubai ) and the only way I can think about how my email got harvested was that I once wrote a letter on an Al-Jazeera forum mentioning that not all Americans want to invade Iraq when the current Gulf War started.I 've noticed multiple resellers have my email now are are even soliciting me to buy their spam list as they are spamming me.What is most annoying is that I am now getting emails that state that " this is not a spam email because is it from blah blah " .Spammers simply need to die .
It 's that simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get a crapload of spam from the UAE (Dubai) and the only way I can think about how my email got harvested was that I once wrote a letter on an Al-Jazeera forum mentioning that not all Americans want to invade Iraq when the current Gulf War started.I've noticed multiple resellers have my email now are are even soliciting me to buy their spam list as they are spamming me.What is most annoying is that I am now getting emails that state that "this is not a spam email because is it from blah blah".Spammers simply need to die.
It's that simple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707959</id>
	<title>Re:Correction</title>
	<author>dontmakemethink</author>
	<datestamp>1247650560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's more likely the most shy and/or secretive ones responding. Typically spammers are selling something people don't want to be known to purchase, and they may even be reluctant to enter an inflammatory keyword into Google.  If I had any thoughts of a political career, for example, I wouldn't want any chance of an "anal intruder" search tracing back to my IP.  That's not the case, I proudly get mine from Walmart.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's more likely the most shy and/or secretive ones responding .
Typically spammers are selling something people do n't want to be known to purchase , and they may even be reluctant to enter an inflammatory keyword into Google .
If I had any thoughts of a political career , for example , I would n't want any chance of an " anal intruder " search tracing back to my IP .
That 's not the case , I proudly get mine from Walmart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's more likely the most shy and/or secretive ones responding.
Typically spammers are selling something people don't want to be known to purchase, and they may even be reluctant to enter an inflammatory keyword into Google.
If I had any thoughts of a political career, for example, I wouldn't want any chance of an "anal intruder" search tracing back to my IP.
That's not the case, I proudly get mine from Walmart.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707477</id>
	<title>Spam responders</title>
	<author>C\_Kode</author>
	<datestamp>1247691540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone who responds to spam should be executed.  Send them on the express train to Huntsville Texas and they should not pass go or collect $200.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone who responds to spam should be executed .
Send them on the express train to Huntsville Texas and they should not pass go or collect $ 200 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone who responds to spam should be executed.
Send them on the express train to Huntsville Texas and they should not pass go or collect $200.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713717</id>
	<title>Re:That's why...</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1247777400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They tricked you - you're only posting as an anonymous <b>cowardon</b>. The penis enlargement people will arrive at your house shortly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They tricked you - you 're only posting as an anonymous cowardon .
The penis enlargement people will arrive at your house shortly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They tricked you - you're only posting as an anonymous cowardon.
The penis enlargement people will arrive at your house shortly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707133</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707417</id>
	<title>Garbage In, Garbage Out</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247691180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has it not occurred to us that surveys do not sell as well as desired if they are not controversial?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has it not occurred to us that surveys do not sell as well as desired if they are not controversial ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has it not occurred to us that surveys do not sell as well as desired if they are not controversial?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711317</id>
	<title>Re:They got my email</title>
	<author>xeoron</author>
	<datestamp>1247668920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here is another question: have you ever had spam from sending out a email moments later? It happens every time I send a message to someone with a yahoo mail account, and within seconds 1 to 4 spam messages appears.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is another question : have you ever had spam from sending out a email moments later ?
It happens every time I send a message to someone with a yahoo mail account , and within seconds 1 to 4 spam messages appears .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is another question: have you ever had spam from sending out a email moments later?
It happens every time I send a message to someone with a yahoo mail account, and within seconds 1 to 4 spam messages appears.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707935</id>
	<title>Re:Correction</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247650440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use the Internet today.  Feel smarter tomorrow!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use the Internet today .
Feel smarter tomorrow !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use the Internet today.
Feel smarter tomorrow!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709369</id>
	<title>Re:Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247657220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>as can be quoted from the monty python "but I don't want spam"</p><p>Spam is that which you don't want...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>as can be quoted from the monty python " but I do n't want spam " Spam is that which you do n't want.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as can be quoted from the monty python "but I don't want spam"Spam is that which you don't want...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709001</id>
	<title>The Best Solution</title>
	<author>DaMattster</author>
	<datestamp>1247655540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is the one developed by the hard working folks at the OpenBSD project whom have been studying spam for well over 5 years.  They came up with something that is devlishly clever called OpenBSD Spamd.  Spamd is basically a fake smtp engine that sets the TCP RWIN to 1.  By doing this, it causes the transmission speed to slow to 1 byte per second.  This can cause a backlog or even crash the spam spender.  Fight back, don't filter!  You can even create a serious of spam trap addresses, publish them, and reverse harvest the IP addresses of the spam senders.  Check out <a href="http://www.openbsd.org/" title="openbsd.org">http://www.openbsd.org/</a> [openbsd.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is the one developed by the hard working folks at the OpenBSD project whom have been studying spam for well over 5 years .
They came up with something that is devlishly clever called OpenBSD Spamd .
Spamd is basically a fake smtp engine that sets the TCP RWIN to 1 .
By doing this , it causes the transmission speed to slow to 1 byte per second .
This can cause a backlog or even crash the spam spender .
Fight back , do n't filter !
You can even create a serious of spam trap addresses , publish them , and reverse harvest the IP addresses of the spam senders .
Check out http : //www.openbsd.org/ [ openbsd.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is the one developed by the hard working folks at the OpenBSD project whom have been studying spam for well over 5 years.
They came up with something that is devlishly clever called OpenBSD Spamd.
Spamd is basically a fake smtp engine that sets the TCP RWIN to 1.
By doing this, it causes the transmission speed to slow to 1 byte per second.
This can cause a backlog or even crash the spam spender.
Fight back, don't filter!
You can even create a serious of spam trap addresses, publish them, and reverse harvest the IP addresses of the spam senders.
Check out http://www.openbsd.org/ [openbsd.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707285</id>
	<title>Misleading</title>
	<author>Blixinator</author>
	<datestamp>1247690640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While 12\% seems reasonable for the amount of people who have responded to spam at least once (think of the first time a banner told you you were the 1,000,000th visitor), I suspect the number is much, much lower for the percentage of people who continuously respond to spam.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While 12 \ % seems reasonable for the amount of people who have responded to spam at least once ( think of the first time a banner told you you were the 1,000,000th visitor ) , I suspect the number is much , much lower for the percentage of people who continuously respond to spam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While 12\% seems reasonable for the amount of people who have responded to spam at least once (think of the first time a banner told you you were the 1,000,000th visitor), I suspect the number is much, much lower for the percentage of people who continuously respond to spam.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711003</id>
	<title>List of the 12\%</title>
	<author>BatGnat</author>
	<datestamp>1247666580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can I have a list of the 12\%,  I have some bridges to sell....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I have a list of the 12 \ % , I have some bridges to sell... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I have a list of the 12\%,  I have some bridges to sell....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28712683</id>
	<title>Re:My email address has only been on Slashdot</title>
	<author>Sir\_Lewk</author>
	<datestamp>1247680860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Kind of unfair.  "Only" posting your email on slashdot (in un-obscfucated plaintext I might add...) is for all intents and purposes "posting for the entire internet to see".  It's not like seperate websites are some sort of mystical barrier that will somewhat hold at bay any amount of email scrappers,  certainly not on a site as large as slashdot anyways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Kind of unfair .
" Only " posting your email on slashdot ( in un-obscfucated plaintext I might add... ) is for all intents and purposes " posting for the entire internet to see " .
It 's not like seperate websites are some sort of mystical barrier that will somewhat hold at bay any amount of email scrappers , certainly not on a site as large as slashdot anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kind of unfair.
"Only" posting your email on slashdot (in un-obscfucated plaintext I might add...) is for all intents and purposes "posting for the entire internet to see".
It's not like seperate websites are some sort of mystical barrier that will somewhat hold at bay any amount of email scrappers,  certainly not on a site as large as slashdot anyways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707225</id>
	<title>Re:They got my email</title>
	<author>Hyppy</author>
	<datestamp>1247690400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why did you choose to display your address publicly if you don't want the public using it to send correspondence?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why did you choose to display your address publicly if you do n't want the public using it to send correspondence ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why did you choose to display your address publicly if you don't want the public using it to send correspondence?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708291</id>
	<title>12\%? No, according to research from last year</title>
	<author>Anubis IV</author>
	<datestamp>1247652420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/pubs/networking/2008-ccs-spamalytics.pdf" title="berkeley.edu">http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/pubs/networking/2008-ccs-spamalytics.pdf</a> [berkeley.edu]
<br>
<br>
The idea that 12\% have responded and tried to make purchases is ridiculous. Take a look at the paper I just linked. If you scroll towards the end, you can see the results of the experiment they did. Out of about 350,000,000 e-mails they observed being sent out, they only had about 10.5K (0.00303\%) actually click on the link, and of those, only 28 (well below 0.00001\%) people tried to make a purchase.
<br>
<br>
Now, granted, the poll included historical data, since they asked if people had ever clicked on a link or else tried to make a purchase before, but come on. 12\%? Maybe back when spam was new or something, but as another person said earlier, almost all of us are "not retarded" at this point, or at least not stupid enough to go clicking those links. I wonder what percentage of people have actually clicked on spam links in the last year, as opposed to in their lifetime...</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.icsi.berkeley.edu/pubs/networking/2008-ccs-spamalytics.pdf [ berkeley.edu ] The idea that 12 \ % have responded and tried to make purchases is ridiculous .
Take a look at the paper I just linked .
If you scroll towards the end , you can see the results of the experiment they did .
Out of about 350,000,000 e-mails they observed being sent out , they only had about 10.5K ( 0.00303 \ % ) actually click on the link , and of those , only 28 ( well below 0.00001 \ % ) people tried to make a purchase .
Now , granted , the poll included historical data , since they asked if people had ever clicked on a link or else tried to make a purchase before , but come on .
12 \ % ? Maybe back when spam was new or something , but as another person said earlier , almost all of us are " not retarded " at this point , or at least not stupid enough to go clicking those links .
I wonder what percentage of people have actually clicked on spam links in the last year , as opposed to in their lifetime.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/pubs/networking/2008-ccs-spamalytics.pdf [berkeley.edu]


The idea that 12\% have responded and tried to make purchases is ridiculous.
Take a look at the paper I just linked.
If you scroll towards the end, you can see the results of the experiment they did.
Out of about 350,000,000 e-mails they observed being sent out, they only had about 10.5K (0.00303\%) actually click on the link, and of those, only 28 (well below 0.00001\%) people tried to make a purchase.
Now, granted, the poll included historical data, since they asked if people had ever clicked on a link or else tried to make a purchase before, but come on.
12\%? Maybe back when spam was new or something, but as another person said earlier, almost all of us are "not retarded" at this point, or at least not stupid enough to go clicking those links.
I wonder what percentage of people have actually clicked on spam links in the last year, as opposed to in their lifetime...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707299</id>
	<title>My Penis Enlargement Pills Worked Great!!!</title>
	<author>loose electron</author>
	<datestamp>1247690700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey! I got a great deal on penis enlargement, breast enhancement, and this greasy stuff you rub all over your body to increase your sexual desirability scent! Works great! Now if I could only get the dog to stop sniffing me, all the women would be barking at my door!</p><p>Sad to say, one of the places that I buy "generic viagra" from would not return my money when it did not work as well as the "super size me" products... I will just have to wait for my money from the deal I made in Nigeria to counter that loss.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey !
I got a great deal on penis enlargement , breast enhancement , and this greasy stuff you rub all over your body to increase your sexual desirability scent !
Works great !
Now if I could only get the dog to stop sniffing me , all the women would be barking at my door ! Sad to say , one of the places that I buy " generic viagra " from would not return my money when it did not work as well as the " super size me " products... I will just have to wait for my money from the deal I made in Nigeria to counter that loss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey!
I got a great deal on penis enlargement, breast enhancement, and this greasy stuff you rub all over your body to increase your sexual desirability scent!
Works great!
Now if I could only get the dog to stop sniffing me, all the women would be barking at my door!Sad to say, one of the places that I buy "generic viagra" from would not return my money when it did not work as well as the "super size me" products... I will just have to wait for my money from the deal I made in Nigeria to counter that loss.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707261</id>
	<title>Which sites sell addresses to spammers?</title>
	<author>piojo</author>
	<datestamp>1247690580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would have liked the article to state which sites sell e-mail addresses to spammers. They would certainly deserve it.</p><p>I use unique e-mail addresses for (almost) everything I sign up for, and I've never gotten a spam message from any of those unique accounts. I started getting a lot of spam when I first posted to LKML, which is published online.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would have liked the article to state which sites sell e-mail addresses to spammers .
They would certainly deserve it.I use unique e-mail addresses for ( almost ) everything I sign up for , and I 've never gotten a spam message from any of those unique accounts .
I started getting a lot of spam when I first posted to LKML , which is published online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would have liked the article to state which sites sell e-mail addresses to spammers.
They would certainly deserve it.I use unique e-mail addresses for (almost) everything I sign up for, and I've never gotten a spam message from any of those unique accounts.
I started getting a lot of spam when I first posted to LKML, which is published online.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709837</id>
	<title>Re:Of course people respond...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247659440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I seem to win the Nigerian lottery even when I don't enter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I seem to win the Nigerian lottery even when I do n't enter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seem to win the Nigerian lottery even when I don't enter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713775</id>
	<title>Re:How come nobody shoots spammers?</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1247734920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because for most people spam isn't that big a problem as it all goes into your spam folder and the one or two that do get through can be banished just by clicking the delete button?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because for most people spam is n't that big a problem as it all goes into your spam folder and the one or two that do get through can be banished just by clicking the delete button ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because for most people spam isn't that big a problem as it all goes into your spam folder and the one or two that do get through can be banished just by clicking the delete button?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709873</id>
	<title>Re:How come nobody shoots spammers?</title>
	<author>DriedClexler</author>
	<datestamp>1247659620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Along the same lines, I've wondered why it's even possible for spammers to mount a legal defense at all.  That is, how come vigilantes aren't targeting the lawyers who represent spammers?  Imagine if you were effectively cut off from fair treatment by the legal system because no lawyer wants to be associated with you...</p><p>Not endorsing it, just wondering why this low-hanging fruit hasn't been grabbed by spam haters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Along the same lines , I 've wondered why it 's even possible for spammers to mount a legal defense at all .
That is , how come vigilantes are n't targeting the lawyers who represent spammers ?
Imagine if you were effectively cut off from fair treatment by the legal system because no lawyer wants to be associated with you...Not endorsing it , just wondering why this low-hanging fruit has n't been grabbed by spam haters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Along the same lines, I've wondered why it's even possible for spammers to mount a legal defense at all.
That is, how come vigilantes aren't targeting the lawyers who represent spammers?
Imagine if you were effectively cut off from fair treatment by the legal system because no lawyer wants to be associated with you...Not endorsing it, just wondering why this low-hanging fruit hasn't been grabbed by spam haters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708447</id>
	<title>Re:Lately...</title>
	<author>redJag</author>
	<datestamp>1247653140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or they are looking for hits on transparent GIFs to determine the quality of their mailing list..<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or they are looking for hits on transparent GIFs to determine the quality of their mailing list.. ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or they are looking for hits on transparent GIFs to determine the quality of their mailing list.. ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707541</id>
	<title>My email address has only been on Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247648640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I got this username and email as an experiment.  I have only posted it publicly on Slashdot and have not used it for anything else.  I don't even check it. I just checked.  I have 5,000 messages in my spam folder.  And gmail deletes them after a month.  So posting my email publicly on Slashdot only is resulting in 5,000 spams a month.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got this username and email as an experiment .
I have only posted it publicly on Slashdot and have not used it for anything else .
I do n't even check it .
I just checked .
I have 5,000 messages in my spam folder .
And gmail deletes them after a month .
So posting my email publicly on Slashdot only is resulting in 5,000 spams a month .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got this username and email as an experiment.
I have only posted it publicly on Slashdot and have not used it for anything else.
I don't even check it.
I just checked.
I have 5,000 messages in my spam folder.
And gmail deletes them after a month.
So posting my email publicly on Slashdot only is resulting in 5,000 spams a month.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28717341</id>
	<title>Re:12\%? No, according to research from last year</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247761380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Their sampling method is incorrect.  People who respond to spam and people who respond to surveys (phone/internet) about spam are highly correlated populations, so they are not really sampling from the general population.  Thus, 12\% of their respondents may have responding to spam, but that does not equal 12\% of the general population.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Their sampling method is incorrect .
People who respond to spam and people who respond to surveys ( phone/internet ) about spam are highly correlated populations , so they are not really sampling from the general population .
Thus , 12 \ % of their respondents may have responding to spam , but that does not equal 12 \ % of the general population .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their sampling method is incorrect.
People who respond to spam and people who respond to surveys (phone/internet) about spam are highly correlated populations, so they are not really sampling from the general population.
Thus, 12\% of their respondents may have responding to spam, but that does not equal 12\% of the general population.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708845</id>
	<title>Re:Of course people respond...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247655060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I respectfully disagree, Heed, I've won several internet lotteries that I didn't enter.  Although most of them were from Microsoft or the UK, I'm sure there must have been a Nigerian one in there somewhere.  Of course, I never claim the prizes because they're just not large enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I respectfully disagree , Heed , I 've won several internet lotteries that I did n't enter .
Although most of them were from Microsoft or the UK , I 'm sure there must have been a Nigerian one in there somewhere .
Of course , I never claim the prizes because they 're just not large enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I respectfully disagree, Heed, I've won several internet lotteries that I didn't enter.
Although most of them were from Microsoft or the UK, I'm sure there must have been a Nigerian one in there somewhere.
Of course, I never claim the prizes because they're just not large enough.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708227</id>
	<title>Re:My Penis Enlargement Pills Worked Great!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247652120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sad to say, one of the places that I buy "generic viagra" from would not return my money when it did not work as well as the "super size me" products.</p></div><p>It's a sad fact of life; most men don't have enough blood in their veins to make an eleven incher work (myself included).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sad to say , one of the places that I buy " generic viagra " from would not return my money when it did not work as well as the " super size me " products.It 's a sad fact of life ; most men do n't have enough blood in their veins to make an eleven incher work ( myself included ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sad to say, one of the places that I buy "generic viagra" from would not return my money when it did not work as well as the "super size me" products.It's a sad fact of life; most men don't have enough blood in their veins to make an eleven incher work (myself included).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707735</id>
	<title>Re:Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>julesh</author>
	<datestamp>1247649600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The entire premise of this article depends on the definition of "spam." One could mark a legitimate business' unsolicited email as spam, but that doesn't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy.</i></p><p><i>Nigerian princes in peril are another matter, though.</i></p><p>If we definte spam as excluding legitimate businesses, who gets to define what's legitimate and what isn't?  OK, so 419 scammers aren't legitimate, but they make up a small minority of the spam I get.  And I'll grant that those "OEM" software sellers who apparently sell software cheaper than the manufacturers' OEM prices are somewhat dubious, too.  But are the viagra retailers legitimate?  They're (AFAICT) offering a real product that they are legally allowed to sell to you.  What about the acai berry products sellers?  Or the online casinos?  Or the fake rolex people?  All of these are real legal businesses who make their money by sending unsolicited emails.  But they're still spammers, as far as I'm concerned, and should therefore be preparing themselves for whichever circle of hell is reserved for their kind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The entire premise of this article depends on the definition of " spam .
" One could mark a legitimate business ' unsolicited email as spam , but that does n't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy.Nigerian princes in peril are another matter , though.If we definte spam as excluding legitimate businesses , who gets to define what 's legitimate and what is n't ?
OK , so 419 scammers are n't legitimate , but they make up a small minority of the spam I get .
And I 'll grant that those " OEM " software sellers who apparently sell software cheaper than the manufacturers ' OEM prices are somewhat dubious , too .
But are the viagra retailers legitimate ?
They 're ( AFAICT ) offering a real product that they are legally allowed to sell to you .
What about the acai berry products sellers ?
Or the online casinos ?
Or the fake rolex people ?
All of these are real legal businesses who make their money by sending unsolicited emails .
But they 're still spammers , as far as I 'm concerned , and should therefore be preparing themselves for whichever circle of hell is reserved for their kind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The entire premise of this article depends on the definition of "spam.
" One could mark a legitimate business' unsolicited email as spam, but that doesn't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy.Nigerian princes in peril are another matter, though.If we definte spam as excluding legitimate businesses, who gets to define what's legitimate and what isn't?
OK, so 419 scammers aren't legitimate, but they make up a small minority of the spam I get.
And I'll grant that those "OEM" software sellers who apparently sell software cheaper than the manufacturers' OEM prices are somewhat dubious, too.
But are the viagra retailers legitimate?
They're (AFAICT) offering a real product that they are legally allowed to sell to you.
What about the acai berry products sellers?
Or the online casinos?
Or the fake rolex people?
All of these are real legal businesses who make their money by sending unsolicited emails.
But they're still spammers, as far as I'm concerned, and should therefore be preparing themselves for whichever circle of hell is reserved for their kind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709101</id>
	<title>A Better Solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247655960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone needs to make a machine that can be installed at every mall.  You insert $1 and it gives you a one in one trillion chance of winning a million dollars.  If you don't win, it punches you in the crotch.</p><p>Hopefully, this will speed natural selection by weeding out those likely to respond to scam offers and money can be made by selling videos of people using it to FOX.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone needs to make a machine that can be installed at every mall .
You insert $ 1 and it gives you a one in one trillion chance of winning a million dollars .
If you do n't win , it punches you in the crotch.Hopefully , this will speed natural selection by weeding out those likely to respond to scam offers and money can be made by selling videos of people using it to FOX .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone needs to make a machine that can be installed at every mall.
You insert $1 and it gives you a one in one trillion chance of winning a million dollars.
If you don't win, it punches you in the crotch.Hopefully, this will speed natural selection by weeding out those likely to respond to scam offers and money can be made by selling videos of people using it to FOX.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175</id>
	<title>Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>Hyppy</author>
	<datestamp>1247690160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The entire premise of this article depends on the definition of "spam."  One could mark a legitimate business' unsolicited email as spam, but that doesn't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy.<br> <br>Nigerian princes in peril are another matter, though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The entire premise of this article depends on the definition of " spam .
" One could mark a legitimate business ' unsolicited email as spam , but that does n't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy .
Nigerian princes in peril are another matter , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The entire premise of this article depends on the definition of "spam.
"  One could mark a legitimate business' unsolicited email as spam, but that doesn't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy.
Nigerian princes in peril are another matter, though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707715</id>
	<title>I'm in the 12\%</title>
	<author>ClosedEyesSeeing</author>
	<datestamp>1247649540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because I like to <a href="http://www.419eater.com/" title="419eater.com" rel="nofollow">scambait.</a> [419eater.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because I like to scambait .
[ 419eater.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because I like to scambait.
[419eater.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28714173</id>
	<title>Re:Of course people respond...</title>
	<author>Lord Bitman</author>
	<datestamp>1247740200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>unsubscribing works, if you've ever done business with the company before. People seem to forget that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>unsubscribing works , if you 've ever done business with the company before .
People seem to forget that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>unsubscribing works, if you've ever done business with the company before.
People seem to forget that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28710305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708689</id>
	<title>Re:How come nobody shoots spammers?</title>
	<author>Beerdood</author>
	<datestamp>1247654340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So far I've only heard of one case of <a href="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.08/spamking.html" title="wired.com" rel="nofollow"> this </a> [wired.com] happening, and even here you could argue that his lifestyle was more of a motive for murder than the spam itself.  One factor could be there aren't that many of them, most spam is generated by a handful of bot nets which don't require a whole lot of maintenance.  <br> <br>
The other factor is that they're just too hard to identify.  Or in other countries that make it too hard to track down and make worthwhile finding.  Compare that with identify theft / scamming which does far more damage to an individual than spam - but you never hear about identity thieves getting murdered either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So far I 've only heard of one case of this [ wired.com ] happening , and even here you could argue that his lifestyle was more of a motive for murder than the spam itself .
One factor could be there are n't that many of them , most spam is generated by a handful of bot nets which do n't require a whole lot of maintenance .
The other factor is that they 're just too hard to identify .
Or in other countries that make it too hard to track down and make worthwhile finding .
Compare that with identify theft / scamming which does far more damage to an individual than spam - but you never hear about identity thieves getting murdered either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So far I've only heard of one case of  this  [wired.com] happening, and even here you could argue that his lifestyle was more of a motive for murder than the spam itself.
One factor could be there aren't that many of them, most spam is generated by a handful of bot nets which don't require a whole lot of maintenance.
The other factor is that they're just too hard to identify.
Or in other countries that make it too hard to track down and make worthwhile finding.
Compare that with identify theft / scamming which does far more damage to an individual than spam - but you never hear about identity thieves getting murdered either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708173</id>
	<title>Re:Lately...</title>
	<author>Phroggy</author>
	<datestamp>1247651760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Every so often I go through my spam folder, it's pretty funny. I've noticed lately that a lot of them don't even have links, it's like they're just trying to annoy us. For example, I received this yesterday:</p><blockquote><div><p>Forge your huge love sword</p></div></blockquote><p>and that was it. No link, no pictures. My theory is I have a really good friend who goes through a whole lot of effort just to make me smile. Either that, or it's an insult on my manhood designed to make me feel inadequate.</p></div><p>A lot of spammers aren't very smart.  They use pre-built off-the-shelf tools, and sometimes they click the wrong button and end up accidentally sending a mal-formed message to three million people by mistake.  Sometimes there's a bug in the software, or it's just misconfigured.  It doesn't really matter to them - after all, it doesn't cost them anything to send the spam, because they're stealing resources from others.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every so often I go through my spam folder , it 's pretty funny .
I 've noticed lately that a lot of them do n't even have links , it 's like they 're just trying to annoy us .
For example , I received this yesterday : Forge your huge love swordand that was it .
No link , no pictures .
My theory is I have a really good friend who goes through a whole lot of effort just to make me smile .
Either that , or it 's an insult on my manhood designed to make me feel inadequate.A lot of spammers are n't very smart .
They use pre-built off-the-shelf tools , and sometimes they click the wrong button and end up accidentally sending a mal-formed message to three million people by mistake .
Sometimes there 's a bug in the software , or it 's just misconfigured .
It does n't really matter to them - after all , it does n't cost them anything to send the spam , because they 're stealing resources from others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every so often I go through my spam folder, it's pretty funny.
I've noticed lately that a lot of them don't even have links, it's like they're just trying to annoy us.
For example, I received this yesterday:Forge your huge love swordand that was it.
No link, no pictures.
My theory is I have a really good friend who goes through a whole lot of effort just to make me smile.
Either that, or it's an insult on my manhood designed to make me feel inadequate.A lot of spammers aren't very smart.
They use pre-built off-the-shelf tools, and sometimes they click the wrong button and end up accidentally sending a mal-formed message to three million people by mistake.
Sometimes there's a bug in the software, or it's just misconfigured.
It doesn't really matter to them - after all, it doesn't cost them anything to send the spam, because they're stealing resources from others.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707573</id>
	<title>Want Spam? Use Yahoo Groups</title>
	<author>JimMcc</author>
	<datestamp>1247648700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have two email addresses on yahoo.com. One is a jumble of letters and numbers which I use to for access to things I have no desire to ever see again. Dump things like "we'll email you the download link". That email address, which has been around for 7+ years gets the odd spam here and there.</p><p>The other yahoo.com email address is used only to enroll in a number of Yahoo groups and never given out or used for email. (I'm a ham and for whatever reason the ham community has fallen in love with Yahoo groups.) This second email address receives between 100-200 spams per week.</p><p>Keeping in mind that the second email address has never been given out, where did the spammers get my email address from? I can only assume that either Yahoo sells email addresses used in groups for "targeted advertising" or that they have a huge security hole through which the leak Yahoo group email address.</p><p>In any case... What spam? Use Yahoo Groups!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have two email addresses on yahoo.com .
One is a jumble of letters and numbers which I use to for access to things I have no desire to ever see again .
Dump things like " we 'll email you the download link " .
That email address , which has been around for 7 + years gets the odd spam here and there.The other yahoo.com email address is used only to enroll in a number of Yahoo groups and never given out or used for email .
( I 'm a ham and for whatever reason the ham community has fallen in love with Yahoo groups .
) This second email address receives between 100-200 spams per week.Keeping in mind that the second email address has never been given out , where did the spammers get my email address from ?
I can only assume that either Yahoo sells email addresses used in groups for " targeted advertising " or that they have a huge security hole through which the leak Yahoo group email address.In any case... What spam ?
Use Yahoo Groups !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have two email addresses on yahoo.com.
One is a jumble of letters and numbers which I use to for access to things I have no desire to ever see again.
Dump things like "we'll email you the download link".
That email address, which has been around for 7+ years gets the odd spam here and there.The other yahoo.com email address is used only to enroll in a number of Yahoo groups and never given out or used for email.
(I'm a ham and for whatever reason the ham community has fallen in love with Yahoo groups.
) This second email address receives between 100-200 spams per week.Keeping in mind that the second email address has never been given out, where did the spammers get my email address from?
I can only assume that either Yahoo sells email addresses used in groups for "targeted advertising" or that they have a huge security hole through which the leak Yahoo group email address.In any case... What spam?
Use Yahoo Groups!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28719365</id>
	<title>Re:LinkedIn sold my email address</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247768700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I've been getting spam from charities that I've donated to. Every single time when, making a donation, I've unchecked the box that says I want to receive their marketing. Yet, a few months later, they decide that it's OK to start spamming me. When I call them on it, they always claim it was an "error".</p></div></blockquote><p>I've had that problem about half the time.  Guess which charities never see another penny and which get yearly donations.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been getting spam from charities that I 've donated to .
Every single time when , making a donation , I 've unchecked the box that says I want to receive their marketing .
Yet , a few months later , they decide that it 's OK to start spamming me .
When I call them on it , they always claim it was an " error " .I 've had that problem about half the time .
Guess which charities never see another penny and which get yearly donations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been getting spam from charities that I've donated to.
Every single time when, making a donation, I've unchecked the box that says I want to receive their marketing.
Yet, a few months later, they decide that it's OK to start spamming me.
When I call them on it, they always claim it was an "error".I've had that problem about half the time.
Guess which charities never see another penny and which get yearly donations.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28712009</id>
	<title>Hey!</title>
	<author>sydbarrett74</author>
	<datestamp>1247674080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some of us really <strong>do</strong> need longer, firmer erections, you insensitive clod!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some of us really do need longer , firmer erections , you insensitive clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some of us really do need longer, firmer erections, you insensitive clod!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707865</id>
	<title>Re:Correction</title>
	<author>Spy Handler</author>
	<datestamp>1247650140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pretty much everybody qualifies as a "internet user" these days, so it's not surprising that the bottom 12\% are doing stupid shit. We're talking about people whose IQ is in the 80-90 range.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pretty much everybody qualifies as a " internet user " these days , so it 's not surprising that the bottom 12 \ % are doing stupid shit .
We 're talking about people whose IQ is in the 80-90 range .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pretty much everybody qualifies as a "internet user" these days, so it's not surprising that the bottom 12\% are doing stupid shit.
We're talking about people whose IQ is in the 80-90 range.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709793</id>
	<title>I am not afraid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247659140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>rose@askauntrose.com</p><p>There I dare you to spam me.  I will resist the urge to join the 12\%.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>rose @ askauntrose.comThere I dare you to spam me .
I will resist the urge to join the 12 \ % .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>rose@askauntrose.comThere I dare you to spam me.
I will resist the urge to join the 12\%.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707667</id>
	<title>Have you seen some spam nowadays?!</title>
	<author>MrCrassic</author>
	<datestamp>1247649180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll shamelessly admit it: I've used Craigslist Personals to help me find dates. Before the entire hullabaloo regarding "erotic services," it was actually possible to get a few good, quality dates off the service. In fact, I was doing better on CL than other highly-regarded dating services, often using the same techniques! Spam was prevalent, but was often easy to spot and avoid.
<br> <br>
Recently, I had a brief falling out with my girlfriend and browsed through CL to see other people. I was upset, but not surprised, to find that not only were almost ALL of the postings spam, but the ones that looked strikingly legitimate (and I'm talking "real person," excellent grammar legitimate) were often spam bait as well! It comes to show that spammers are getting pretty crafty in their techniques, both technically and socially.
<br> <br>
Kind of sucks that it's almost impossible to get dates through Craigslist now, though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll shamelessly admit it : I 've used Craigslist Personals to help me find dates .
Before the entire hullabaloo regarding " erotic services , " it was actually possible to get a few good , quality dates off the service .
In fact , I was doing better on CL than other highly-regarded dating services , often using the same techniques !
Spam was prevalent , but was often easy to spot and avoid .
Recently , I had a brief falling out with my girlfriend and browsed through CL to see other people .
I was upset , but not surprised , to find that not only were almost ALL of the postings spam , but the ones that looked strikingly legitimate ( and I 'm talking " real person , " excellent grammar legitimate ) were often spam bait as well !
It comes to show that spammers are getting pretty crafty in their techniques , both technically and socially .
Kind of sucks that it 's almost impossible to get dates through Craigslist now , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll shamelessly admit it: I've used Craigslist Personals to help me find dates.
Before the entire hullabaloo regarding "erotic services," it was actually possible to get a few good, quality dates off the service.
In fact, I was doing better on CL than other highly-regarded dating services, often using the same techniques!
Spam was prevalent, but was often easy to spot and avoid.
Recently, I had a brief falling out with my girlfriend and browsed through CL to see other people.
I was upset, but not surprised, to find that not only were almost ALL of the postings spam, but the ones that looked strikingly legitimate (and I'm talking "real person," excellent grammar legitimate) were often spam bait as well!
It comes to show that spammers are getting pretty crafty in their techniques, both technically and socially.
Kind of sucks that it's almost impossible to get dates through Craigslist now, though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709835</id>
	<title>Re:Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>HeronBlademaster</author>
	<datestamp>1247659440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So when an old college acquaintance e-mailed me asking me to do freelance work which I did not solicit, he was spamming me?</p><p>I think your definition needs some tweaking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So when an old college acquaintance e-mailed me asking me to do freelance work which I did not solicit , he was spamming me ? I think your definition needs some tweaking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So when an old college acquaintance e-mailed me asking me to do freelance work which I did not solicit, he was spamming me?I think your definition needs some tweaking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855</id>
	<title>How come nobody shoots spammers?</title>
	<author>tekrat</author>
	<datestamp>1247650080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You would figure with all the crazies on the internet (that we MUST protect our children from), that sooner or later, some hot-head with a gun and enough technical know-how to track down a spammer would start a spammer hunt and start mowing them down.</p><p>It's ONLY when we have a spammer-serial-killer that spammers will stop. Suing them doesn't work, there's a guy out there that makes a living just suing spammers in small claims court. Laws and even government crackdowns don't work. It will only be when spammers live in fear for their lives and the lives of their families that they will consider another line of work.</p><p>What's annoying is that they've gotten so adept at hiding their identities, they are probably the only people on the internet who don't get spam, furthermore, they are probably the least likely to be targeted by the govt-nannyism of the web.</p><p>All in the name of selling snake oil. PT Barnum wouldn't believe how true his law is or that it's grown by a factor of a 1000...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You would figure with all the crazies on the internet ( that we MUST protect our children from ) , that sooner or later , some hot-head with a gun and enough technical know-how to track down a spammer would start a spammer hunt and start mowing them down.It 's ONLY when we have a spammer-serial-killer that spammers will stop .
Suing them does n't work , there 's a guy out there that makes a living just suing spammers in small claims court .
Laws and even government crackdowns do n't work .
It will only be when spammers live in fear for their lives and the lives of their families that they will consider another line of work.What 's annoying is that they 've gotten so adept at hiding their identities , they are probably the only people on the internet who do n't get spam , furthermore , they are probably the least likely to be targeted by the govt-nannyism of the web.All in the name of selling snake oil .
PT Barnum would n't believe how true his law is or that it 's grown by a factor of a 1000.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You would figure with all the crazies on the internet (that we MUST protect our children from), that sooner or later, some hot-head with a gun and enough technical know-how to track down a spammer would start a spammer hunt and start mowing them down.It's ONLY when we have a spammer-serial-killer that spammers will stop.
Suing them doesn't work, there's a guy out there that makes a living just suing spammers in small claims court.
Laws and even government crackdowns don't work.
It will only be when spammers live in fear for their lives and the lives of their families that they will consider another line of work.What's annoying is that they've gotten so adept at hiding their identities, they are probably the only people on the internet who don't get spam, furthermore, they are probably the least likely to be targeted by the govt-nannyism of the web.All in the name of selling snake oil.
PT Barnum wouldn't believe how true his law is or that it's grown by a factor of a 1000...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708567</id>
	<title>Breathing</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1247653740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's a good thing breathing is an involuntary action, cause there are a lot of people out there who'd forget to.</p></div><p>You know, it was the weirdest thing.  For about an hour after my general anesthesia wore off (surgery...) I actually had to remind myself to breathe - felt like if I didn't do it consciously, I wouldn't do it at all.   And even worse -- once I got home, I had to remind myself not to reply to spam!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a good thing breathing is an involuntary action , cause there are a lot of people out there who 'd forget to.You know , it was the weirdest thing .
For about an hour after my general anesthesia wore off ( surgery... ) I actually had to remind myself to breathe - felt like if I did n't do it consciously , I would n't do it at all .
And even worse -- once I got home , I had to remind myself not to reply to spam !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a good thing breathing is an involuntary action, cause there are a lot of people out there who'd forget to.You know, it was the weirdest thing.
For about an hour after my general anesthesia wore off (surgery...) I actually had to remind myself to breathe - felt like if I didn't do it consciously, I wouldn't do it at all.
And even worse -- once I got home, I had to remind myself not to reply to spam!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28715447</id>
	<title>Re:no kidding?</title>
	<author>blackjackshellac</author>
	<datestamp>1247753040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I figured it would be a lot higher too, given that over 45\% of Americans thought that John McCain and Sarah Palin were a good idea.</p><p>I have responded to the occasional spam while drunk, usually with a string of epithets intended to hurt their feelings.  Somehow I knew that that would not be the outcome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I figured it would be a lot higher too , given that over 45 \ % of Americans thought that John McCain and Sarah Palin were a good idea.I have responded to the occasional spam while drunk , usually with a string of epithets intended to hurt their feelings .
Somehow I knew that that would not be the outcome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I figured it would be a lot higher too, given that over 45\% of Americans thought that John McCain and Sarah Palin were a good idea.I have responded to the occasional spam while drunk, usually with a string of epithets intended to hurt their feelings.
Somehow I knew that that would not be the outcome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707273</id>
	<title>Obama voters surely</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247690580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll bet that 12\% all voted for Obama.<br> <br>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll bet that 12 \ % all voted for Obama .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll bet that 12\% all voted for Obama.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711777</id>
	<title>Re:The Best Solution</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1247672160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I found greylisting to be very effective too. It weeds out 90\% of the spam, before the filters even start to process anything.</p><p>I installed this setup: <a href="http://www.gentoo-wiki.info/Complete\_Virtual\_Mail\_Server" title="gentoo-wiki.info">http://www.gentoo-wiki.info/Complete\_Virtual\_Mail\_Server</a> [gentoo-wiki.info] (Original site unfortunately defunct. This is a mirror.)</p><p>And I got down from 250 spam mails a day per account, to maybe one per week in total, from the first day on.  That one mail usually landed straight in my IMAP(S) junk folder thanks to Thunderbird, and a script picked it up in the night, to train the filter with it. It was beautiful.</p><p>It is hard to install, but I found it fun, learned much, and as I said, I had the same filter power as Google, just with total freedom of configurability and quarantine settings. And IMAPS, SSMTP, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I found greylisting to be very effective too .
It weeds out 90 \ % of the spam , before the filters even start to process anything.I installed this setup : http : //www.gentoo-wiki.info/Complete \ _Virtual \ _Mail \ _Server [ gentoo-wiki.info ] ( Original site unfortunately defunct .
This is a mirror .
) And I got down from 250 spam mails a day per account , to maybe one per week in total , from the first day on .
That one mail usually landed straight in my IMAP ( S ) junk folder thanks to Thunderbird , and a script picked it up in the night , to train the filter with it .
It was beautiful.It is hard to install , but I found it fun , learned much , and as I said , I had the same filter power as Google , just with total freedom of configurability and quarantine settings .
And IMAPS , SSMTP , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I found greylisting to be very effective too.
It weeds out 90\% of the spam, before the filters even start to process anything.I installed this setup: http://www.gentoo-wiki.info/Complete\_Virtual\_Mail\_Server [gentoo-wiki.info] (Original site unfortunately defunct.
This is a mirror.
)And I got down from 250 spam mails a day per account, to maybe one per week in total, from the first day on.
That one mail usually landed straight in my IMAP(S) junk folder thanks to Thunderbird, and a script picked it up in the night, to train the filter with it.
It was beautiful.It is hard to install, but I found it fun, learned much, and as I said, I had the same filter power as Google, just with total freedom of configurability and quarantine settings.
And IMAPS, SSMTP, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28710195</id>
	<title>I try to respond to one or two a day.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247661420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I live to purchase a few thousand bucks of viagra with my credit card.</p><p>You guys should too.</p><p>It's 4111 1111 1111 1111 expires in 01/11 and the ccv is 771.<br>The name on the card is 'dyan gotohell'</p><p>For phishers I view the source of the submission page and build a form<br>with a little perl/bash script on a book from project gutenberg:</p><p>$spamSubmitUrl='http://scammer.126.com?phishing.url';<br>while(  ) {<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ($f, $l, $a1, $a2, $c, $s, $z, $p, $e, $d) = @\_;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; $argList="?first=$f\&amp;$last=$l&amp;{whatever else the form needs};<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; `lynx -useragent="ThankYouForYourSpam" -dump "$spamsubmiturl$argList" &gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/null`;<br>}</p><p>You have to fill in some of your own stuff, but since most of the phishig sends an email, this<br>will fill the email scammers inbox with nifty messages.</p><p>The most I ever submitted was 2500 emails before the guy blocked my IP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I live to purchase a few thousand bucks of viagra with my credit card.You guys should too.It 's 4111 1111 1111 1111 expires in 01/11 and the ccv is 771.The name on the card is 'dyan gotohell'For phishers I view the source of the submission page and build a formwith a little perl/bash script on a book from project gutenberg : $ spamSubmitUrl = 'http : //scammer.126.com ? phishing.url ' ; while ( ) {       ( $ f , $ l , $ a1 , $ a2 , $ c , $ s , $ z , $ p , $ e , $ d ) = @ \ _ ;       $ argList = " ? first = $ f \ &amp; $ last = $ l&amp; { whatever else the form needs } ;       ` lynx -useragent = " ThankYouForYourSpam " -dump " $ spamsubmiturl $ argList " &gt; /dev/null ` ; } You have to fill in some of your own stuff , but since most of the phishig sends an email , thiswill fill the email scammers inbox with nifty messages.The most I ever submitted was 2500 emails before the guy blocked my IP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live to purchase a few thousand bucks of viagra with my credit card.You guys should too.It's 4111 1111 1111 1111 expires in 01/11 and the ccv is 771.The name on the card is 'dyan gotohell'For phishers I view the source of the submission page and build a formwith a little perl/bash script on a book from project gutenberg:$spamSubmitUrl='http://scammer.126.com?phishing.url';while(  ) {
      ($f, $l, $a1, $a2, $c, $s, $z, $p, $e, $d) = @\_;
      $argList="?first=$f\&amp;$last=$l&amp;{whatever else the form needs};
      `lynx -useragent="ThankYouForYourSpam" -dump "$spamsubmiturl$argList" &gt; /dev/null`;}You have to fill in some of your own stuff, but since most of the phishig sends an email, thiswill fill the email scammers inbox with nifty messages.The most I ever submitted was 2500 emails before the guy blocked my IP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711679</id>
	<title>Re:no kidding?</title>
	<author>mrbcs</author>
	<datestamp>1247671560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They busted this 17 year old in Kitchener, Ontario a few years back. Everyone though he was selling dope. He was buying new cars, bringing in big screen tv's and no-one really left the house. Turns out the kid was selling penis enlargement pills for $50. a bottle. He was getting his sisters to fill the bottle with pills that cost him $5 a bottle. They showed it on the evening news! The girls are filling the bottles right on tv. The kid was brilliant... almost.. he was giving money back guarantees!!

<p>I can see this exec in California, bought 3 bottles. They didn't work. Would YOU call your credit card company to tell them that you bought fake penis enlargement pills? hehe The kids did get busted for abusing the internet connection because he had his own email server farm running off a cable modem.

</p><p> I just about pissed myself I was laughing so hard!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They busted this 17 year old in Kitchener , Ontario a few years back .
Everyone though he was selling dope .
He was buying new cars , bringing in big screen tv 's and no-one really left the house .
Turns out the kid was selling penis enlargement pills for $ 50 .
a bottle .
He was getting his sisters to fill the bottle with pills that cost him $ 5 a bottle .
They showed it on the evening news !
The girls are filling the bottles right on tv .
The kid was brilliant... almost.. he was giving money back guarantees ! !
I can see this exec in California , bought 3 bottles .
They did n't work .
Would YOU call your credit card company to tell them that you bought fake penis enlargement pills ?
hehe The kids did get busted for abusing the internet connection because he had his own email server farm running off a cable modem .
I just about pissed myself I was laughing so hard !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They busted this 17 year old in Kitchener, Ontario a few years back.
Everyone though he was selling dope.
He was buying new cars, bringing in big screen tv's and no-one really left the house.
Turns out the kid was selling penis enlargement pills for $50.
a bottle.
He was getting his sisters to fill the bottle with pills that cost him $5 a bottle.
They showed it on the evening news!
The girls are filling the bottles right on tv.
The kid was brilliant... almost.. he was giving money back guarantees!!
I can see this exec in California, bought 3 bottles.
They didn't work.
Would YOU call your credit card company to tell them that you bought fake penis enlargement pills?
hehe The kids did get busted for abusing the internet connection because he had his own email server farm running off a cable modem.
I just about pissed myself I was laughing so hard!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709371</id>
	<title>Re:LinkedIn sold my email address</title>
	<author>UdoKeir</author>
	<datestamp>1247657220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been getting spam from charities that I've donated to. Every single time when, making a donation, I've unchecked the box that says I want to receive their marketing. Yet, a few months later, they decide that it's OK to start spamming me. When I call them on it, they always claim it was an "error".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been getting spam from charities that I 've donated to .
Every single time when , making a donation , I 've unchecked the box that says I want to receive their marketing .
Yet , a few months later , they decide that it 's OK to start spamming me .
When I call them on it , they always claim it was an " error " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been getting spam from charities that I've donated to.
Every single time when, making a donation, I've unchecked the box that says I want to receive their marketing.
Yet, a few months later, they decide that it's OK to start spamming me.
When I call them on it, they always claim it was an "error".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711289</id>
	<title>Note the Word "Responded"</title>
	<author>StormyMonday</author>
	<datestamp>1247668680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TFA says that 12\% of e-mail users "clicked on spam".  I take this to mean a URL in a spam e-mail.  I'm surprised it's that low -- haven't you ever wanted to see what's on the other end of some of the weirder spams?</p><p>But does anybody actually *buy* anything from spam?   Has anybody actually come out and said "Yes, I bought a fake Rolex watch from a spammer"?  I'd suspect that anybody dumb enough to give a credit card to a spammer is already living in a cardboard box.    Who would buy a prescription drug from somebody who can't spell it?</p><p>(I'm not talking about fraud -- there have been plenty of news reports about people falling for everything from crude 419s to elaborate phishing scams.)</p><p>In general, spam looks a lot more like a DDOS attack than marketing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TFA says that 12 \ % of e-mail users " clicked on spam " .
I take this to mean a URL in a spam e-mail .
I 'm surprised it 's that low -- have n't you ever wanted to see what 's on the other end of some of the weirder spams ? But does anybody actually * buy * anything from spam ?
Has anybody actually come out and said " Yes , I bought a fake Rolex watch from a spammer " ?
I 'd suspect that anybody dumb enough to give a credit card to a spammer is already living in a cardboard box .
Who would buy a prescription drug from somebody who ca n't spell it ?
( I 'm not talking about fraud -- there have been plenty of news reports about people falling for everything from crude 419s to elaborate phishing scams .
) In general , spam looks a lot more like a DDOS attack than marketing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFA says that 12\% of e-mail users "clicked on spam".
I take this to mean a URL in a spam e-mail.
I'm surprised it's that low -- haven't you ever wanted to see what's on the other end of some of the weirder spams?But does anybody actually *buy* anything from spam?
Has anybody actually come out and said "Yes, I bought a fake Rolex watch from a spammer"?
I'd suspect that anybody dumb enough to give a credit card to a spammer is already living in a cardboard box.
Who would buy a prescription drug from somebody who can't spell it?
(I'm not talking about fraud -- there have been plenty of news reports about people falling for everything from crude 419s to elaborate phishing scams.
)In general, spam looks a lot more like a DDOS attack than marketing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707723</id>
	<title>Re:Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1247649600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/216.html" title="irregularwebcomic.net">http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/216.html</a> [irregularwebcomic.net]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.irregularwebcomic.net/216.html [ irregularwebcomic.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/216.html [irregularwebcomic.net]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713319</id>
	<title>Re:Correction</title>
	<author>jawahar</author>
	<datestamp>1247686740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>spam = unsolicited mail</htmltext>
<tokenext>spam = unsolicited mail</tokentext>
<sentencetext>spam = unsolicited mail</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173</id>
	<title>no kidding?</title>
	<author>Em Emalb</author>
	<datestamp>1247690160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>12\%?</p><p>Really?  I honestly thought it would be much higher...just basing that off of some of my daily interactions with people.  It's a good thing breathing is an involuntary action, cause there are a lot of people out there who'd forget to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>12 \ % ? Really ?
I honestly thought it would be much higher...just basing that off of some of my daily interactions with people .
It 's a good thing breathing is an involuntary action , cause there are a lot of people out there who 'd forget to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>12\%?Really?
I honestly thought it would be much higher...just basing that off of some of my daily interactions with people.
It's a good thing breathing is an involuntary action, cause there are a lot of people out there who'd forget to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305</id>
	<title>Correction</title>
	<author>Absolut187</author>
	<datestamp>1247690700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>The dumbest</b> 12\% of internet users have actually responded to spam messages and tried to buy items.</p><p>The other 88\% are what scientists refer to as "not retarded".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The dumbest 12 \ % of internet users have actually responded to spam messages and tried to buy items.The other 88 \ % are what scientists refer to as " not retarded " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The dumbest 12\% of internet users have actually responded to spam messages and tried to buy items.The other 88\% are what scientists refer to as "not retarded".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707727</id>
	<title>Re:They got my email</title>
	<author>jimicus</author>
	<datestamp>1247649600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bet if you received a comparable amount of paper junk mail you'd soon change your mind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet if you received a comparable amount of paper junk mail you 'd soon change your mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet if you received a comparable amount of paper junk mail you'd soon change your mind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707225</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708395</id>
	<title>Re:How come nobody shoots spammers?</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1247652900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's ONLY when we have a spammer-serial-killer that spammers will stop.</p> </div><p>Or when there's an official record of one, and a report of another on the loose.  Neither have to be real.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's ONLY when we have a spammer-serial-killer that spammers will stop .
Or when there 's an official record of one , and a report of another on the loose .
Neither have to be real .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's ONLY when we have a spammer-serial-killer that spammers will stop.
Or when there's an official record of one, and a report of another on the loose.
Neither have to be real.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707863</id>
	<title>Joe Job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247650140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can believe the replying part, but not the buying part.<br><br>I was Joe Jobbed some years back. It was the highlight of my internet year. Seriously, it gave me giggles for a few days. I had a few "fuck off" replies but most were of the "take me off your list" type. One was from the CEO of NTL, or more likely his PA. Giggles, like I said. I responded to each email explaining what a Joe Job was, but no one replied back after that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can believe the replying part , but not the buying part.I was Joe Jobbed some years back .
It was the highlight of my internet year .
Seriously , it gave me giggles for a few days .
I had a few " fuck off " replies but most were of the " take me off your list " type .
One was from the CEO of NTL , or more likely his PA. Giggles , like I said .
I responded to each email explaining what a Joe Job was , but no one replied back after that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can believe the replying part, but not the buying part.I was Joe Jobbed some years back.
It was the highlight of my internet year.
Seriously, it gave me giggles for a few days.
I had a few "fuck off" replies but most were of the "take me off your list" type.
One was from the CEO of NTL, or more likely his PA. Giggles, like I said.
I responded to each email explaining what a Joe Job was, but no one replied back after that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707281</id>
	<title>No suprises. Some problems.</title>
	<author>w0mprat</author>
	<datestamp>1247690640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The data may be skewed: users may consider offers from genuine mailing lists 'spam' whether they've signed up to it intentionally or not, when completing a survey. This more relevant stuff is more likely click-worthy. The survey doesn't necessarily make this distinction and account for it. <br> <br>
Otherwise, it is somewhat believable as many individuals new to the internet learn many lessons the hard way.
<br> <br>
Mind you, <i>"but another 13 percent said they simply had no idea why they did it; they just did."</i> explains why I still receive 'send this to 10 people or you will has bad luck' from otherwise intelligent and educated people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The data may be skewed : users may consider offers from genuine mailing lists 'spam ' whether they 've signed up to it intentionally or not , when completing a survey .
This more relevant stuff is more likely click-worthy .
The survey does n't necessarily make this distinction and account for it .
Otherwise , it is somewhat believable as many individuals new to the internet learn many lessons the hard way .
Mind you , " but another 13 percent said they simply had no idea why they did it ; they just did .
" explains why I still receive 'send this to 10 people or you will has bad luck ' from otherwise intelligent and educated people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The data may be skewed: users may consider offers from genuine mailing lists 'spam' whether they've signed up to it intentionally or not, when completing a survey.
This more relevant stuff is more likely click-worthy.
The survey doesn't necessarily make this distinction and account for it.
Otherwise, it is somewhat believable as many individuals new to the internet learn many lessons the hard way.
Mind you, "but another 13 percent said they simply had no idea why they did it; they just did.
" explains why I still receive 'send this to 10 people or you will has bad luck' from otherwise intelligent and educated people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708093</id>
	<title>Article and summary are wrong</title>
	<author>Phylarr</author>
	<datestamp>1247651280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you RTFA, it says that 12\% of people have clicked on a spam message. It then uses the phrase "responded to" to describe what those people did.<br> <br>
Clicking on an email is not the same as responding to it. I've clicked on spam emails. I've never responded to one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you RTFA , it says that 12 \ % of people have clicked on a spam message .
It then uses the phrase " responded to " to describe what those people did .
Clicking on an email is not the same as responding to it .
I 've clicked on spam emails .
I 've never responded to one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you RTFA, it says that 12\% of people have clicked on a spam message.
It then uses the phrase "responded to" to describe what those people did.
Clicking on an email is not the same as responding to it.
I've clicked on spam emails.
I've never responded to one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708139</id>
	<title>Re:Lately...</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1247651640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I remember correctly, the purpose of those emails is to try to confuse Bayesian filters.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I remember correctly , the purpose of those emails is to try to confuse Bayesian filters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I remember correctly, the purpose of those emails is to try to confuse Bayesian filters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489</id>
	<title>Lately...</title>
	<author>jciarlan</author>
	<datestamp>1247648400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Every so often I go through my spam folder, it's pretty funny. I've noticed lately that a lot of them don't even have links, it's like they're just trying to annoy us. For example, I received this yesterday:<blockquote><div><p>Forge your huge love sword</p></div></blockquote><p>and that was it. No link, no pictures. My theory is I have a really good friend who goes through a whole lot of effort just to make me smile. Either that, or it's an insult on my manhood designed to make me feel inadequate.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every so often I go through my spam folder , it 's pretty funny .
I 've noticed lately that a lot of them do n't even have links , it 's like they 're just trying to annoy us .
For example , I received this yesterday : Forge your huge love swordand that was it .
No link , no pictures .
My theory is I have a really good friend who goes through a whole lot of effort just to make me smile .
Either that , or it 's an insult on my manhood designed to make me feel inadequate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every so often I go through my spam folder, it's pretty funny.
I've noticed lately that a lot of them don't even have links, it's like they're just trying to annoy us.
For example, I received this yesterday:Forge your huge love swordand that was it.
No link, no pictures.
My theory is I have a really good friend who goes through a whole lot of effort just to make me smile.
Either that, or it's an insult on my manhood designed to make me feel inadequate.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708233</id>
	<title>I always reply!</title>
	<author>dvh.tosomja</author>
	<datestamp>1247652120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always tell them I already have 12 inch dick, yet they still sending me prolongation pills spam.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always tell them I already have 12 inch dick , yet they still sending me prolongation pills spam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always tell them I already have 12 inch dick, yet they still sending me prolongation pills spam.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713735</id>
	<title>Re:Order of the day</title>
	<author>ivucica</author>
	<datestamp>1247777580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Works only in the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Works only in the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Works only in the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707181</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713637</id>
	<title>Re:no kidding?</title>
	<author>ivucica</author>
	<datestamp>1247776740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your local community's representative sample is not the world's representative sample.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your local community 's representative sample is not the world 's representative sample .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your local community's representative sample is not the world's representative sample.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707633</id>
	<title>Re:Which sites sell addresses to spammers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247649120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I would have liked the article to state which sites sell e-mail addresses to spammers. </p></div><p>Here's one:  payday-loan-yes.com.</p><p>My wife applied online and submitted MY email address.  Within minutes my gmail spam box was getting filled with "get your cash advance now" spam from a half-dozen different apparent companies.</p><p>Aside from the fact that payday loans are bad (mm-kay).  But that's not what we're talking about.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would have liked the article to state which sites sell e-mail addresses to spammers .
Here 's one : payday-loan-yes.com.My wife applied online and submitted MY email address .
Within minutes my gmail spam box was getting filled with " get your cash advance now " spam from a half-dozen different apparent companies.Aside from the fact that payday loans are bad ( mm-kay ) .
But that 's not what we 're talking about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would have liked the article to state which sites sell e-mail addresses to spammers.
Here's one:  payday-loan-yes.com.My wife applied online and submitted MY email address.
Within minutes my gmail spam box was getting filled with "get your cash advance now" spam from a half-dozen different apparent companies.Aside from the fact that payday loans are bad (mm-kay).
But that's not what we're talking about.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28717693</id>
	<title>I have responded to spam</title>
	<author>TheCarp</author>
	<datestamp>1247762700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...to fuck with them. The Nigerian scammers can be a real hoot.</p><p>I found this out by accident looking for a roomate on cragislist. I knew the game as soon as he told me he was sending a $5000 money order and wanted me to take the first and last months rent, and forward the rest on to someone else. As if!</p><p>Anyway, the money orders were fakes (big shock) so I told him they never arrived and he sent another package with more. At which point I decided to change the game, I told him I have seen better fakes, and his were crap.</p><p>Boy did that get him hooked. He spent the next month trying to convince me to distribute packages for him, just take letters and money orders, place them in evnvelopes and send them out, he would pay me $500 a package.</p><p>Talks broke down when I insisted on payment in real US cash, up front in the package. His fakes and letters would make ok fire starter paper for the next camping trip, and scamming the scammer out of 500 would have been much funnier story.</p><p>In any case, the nigerians are great. I HIGHLY recommend fucking with them. Remember, every package of 5k in money orders they send you, is several K in profits they never get back.</p><p>-Steve</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...to fuck with them .
The Nigerian scammers can be a real hoot.I found this out by accident looking for a roomate on cragislist .
I knew the game as soon as he told me he was sending a $ 5000 money order and wanted me to take the first and last months rent , and forward the rest on to someone else .
As if ! Anyway , the money orders were fakes ( big shock ) so I told him they never arrived and he sent another package with more .
At which point I decided to change the game , I told him I have seen better fakes , and his were crap.Boy did that get him hooked .
He spent the next month trying to convince me to distribute packages for him , just take letters and money orders , place them in evnvelopes and send them out , he would pay me $ 500 a package.Talks broke down when I insisted on payment in real US cash , up front in the package .
His fakes and letters would make ok fire starter paper for the next camping trip , and scamming the scammer out of 500 would have been much funnier story.In any case , the nigerians are great .
I HIGHLY recommend fucking with them .
Remember , every package of 5k in money orders they send you , is several K in profits they never get back.-Steve</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...to fuck with them.
The Nigerian scammers can be a real hoot.I found this out by accident looking for a roomate on cragislist.
I knew the game as soon as he told me he was sending a $5000 money order and wanted me to take the first and last months rent, and forward the rest on to someone else.
As if!Anyway, the money orders were fakes (big shock) so I told him they never arrived and he sent another package with more.
At which point I decided to change the game, I told him I have seen better fakes, and his were crap.Boy did that get him hooked.
He spent the next month trying to convince me to distribute packages for him, just take letters and money orders, place them in evnvelopes and send them out, he would pay me $500 a package.Talks broke down when I insisted on payment in real US cash, up front in the package.
His fakes and letters would make ok fire starter paper for the next camping trip, and scamming the scammer out of 500 would have been much funnier story.In any case, the nigerians are great.
I HIGHLY recommend fucking with them.
Remember, every package of 5k in money orders they send you, is several K in profits they never get back.-Steve</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707201</id>
	<title>Re:They got my email</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247690280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not irony, that's exactly what the study says:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>E-mail addresses in comments posted to a website had a high probability of getting spammed</p></div><p>It probably doesn't help that your email address is sitting there in plain text with no obfuscation.</p><p>Myself, on the other hand, I've never received spam from having my email harvested on Slashdot.  Why do you think that is?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not irony , that 's exactly what the study says : E-mail addresses in comments posted to a website had a high probability of getting spammedIt probably does n't help that your email address is sitting there in plain text with no obfuscation.Myself , on the other hand , I 've never received spam from having my email harvested on Slashdot .
Why do you think that is ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not irony, that's exactly what the study says:E-mail addresses in comments posted to a website had a high probability of getting spammedIt probably doesn't help that your email address is sitting there in plain text with no obfuscation.Myself, on the other hand, I've never received spam from having my email harvested on Slashdot.
Why do you think that is?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707731</id>
	<title>I've responded to spam</title>
	<author>owlstead</author>
	<datestamp>1247649600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>By swearing and trying other spam filters mostly<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>By swearing and trying other spam filters mostly : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By swearing and trying other spam filters mostly :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711709</id>
	<title>Re:How come nobody shoots spammers?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1247671680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think spammers are doing us a service. When we have no predators, and actively support those with the biggest deficiencies the most (instead of everybody the same), <em>something</em> has to keep up natural selection, right?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think spammers are doing us a service .
When we have no predators , and actively support those with the biggest deficiencies the most ( instead of everybody the same ) , something has to keep up natural selection , right ?
: D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think spammers are doing us a service.
When we have no predators, and actively support those with the biggest deficiencies the most (instead of everybody the same), something has to keep up natural selection, right?
:D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707181</id>
	<title>Order of the day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247690160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Terrify people into compliance!</p><p>"Hey, y'know gramma - I heard answering junk email funds the terrorists."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>"Yep, that's right - that email you've got right there advertising cheap knob-expanders? That came straight from Osama bin Laden's laptop, uh huh."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Terrify people into compliance !
" Hey , y'know gramma - I heard answering junk email funds the terrorists .
" ... " Yep , that 's right - that email you 've got right there advertising cheap knob-expanders ?
That came straight from Osama bin Laden 's laptop , uh huh .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Terrify people into compliance!
"Hey, y'know gramma - I heard answering junk email funds the terrorists.
" ..."Yep, that's right - that email you've got right there advertising cheap knob-expanders?
That came straight from Osama bin Laden's laptop, uh huh.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708101</id>
	<title>Re:Which sites sell addresses to spammers?</title>
	<author>izomiac</author>
	<datestamp>1247651340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been using subdomain forwarding for quite a few years and it seems that extremely few websites/businesses sell e-mail addresses.  This method has worked quite well at blocking spam at 100\% accuracy for several years, although just about a month ago it would seem that my entire subdomain has started getting spam to random addresses.  So I've had to move to whitelisting addresses rather than black listing ones that get spammed.

<br> <br>That said, all I've generally had to black list are addresses to forums that [allegedly] got cracked, and a couple merchants that mistakenly think I'm likely to order from them again if they e-mail me three times a week.  The only merchant that comes to mind that downright sold the address I gave them was AquaGlobes, though I kinda expected that given their spammy website/order process.<br> <br>

Oh, one warning to anyone who tries this spam prevention scheme...  A lot of websites are under the impression that e-mail addresses are good identifiers.  So I basically have to be very consistent in how I generate throw-away addresses since I often need to use them to log in to things.  Why this practice has caught on I'll have no idea.  I mean, typing a 20 character e-mail address is more difficult than a 10 character username, and people change e-mail addresses all the time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using subdomain forwarding for quite a few years and it seems that extremely few websites/businesses sell e-mail addresses .
This method has worked quite well at blocking spam at 100 \ % accuracy for several years , although just about a month ago it would seem that my entire subdomain has started getting spam to random addresses .
So I 've had to move to whitelisting addresses rather than black listing ones that get spammed .
That said , all I 've generally had to black list are addresses to forums that [ allegedly ] got cracked , and a couple merchants that mistakenly think I 'm likely to order from them again if they e-mail me three times a week .
The only merchant that comes to mind that downright sold the address I gave them was AquaGlobes , though I kinda expected that given their spammy website/order process .
Oh , one warning to anyone who tries this spam prevention scheme... A lot of websites are under the impression that e-mail addresses are good identifiers .
So I basically have to be very consistent in how I generate throw-away addresses since I often need to use them to log in to things .
Why this practice has caught on I 'll have no idea .
I mean , typing a 20 character e-mail address is more difficult than a 10 character username , and people change e-mail addresses all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using subdomain forwarding for quite a few years and it seems that extremely few websites/businesses sell e-mail addresses.
This method has worked quite well at blocking spam at 100\% accuracy for several years, although just about a month ago it would seem that my entire subdomain has started getting spam to random addresses.
So I've had to move to whitelisting addresses rather than black listing ones that get spammed.
That said, all I've generally had to black list are addresses to forums that [allegedly] got cracked, and a couple merchants that mistakenly think I'm likely to order from them again if they e-mail me three times a week.
The only merchant that comes to mind that downright sold the address I gave them was AquaGlobes, though I kinda expected that given their spammy website/order process.
Oh, one warning to anyone who tries this spam prevention scheme...  A lot of websites are under the impression that e-mail addresses are good identifiers.
So I basically have to be very consistent in how I generate throw-away addresses since I often need to use them to log in to things.
Why this practice has caught on I'll have no idea.
I mean, typing a 20 character e-mail address is more difficult than a 10 character username, and people change e-mail addresses all the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707261</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707163</id>
	<title>They got my email</title>
	<author>Archfeld</author>
	<datestamp>1247690040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and details regarding wow from this web site. Irony abounds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and details regarding wow from this web site .
Irony abounds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and details regarding wow from this web site.
Irony abounds.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708499</id>
	<title>Re:Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>Idbar</author>
	<datestamp>1247653320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe you're right pointing out that "spam" and "scam" are different, but people have now tied those two really tight.<br> <br>
As for replying to spam? I'm guilty. Before I knew it wouldn't work, I replied several times asking them to remove me from their lists. Turns out, little attention they pay, unless for using your address to annoy you even more.<br> <br>
But yeah, I've replied to them as I believe "remove me from your list" falls into that category. Shame on me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe you 're right pointing out that " spam " and " scam " are different , but people have now tied those two really tight .
As for replying to spam ?
I 'm guilty .
Before I knew it would n't work , I replied several times asking them to remove me from their lists .
Turns out , little attention they pay , unless for using your address to annoy you even more .
But yeah , I 've replied to them as I believe " remove me from your list " falls into that category .
Shame on me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe you're right pointing out that "spam" and "scam" are different, but people have now tied those two really tight.
As for replying to spam?
I'm guilty.
Before I knew it wouldn't work, I replied several times asking them to remove me from their lists.
Turns out, little attention they pay, unless for using your address to annoy you even more.
But yeah, I've replied to them as I believe "remove me from your list" falls into that category.
Shame on me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707171</id>
	<title>Of course people respond...</title>
	<author>Heed00</author>
	<datestamp>1247690160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>How else are they going to win the Nigerian lottery? You can't win if you don't enter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How else are they going to win the Nigerian lottery ?
You ca n't win if you do n't enter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How else are they going to win the Nigerian lottery?
You can't win if you don't enter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28710305</id>
	<title>Re:Of course people respond...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247661960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't understand how you believe such crap. I always <i>unsubscribe</i> to those mailing lists..I mean they do give you the option to unsubscribe. Thank god I don't belong to that 12\% of idiots!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand how you believe such crap .
I always unsubscribe to those mailing lists..I mean they do give you the option to unsubscribe .
Thank god I do n't belong to that 12 \ % of idiots !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand how you believe such crap.
I always unsubscribe to those mailing lists..I mean they do give you the option to unsubscribe.
Thank god I don't belong to that 12\% of idiots!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707171</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707303</id>
	<title>sounds low</title>
	<author>gEvil (beta)</author>
	<datestamp>1247690700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hate to say this, but 12\% sounds really low. I'd expect it to be somewhere in the 20-30\% range.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate to say this , but 12 \ % sounds really low .
I 'd expect it to be somewhere in the 20-30 \ % range .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate to say this, but 12\% sounds really low.
I'd expect it to be somewhere in the 20-30\% range.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709387</id>
	<title>More spams from Fwd's</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247657280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had a 'clean' e-mail account I used often for message, signed up on boards, etc. I even posted it on a few message boards, and got little to no spam. I gave the message to a few friends, and started getting those [Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: This is Funny!] messages. My spam box exploded after this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a 'clean ' e-mail account I used often for message , signed up on boards , etc .
I even posted it on a few message boards , and got little to no spam .
I gave the message to a few friends , and started getting those [ Fwd : Fwd : Fwd : Fwd : This is Funny !
] messages .
My spam box exploded after this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a 'clean' e-mail account I used often for message, signed up on boards, etc.
I even posted it on a few message boards, and got little to no spam.
I gave the message to a few friends, and started getting those [Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: This is Funny!
] messages.
My spam box exploded after this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707185</id>
	<title>Oh no!</title>
	<author>isolovelinux</author>
	<datestamp>1247690220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is so cool! I never responded to spam but I once heard about some guys who set up a spammer to call some guy at 4am. LOL! I hope no one else responds--this would damage the Open Source community's resources!</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is so cool !
I never responded to spam but I once heard about some guys who set up a spammer to call some guy at 4am .
LOL ! I hope no one else responds--this would damage the Open Source community 's resources !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is so cool!
I never responded to spam but I once heard about some guys who set up a spammer to call some guy at 4am.
LOL! I hope no one else responds--this would damage the Open Source community's resources!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708615</id>
	<title>Re:No suprises. Some problems.</title>
	<author>BobMcD</author>
	<datestamp>1247653920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure a distinction is necessary to this study.  That level of detail is certainly useful in a different context, but if spam merely meant 'advertisement via email they were not expecting' it would be equally valid.</p><p>Lets face it, few if any of us actually say 'yes, please annoy the hell out of me as I am allergic to Google'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure a distinction is necessary to this study .
That level of detail is certainly useful in a different context , but if spam merely meant 'advertisement via email they were not expecting ' it would be equally valid.Lets face it , few if any of us actually say 'yes , please annoy the hell out of me as I am allergic to Google' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure a distinction is necessary to this study.
That level of detail is certainly useful in a different context, but if spam merely meant 'advertisement via email they were not expecting' it would be equally valid.Lets face it, few if any of us actually say 'yes, please annoy the hell out of me as I am allergic to Google'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708219</id>
	<title>Re:Lately...</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1247652000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Forge your huge love sword</p></div></blockquote><p><i>My theory is I have a really good friend who goes through a whole lot of effort just to make me smile. Either that, or it's an insult on my manhood designed to make me feel inadequate.</i></p><p>Sounds to me like they hate you and are trying to trick you into sticking your "love sword" into a fire and then smashing it with a hammer!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Forge your huge love swordMy theory is I have a really good friend who goes through a whole lot of effort just to make me smile .
Either that , or it 's an insult on my manhood designed to make me feel inadequate.Sounds to me like they hate you and are trying to trick you into sticking your " love sword " into a fire and then smashing it with a hammer !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forge your huge love swordMy theory is I have a really good friend who goes through a whole lot of effort just to make me smile.
Either that, or it's an insult on my manhood designed to make me feel inadequate.Sounds to me like they hate you and are trying to trick you into sticking your "love sword" into a fire and then smashing it with a hammer!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707547</id>
	<title>Sources</title>
	<author>Phroggy</author>
	<datestamp>1247648640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What disturbs me isn't the spam that comes from botnets of infected Windows PCs on residential broadband connections.  I expect that.  What bothers me is the spam that comes from dedicated servers colocated in actual datacenters, with static IP addresses, domain names, reverse DNS properly configured, and valid SPF records.</p><p>For example, these are apparently all owned by one spammer, that I've received spam from in the past few days:<br>mx5.mit9zinger.com<br>mx2.finogento.com<br>mx1.finogento.com<br>mx4.pinchmir.com<br>mx1.travel1soe.com<br>mx2.kintopuzi.com<br>mx1.petchin.com<br>mx1.abaganawena.com<br>mx1.tineraset.com<br>mx2.kimbolimbo.com<br>mx2.greenzetrain.com</p><p>From a technical standpoint, everything looks legitimate.  Because they offer an apparently-working opt-out mechanism (I'm sure it really just marks your address as "confirmed", but you'd have to come up with a way to prove that) and they're not spoofing any headers, they're probably not in violation of the CAN-SPAM Act.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What disturbs me is n't the spam that comes from botnets of infected Windows PCs on residential broadband connections .
I expect that .
What bothers me is the spam that comes from dedicated servers colocated in actual datacenters , with static IP addresses , domain names , reverse DNS properly configured , and valid SPF records.For example , these are apparently all owned by one spammer , that I 've received spam from in the past few days : mx5.mit9zinger.commx2.finogento.commx1.finogento.commx4.pinchmir.commx1.travel1soe.commx2.kintopuzi.commx1.petchin.commx1.abaganawena.commx1.tineraset.commx2.kimbolimbo.commx2.greenzetrain.comFrom a technical standpoint , everything looks legitimate .
Because they offer an apparently-working opt-out mechanism ( I 'm sure it really just marks your address as " confirmed " , but you 'd have to come up with a way to prove that ) and they 're not spoofing any headers , they 're probably not in violation of the CAN-SPAM Act .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What disturbs me isn't the spam that comes from botnets of infected Windows PCs on residential broadband connections.
I expect that.
What bothers me is the spam that comes from dedicated servers colocated in actual datacenters, with static IP addresses, domain names, reverse DNS properly configured, and valid SPF records.For example, these are apparently all owned by one spammer, that I've received spam from in the past few days:mx5.mit9zinger.commx2.finogento.commx1.finogento.commx4.pinchmir.commx1.travel1soe.commx2.kintopuzi.commx1.petchin.commx1.abaganawena.commx1.tineraset.commx2.kimbolimbo.commx2.greenzetrain.comFrom a technical standpoint, everything looks legitimate.
Because they offer an apparently-working opt-out mechanism (I'm sure it really just marks your address as "confirmed", but you'd have to come up with a way to prove that) and they're not spoofing any headers, they're probably not in violation of the CAN-SPAM Act.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28722467</id>
	<title>Re:My email address has only been on Slashdot</title>
	<author>MrBasil</author>
	<datestamp>1247737440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>maybe your email was guessed via a dictionary?</htmltext>
<tokenext>maybe your email was guessed via a dictionary ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>maybe your email was guessed via a dictionary?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708451</id>
	<title>Re:My email address has only been on Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247653140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's preposterous libel. Slashdot has the most advanced antispam technology devised. Feel free to email me for further details.
</p><p>
Sincerely, <br>
CmdrTaco ( malda@slashdot.org )
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's preposterous libel .
Slashdot has the most advanced antispam technology devised .
Feel free to email me for further details .
Sincerely , CmdrTaco ( malda @ slashdot.org )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's preposterous libel.
Slashdot has the most advanced antispam technology devised.
Feel free to email me for further details.
Sincerely, 
CmdrTaco ( malda@slashdot.org )
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708465</id>
	<title>Re:Joe Job</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1247653200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I was Joe Jobbed some years back. It was the highlight of my internet year. Seriously, it gave me giggles for a few days. I had a few "fuck off" replies but most were of the "take me off your list" type. One was from the CEO of NTL, or more likely his PA. Giggles, like I said. I responded to each email explaining what a Joe Job was, but no one replied back after that.</p></div><p>Here's the tricky part:  How many emails "responding" to the Joe-job victim are emails from the spammer trying to validate the Joe-jobbed address?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was Joe Jobbed some years back .
It was the highlight of my internet year .
Seriously , it gave me giggles for a few days .
I had a few " fuck off " replies but most were of the " take me off your list " type .
One was from the CEO of NTL , or more likely his PA. Giggles , like I said .
I responded to each email explaining what a Joe Job was , but no one replied back after that.Here 's the tricky part : How many emails " responding " to the Joe-job victim are emails from the spammer trying to validate the Joe-jobbed address ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was Joe Jobbed some years back.
It was the highlight of my internet year.
Seriously, it gave me giggles for a few days.
I had a few "fuck off" replies but most were of the "take me off your list" type.
One was from the CEO of NTL, or more likely his PA. Giggles, like I said.
I responded to each email explaining what a Joe Job was, but no one replied back after that.Here's the tricky part:  How many emails "responding" to the Joe-job victim are emails from the spammer trying to validate the Joe-jobbed address?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707863</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707293</id>
	<title>Re:Definition of "Spam?"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247690700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>One could mark a legitimate business' unsolicited email as spam, but that doesn't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy.</i></p><p>Unsolicited email from a legitimate business is SPAM too. Just a less evil spam with an opt out function that works.</p><p>Though sometimes its easier to just not even do that and block those messages just in case that opt out is a trick to see if your email is alive or not.</p><p>But yeah unsolicited email, no matter who it is from, is by definition is spam.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One could mark a legitimate business ' unsolicited email as spam , but that does n't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy.Unsolicited email from a legitimate business is SPAM too .
Just a less evil spam with an opt out function that works.Though sometimes its easier to just not even do that and block those messages just in case that opt out is a trick to see if your email is alive or not.But yeah unsolicited email , no matter who it is from , is by definition is spam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One could mark a legitimate business' unsolicited email as spam, but that doesn't mean that purchasing a product because of the material in one of those emails is newsworthy.Unsolicited email from a legitimate business is SPAM too.
Just a less evil spam with an opt out function that works.Though sometimes its easier to just not even do that and block those messages just in case that opt out is a trick to see if your email is alive or not.But yeah unsolicited email, no matter who it is from, is by definition is spam.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708081</id>
	<title>LinkedIn sold my email address</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247651220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A friend of mine invited me to linkedin by using my personal email address and lo and behold I started getting a ton of spam relating to owning a business.</p><p>Never EVER EVER type your (or a friends') email address in to a website no matter how reputable they seem.<br>They will change their privacy policy the second they decide to make a buck.</p><p>And I hope the linkedin people go to hell because now that email address is about useless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A friend of mine invited me to linkedin by using my personal email address and lo and behold I started getting a ton of spam relating to owning a business.Never EVER EVER type your ( or a friends ' ) email address in to a website no matter how reputable they seem.They will change their privacy policy the second they decide to make a buck.And I hope the linkedin people go to hell because now that email address is about useless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A friend of mine invited me to linkedin by using my personal email address and lo and behold I started getting a ton of spam relating to owning a business.Never EVER EVER type your (or a friends') email address in to a website no matter how reputable they seem.They will change their privacy policy the second they decide to make a buck.And I hope the linkedin people go to hell because now that email address is about useless.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708709</id>
	<title>Re:They got my email</title>
	<author>Beorytis</author>
	<datestamp>1247654400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That's not irony, that's exactly what the study says:</p></div><p>Cool!  More proof that the word "ironic" is undergoing a semantic shift!  Soon, more people will take "ironic" to mean merely "coincidental" than "coincidental and contradictory".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not irony , that 's exactly what the study says : Cool !
More proof that the word " ironic " is undergoing a semantic shift !
Soon , more people will take " ironic " to mean merely " coincidental " than " coincidental and contradictory " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not irony, that's exactly what the study says:Cool!
More proof that the word "ironic" is undergoing a semantic shift!
Soon, more people will take "ironic" to mean merely "coincidental" than "coincidental and contradictory".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28710051</id>
	<title>Rebates.</title>
	<author>seebs</author>
	<datestamp>1247660580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I submitted a rebate form to MSI.  They submitted the address to multiple spam sources.</p><p>No, I'm not guessing.  I got IP addresses from helpful people at a couple of the companies, and it correlates with the day they found out I was suing them for refusing to honor the rebate.  So, that's one way it can happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I submitted a rebate form to MSI .
They submitted the address to multiple spam sources.No , I 'm not guessing .
I got IP addresses from helpful people at a couple of the companies , and it correlates with the day they found out I was suing them for refusing to honor the rebate .
So , that 's one way it can happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I submitted a rebate form to MSI.
They submitted the address to multiple spam sources.No, I'm not guessing.
I got IP addresses from helpful people at a couple of the companies, and it correlates with the day they found out I was suing them for refusing to honor the rebate.
So, that's one way it can happen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713649</id>
	<title>Re:That's why...</title>
	<author>u38cg</author>
	<datestamp>1247776800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It doesn't make much difference.  My email address is in the clear, here and everywhere else I post.  I average between 300-1000 spam emails a month, and the bulk of that is *still* to the address I used to use to post to Usenet.  As far as I can tell, spammers don't scrape the web much any more.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't make much difference .
My email address is in the clear , here and everywhere else I post .
I average between 300-1000 spam emails a month , and the bulk of that is * still * to the address I used to use to post to Usenet .
As far as I can tell , spammers do n't scrape the web much any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't make much difference.
My email address is in the clear, here and everywhere else I post.
I average between 300-1000 spam emails a month, and the bulk of that is *still* to the address I used to use to post to Usenet.
As far as I can tell, spammers don't scrape the web much any more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707133</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711773</id>
	<title>Re:That's why...</title>
	<author>neoform</author>
	<datestamp>1247672160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's why I switched my email to gmail.. i get at most 3 spams a day in my inbox.. most days I get none.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why I switched my email to gmail.. i get at most 3 spams a day in my inbox.. most days I get none .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why I switched my email to gmail.. i get at most 3 spams a day in my inbox.. most days I get none.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707133</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708265
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28710037
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28710305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28714173
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28717341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709369
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28714015
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707367
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711613
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28719365
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707181
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713735
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707225
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711071
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713649
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708499
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707935
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707735
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708173
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707765
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28712683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28714937
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708447
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713775
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28712501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709873
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707873
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707567
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711679
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707311
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28715447
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708227
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708799
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707521
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28722467
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707225
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707865
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28710305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28712399
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707171
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709837
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_15_1820247_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28714015
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707871
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707567
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711679
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711613
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28715447
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708291
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28717341
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708081
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709371
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28719365
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707547
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707133
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711773
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713649
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707543
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707181
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713735
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707331
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707333
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707285
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708093
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707163
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707201
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708283
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711317
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707225
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707727
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711071
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707667
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708499
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707293
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707367
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707521
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707603
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707433
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709835
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709369
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707311
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708099
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708263
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28722467
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28712683
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707477
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707281
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708615
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707261
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708101
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708243
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707633
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708465
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707171
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709837
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28710305
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28712399
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28714173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28712501
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711777
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713775
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28711709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708379
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708689
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708265
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28710037
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708395
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28709101
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707303
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707499
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707731
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708447
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708139
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28714937
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707765
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707959
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707935
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28713319
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707573
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_15_1820247.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28707299
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_15_1820247.28708227
</commentlist>
</conversation>
