<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_29_1413249</id>
	<title>John Hodgman On the Coming Geek Culture</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1256831400000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Famous writer and minor television personality John Hodgman posits the end of the culture of Jockdom in favor of a <a href="http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2009/10/john\_hodgman\_a\_literary\_conver.php">cultural reverence for engineers, scientists and Slashdot readers</a>: 'Jockdom is very noble. It's not deliberative. It's certainly the best way to win wars. It's the best way to motivate teams of people to fulfill a goal &mdash; not just war, but getting things done. The most important way to motivate a factory floor. But as you know, we're not as much of a manufacturing society as we were before. China and other big industrial nations are rewarding their nerds and technicians rather than creating a culture that makes fun of them &mdash; it would be wise for us to embrace the book-smart as much as our culture has traditionally embraced the street-smart, the jock-smart. I'm not saying nerds must have their revenge; I'm just saying the time for wedgies is at an end.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Famous writer and minor television personality John Hodgman posits the end of the culture of Jockdom in favor of a cultural reverence for engineers , scientists and Slashdot readers : 'Jockdom is very noble .
It 's not deliberative .
It 's certainly the best way to win wars .
It 's the best way to motivate teams of people to fulfill a goal    not just war , but getting things done .
The most important way to motivate a factory floor .
But as you know , we 're not as much of a manufacturing society as we were before .
China and other big industrial nations are rewarding their nerds and technicians rather than creating a culture that makes fun of them    it would be wise for us to embrace the book-smart as much as our culture has traditionally embraced the street-smart , the jock-smart .
I 'm not saying nerds must have their revenge ; I 'm just saying the time for wedgies is at an end .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Famous writer and minor television personality John Hodgman posits the end of the culture of Jockdom in favor of a cultural reverence for engineers, scientists and Slashdot readers: 'Jockdom is very noble.
It's not deliberative.
It's certainly the best way to win wars.
It's the best way to motivate teams of people to fulfill a goal — not just war, but getting things done.
The most important way to motivate a factory floor.
But as you know, we're not as much of a manufacturing society as we were before.
China and other big industrial nations are rewarding their nerds and technicians rather than creating a culture that makes fun of them — it would be wise for us to embrace the book-smart as much as our culture has traditionally embraced the street-smart, the jock-smart.
I'm not saying nerds must have their revenge; I'm just saying the time for wedgies is at an end.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914033</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256844900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remind me, which war did Machiavelli win?</p><p>Marcus Aurelius was distinguished by picking a decent general to win a war for him, his writing on Stoic philosophy had little to do with winning wars, and it's pretty debatable who Sun Tzu actually was.</p><p>Wow, three categories of people, that's much better than two...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remind me , which war did Machiavelli win ? Marcus Aurelius was distinguished by picking a decent general to win a war for him , his writing on Stoic philosophy had little to do with winning wars , and it 's pretty debatable who Sun Tzu actually was.Wow , three categories of people , that 's much better than two.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remind me, which war did Machiavelli win?Marcus Aurelius was distinguished by picking a decent general to win a war for him, his writing on Stoic philosophy had little to do with winning wars, and it's pretty debatable who Sun Tzu actually was.Wow, three categories of people, that's much better than two...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916231</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256810100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The jockdom is for the foot soldiers, not the leaders or strategists.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The jockdom is for the foot soldiers , not the leaders or strategists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The jockdom is for the foot soldiers, not the leaders or strategists.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912273</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256838120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> There should probably be three categories, 'jock','nerd','loser/lamer'</p></div><p>I really thought you were going to say "dicks, pussies and assholes"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There should probably be three categories , 'jock','nerd','loser/lamer'I really thought you were going to say " dicks , pussies and assholes "</tokentext>
<sentencetext> There should probably be three categories, 'jock','nerd','loser/lamer'I really thought you were going to say "dicks, pussies and assholes"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912365</id>
	<title>Johnny is a bit slow...</title>
	<author>TheGreatOrangePeel</author>
	<datestamp>1256838480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Geek culture has been around for a long while now. A large number of movies have been based on comic books lately and have been successful. The SyFy channel is enjoying some of the highest viewership it has ever had and, in part, due to remakes of some Science Fiction classics like Battlestar Galactica (even MST3K pokes fun at Battlestar, for crying out loud!). Video games are considered a daily activity by many. Don't even get me started at how huge Magic: The Gathering got<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... The fact of the matter is, Geek Culture is now a staple of American culture. The resident computer geek is someone that gets thanked, paid and taken out to dinner for stripping all the crap off of your friend's computer. I'd have to say John hasn't been paying very close attention.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Geek culture has been around for a long while now .
A large number of movies have been based on comic books lately and have been successful .
The SyFy channel is enjoying some of the highest viewership it has ever had and , in part , due to remakes of some Science Fiction classics like Battlestar Galactica ( even MST3K pokes fun at Battlestar , for crying out loud ! ) .
Video games are considered a daily activity by many .
Do n't even get me started at how huge Magic : The Gathering got ... The fact of the matter is , Geek Culture is now a staple of American culture .
The resident computer geek is someone that gets thanked , paid and taken out to dinner for stripping all the crap off of your friend 's computer .
I 'd have to say John has n't been paying very close attention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Geek culture has been around for a long while now.
A large number of movies have been based on comic books lately and have been successful.
The SyFy channel is enjoying some of the highest viewership it has ever had and, in part, due to remakes of some Science Fiction classics like Battlestar Galactica (even MST3K pokes fun at Battlestar, for crying out loud!).
Video games are considered a daily activity by many.
Don't even get me started at how huge Magic: The Gathering got ... The fact of the matter is, Geek Culture is now a staple of American culture.
The resident computer geek is someone that gets thanked, paid and taken out to dinner for stripping all the crap off of your friend's computer.
I'd have to say John hasn't been paying very close attention.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914451</id>
	<title>What a moronic reply</title>
	<author>MikeRT</author>
	<datestamp>1256846580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At no point did I defend unions. Your entire rant about them is absolutely irrelevant because it does nothing to address what I said about the very concept of working in a factory being considered a trashy, peon, loser job. To a lesser extent, but still meaningfully felt, tradesmen experience the same thing. The only thing, and I emphasize the only thing, that keeps engineers out of this is the college degree!</p><p>People like you don't even grasp what the hell you are saying. Fuck the industrial age? Well fuck the very computer you are using! Fuck the car you drive, fuck half of the materials in your house! Fuck the drugs the keep you alive. Fuck the cheap clothes you wear, and fuck the cheap food you eat. Fuck 90\% of the material possession you have had, have and every will have, then.</p><p>Guess what? Someone had to make them. The majority of them are made industrially. The majority of what the US makes today is intellectual property and new financial instruments like the ones that Goldman Sachs and company used to plunder the economy and mortgage market. That's it. We don't really produce much more domestically than Latin America does. Probably less, actually, for our size and position than Brazil.</p><p>At some point, the rest of the world is going to stop investing in us, and all of those government employees, non-profits, educational institutions, etc. are going to have to wake up to the fact that they aren't producing any wealth worth mentioning. They aren't making anything. They aren't adding value right into the economy. The schools will survive; they'll privatize and compete like businesses like they should be already. The rest, well, not so bright of a future for a workplace fill with all manner of college debt and cliff notes-level knowledge of liberal arts rubbish, but little direct skill in making something....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At no point did I defend unions .
Your entire rant about them is absolutely irrelevant because it does nothing to address what I said about the very concept of working in a factory being considered a trashy , peon , loser job .
To a lesser extent , but still meaningfully felt , tradesmen experience the same thing .
The only thing , and I emphasize the only thing , that keeps engineers out of this is the college degree ! People like you do n't even grasp what the hell you are saying .
Fuck the industrial age ?
Well fuck the very computer you are using !
Fuck the car you drive , fuck half of the materials in your house !
Fuck the drugs the keep you alive .
Fuck the cheap clothes you wear , and fuck the cheap food you eat .
Fuck 90 \ % of the material possession you have had , have and every will have , then.Guess what ?
Someone had to make them .
The majority of them are made industrially .
The majority of what the US makes today is intellectual property and new financial instruments like the ones that Goldman Sachs and company used to plunder the economy and mortgage market .
That 's it .
We do n't really produce much more domestically than Latin America does .
Probably less , actually , for our size and position than Brazil.At some point , the rest of the world is going to stop investing in us , and all of those government employees , non-profits , educational institutions , etc .
are going to have to wake up to the fact that they are n't producing any wealth worth mentioning .
They are n't making anything .
They are n't adding value right into the economy .
The schools will survive ; they 'll privatize and compete like businesses like they should be already .
The rest , well , not so bright of a future for a workplace fill with all manner of college debt and cliff notes-level knowledge of liberal arts rubbish , but little direct skill in making something... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At no point did I defend unions.
Your entire rant about them is absolutely irrelevant because it does nothing to address what I said about the very concept of working in a factory being considered a trashy, peon, loser job.
To a lesser extent, but still meaningfully felt, tradesmen experience the same thing.
The only thing, and I emphasize the only thing, that keeps engineers out of this is the college degree!People like you don't even grasp what the hell you are saying.
Fuck the industrial age?
Well fuck the very computer you are using!
Fuck the car you drive, fuck half of the materials in your house!
Fuck the drugs the keep you alive.
Fuck the cheap clothes you wear, and fuck the cheap food you eat.
Fuck 90\% of the material possession you have had, have and every will have, then.Guess what?
Someone had to make them.
The majority of them are made industrially.
The majority of what the US makes today is intellectual property and new financial instruments like the ones that Goldman Sachs and company used to plunder the economy and mortgage market.
That's it.
We don't really produce much more domestically than Latin America does.
Probably less, actually, for our size and position than Brazil.At some point, the rest of the world is going to stop investing in us, and all of those government employees, non-profits, educational institutions, etc.
are going to have to wake up to the fact that they aren't producing any wealth worth mentioning.
They aren't making anything.
They aren't adding value right into the economy.
The schools will survive; they'll privatize and compete like businesses like they should be already.
The rest, well, not so bright of a future for a workplace fill with all manner of college debt and cliff notes-level knowledge of liberal arts rubbish, but little direct skill in making something....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912611</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1256839440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's the thing, Hodgman is partially right, because in the world of Jockdom, you have 2 opposing forces: those of the jocks (the war mongers), and those of the academics (the folks you're talking about). The football hero ended up being the general, and the brainy Harvard grad ended up being the politician or war planner. And guess what, in high school,  they both hated "the geeks".
<br>
<br>
Nerds, geeks, normal scientists/engineers that aren't working at Princeton have only been around for 50 years, they are not academic, nor jock, just normal people with a love for science and technology. We now have 3 opposing forces. And that's where Hodgman is leading towards...
<br>
<br>
Note along side the geeks, the business wonks are rising as well, that's those folks who are like geeks, technology savvy, but focused on their MBA credentials, VCs and their network--yeah I'm talking to you MIT/Stanford grads.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the thing , Hodgman is partially right , because in the world of Jockdom , you have 2 opposing forces : those of the jocks ( the war mongers ) , and those of the academics ( the folks you 're talking about ) .
The football hero ended up being the general , and the brainy Harvard grad ended up being the politician or war planner .
And guess what , in high school , they both hated " the geeks " .
Nerds , geeks , normal scientists/engineers that are n't working at Princeton have only been around for 50 years , they are not academic , nor jock , just normal people with a love for science and technology .
We now have 3 opposing forces .
And that 's where Hodgman is leading towards.. . Note along side the geeks , the business wonks are rising as well , that 's those folks who are like geeks , technology savvy , but focused on their MBA credentials , VCs and their network--yeah I 'm talking to you MIT/Stanford grads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the thing, Hodgman is partially right, because in the world of Jockdom, you have 2 opposing forces: those of the jocks (the war mongers), and those of the academics (the folks you're talking about).
The football hero ended up being the general, and the brainy Harvard grad ended up being the politician or war planner.
And guess what, in high school,  they both hated "the geeks".
Nerds, geeks, normal scientists/engineers that aren't working at Princeton have only been around for 50 years, they are not academic, nor jock, just normal people with a love for science and technology.
We now have 3 opposing forces.
And that's where Hodgman is leading towards...


Note along side the geeks, the business wonks are rising as well, that's those folks who are like geeks, technology savvy, but focused on their MBA credentials, VCs and their network--yeah I'm talking to you MIT/Stanford grads.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29926483</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>RazorSharp</author>
	<datestamp>1256929020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No dude, the French guy is right. It's not like the protagonists in French films are winners from the start, they have their flaws, but American protagonists tend to have little to no redeeming values. They're nothing but a bundle of flaws. Look at Transformers or Spider-man. Had Peter Parker not become Spider-man Mary-Jane would never have been his. It's always some ridiculous circumstance which, although a great conflict and seeming detriment to all involved, is not only resolved by the protagonist, BUT WORKS TO HIS ADVANTAGE. "Good thing all those people died and the world was in danger, otherwise I would never have lost my virginity."</p><p>If you think the French want to monopolize production then you really lack an understanding of their culture. If they wanted to compete with us in an ownership and logo war they wouldn't have a 35 hour work week and more national holidays than our jobs give us vacation days. Your assumption that this guy thinks we're pathetic because he's jealous is just absurd, there's nothing to be jealous of. Why don't you go visit France sometime and see if you can find the "inferiority complex" you speak of? Most of the French I've met come off as arrogant, but it's because they value enjoying life over "being #1!" So American logos are plastered everywhere and we're miserable because we're haunted by our nerd/jock high school dichotomy. Go #1! Meanwhile, the French enjoy the fruits of our labor.</p><p>And how exactly is underdog different from loser?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No dude , the French guy is right .
It 's not like the protagonists in French films are winners from the start , they have their flaws , but American protagonists tend to have little to no redeeming values .
They 're nothing but a bundle of flaws .
Look at Transformers or Spider-man .
Had Peter Parker not become Spider-man Mary-Jane would never have been his .
It 's always some ridiculous circumstance which , although a great conflict and seeming detriment to all involved , is not only resolved by the protagonist , BUT WORKS TO HIS ADVANTAGE .
" Good thing all those people died and the world was in danger , otherwise I would never have lost my virginity .
" If you think the French want to monopolize production then you really lack an understanding of their culture .
If they wanted to compete with us in an ownership and logo war they would n't have a 35 hour work week and more national holidays than our jobs give us vacation days .
Your assumption that this guy thinks we 're pathetic because he 's jealous is just absurd , there 's nothing to be jealous of .
Why do n't you go visit France sometime and see if you can find the " inferiority complex " you speak of ?
Most of the French I 've met come off as arrogant , but it 's because they value enjoying life over " being # 1 !
" So American logos are plastered everywhere and we 're miserable because we 're haunted by our nerd/jock high school dichotomy .
Go # 1 !
Meanwhile , the French enjoy the fruits of our labor.And how exactly is underdog different from loser ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No dude, the French guy is right.
It's not like the protagonists in French films are winners from the start, they have their flaws, but American protagonists tend to have little to no redeeming values.
They're nothing but a bundle of flaws.
Look at Transformers or Spider-man.
Had Peter Parker not become Spider-man Mary-Jane would never have been his.
It's always some ridiculous circumstance which, although a great conflict and seeming detriment to all involved, is not only resolved by the protagonist, BUT WORKS TO HIS ADVANTAGE.
"Good thing all those people died and the world was in danger, otherwise I would never have lost my virginity.
"If you think the French want to monopolize production then you really lack an understanding of their culture.
If they wanted to compete with us in an ownership and logo war they wouldn't have a 35 hour work week and more national holidays than our jobs give us vacation days.
Your assumption that this guy thinks we're pathetic because he's jealous is just absurd, there's nothing to be jealous of.
Why don't you go visit France sometime and see if you can find the "inferiority complex" you speak of?
Most of the French I've met come off as arrogant, but it's because they value enjoying life over "being #1!
" So American logos are plastered everywhere and we're miserable because we're haunted by our nerd/jock high school dichotomy.
Go #1!
Meanwhile, the French enjoy the fruits of our labor.And how exactly is underdog different from loser?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921153</id>
	<title>MBA</title>
	<author>jawahar</author>
	<datestamp>1256845740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I sincerely advice <i>geeks</i> to explore the <a href="http://www.netmba.com/" title="netmba.com" rel="nofollow">unknown</a> [netmba.com] world.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I sincerely advice geeks to explore the unknown [ netmba.com ] world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sincerely advice geeks to explore the unknown [netmba.com] world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911821</id>
	<title>Jocks are FEARFUL !</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256836560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The jocks [or anyone who chases dominance] are deeply insecure, and need external support for their fragile egos.  Why else be so sensitive to perceived slights?  The truly strong merely shrug them off.  Strength means confidence, and confidence does not require continual demonstration.</p><p>Here I am talking only about constructive society.  There are also predatory societies where it is necessary to grab eveything you can.  Doomed to implosion.  Or in dealing with the stupid, who sometimes need to see teeth.</p><p>Since these guys should know themselves best, I take them at their word.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The jocks [ or anyone who chases dominance ] are deeply insecure , and need external support for their fragile egos .
Why else be so sensitive to perceived slights ?
The truly strong merely shrug them off .
Strength means confidence , and confidence does not require continual demonstration.Here I am talking only about constructive society .
There are also predatory societies where it is necessary to grab eveything you can .
Doomed to implosion .
Or in dealing with the stupid , who sometimes need to see teeth.Since these guys should know themselves best , I take them at their word .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The jocks [or anyone who chases dominance] are deeply insecure, and need external support for their fragile egos.
Why else be so sensitive to perceived slights?
The truly strong merely shrug them off.
Strength means confidence, and confidence does not require continual demonstration.Here I am talking only about constructive society.
There are also predatory societies where it is necessary to grab eveything you can.
Doomed to implosion.
Or in dealing with the stupid, who sometimes need to see teeth.Since these guys should know themselves best, I take them at their word.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916241</id>
	<title>Re:american labor is too expensive</title>
	<author>Have Brain Will Rent</author>
	<datestamp>1256810160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr><i>...fuck... fuck... fucking... fuckity fuck fuck.. fuck... fuck your fetishization of the industrial age as all we should aspire to. welcome the poorer, more mellower american age. time to step off the world stage as its master, and fuck you to those of you who think we need to stay in that role for some reason</i> </p><p>
That mellow you kept talking about? You might want to try a little of that yourself. I'm just sayin...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...fuck... fuck... fucking... fuckity fuck fuck.. fuck... fuck your fetishization of the industrial age as all we should aspire to .
welcome the poorer , more mellower american age .
time to step off the world stage as its master , and fuck you to those of you who think we need to stay in that role for some reason That mellow you kept talking about ?
You might want to try a little of that yourself .
I 'm just sayin.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...fuck... fuck... fucking... fuckity fuck fuck.. fuck... fuck your fetishization of the industrial age as all we should aspire to.
welcome the poorer, more mellower american age.
time to step off the world stage as its master, and fuck you to those of you who think we need to stay in that role for some reason 
That mellow you kept talking about?
You might want to try a little of that yourself.
I'm just sayin...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912375</id>
	<title>Nerds dominate media</title>
	<author>cretog8</author>
	<datestamp>1256838540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, maybe overstated. But I think it was 2 years ago or so that I saw Conan O'Brien interviewing Quentin Tarantino, and WOW, those are two enormous nerds. From what I've seen of Tarantino, he can't help himself, and maybe O'Brien can but instead makes fun of himself for it. These are the people defining pop culture, and they're us (well, except they're a lot better at it than me, but...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , maybe overstated .
But I think it was 2 years ago or so that I saw Conan O'Brien interviewing Quentin Tarantino , and WOW , those are two enormous nerds .
From what I 've seen of Tarantino , he ca n't help himself , and maybe O'Brien can but instead makes fun of himself for it .
These are the people defining pop culture , and they 're us ( well , except they 're a lot better at it than me , but... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, maybe overstated.
But I think it was 2 years ago or so that I saw Conan O'Brien interviewing Quentin Tarantino, and WOW, those are two enormous nerds.
From what I've seen of Tarantino, he can't help himself, and maybe O'Brien can but instead makes fun of himself for it.
These are the people defining pop culture, and they're us (well, except they're a lot better at it than me, but...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922291</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>skiman1979</author>
	<datestamp>1256907600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I played sports in elementary school, little league baseball, and I still got bullied.  Admittedly, I wasn't very good at baseball though, but the main person that bullied me admitted several years later he did it because of jealousy of my grades, not because I sucked at sports.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I played sports in elementary school , little league baseball , and I still got bullied .
Admittedly , I was n't very good at baseball though , but the main person that bullied me admitted several years later he did it because of jealousy of my grades , not because I sucked at sports .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I played sports in elementary school, little league baseball, and I still got bullied.
Admittedly, I wasn't very good at baseball though, but the main person that bullied me admitted several years later he did it because of jealousy of my grades, not because I sucked at sports.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912189</id>
	<title>Geeks at war</title>
	<author>SpinyNorman</author>
	<datestamp>1256837940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Surely getting a geek to build you an atom bomb, or whatever, is more effective then sending a jock off to wrestle with the enemy.</p><p>I've also got to wonder what the survival rate at war is for geeks vs jocks? I'd have to guess the geeks do better, and it's hard to win a war (not to mention somewhat meaningless) if you're dead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Surely getting a geek to build you an atom bomb , or whatever , is more effective then sending a jock off to wrestle with the enemy.I 've also got to wonder what the survival rate at war is for geeks vs jocks ?
I 'd have to guess the geeks do better , and it 's hard to win a war ( not to mention somewhat meaningless ) if you 're dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surely getting a geek to build you an atom bomb, or whatever, is more effective then sending a jock off to wrestle with the enemy.I've also got to wonder what the survival rate at war is for geeks vs jocks?
I'd have to guess the geeks do better, and it's hard to win a war (not to mention somewhat meaningless) if you're dead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912399</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>avandesande</author>
	<datestamp>1256838600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In matters of fashion, swim with the current. In matters of conscience, stand like a rock - Thomas Jefferson</p><p>I don't think this dichotomy ever really existed- better minds have discovered that the most successful people are educated AND social. People fall into stereotypes as an excuse to under-achieve.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In matters of fashion , swim with the current .
In matters of conscience , stand like a rock - Thomas JeffersonI do n't think this dichotomy ever really existed- better minds have discovered that the most successful people are educated AND social .
People fall into stereotypes as an excuse to under-achieve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In matters of fashion, swim with the current.
In matters of conscience, stand like a rock - Thomas JeffersonI don't think this dichotomy ever really existed- better minds have discovered that the most successful people are educated AND social.
People fall into stereotypes as an excuse to under-achieve.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912105</id>
	<title>nerdz</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256837700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Being a geek implies a sense of style. I prefer being a nerd.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Being a geek implies a sense of style .
I prefer being a nerd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being a geek implies a sense of style.
I prefer being a nerd.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922829</id>
	<title>Re:I'm not so sure...</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1256912520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The second article, minus the paywall:</p><p><a href="http://www.afa.org/EdOp/edop\_08-08-08.asp" title="afa.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.afa.org/EdOp/edop\_08-08-08.asp</a> [afa.org]</p><p>There is something hilarious about Neal Stephenson complaining about people lacking affinity for details, I have enjoyed each of his books, but in reading them, it is clear that he likes to absolutely drown in details (So his perspective is probably at the very extreme). I think the new Star Wars films turned out the way they did because George Lucas was actually able to achieve his visions for them, rather than having to work inside some limitations (so the glitz and lack of 'geek out moments' comes from him, not from the option to put the geek out material in other mediums, he could do 15 minute CGI battle scenes, so there was no need to fill things out with a cheap shop of some guys standing around in foam rubber).</p><p>Paul Graham has a habit of forming an opinion based on his life experience and then writing a persuasive essay about that opinion, using an informative tone to bamboozle the reader. Really, there are lots of reasons people are popular or not, and there are plenty of popular sitting at his 'A' table that are geeks or smart or whatever (looking back, I sure wasn't one of those people, but I can think of many who where...).</p><p>The other article just complains about the liberal agenda present in the educational system (I'm paraphrasing a bit, but that does seem to be the ax the author is grinding), without actually backing up any of the mournful wailing it does about the state of science education in the United States (why are all those graduate students coming <em>here</em>?).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The second article , minus the paywall : http : //www.afa.org/EdOp/edop \ _08-08-08.asp [ afa.org ] There is something hilarious about Neal Stephenson complaining about people lacking affinity for details , I have enjoyed each of his books , but in reading them , it is clear that he likes to absolutely drown in details ( So his perspective is probably at the very extreme ) .
I think the new Star Wars films turned out the way they did because George Lucas was actually able to achieve his visions for them , rather than having to work inside some limitations ( so the glitz and lack of 'geek out moments ' comes from him , not from the option to put the geek out material in other mediums , he could do 15 minute CGI battle scenes , so there was no need to fill things out with a cheap shop of some guys standing around in foam rubber ) .Paul Graham has a habit of forming an opinion based on his life experience and then writing a persuasive essay about that opinion , using an informative tone to bamboozle the reader .
Really , there are lots of reasons people are popular or not , and there are plenty of popular sitting at his 'A ' table that are geeks or smart or whatever ( looking back , I sure was n't one of those people , but I can think of many who where... ) .The other article just complains about the liberal agenda present in the educational system ( I 'm paraphrasing a bit , but that does seem to be the ax the author is grinding ) , without actually backing up any of the mournful wailing it does about the state of science education in the United States ( why are all those graduate students coming here ?
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The second article, minus the paywall:http://www.afa.org/EdOp/edop\_08-08-08.asp [afa.org]There is something hilarious about Neal Stephenson complaining about people lacking affinity for details, I have enjoyed each of his books, but in reading them, it is clear that he likes to absolutely drown in details (So his perspective is probably at the very extreme).
I think the new Star Wars films turned out the way they did because George Lucas was actually able to achieve his visions for them, rather than having to work inside some limitations (so the glitz and lack of 'geek out moments' comes from him, not from the option to put the geek out material in other mediums, he could do 15 minute CGI battle scenes, so there was no need to fill things out with a cheap shop of some guys standing around in foam rubber).Paul Graham has a habit of forming an opinion based on his life experience and then writing a persuasive essay about that opinion, using an informative tone to bamboozle the reader.
Really, there are lots of reasons people are popular or not, and there are plenty of popular sitting at his 'A' table that are geeks or smart or whatever (looking back, I sure wasn't one of those people, but I can think of many who where...).The other article just complains about the liberal agenda present in the educational system (I'm paraphrasing a bit, but that does seem to be the ax the author is grinding), without actually backing up any of the mournful wailing it does about the state of science education in the United States (why are all those graduate students coming here?
).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912737</id>
	<title>Sounds a lot like his roast of Obama</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256839860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Link <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yW7OPByRGDY" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">here</a> [youtube.com].  Very funny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Link here [ youtube.com ] .
Very funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Link here [youtube.com].
Very funny.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914823</id>
	<title>Re:I for one</title>
	<author>rolando2424</author>
	<datestamp>1256848200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now is the time to rise up from our comfy chairs, to rise up from our futons, to rise up from the depths of our basements!</p></div><p>Ahhh do I have to?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now is the time to rise up from our comfy chairs , to rise up from our futons , to rise up from the depths of our basements ! Ahhh do I have to ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now is the time to rise up from our comfy chairs, to rise up from our futons, to rise up from the depths of our basements!Ahhh do I have to?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913129</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>Dogbertius</author>
	<datestamp>1256841300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm on top of my grades in a joint computer/biomedical engineering major (graduate in 2 months), presented a paper of mine at an IEEE conference during my undergrad (which is pretty impressive for someone who's only been out of high school for a few years), yet I ran the mixed martial arts/UFC club at my university, for 3 years, was heavily involved in dance clubs, soccer, karate, and still spar on a weekly basis to this day. Top it off with being triligual. The notion of being simultaneously athletic, educated, intelligent, and cultured, seems (to my disappointment) to many, non-existent or impossible to achieve. A shame.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm on top of my grades in a joint computer/biomedical engineering major ( graduate in 2 months ) , presented a paper of mine at an IEEE conference during my undergrad ( which is pretty impressive for someone who 's only been out of high school for a few years ) , yet I ran the mixed martial arts/UFC club at my university , for 3 years , was heavily involved in dance clubs , soccer , karate , and still spar on a weekly basis to this day .
Top it off with being triligual .
The notion of being simultaneously athletic , educated , intelligent , and cultured , seems ( to my disappointment ) to many , non-existent or impossible to achieve .
A shame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm on top of my grades in a joint computer/biomedical engineering major (graduate in 2 months), presented a paper of mine at an IEEE conference during my undergrad (which is pretty impressive for someone who's only been out of high school for a few years), yet I ran the mixed martial arts/UFC club at my university, for 3 years, was heavily involved in dance clubs, soccer, karate, and still spar on a weekly basis to this day.
Top it off with being triligual.
The notion of being simultaneously athletic, educated, intelligent, and cultured, seems (to my disappointment) to many, non-existent or impossible to achieve.
A shame.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913037</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>Zalbik</author>
	<datestamp>1256840940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The dichotomy between nerds and jocks is a false one, and it has been for some time. The stereotypes assert that "jocks" who are socially active, athletic, and attractive must not have any interest in technology, be smart, or value intellectual pursuits. Likewise, "nerds" who are smart and dedicated to learning must be slobs, socially awkward, and unattractive.</p></div></blockquote><p>I believe Hodgeman's point is more around the dichotomy between society's celebration of jockdom as opposed to nerddom.  How many current professional athletes can the average person name?  50?  100?.  How many Nobel prize scientiest?   Maybe 3?</p><p>Sure, those Nobel prize winners may also be rock climbers, rugby players, what have you, and those professional athletes may have IQ's in th 140's, but that is not what they are being recognized for.</p><p>The fact is, society rewards elite jockdom much more that in does elite nerddom.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The dichotomy between nerds and jocks is a false one , and it has been for some time .
The stereotypes assert that " jocks " who are socially active , athletic , and attractive must not have any interest in technology , be smart , or value intellectual pursuits .
Likewise , " nerds " who are smart and dedicated to learning must be slobs , socially awkward , and unattractive.I believe Hodgeman 's point is more around the dichotomy between society 's celebration of jockdom as opposed to nerddom .
How many current professional athletes can the average person name ?
50 ? 100 ? .
How many Nobel prize scientiest ?
Maybe 3 ? Sure , those Nobel prize winners may also be rock climbers , rugby players , what have you , and those professional athletes may have IQ 's in th 140 's , but that is not what they are being recognized for.The fact is , society rewards elite jockdom much more that in does elite nerddom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The dichotomy between nerds and jocks is a false one, and it has been for some time.
The stereotypes assert that "jocks" who are socially active, athletic, and attractive must not have any interest in technology, be smart, or value intellectual pursuits.
Likewise, "nerds" who are smart and dedicated to learning must be slobs, socially awkward, and unattractive.I believe Hodgeman's point is more around the dichotomy between society's celebration of jockdom as opposed to nerddom.
How many current professional athletes can the average person name?
50?  100?.
How many Nobel prize scientiest?
Maybe 3?Sure, those Nobel prize winners may also be rock climbers, rugby players, what have you, and those professional athletes may have IQ's in th 140's, but that is not what they are being recognized for.The fact is, society rewards elite jockdom much more that in does elite nerddom.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913253</id>
	<title>Sure... But you can't be nerd and a jock.</title>
	<author>denzacar</author>
	<datestamp>1256841900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because main distinction (and a requirement) of a jock is his physical shape and build, while the main distinction of a nerd is always intellectual.</p><p>There is no natural law that prohibits physically endowed humans to also have intellectual tendencies - just look at Dolph Lundgren.<br>But, as the <b>requirement</b> to be a jock is physical, someone born with a nerd body can't just say "Hell... I'll start doing sports too."</p><p>That is why Biff Tannen and his progeny (and ancestors) remain jocks (and bullies) in all incarnations and time-lines - while George McFly and his remain nerds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because main distinction ( and a requirement ) of a jock is his physical shape and build , while the main distinction of a nerd is always intellectual.There is no natural law that prohibits physically endowed humans to also have intellectual tendencies - just look at Dolph Lundgren.But , as the requirement to be a jock is physical , someone born with a nerd body ca n't just say " Hell... I 'll start doing sports too .
" That is why Biff Tannen and his progeny ( and ancestors ) remain jocks ( and bullies ) in all incarnations and time-lines - while George McFly and his remain nerds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because main distinction (and a requirement) of a jock is his physical shape and build, while the main distinction of a nerd is always intellectual.There is no natural law that prohibits physically endowed humans to also have intellectual tendencies - just look at Dolph Lundgren.But, as the requirement to be a jock is physical, someone born with a nerd body can't just say "Hell... I'll start doing sports too.
"That is why Biff Tannen and his progeny (and ancestors) remain jocks (and bullies) in all incarnations and time-lines - while George McFly and his remain nerds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917477</id>
	<title>Re:I for one</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1256814840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nerds have never been on top.<br>Real nerds don't live in their mothers basements.</p><p>You're thinking of lazy wanna be nerds that think surrounding themselves with toys equals smart and nerdy. Frankly, we could do with less of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nerds have never been on top.Real nerds do n't live in their mothers basements.You 're thinking of lazy wan na be nerds that think surrounding themselves with toys equals smart and nerdy .
Frankly , we could do with less of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nerds have never been on top.Real nerds don't live in their mothers basements.You're thinking of lazy wanna be nerds that think surrounding themselves with toys equals smart and nerdy.
Frankly, we could do with less of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913513</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>ph0rk</author>
	<datestamp>1256842980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As you said, some of the most successful people from your high school were also the <b>most attractive.</b> <br>


Which is a very different ball of wax than whether or not there is a jock/nerd continuum.<br> <br>


You also seem to be arguing that there <i>isn't</i> a thread of anti-intellectualism in the United States. I don't think that position is very accurate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As you said , some of the most successful people from your high school were also the most attractive .
Which is a very different ball of wax than whether or not there is a jock/nerd continuum .
You also seem to be arguing that there is n't a thread of anti-intellectualism in the United States .
I do n't think that position is very accurate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As you said, some of the most successful people from your high school were also the most attractive.
Which is a very different ball of wax than whether or not there is a jock/nerd continuum.
You also seem to be arguing that there isn't a thread of anti-intellectualism in the United States.
I don't think that position is very accurate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913263</id>
	<title>Re:Hey?</title>
	<author>ae1294</author>
	<datestamp>1256841900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it was terrible. You're right where you belong.</p> </div><p>I thought it was pretty funny as the guy looks like you could crush his spine with your bare hands...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it was terrible .
You 're right where you belong .
I thought it was pretty funny as the guy looks like you could crush his spine with your bare hands.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it was terrible.
You're right where you belong.
I thought it was pretty funny as the guy looks like you could crush his spine with your bare hands...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911573</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912139</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>nate nice</author>
	<datestamp>1256837820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know dude, in the engineering building we had a lot of geeks, dweebs and everything else.  I mean, sure there were some studs such as myself and a few others...but I can't honestly recall a hot girl.  Maybe 1 or 2.  But there were lots and lots of hotties in the business buildings.</p><p>Is it black and white?  No.  But there was a noticeable difference in the clientele between engineering and business on campus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know dude , in the engineering building we had a lot of geeks , dweebs and everything else .
I mean , sure there were some studs such as myself and a few others...but I ca n't honestly recall a hot girl .
Maybe 1 or 2 .
But there were lots and lots of hotties in the business buildings.Is it black and white ?
No. But there was a noticeable difference in the clientele between engineering and business on campus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know dude, in the engineering building we had a lot of geeks, dweebs and everything else.
I mean, sure there were some studs such as myself and a few others...but I can't honestly recall a hot girl.
Maybe 1 or 2.
But there were lots and lots of hotties in the business buildings.Is it black and white?
No.  But there was a noticeable difference in the clientele between engineering and business on campus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911683</id>
	<title>f this guy</title>
	<author>captain\_cthulhu</author>
	<datestamp>1256836140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just don't find this guy funny or even all that intelligent. what is he even saying here? yes the US has been trailing in science and math education for a while and yes we know that trend must stop - stating the obvious doesn't make it so, it's not funny (obligatory nerd/wedgie comment not withstanding) and it's not smart or original. if he did 'I'm a Linux' commercials he might not come across as such a d-bag.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just do n't find this guy funny or even all that intelligent .
what is he even saying here ?
yes the US has been trailing in science and math education for a while and yes we know that trend must stop - stating the obvious does n't make it so , it 's not funny ( obligatory nerd/wedgie comment not withstanding ) and it 's not smart or original .
if he did 'I 'm a Linux ' commercials he might not come across as such a d-bag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just don't find this guy funny or even all that intelligent.
what is he even saying here?
yes the US has been trailing in science and math education for a while and yes we know that trend must stop - stating the obvious doesn't make it so, it's not funny (obligatory nerd/wedgie comment not withstanding) and it's not smart or original.
if he did 'I'm a Linux' commercials he might not come across as such a d-bag.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917603</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1256815320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Specialization is great.. for insects and automatons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Specialization is great.. for insects and automatons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Specialization is great.. for insects and automatons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914005</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>Sylver Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1256844840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you're going in for bypass surgery do you want the General Practitioner or the Cardiologist to be the one with the scalpel?<br>
<br>
We are a very highly specialized society for a reason, specialists usually know the tiny little intricacies of their chosen field, while the general folks will know just enough to be dangerous.  It is occasionally useful to have some generalized knowledge, as it can help one get outside the box, and to bring different ideas together; but, you are still going to need a specialist to tell you how to do that crazy idea, or to tell you that, "no, that's just a dumb idea."</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're going in for bypass surgery do you want the General Practitioner or the Cardiologist to be the one with the scalpel ?
We are a very highly specialized society for a reason , specialists usually know the tiny little intricacies of their chosen field , while the general folks will know just enough to be dangerous .
It is occasionally useful to have some generalized knowledge , as it can help one get outside the box , and to bring different ideas together ; but , you are still going to need a specialist to tell you how to do that crazy idea , or to tell you that , " no , that 's just a dumb idea .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're going in for bypass surgery do you want the General Practitioner or the Cardiologist to be the one with the scalpel?
We are a very highly specialized society for a reason, specialists usually know the tiny little intricacies of their chosen field, while the general folks will know just enough to be dangerous.
It is occasionally useful to have some generalized knowledge, as it can help one get outside the box, and to bring different ideas together; but, you are still going to need a specialist to tell you how to do that crazy idea, or to tell you that, "no, that's just a dumb idea.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912259</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911761</id>
	<title>Huh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256836380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since when does street-smart have anything to do with jocks?  For that matter, *-smart.  Jock-smart is any oxymoron</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when does street-smart have anything to do with jocks ?
For that matter , * -smart .
Jock-smart is any oxymoron</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when does street-smart have anything to do with jocks?
For that matter, *-smart.
Jock-smart is any oxymoron</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911707</id>
	<title>Geek culture already won?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256836200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought the geek culture ALREADY won?  Once upon a time, getting the latest tech gadget would have been nerdy, yeah, but today everyone has mp3 players, iPods/iPhones are as much about brand, fashion, being hip, etc as anything else.  Everyone has a computer and uses the internet.  Back in the day, calling up a BBS and leaving messages to your friends was nerdy.  Today, posting on your friend's facebook wall or sending out tweeks is normal.  Even gaming has come to the masses more and more with things like the Wii/DS and smartphone gaming (not to mention all the casual online games and whatnot that get passed around... often on the aforementioned social networking sites and sometimes with the also aforementioned smartphone devices).</p><p>Okay, there are still plenty of areas that fall only within the realm of geekdom such as tabletop RPG gaming and a love of mathematics for the sake of mathematics.  But as far as technology goes, geek culture has already taken over.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the geek culture ALREADY won ?
Once upon a time , getting the latest tech gadget would have been nerdy , yeah , but today everyone has mp3 players , iPods/iPhones are as much about brand , fashion , being hip , etc as anything else .
Everyone has a computer and uses the internet .
Back in the day , calling up a BBS and leaving messages to your friends was nerdy .
Today , posting on your friend 's facebook wall or sending out tweeks is normal .
Even gaming has come to the masses more and more with things like the Wii/DS and smartphone gaming ( not to mention all the casual online games and whatnot that get passed around... often on the aforementioned social networking sites and sometimes with the also aforementioned smartphone devices ) .Okay , there are still plenty of areas that fall only within the realm of geekdom such as tabletop RPG gaming and a love of mathematics for the sake of mathematics .
But as far as technology goes , geek culture has already taken over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the geek culture ALREADY won?
Once upon a time, getting the latest tech gadget would have been nerdy, yeah, but today everyone has mp3 players, iPods/iPhones are as much about brand, fashion, being hip, etc as anything else.
Everyone has a computer and uses the internet.
Back in the day, calling up a BBS and leaving messages to your friends was nerdy.
Today, posting on your friend's facebook wall or sending out tweeks is normal.
Even gaming has come to the masses more and more with things like the Wii/DS and smartphone gaming (not to mention all the casual online games and whatnot that get passed around... often on the aforementioned social networking sites and sometimes with the also aforementioned smartphone devices).Okay, there are still plenty of areas that fall only within the realm of geekdom such as tabletop RPG gaming and a love of mathematics for the sake of mathematics.
But as far as technology goes, geek culture has already taken over.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914911</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>mapkinase</author>
	<datestamp>1256848500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly. Russians say: "Healthy body has healthy spirit".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
Russians say : " Healthy body has healthy spirit " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
Russians say: "Healthy body has healthy spirit".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29918133</id>
	<title>Nobel bar</title>
	<author>jwhitener</author>
	<datestamp>1256818380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm trying to picture a sports bar type place, only...</p><p>It is the Nobel Bar.  The TV's would play years past and current Nobel Award ceremonies, and the "big event" night, like Monday night football,  would be filming inside some guy's lab watching his centrifuge spin;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm trying to picture a sports bar type place , only...It is the Nobel Bar .
The TV 's would play years past and current Nobel Award ceremonies , and the " big event " night , like Monday night football , would be filming inside some guy 's lab watching his centrifuge spin ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm trying to picture a sports bar type place, only...It is the Nobel Bar.
The TV's would play years past and current Nobel Award ceremonies, and the "big event" night, like Monday night football,  would be filming inside some guy's lab watching his centrifuge spin;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913037</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922909</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1256913000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see your rant and raise you a speedo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see your rant and raise you a speedo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see your rant and raise you a speedo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922023</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256903760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who do you think was doing the fighting, however?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who do you think was doing the fighting , however ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who do you think was doing the fighting, however?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922433</id>
	<title>Re:Wars are won by science nowadays...</title>
	<author>GbrDead</author>
	<datestamp>1256909520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>WWII: Actually, it was the tank again. T-34, to be more precise.</htmltext>
<tokenext>WWII : Actually , it was the tank again .
T-34 , to be more precise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WWII: Actually, it was the tank again.
T-34, to be more precise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915287</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916093</id>
	<title>Re:Nonsense.</title>
	<author>Have Brain Will Rent</author>
	<datestamp>1256809740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Women, despite outnumbering men, have been unable to achieve equality in macho culture despite at least 100 years of effort.</i> </p><p>
Why would women want to decrease their status, life-expectancy, economic power etc. etc. etc. by lowering their status to equality with men?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Women , despite outnumbering men , have been unable to achieve equality in macho culture despite at least 100 years of effort .
Why would women want to decrease their status , life-expectancy , economic power etc .
etc. etc .
by lowering their status to equality with men ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Women, despite outnumbering men, have been unable to achieve equality in macho culture despite at least 100 years of effort.
Why would women want to decrease their status, life-expectancy, economic power etc.
etc. etc.
by lowering their status to equality with men?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911919</id>
	<title>Re:I for one</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1256837040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you're already at +5, but that was one of the funniest meme posts I've seen.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>you 're already at + 5 , but that was one of the funniest meme posts I 've seen .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you're already at +5, but that was one of the funniest meme posts I've seen.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915683</id>
	<title>Re:I for one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256808180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I, for one, would be first in line to give Hodgman a wedgie.  Ok, that sounded gay.  Guess I'll go beat myself up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I , for one , would be first in line to give Hodgman a wedgie .
Ok , that sounded gay .
Guess I 'll go beat myself up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, for one, would be first in line to give Hodgman a wedgie.
Ok, that sounded gay.
Guess I'll go beat myself up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912319</id>
	<title>Motivational</title>
	<author>SEWilco</author>
	<datestamp>1256838300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I do look forward to the XKCD motivational posters.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do look forward to the XKCD motivational posters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do look forward to the XKCD motivational posters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913097</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>BrokenHalo</author>
	<datestamp>1256841180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Specialization means no ability to think outside the box. Knowledge is overlapping.</i> <br> <br>
Verily, forsooth. A couple of generations ago, it was regarded as a Good Thing(TM) to be a polymath. It seems that has largely been buried in a drive towards specialisation, and I believe the richness of our education has suffered as a result.<br> <br>
One thing I have found interesting is a tendency for mathematics professors to be quite well-read in the arts. I still remember one of my first maths professors illustrating a point regarding some misdemeanour of logic as one that would return, like Banquo's Ghost to haunt one later - complete with impromptu illustration on whiteboard of Elizabethan gentleman with ruff, carrying his head under his arm...<br> <br>
In the years since, where I have mostly been involved with individuals involved in chemistry and molecular biology, I have rarely encountered as much in the way of breadth of education, by which I simply mean exposure to other fields of discipline, including the arts. To be a polymath is to be much more interesting as a conversationalist.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Specialization means no ability to think outside the box .
Knowledge is overlapping .
Verily , forsooth .
A couple of generations ago , it was regarded as a Good Thing ( TM ) to be a polymath .
It seems that has largely been buried in a drive towards specialisation , and I believe the richness of our education has suffered as a result .
One thing I have found interesting is a tendency for mathematics professors to be quite well-read in the arts .
I still remember one of my first maths professors illustrating a point regarding some misdemeanour of logic as one that would return , like Banquo 's Ghost to haunt one later - complete with impromptu illustration on whiteboard of Elizabethan gentleman with ruff , carrying his head under his arm.. . In the years since , where I have mostly been involved with individuals involved in chemistry and molecular biology , I have rarely encountered as much in the way of breadth of education , by which I simply mean exposure to other fields of discipline , including the arts .
To be a polymath is to be much more interesting as a conversationalist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Specialization means no ability to think outside the box.
Knowledge is overlapping.
Verily, forsooth.
A couple of generations ago, it was regarded as a Good Thing(TM) to be a polymath.
It seems that has largely been buried in a drive towards specialisation, and I believe the richness of our education has suffered as a result.
One thing I have found interesting is a tendency for mathematics professors to be quite well-read in the arts.
I still remember one of my first maths professors illustrating a point regarding some misdemeanour of logic as one that would return, like Banquo's Ghost to haunt one later - complete with impromptu illustration on whiteboard of Elizabethan gentleman with ruff, carrying his head under his arm... 
In the years since, where I have mostly been involved with individuals involved in chemistry and molecular biology, I have rarely encountered as much in the way of breadth of education, by which I simply mean exposure to other fields of discipline, including the arts.
To be a polymath is to be much more interesting as a conversationalist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912259</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911665</id>
	<title>Put your backbone into it</title>
	<author>meniah</author>
	<datestamp>1256836080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While Hodgeman may be a comedian by trade, he has a great point. Though, where I live (Portland Oregon) the numbers of Geeks-to-non-Geeks is shoring up over time. In fact, I think Portland was recently declared the 3rd most geek-friendly place in the world.</p><p>Truth is, the geek inherited the earth long ago. They just need to rise up and grow a backbone. It can be done. Right? Anyone? Bueler?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While Hodgeman may be a comedian by trade , he has a great point .
Though , where I live ( Portland Oregon ) the numbers of Geeks-to-non-Geeks is shoring up over time .
In fact , I think Portland was recently declared the 3rd most geek-friendly place in the world.Truth is , the geek inherited the earth long ago .
They just need to rise up and grow a backbone .
It can be done .
Right ? Anyone ?
Bueler ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While Hodgeman may be a comedian by trade, he has a great point.
Though, where I live (Portland Oregon) the numbers of Geeks-to-non-Geeks is shoring up over time.
In fact, I think Portland was recently declared the 3rd most geek-friendly place in the world.Truth is, the geek inherited the earth long ago.
They just need to rise up and grow a backbone.
It can be done.
Right? Anyone?
Bueler?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29924767</id>
	<title>HotShot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256921640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man look at me now top of the celebrity hold and holding off the girls who want to be with me. I mean serious what girl doesn't get off with me installing Gentoo Linux, running my home with x10 adapters, hacking my Apple TV with Boxee, and controlling my computers from my Droid phone. I'm sure she loves the countless<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/played hours of lvling my hunter in WoW. This makes me a hot shot right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man look at me now top of the celebrity hold and holding off the girls who want to be with me .
I mean serious what girl does n't get off with me installing Gentoo Linux , running my home with x10 adapters , hacking my Apple TV with Boxee , and controlling my computers from my Droid phone .
I 'm sure she loves the countless /played hours of lvling my hunter in WoW .
This makes me a hot shot right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man look at me now top of the celebrity hold and holding off the girls who want to be with me.
I mean serious what girl doesn't get off with me installing Gentoo Linux, running my home with x10 adapters, hacking my Apple TV with Boxee, and controlling my computers from my Droid phone.
I'm sure she loves the countless /played hours of lvling my hunter in WoW.
This makes me a hot shot right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917837</id>
	<title>Re:Geeks wake up!</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1256816520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"women are beautiful, men are ugly. Agreed?<br>nice strawman. Not agreed, and false.</p><p>"(that's why women get more beautiful every generation) "<br>not true.</p><p>women must be choosing mates based on other features (Security).</p><p>After Security, treatment, then looks. In a society where security comes from people being intelligent, then they will be higher up on the choosing list.</p><p>Of course since there is just about equal men and women, this means pretty much everyone is going to get laid and be married. However women with low self esteem, or outside societies 'norm' just don't have top pick.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" women are beautiful , men are ugly .
Agreed ? nice strawman .
Not agreed , and false .
" ( that 's why women get more beautiful every generation ) " not true.women must be choosing mates based on other features ( Security ) .After Security , treatment , then looks .
In a society where security comes from people being intelligent , then they will be higher up on the choosing list.Of course since there is just about equal men and women , this means pretty much everyone is going to get laid and be married .
However women with low self esteem , or outside societies 'norm ' just do n't have top pick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"women are beautiful, men are ugly.
Agreed?nice strawman.
Not agreed, and false.
"(that's why women get more beautiful every generation) "not true.women must be choosing mates based on other features (Security).After Security, treatment, then looks.
In a society where security comes from people being intelligent, then they will be higher up on the choosing list.Of course since there is just about equal men and women, this means pretty much everyone is going to get laid and be married.
However women with low self esteem, or outside societies 'norm' just don't have top pick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913185</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651</id>
	<title>Nonsense.</title>
	<author>MarkvW</author>
	<datestamp>1256836020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Women, despite outnumbering men, have been unable to achieve equality in macho culture despite at least 100 years of effort.  No big reason to think that nerds will do any better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Women , despite outnumbering men , have been unable to achieve equality in macho culture despite at least 100 years of effort .
No big reason to think that nerds will do any better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Women, despite outnumbering men, have been unable to achieve equality in macho culture despite at least 100 years of effort.
No big reason to think that nerds will do any better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911403</id>
	<title>I'm a PC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256835240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm a PC and I got first post.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a PC and I got first post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a PC and I got first post.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911689</id>
	<title>You're telling me this,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256836140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now?</p><p>
&nbsp; -Jack O'Neill</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now ?
  -Jack O'Neill</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now?
  -Jack O'Neill</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917733</id>
	<title>Re:Put your backbone into it</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1256815920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By your logic, the hippies are about to rise up and rule the world.</p><p>I work in Portland, live in Tualatin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By your logic , the hippies are about to rise up and rule the world.I work in Portland , live in Tualatin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By your logic, the hippies are about to rise up and rule the world.I work in Portland, live in Tualatin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914393</id>
	<title>PC vs Mac ads</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256846340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't this the same guy I see every 15 minutes on TV parodying nerds and espousing the cool, hip Mac culture? Yeah, totally embracing our inner geek.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't this the same guy I see every 15 minutes on TV parodying nerds and espousing the cool , hip Mac culture ?
Yeah , totally embracing our inner geek .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't this the same guy I see every 15 minutes on TV parodying nerds and espousing the cool, hip Mac culture?
Yeah, totally embracing our inner geek.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922067</id>
	<title>Re:Geeks wake up!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256904600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fixed that for you:</p><p>2. The feature in men that women are most attracted to: confidence</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fixed that for you : 2 .
The feature in men that women are most attracted to : confidence</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fixed that for you:2.
The feature in men that women are most attracted to: confidence</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913185</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912899</id>
	<title>see also</title>
	<author>Emesee</author>
	<datestamp>1256840460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Nerd\_project" title="wikiversity.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Nerd\_project</a> [wikiversity.org]


thank you very much.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Nerd \ _project [ wikiversity.org ] thank you very much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Nerd\_project [wikiversity.org]


thank you very much.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911675</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1256836140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Military history is full of examples of headstrong, impulsive leaders losing while the soft spoken, thoughtful (as in deliberative), strategic leader winning. Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Marcus Aurelius, don't seem to me as typical 'jocks'."</p><p>The military incorporates a wide range of people as it must. The strategist and leaders have their roles, the "tactical athletes" have theirs, and there is plenty of overlap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Military history is full of examples of headstrong , impulsive leaders losing while the soft spoken , thoughtful ( as in deliberative ) , strategic leader winning .
Sun Tzu , Machiavelli , Marcus Aurelius , do n't seem to me as typical 'jocks' .
" The military incorporates a wide range of people as it must .
The strategist and leaders have their roles , the " tactical athletes " have theirs , and there is plenty of overlap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Military history is full of examples of headstrong, impulsive leaders losing while the soft spoken, thoughtful (as in deliberative), strategic leader winning.
Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Marcus Aurelius, don't seem to me as typical 'jocks'.
"The military incorporates a wide range of people as it must.
The strategist and leaders have their roles, the "tactical athletes" have theirs, and there is plenty of overlap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912783</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256840040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, all the jocks ended up in the Marines, Army and other best equipped fighting forces on Earth, and the nerds ended up at Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, and Boeing, making them the best equipped fighting forces on earth.

The marines would not be any better than any other troops without fighter jets and UAVs backing them and telling them exactly where to find the enemy. Who needs jocks when you have exoskeletons carrying hundreds of pounds of the most sophisticated fighting equipment on the planet for you?</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , all the jocks ended up in the Marines , Army and other best equipped fighting forces on Earth , and the nerds ended up at Lockheed Martin , Northrup Grumman , and Boeing , making them the best equipped fighting forces on earth .
The marines would not be any better than any other troops without fighter jets and UAVs backing them and telling them exactly where to find the enemy .
Who needs jocks when you have exoskeletons carrying hundreds of pounds of the most sophisticated fighting equipment on the planet for you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, all the jocks ended up in the Marines, Army and other best equipped fighting forces on Earth, and the nerds ended up at Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, and Boeing, making them the best equipped fighting forces on earth.
The marines would not be any better than any other troops without fighter jets and UAVs backing them and telling them exactly where to find the enemy.
Who needs jocks when you have exoskeletons carrying hundreds of pounds of the most sophisticated fighting equipment on the planet for you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912353</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915287</id>
	<title>Wars are won by science nowadays...</title>
	<author>seifried</author>
	<datestamp>1256849940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WWI: the tank broke the stalemate in the fields, although without it the allies would have eventually ground the Germans down (at a much higher cost though). Plus all the boring logistics stuff like convoys, canned food, etc.</p><p>WWII: the atomic bomb, the 4 engine bomber (delivery system of other weapons such as fire bombs used to level many of Germany and Japan's major cities), radar, radar jamming, navigation aids for bombing like Oboe, statistical analysis of what worked and what didn't work in the war of the Atlantic (aka the best way to kill U-boats) oh and a code breaking effort by the allies that broke Enigma (German rotor machine) and Purple (Japanese rotor machine) allowing the Allies to read enemy message traffic in near real time in some cases. The guys like Patton definitely get a lot of credit in the media/text books but it's geeks like Turing that really kicked ass.</p><p>Post WWII conflicts: many of the stalemated conflicts could be more properly termed police actions (especially in some cases as war was not declared) and in many cases you'll see a combination off stagnation/misunderstanding of the enemies real intentions/motivations has lead to serious messes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WWI : the tank broke the stalemate in the fields , although without it the allies would have eventually ground the Germans down ( at a much higher cost though ) .
Plus all the boring logistics stuff like convoys , canned food , etc.WWII : the atomic bomb , the 4 engine bomber ( delivery system of other weapons such as fire bombs used to level many of Germany and Japan 's major cities ) , radar , radar jamming , navigation aids for bombing like Oboe , statistical analysis of what worked and what did n't work in the war of the Atlantic ( aka the best way to kill U-boats ) oh and a code breaking effort by the allies that broke Enigma ( German rotor machine ) and Purple ( Japanese rotor machine ) allowing the Allies to read enemy message traffic in near real time in some cases .
The guys like Patton definitely get a lot of credit in the media/text books but it 's geeks like Turing that really kicked ass.Post WWII conflicts : many of the stalemated conflicts could be more properly termed police actions ( especially in some cases as war was not declared ) and in many cases you 'll see a combination off stagnation/misunderstanding of the enemies real intentions/motivations has lead to serious messes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WWI: the tank broke the stalemate in the fields, although without it the allies would have eventually ground the Germans down (at a much higher cost though).
Plus all the boring logistics stuff like convoys, canned food, etc.WWII: the atomic bomb, the 4 engine bomber (delivery system of other weapons such as fire bombs used to level many of Germany and Japan's major cities), radar, radar jamming, navigation aids for bombing like Oboe, statistical analysis of what worked and what didn't work in the war of the Atlantic (aka the best way to kill U-boats) oh and a code breaking effort by the allies that broke Enigma (German rotor machine) and Purple (Japanese rotor machine) allowing the Allies to read enemy message traffic in near real time in some cases.
The guys like Patton definitely get a lot of credit in the media/text books but it's geeks like Turing that really kicked ass.Post WWII conflicts: many of the stalemated conflicts could be more properly termed police actions (especially in some cases as war was not declared) and in many cases you'll see a combination off stagnation/misunderstanding of the enemies real intentions/motivations has lead to serious messes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914243</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>SleazyRidr</author>
	<datestamp>1256845740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I read the headline I thought that something else was supposed to change in the near future, but again it's just the same story that we've been hearing for 10+ years. Whenever any of my friends tell me that being a geek is cool now I tell them they're about 5 years behind and back to being uncool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I read the headline I thought that something else was supposed to change in the near future , but again it 's just the same story that we 've been hearing for 10 + years .
Whenever any of my friends tell me that being a geek is cool now I tell them they 're about 5 years behind and back to being uncool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I read the headline I thought that something else was supposed to change in the near future, but again it's just the same story that we've been hearing for 10+ years.
Whenever any of my friends tell me that being a geek is cool now I tell them they're about 5 years behind and back to being uncool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934251</id>
	<title>Re:Geeks wake up!</title>
	<author>Eli Gottlieb</author>
	<datestamp>1257001740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you don't believe me consider this (proposed by a evolutionary biologist): women are beautiful, men are ugly.</p></div><p>Wrong.  I've seen some pretty handsome guys in my time, including when I look in the mirror on a good day.</p><p>Admittedly, I've no desire to see any of those guys out of the snappy clothes, but men aren't ugly.  You just bought into another pop-culture trope is all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't believe me consider this ( proposed by a evolutionary biologist ) : women are beautiful , men are ugly.Wrong .
I 've seen some pretty handsome guys in my time , including when I look in the mirror on a good day.Admittedly , I 've no desire to see any of those guys out of the snappy clothes , but men are n't ugly .
You just bought into another pop-culture trope is all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't believe me consider this (proposed by a evolutionary biologist): women are beautiful, men are ugly.Wrong.
I've seen some pretty handsome guys in my time, including when I look in the mirror on a good day.Admittedly, I've no desire to see any of those guys out of the snappy clothes, but men aren't ugly.
You just bought into another pop-culture trope is all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913185</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911699</id>
	<title>Ungrateful bastards to a man</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256836200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's true that people don't appreciate what the geeks do for them.</p><p>I was reading a programming book while waiting for the train once, and this kid and his friend start laughing at the "brainiac" who's weird enough to read books when he doesn't have to.</p><p>Then the kid whips out his cell phone and starts poking at it. I said, "sure, you love using technology, but you don't think anyone should know how to make it?" Dumbass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's true that people do n't appreciate what the geeks do for them.I was reading a programming book while waiting for the train once , and this kid and his friend start laughing at the " brainiac " who 's weird enough to read books when he does n't have to.Then the kid whips out his cell phone and starts poking at it .
I said , " sure , you love using technology , but you do n't think anyone should know how to make it ?
" Dumbass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's true that people don't appreciate what the geeks do for them.I was reading a programming book while waiting for the train once, and this kid and his friend start laughing at the "brainiac" who's weird enough to read books when he doesn't have to.Then the kid whips out his cell phone and starts poking at it.
I said, "sure, you love using technology, but you don't think anyone should know how to make it?
" Dumbass.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917619</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1256815380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Specializing in IT " yeah, and honestly it makes about as much sense as "Specializing in making stuff"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Specializing in IT " yeah , and honestly it makes about as much sense as " Specializing in making stuff "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Specializing in IT " yeah, and honestly it makes about as much sense as "Specializing in making stuff"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913191</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922461</id>
	<title>Re:Nonsense.</title>
	<author>skiman1979</author>
	<datestamp>1256909760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why even try to achieve equality in the culture when you can just change the culture?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why even try to achieve equality in the culture when you can just change the culture ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why even try to achieve equality in the culture when you can just change the culture?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913631</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>NiteShaed</author>
	<datestamp>1256843400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Psst, hey, French guy.  C'mere.....</p><p>At first, I was wondering where this vitriolic rant came from, and from which country you could be from.  Then I saw "France", and it all became clear.  I'm not going to scream and yell, really, because I understand that this kind of a tantrum comes from a massive inferiority complex that the French collective psyche carries around.  Hey, it's okay, really.  Once proud imperial power, now relegated to getting wedgies from upstart nations that you once toyed with.  You need a hug, and maybe a good solid "There, there" and a pat on the back.  Then you'll bawl for a bit, check under your bed for Germans, and go back to sleep 'till morning.  I know, it's hard to look around seeing American stuff *everywhere*, when you know deep in your heart that it's just not fair!  "That should be French culture that's slipping it's tendrils into the lives of people around the globe, not American!  Those jocks, er, I mean Americans don't deserve all the attention that us nerds, er, I mean Frenchmen should be getting on the world-stage!" you cry out.  Then the U.S. gives you another wedgie and stupid England just snickers in that annoying way it has, and you're just left *steaming*.</p><p>Oh, and "big jewy loser"?  Really?</p><p>As an aside, you've completely missed the point of all those movies you are so angry about.  It's not that people identify with the "loser" character in those movies.  It's that Americans like to root for the underdog.  Maybe that's a cultural difference, maybe France prefers to "root for the winner", I don't know, but somewhere something seems to be getting lost in the translation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Psst , hey , French guy .
C'mere.....At first , I was wondering where this vitriolic rant came from , and from which country you could be from .
Then I saw " France " , and it all became clear .
I 'm not going to scream and yell , really , because I understand that this kind of a tantrum comes from a massive inferiority complex that the French collective psyche carries around .
Hey , it 's okay , really .
Once proud imperial power , now relegated to getting wedgies from upstart nations that you once toyed with .
You need a hug , and maybe a good solid " There , there " and a pat on the back .
Then you 'll bawl for a bit , check under your bed for Germans , and go back to sleep 'till morning .
I know , it 's hard to look around seeing American stuff * everywhere * , when you know deep in your heart that it 's just not fair !
" That should be French culture that 's slipping it 's tendrils into the lives of people around the globe , not American !
Those jocks , er , I mean Americans do n't deserve all the attention that us nerds , er , I mean Frenchmen should be getting on the world-stage !
" you cry out .
Then the U.S. gives you another wedgie and stupid England just snickers in that annoying way it has , and you 're just left * steaming * .Oh , and " big jewy loser " ?
Really ? As an aside , you 've completely missed the point of all those movies you are so angry about .
It 's not that people identify with the " loser " character in those movies .
It 's that Americans like to root for the underdog .
Maybe that 's a cultural difference , maybe France prefers to " root for the winner " , I do n't know , but somewhere something seems to be getting lost in the translation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Psst, hey, French guy.
C'mere.....At first, I was wondering where this vitriolic rant came from, and from which country you could be from.
Then I saw "France", and it all became clear.
I'm not going to scream and yell, really, because I understand that this kind of a tantrum comes from a massive inferiority complex that the French collective psyche carries around.
Hey, it's okay, really.
Once proud imperial power, now relegated to getting wedgies from upstart nations that you once toyed with.
You need a hug, and maybe a good solid "There, there" and a pat on the back.
Then you'll bawl for a bit, check under your bed for Germans, and go back to sleep 'till morning.
I know, it's hard to look around seeing American stuff *everywhere*, when you know deep in your heart that it's just not fair!
"That should be French culture that's slipping it's tendrils into the lives of people around the globe, not American!
Those jocks, er, I mean Americans don't deserve all the attention that us nerds, er, I mean Frenchmen should be getting on the world-stage!
" you cry out.
Then the U.S. gives you another wedgie and stupid England just snickers in that annoying way it has, and you're just left *steaming*.Oh, and "big jewy loser"?
Really?As an aside, you've completely missed the point of all those movies you are so angry about.
It's not that people identify with the "loser" character in those movies.
It's that Americans like to root for the underdog.
Maybe that's a cultural difference, maybe France prefers to "root for the winner", I don't know, but somewhere something seems to be getting lost in the translation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911607</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256835900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>.Military history is full of examples of headstrong, impulsive leaders losing while the soft spoken, thoughtful (as in deliberative), strategic leader winning. Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Marcus Aurelius, don't seem to me as typical 'jocks'.</p></div><p>Yet they all had an athletic prowess that the modern-day, stereotypical geek completely lacks.  Simply outthinking your opponent isn't enough to win wars.  You have to outthink AND outdo.  Geeks, by and large, lack the muscle mass to accomplish the "doing" part.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>.Military history is full of examples of headstrong , impulsive leaders losing while the soft spoken , thoughtful ( as in deliberative ) , strategic leader winning .
Sun Tzu , Machiavelli , Marcus Aurelius , do n't seem to me as typical 'jocks'.Yet they all had an athletic prowess that the modern-day , stereotypical geek completely lacks .
Simply outthinking your opponent is n't enough to win wars .
You have to outthink AND outdo .
Geeks , by and large , lack the muscle mass to accomplish the " doing " part .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> .Military history is full of examples of headstrong, impulsive leaders losing while the soft spoken, thoughtful (as in deliberative), strategic leader winning.
Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Marcus Aurelius, don't seem to me as typical 'jocks'.Yet they all had an athletic prowess that the modern-day, stereotypical geek completely lacks.
Simply outthinking your opponent isn't enough to win wars.
You have to outthink AND outdo.
Geeks, by and large, lack the muscle mass to accomplish the "doing" part.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934285</id>
	<title>Re:Cultural biases</title>
	<author>Eli Gottlieb</author>
	<datestamp>1257001980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only America has nerds because only America needed a stereotype to cover up its prejudices against certain ethnicities of immigrants who were regarded as stealing jobs and power with their relentless hard work and community-based mutual support systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only America has nerds because only America needed a stereotype to cover up its prejudices against certain ethnicities of immigrants who were regarded as stealing jobs and power with their relentless hard work and community-based mutual support systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only America has nerds because only America needed a stereotype to cover up its prejudices against certain ethnicities of immigrants who were regarded as stealing jobs and power with their relentless hard work and community-based mutual support systems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915093</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29929739</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>metlin</author>
	<datestamp>1256902740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other. Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete.</p></div></blockquote><p>Who do you think invented the spear?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other .
Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower , the jocks were obsolete.Who do you think invented the spear ?
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other.
Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete.Who do you think invented the spear?
;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915399</id>
	<title>Too bad he's a sellout</title>
	<author>StikyPad</author>
	<datestamp>1256807220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd probably have more affection for Mr. Hodgman if he wasn't the vehicle of misinformation and straw-men arguments from Apple.  Engaging in juvenile antics by equating nerds to Windows, and then decrying those very antics is a bit of the pot and kettle.  Paid or not, he's essentially lending his credibility (or lack thereof) to Apple.</p><p>For those unfamiliar (anyone?), the Mac ad jokes are funny, but like the Australian toilet in the Simpsons, they're based in misconceptions.  The difference is that Apple has a vested interest in furthering those misconceptions, aka deceptions.  The Simpsons are not, to my knowledge, selling any high-end toilets that flush in a counter-clockwise direction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd probably have more affection for Mr. Hodgman if he was n't the vehicle of misinformation and straw-men arguments from Apple .
Engaging in juvenile antics by equating nerds to Windows , and then decrying those very antics is a bit of the pot and kettle .
Paid or not , he 's essentially lending his credibility ( or lack thereof ) to Apple.For those unfamiliar ( anyone ?
) , the Mac ad jokes are funny , but like the Australian toilet in the Simpsons , they 're based in misconceptions .
The difference is that Apple has a vested interest in furthering those misconceptions , aka deceptions .
The Simpsons are not , to my knowledge , selling any high-end toilets that flush in a counter-clockwise direction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd probably have more affection for Mr. Hodgman if he wasn't the vehicle of misinformation and straw-men arguments from Apple.
Engaging in juvenile antics by equating nerds to Windows, and then decrying those very antics is a bit of the pot and kettle.
Paid or not, he's essentially lending his credibility (or lack thereof) to Apple.For those unfamiliar (anyone?
), the Mac ad jokes are funny, but like the Australian toilet in the Simpsons, they're based in misconceptions.
The difference is that Apple has a vested interest in furthering those misconceptions, aka deceptions.
The Simpsons are not, to my knowledge, selling any high-end toilets that flush in a counter-clockwise direction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912481</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1256838840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem with the "well-rounded" argument is that eventually it becomes impossible to achieve a higher level in science without intensive focus, study and specialization; largely to the exclusion of other distractions. Many non-engineers have difficulty understanding the sort of mental commitment that comes with pursuing a professional career in science or engineering. They simply refuse to believe that one's career can use up so much of ones otherwise "free" time (my former personal trainer was in this category), but that is the discipline that we must accept in order to meet the demands of our chosen profession. Otherwise, what is the point? We might as well get our MBAs, sell rip-off "investments" and then laugh at the suckers who trusted us with their money in the first place around drinks at a tropical resort.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with the " well-rounded " argument is that eventually it becomes impossible to achieve a higher level in science without intensive focus , study and specialization ; largely to the exclusion of other distractions .
Many non-engineers have difficulty understanding the sort of mental commitment that comes with pursuing a professional career in science or engineering .
They simply refuse to believe that one 's career can use up so much of ones otherwise " free " time ( my former personal trainer was in this category ) , but that is the discipline that we must accept in order to meet the demands of our chosen profession .
Otherwise , what is the point ?
We might as well get our MBAs , sell rip-off " investments " and then laugh at the suckers who trusted us with their money in the first place around drinks at a tropical resort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with the "well-rounded" argument is that eventually it becomes impossible to achieve a higher level in science without intensive focus, study and specialization; largely to the exclusion of other distractions.
Many non-engineers have difficulty understanding the sort of mental commitment that comes with pursuing a professional career in science or engineering.
They simply refuse to believe that one's career can use up so much of ones otherwise "free" time (my former personal trainer was in this category), but that is the discipline that we must accept in order to meet the demands of our chosen profession.
Otherwise, what is the point?
We might as well get our MBAs, sell rip-off "investments" and then laugh at the suckers who trusted us with their money in the first place around drinks at a tropical resort.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934041</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>Eli Gottlieb</author>
	<datestamp>1257000000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As in "big jewy loser who never kissed a girl and plays WoW goes through a bunch of adventures and in the end he kisses a hot chick whom he thought was "out of his league", whatever the fuck that means".</p></div><p>I was pretty much with you until you used the word "jewy" as a derogatory adjective.  We Jews ain't losers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As in " big jewy loser who never kissed a girl and plays WoW goes through a bunch of adventures and in the end he kisses a hot chick whom he thought was " out of his league " , whatever the fuck that means " .I was pretty much with you until you used the word " jewy " as a derogatory adjective .
We Jews ai n't losers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As in "big jewy loser who never kissed a girl and plays WoW goes through a bunch of adventures and in the end he kisses a hot chick whom he thought was "out of his league", whatever the fuck that means".I was pretty much with you until you used the word "jewy" as a derogatory adjective.
We Jews ain't losers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914867</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256848320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh go back to eating cheese and wine, nobody really cares what the french think</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh go back to eating cheese and wine , nobody really cares what the french think</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh go back to eating cheese and wine, nobody really cares what the french think</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917413</id>
	<title>Re:Nonsense.</title>
	<author>bkr1\_2k</author>
	<datestamp>1256814540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nerds have at least an edge, though, that they are more and more becoming the seat of economic power as technology makes more and more of us rich.  We also have the benefit of being part of that already dominant male population (at least many of us do) so we're not starting out in an all-negative position that women had to start from.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nerds have at least an edge , though , that they are more and more becoming the seat of economic power as technology makes more and more of us rich .
We also have the benefit of being part of that already dominant male population ( at least many of us do ) so we 're not starting out in an all-negative position that women had to start from .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nerds have at least an edge, though, that they are more and more becoming the seat of economic power as technology makes more and more of us rich.
We also have the benefit of being part of that already dominant male population (at least many of us do) so we're not starting out in an all-negative position that women had to start from.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913191</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>Bigbutt</author>
	<datestamp>1256841540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Specializing in IT is pretty broad though. I know I've solved a lot of problems as a Unix Admin because I'm also a programmer. I'm amazed at the number of admins who can't even use tar without help.</p><p>But still you should have other knowledge bases. I'm into motorcycles and can fix mine without too much trouble as well as go fast and get my knee down in corners. I'm also a gamer (both computer and table-top) which gives me a very broad level of knowledge.</p><p>And of course:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. <b>Specialization is for insects</b>.</p><p>-Robert A. Heinlein</p></div><p>[John]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Specializing in IT is pretty broad though .
I know I 've solved a lot of problems as a Unix Admin because I 'm also a programmer .
I 'm amazed at the number of admins who ca n't even use tar without help.But still you should have other knowledge bases .
I 'm into motorcycles and can fix mine without too much trouble as well as go fast and get my knee down in corners .
I 'm also a gamer ( both computer and table-top ) which gives me a very broad level of knowledge.And of course : A human being should be able to change a diaper , plan an invasion , butcher a hog , conn a ship , design a building , write a sonnet , balance accounts , build a wall , set a bone , comfort the dying , take orders , give orders , cooperate , act alone , solve equations , analyze a new problem , pitch manure , program a computer , cook a tasty meal , fight efficiently , die gallantly .
Specialization is for insects.-Robert A. Heinlein [ John ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Specializing in IT is pretty broad though.
I know I've solved a lot of problems as a Unix Admin because I'm also a programmer.
I'm amazed at the number of admins who can't even use tar without help.But still you should have other knowledge bases.
I'm into motorcycles and can fix mine without too much trouble as well as go fast and get my knee down in corners.
I'm also a gamer (both computer and table-top) which gives me a very broad level of knowledge.And of course:A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.
Specialization is for insects.-Robert A. Heinlein[John]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911803</id>
	<title>FFC's Bram Stoker's BattleStar Galactica?</title>
	<author>name\_already\_taken</author>
	<datestamp>1256836500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Hodgman<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... played minor parts in Tina Fey's Baby Mama, Ricky Gervais' The Invention of Lying and Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Battlestar Galactica.</p></div><p>No wonder the ending of BSG was so out there.  Too many chefs spoil the stew.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hodgman ... played minor parts in Tina Fey 's Baby Mama , Ricky Gervais ' The Invention of Lying and Francis Ford Coppola 's Bram Stoker 's Battlestar Galactica.No wonder the ending of BSG was so out there .
Too many chefs spoil the stew .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hodgman ... played minor parts in Tina Fey's Baby Mama, Ricky Gervais' The Invention of Lying and Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Battlestar Galactica.No wonder the ending of BSG was so out there.
Too many chefs spoil the stew.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912991</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>npsimons</author>
	<datestamp>1256840760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The dichotomy between nerds and jocks is a false one, and it has been for some time.</p></div></blockquote><p>That may be true in nature and even in some societies, but in USA it's definitely not true, or at the very least not completely true.  The anti-intellectualism in USA is astounding, and it's not entirely caused by a reverence for sports stars (religion has to take a lot of blame).  Personally, I think it's best that we do as a society what geeks and those who were picked on growing up were encouraged to do: ignore them.  Ignore the sports stars, the people who are all style and no substance, ignore the incompetent naysayers.  Don't believe that you have to be stupid to be a quarterback, but also don't limit yourself because you think you have to study all the time.</p><p>I never was very "athletic" growing up; sure, I hiked, backpacked, and was in the marching band.  But until recently I had the same nerd attitude of shunning athletic activity as something that seemed a waste of time to me.  If there is anything I could go back and tell myself, it would be to push myself not just in areas of the mind, but push myself bodily as well.  Why?  For one thing, studies have shown that exercise can signifigantly help improve cognition, not to mention mood.  I've noticed this personally, and there's definitely something to "runner's high" and getting up early to exercise first thing in the morning so I have energy the whole rest of the day.  A message to geeks and nerds: get some exercise, even if it's just walking around your neighborhood for twenty minutes a day; it WILL help.  You don't have to play football (or American football), just get your pulse racing and you will find your mental performance increasing as well.  Find something you like to do that is physical and do it; you'll feel better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The dichotomy between nerds and jocks is a false one , and it has been for some time.That may be true in nature and even in some societies , but in USA it 's definitely not true , or at the very least not completely true .
The anti-intellectualism in USA is astounding , and it 's not entirely caused by a reverence for sports stars ( religion has to take a lot of blame ) .
Personally , I think it 's best that we do as a society what geeks and those who were picked on growing up were encouraged to do : ignore them .
Ignore the sports stars , the people who are all style and no substance , ignore the incompetent naysayers .
Do n't believe that you have to be stupid to be a quarterback , but also do n't limit yourself because you think you have to study all the time.I never was very " athletic " growing up ; sure , I hiked , backpacked , and was in the marching band .
But until recently I had the same nerd attitude of shunning athletic activity as something that seemed a waste of time to me .
If there is anything I could go back and tell myself , it would be to push myself not just in areas of the mind , but push myself bodily as well .
Why ? For one thing , studies have shown that exercise can signifigantly help improve cognition , not to mention mood .
I 've noticed this personally , and there 's definitely something to " runner 's high " and getting up early to exercise first thing in the morning so I have energy the whole rest of the day .
A message to geeks and nerds : get some exercise , even if it 's just walking around your neighborhood for twenty minutes a day ; it WILL help .
You do n't have to play football ( or American football ) , just get your pulse racing and you will find your mental performance increasing as well .
Find something you like to do that is physical and do it ; you 'll feel better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The dichotomy between nerds and jocks is a false one, and it has been for some time.That may be true in nature and even in some societies, but in USA it's definitely not true, or at the very least not completely true.
The anti-intellectualism in USA is astounding, and it's not entirely caused by a reverence for sports stars (religion has to take a lot of blame).
Personally, I think it's best that we do as a society what geeks and those who were picked on growing up were encouraged to do: ignore them.
Ignore the sports stars, the people who are all style and no substance, ignore the incompetent naysayers.
Don't believe that you have to be stupid to be a quarterback, but also don't limit yourself because you think you have to study all the time.I never was very "athletic" growing up; sure, I hiked, backpacked, and was in the marching band.
But until recently I had the same nerd attitude of shunning athletic activity as something that seemed a waste of time to me.
If there is anything I could go back and tell myself, it would be to push myself not just in areas of the mind, but push myself bodily as well.
Why?  For one thing, studies have shown that exercise can signifigantly help improve cognition, not to mention mood.
I've noticed this personally, and there's definitely something to "runner's high" and getting up early to exercise first thing in the morning so I have energy the whole rest of the day.
A message to geeks and nerds: get some exercise, even if it's just walking around your neighborhood for twenty minutes a day; it WILL help.
You don't have to play football (or American football), just get your pulse racing and you will find your mental performance increasing as well.
Find something you like to do that is physical and do it; you'll feel better.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912937</id>
	<title>New-Age Cliques</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256840580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>China and other big industrial nations are rewarding their nerds and technicians rather than creating a culture that makes fun of them -- it would be wise for us to embrace the book-smart as much as our culture has traditionally embraced the <b>street-smart</b>,...</p></div></blockquote><p>In the business world, street-smarts still reigns and probably always will because those are the ones who usually succeed in the US biz environment: the <b>crafty and manipulative wheeler-dealer</b>. After all, Bill Gates' poker skills are perhaps more important to his success than his tech skills, which don't stand out  by geek standards.</p><p>That being said, talking to my teen daughter has given me incite into the newer generation, and they seem more diverse than my school days. There's less "rank" among cliques, and each clique is pretty much allowed to be itself. Thus, band geeks are allowed to be band geeks, etc. Star athletes will always be more popular than star geeks, but outside of that, the hierarchies of popularity seems to be flattening among groups. In short, <b>there's more embracing of diversity</b>, and being a bit "odd" is socially safer.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>China and other big industrial nations are rewarding their nerds and technicians rather than creating a culture that makes fun of them -- it would be wise for us to embrace the book-smart as much as our culture has traditionally embraced the street-smart,...In the business world , street-smarts still reigns and probably always will because those are the ones who usually succeed in the US biz environment : the crafty and manipulative wheeler-dealer .
After all , Bill Gates ' poker skills are perhaps more important to his success than his tech skills , which do n't stand out by geek standards.That being said , talking to my teen daughter has given me incite into the newer generation , and they seem more diverse than my school days .
There 's less " rank " among cliques , and each clique is pretty much allowed to be itself .
Thus , band geeks are allowed to be band geeks , etc .
Star athletes will always be more popular than star geeks , but outside of that , the hierarchies of popularity seems to be flattening among groups .
In short , there 's more embracing of diversity , and being a bit " odd " is socially safer .
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext>China and other big industrial nations are rewarding their nerds and technicians rather than creating a culture that makes fun of them -- it would be wise for us to embrace the book-smart as much as our culture has traditionally embraced the street-smart,...In the business world, street-smarts still reigns and probably always will because those are the ones who usually succeed in the US biz environment: the crafty and manipulative wheeler-dealer.
After all, Bill Gates' poker skills are perhaps more important to his success than his tech skills, which don't stand out  by geek standards.That being said, talking to my teen daughter has given me incite into the newer generation, and they seem more diverse than my school days.
There's less "rank" among cliques, and each clique is pretty much allowed to be itself.
Thus, band geeks are allowed to be band geeks, etc.
Star athletes will always be more popular than star geeks, but outside of that, the hierarchies of popularity seems to be flattening among groups.
In short, there's more embracing of diversity, and being a bit "odd" is socially safer.
     
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29932747</id>
	<title>Re:american labor is too expensive</title>
	<author>strikethree</author>
	<datestamp>1257021300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"fuck your fetishization of the industrial age as all we should aspire to. welcome the poorer, more mellower american age. time to step off the world stage as its master, and fuck you to those of you who think we need to stay in that role for some reason"</i></p><p>Despite the flamebait nature of your comment, I would like to point out an error in your thinking. America did not try to become the master of the world. America just did the best it could and it just so happened that the best that America could do outclassed the rest of the world.</p><p>With that in mind, the idea of stepping off of the world stage as its master implies that America should stop trying to do the best that it can. What value is there in not striving for the best? Why can the rest of the world not strive for better rather than America quitting and stepping to the end of the line? What would be the purpose?</p><p>In short, it would seem that the words you have spoken display a desire to hold an entity back rather than encouraging other entities to step forward. Such regressive thinking, along with your overly aggressive wording clearly indicate that you harbor a hatred/dislike of America and wish nothing more than to do it, and its populace, harm.</p><p>In short, your post should be modded down as flamebait rather than modded as +5 interesting.</p><p>strike</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" fuck your fetishization of the industrial age as all we should aspire to .
welcome the poorer , more mellower american age .
time to step off the world stage as its master , and fuck you to those of you who think we need to stay in that role for some reason " Despite the flamebait nature of your comment , I would like to point out an error in your thinking .
America did not try to become the master of the world .
America just did the best it could and it just so happened that the best that America could do outclassed the rest of the world.With that in mind , the idea of stepping off of the world stage as its master implies that America should stop trying to do the best that it can .
What value is there in not striving for the best ?
Why can the rest of the world not strive for better rather than America quitting and stepping to the end of the line ?
What would be the purpose ? In short , it would seem that the words you have spoken display a desire to hold an entity back rather than encouraging other entities to step forward .
Such regressive thinking , along with your overly aggressive wording clearly indicate that you harbor a hatred/dislike of America and wish nothing more than to do it , and its populace , harm.In short , your post should be modded down as flamebait rather than modded as + 5 interesting.strike</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"fuck your fetishization of the industrial age as all we should aspire to.
welcome the poorer, more mellower american age.
time to step off the world stage as its master, and fuck you to those of you who think we need to stay in that role for some reason"Despite the flamebait nature of your comment, I would like to point out an error in your thinking.
America did not try to become the master of the world.
America just did the best it could and it just so happened that the best that America could do outclassed the rest of the world.With that in mind, the idea of stepping off of the world stage as its master implies that America should stop trying to do the best that it can.
What value is there in not striving for the best?
Why can the rest of the world not strive for better rather than America quitting and stepping to the end of the line?
What would be the purpose?In short, it would seem that the words you have spoken display a desire to hold an entity back rather than encouraging other entities to step forward.
Such regressive thinking, along with your overly aggressive wording clearly indicate that you harbor a hatred/dislike of America and wish nothing more than to do it, and its populace, harm.In short, your post should be modded down as flamebait rather than modded as +5 interesting.strike</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911479</id>
	<title>I don't disagree with him</title>
	<author>Interoperable</author>
	<datestamp>1256835480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>but I would take everything John Hodgman says with a grain of salt.</htmltext>
<tokenext>but I would take everything John Hodgman says with a grain of salt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but I would take everything John Hodgman says with a grain of salt.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915391</id>
	<title>No Shift to Geek Culture</title>
	<author>Chibi</author>
	<datestamp>1256807160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate to say it, but there is no coming shift to geek culture.  There simply are not enough geeks compared to "normal people."  Geeks don't have the spending power or sheer numbers to really matter.  While geeks might have been on the cutting edge at one point, things like the internet, instant messaging, e-mail, social media didn't really start to matter until they started to appeal to more people besides a small niche population.</p><p>While geeks may be some of the driving forces behind some of these advancements, only a few of them actually reap the rewards.  Case in point, Twitter has gone mainstream.  But who has the largest following?  Ashton Kutcher.</p><p>I just spent some time trying to track a gift down for my wife.  In the search results, I came across a forum for handbags/purses.  I've seen all sorts of forums in the past: Computers, DVDs, Anime, Cars, Sports, etc, but this was the first time I came across a forum like that.  The ladies on that forum are not shifting to geek culture, they're just using new tools to communicate with others of similar interests in new ways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate to say it , but there is no coming shift to geek culture .
There simply are not enough geeks compared to " normal people .
" Geeks do n't have the spending power or sheer numbers to really matter .
While geeks might have been on the cutting edge at one point , things like the internet , instant messaging , e-mail , social media did n't really start to matter until they started to appeal to more people besides a small niche population.While geeks may be some of the driving forces behind some of these advancements , only a few of them actually reap the rewards .
Case in point , Twitter has gone mainstream .
But who has the largest following ?
Ashton Kutcher.I just spent some time trying to track a gift down for my wife .
In the search results , I came across a forum for handbags/purses .
I 've seen all sorts of forums in the past : Computers , DVDs , Anime , Cars , Sports , etc , but this was the first time I came across a forum like that .
The ladies on that forum are not shifting to geek culture , they 're just using new tools to communicate with others of similar interests in new ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate to say it, but there is no coming shift to geek culture.
There simply are not enough geeks compared to "normal people.
"  Geeks don't have the spending power or sheer numbers to really matter.
While geeks might have been on the cutting edge at one point, things like the internet, instant messaging, e-mail, social media didn't really start to matter until they started to appeal to more people besides a small niche population.While geeks may be some of the driving forces behind some of these advancements, only a few of them actually reap the rewards.
Case in point, Twitter has gone mainstream.
But who has the largest following?
Ashton Kutcher.I just spent some time trying to track a gift down for my wife.
In the search results, I came across a forum for handbags/purses.
I've seen all sorts of forums in the past: Computers, DVDs, Anime, Cars, Sports, etc, but this was the first time I came across a forum like that.
The ladies on that forum are not shifting to geek culture, they're just using new tools to communicate with others of similar interests in new ways.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915337</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>Terwin</author>
	<datestamp>1256806980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Albert Einstein</p><p>Things that stir the soul of one culture need not make any sense to any other culture.</p><p>Other than having a professional demeanor while at work, I see no reason that a person would need to be a social chameleon.  Sure you may dress up when you go to a costume party, or quiet down when attending church, but in general, one should be able to be oneself at all times.</p><p>My friends, family, and coworkers could all easily distinguish activities I probably have engaged in from ones I probably would not engage in if given a list, and those will generally all match up very well(not counting the lists from a current or former girlfriend, but those things are private between the participants and need not be shared)</p><p>Then again, I suppose not everyone has the foresight to select and train for a career they actually enjoy, and so must put on a mask every day lest their coworkers see the quiet desperation in their eyes as they try to 'make do'</p><p>And I suppose that many are not confident in and of themselves so that they feel they must wear a mask to get people to like them, a mask that they must then wear any time they are around their 'friends' who are not really their friends, but friends of the mask that they wear.</p><p>Just considering those two situations is depressing enough, I don't even want to consider a person that feels a need to wear a mask around their own family.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen .
        Albert EinsteinThings that stir the soul of one culture need not make any sense to any other culture.Other than having a professional demeanor while at work , I see no reason that a person would need to be a social chameleon .
Sure you may dress up when you go to a costume party , or quiet down when attending church , but in general , one should be able to be oneself at all times.My friends , family , and coworkers could all easily distinguish activities I probably have engaged in from ones I probably would not engage in if given a list , and those will generally all match up very well ( not counting the lists from a current or former girlfriend , but those things are private between the participants and need not be shared ) Then again , I suppose not everyone has the foresight to select and train for a career they actually enjoy , and so must put on a mask every day lest their coworkers see the quiet desperation in their eyes as they try to 'make do'And I suppose that many are not confident in and of themselves so that they feel they must wear a mask to get people to like them , a mask that they must then wear any time they are around their 'friends ' who are not really their friends , but friends of the mask that they wear.Just considering those two situations is depressing enough , I do n't even want to consider a person that feels a need to wear a mask around their own family .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.
        Albert EinsteinThings that stir the soul of one culture need not make any sense to any other culture.Other than having a professional demeanor while at work, I see no reason that a person would need to be a social chameleon.
Sure you may dress up when you go to a costume party, or quiet down when attending church, but in general, one should be able to be oneself at all times.My friends, family, and coworkers could all easily distinguish activities I probably have engaged in from ones I probably would not engage in if given a list, and those will generally all match up very well(not counting the lists from a current or former girlfriend, but those things are private between the participants and need not be shared)Then again, I suppose not everyone has the foresight to select and train for a career they actually enjoy, and so must put on a mask every day lest their coworkers see the quiet desperation in their eyes as they try to 'make do'And I suppose that many are not confident in and of themselves so that they feel they must wear a mask to get people to like them, a mask that they must then wear any time they are around their 'friends' who are not really their friends, but friends of the mask that they wear.Just considering those two situations is depressing enough, I don't even want to consider a person that feels a need to wear a mask around their own family.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914337</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912367</id>
	<title>Bush was a jock wannabe</title>
	<author>bussdriver</author>
	<datestamp>1256838480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He wanted to be a jock-- wannabe types are often worse than the real thing.<br>Bush wasn't good enough to be in sports and probably was a wimp like his father. He was a cheerleader because that is the best he could do (and they weren't like the ones of today.)<br>A wimp acting like a strong leader is also worse than the real thing; I don't know why so many people thought he had leadership skills because it was fairly clear he was a wannabe on that as well-- if not also overcompensating for the wimp label of his father; nobody calls Bush Jr a wimp, if they fell for his act.</p><p>Try being around lots of kids - doing similar things - it makes it easier to spot when adults do the same thing!  Adults are often just more sophisticated more socialized children; similar behaviors and motives but with a better disguise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He wanted to be a jock-- wannabe types are often worse than the real thing.Bush was n't good enough to be in sports and probably was a wimp like his father .
He was a cheerleader because that is the best he could do ( and they were n't like the ones of today .
) A wimp acting like a strong leader is also worse than the real thing ; I do n't know why so many people thought he had leadership skills because it was fairly clear he was a wannabe on that as well-- if not also overcompensating for the wimp label of his father ; nobody calls Bush Jr a wimp , if they fell for his act.Try being around lots of kids - doing similar things - it makes it easier to spot when adults do the same thing !
Adults are often just more sophisticated more socialized children ; similar behaviors and motives but with a better disguise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He wanted to be a jock-- wannabe types are often worse than the real thing.Bush wasn't good enough to be in sports and probably was a wimp like his father.
He was a cheerleader because that is the best he could do (and they weren't like the ones of today.
)A wimp acting like a strong leader is also worse than the real thing; I don't know why so many people thought he had leadership skills because it was fairly clear he was a wannabe on that as well-- if not also overcompensating for the wimp label of his father; nobody calls Bush Jr a wimp, if they fell for his act.Try being around lots of kids - doing similar things - it makes it easier to spot when adults do the same thing!
Adults are often just more sophisticated more socialized children; similar behaviors and motives but with a better disguise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917739</id>
	<title>Re:Can't someone be a jock AND a nerd?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1256815980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. A jock has social skills. Part of being a nerd is not having good social skills.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
A jock has social skills .
Part of being a nerd is not having good social skills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
A jock has social skills.
Part of being a nerd is not having good social skills.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914399</id>
	<title>Re:american labor is too expensive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256846340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>you could preserve american labor, and someone else would use cheaper overseas labor. then american consumers would buy that cheaper product of which nothing, not even company headquarters, gets a cut of that profit. then the next step is protectionism, where you insist everyone buy more expensive american made goods. then people buy far less, or they buy black market goods,</b> </p><p>Far less?  Perhaps, but in the long run that might be a good thing.   America should tariff countries that basically use slave labor to produce things, until they pass workers rights and environmental laws.  In addition to keeping more jobs in America, it keeps people off public assistance.  Yes, your DVD player might cost a little bit extra, and that brand new car might be a little more money, but at least people without college diplomas would be able to find reasonable middle class jobs.</p><p>The most powerful economies in the world practice protectionism.  America did it up until the 80's, and China does it now.  The idea that America can not produce high quality goods in a fair market is bullshit, and if we really care about environmentalism and human rights, we should not be trading countries that do not adopt western style worker protection laws.</p><p>So what is more important?  That we have consumer goods as cheaply as possible, or that we live our values as a nation?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you could preserve american labor , and someone else would use cheaper overseas labor .
then american consumers would buy that cheaper product of which nothing , not even company headquarters , gets a cut of that profit .
then the next step is protectionism , where you insist everyone buy more expensive american made goods .
then people buy far less , or they buy black market goods , Far less ?
Perhaps , but in the long run that might be a good thing .
America should tariff countries that basically use slave labor to produce things , until they pass workers rights and environmental laws .
In addition to keeping more jobs in America , it keeps people off public assistance .
Yes , your DVD player might cost a little bit extra , and that brand new car might be a little more money , but at least people without college diplomas would be able to find reasonable middle class jobs.The most powerful economies in the world practice protectionism .
America did it up until the 80 's , and China does it now .
The idea that America can not produce high quality goods in a fair market is bullshit , and if we really care about environmentalism and human rights , we should not be trading countries that do not adopt western style worker protection laws.So what is more important ?
That we have consumer goods as cheaply as possible , or that we live our values as a nation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you could preserve american labor, and someone else would use cheaper overseas labor.
then american consumers would buy that cheaper product of which nothing, not even company headquarters, gets a cut of that profit.
then the next step is protectionism, where you insist everyone buy more expensive american made goods.
then people buy far less, or they buy black market goods, Far less?
Perhaps, but in the long run that might be a good thing.
America should tariff countries that basically use slave labor to produce things, until they pass workers rights and environmental laws.
In addition to keeping more jobs in America, it keeps people off public assistance.
Yes, your DVD player might cost a little bit extra, and that brand new car might be a little more money, but at least people without college diplomas would be able to find reasonable middle class jobs.The most powerful economies in the world practice protectionism.
America did it up until the 80's, and China does it now.
The idea that America can not produce high quality goods in a fair market is bullshit, and if we really care about environmentalism and human rights, we should not be trading countries that do not adopt western style worker protection laws.So what is more important?
That we have consumer goods as cheaply as possible, or that we live our values as a nation?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912353</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>kevinNCSU</author>
	<datestamp>1256838420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right, that must be why all the nerds in high school ended up in the Marines, Army and other best fighting forces on Earth and all the jocks ended up sitting around in their parent's basements lifting weights and playing CoD4 wishing they were badass and smart like us.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , that must be why all the nerds in high school ended up in the Marines , Army and other best fighting forces on Earth and all the jocks ended up sitting around in their parent 's basements lifting weights and playing CoD4 wishing they were badass and smart like us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, that must be why all the nerds in high school ended up in the Marines, Army and other best fighting forces on Earth and all the jocks ended up sitting around in their parent's basements lifting weights and playing CoD4 wishing they were badass and smart like us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912591</id>
	<title>I was a total jock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256839320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and I regularly banged chicks and beat up nerds.</p><p>Now I've got a beautiful wife (ex-model), 3 kids that love me, and a huge house. I drive a 67 Corvette Stingray (a beaut)</p><p>anyhow, I also manage a couple dozen programmer nerds, many my age, and they're all angry. And make less than I do.</p><p>What I'm saying is, you might want to rethink the nerd path you're on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and I regularly banged chicks and beat up nerds.Now I 've got a beautiful wife ( ex-model ) , 3 kids that love me , and a huge house .
I drive a 67 Corvette Stingray ( a beaut ) anyhow , I also manage a couple dozen programmer nerds , many my age , and they 're all angry .
And make less than I do.What I 'm saying is , you might want to rethink the nerd path you 're on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and I regularly banged chicks and beat up nerds.Now I've got a beautiful wife (ex-model), 3 kids that love me, and a huge house.
I drive a 67 Corvette Stingray (a beaut)anyhow, I also manage a couple dozen programmer nerds, many my age, and they're all angry.
And make less than I do.What I'm saying is, you might want to rethink the nerd path you're on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912229</id>
	<title>Re:Can't someone be a jock AND a nerd?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256838000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can't someone be a jock AND a nerd?</p></div><p>Only if you are comfortable giving wedgies to yourself.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't someone be a jock AND a nerd ? Only if you are comfortable giving wedgies to yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't someone be a jock AND a nerd?Only if you are comfortable giving wedgies to yourself.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914569</id>
	<title>Re:Put your backbone into it</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1256847120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Truth is, the geek inherited the earth long ago.</p></div></blockquote><p>Nah.  What's happened is the definition of geek has become so rote and watered down, that anyone can be one.<br>
&nbsp; <br>Used to be that a 'geek' (the old carnie definition notwithstanding) was someone who was not only very smart, but very interested in one or more (usually scholarly) pursuits or interests that were outside the norm.  Hence the term 'computer geek' arose back when few households, offices, or businesses had one.  Back in high school I was the 'space geek' because I was heavily into the space program.  (That was about as high tech as the average person got in the late 70's/early 80's)<br>
&nbsp; <br>But nowadays all that has changed.  To be a geek you just have to have the 'right' (read: latest) tech toy, watch the 'right' TV programs or movies (how many times have you seen "turn in your geek card if you haven't seen \_\_\_\_"?), hang out in the 'right' places (like coffee shops), etc...  It's not about intelligence, knowledge, or passion at all.<br>
&nbsp; <br>As a side note, back in high school I moved freely among jocks, geeks, nerds, stoners, etc...  I spent more time making friends than worrying about fitting in, and as I result I fit in everywhere - despite being a dyed in the wool geek.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Truth is , the geek inherited the earth long ago.Nah .
What 's happened is the definition of geek has become so rote and watered down , that anyone can be one .
  Used to be that a 'geek ' ( the old carnie definition notwithstanding ) was someone who was not only very smart , but very interested in one or more ( usually scholarly ) pursuits or interests that were outside the norm .
Hence the term 'computer geek ' arose back when few households , offices , or businesses had one .
Back in high school I was the 'space geek ' because I was heavily into the space program .
( That was about as high tech as the average person got in the late 70 's/early 80 's )   But nowadays all that has changed .
To be a geek you just have to have the 'right ' ( read : latest ) tech toy , watch the 'right ' TV programs or movies ( how many times have you seen " turn in your geek card if you have n't seen \ _ \ _ \ _ \ _ " ?
) , hang out in the 'right ' places ( like coffee shops ) , etc... It 's not about intelligence , knowledge , or passion at all .
  As a side note , back in high school I moved freely among jocks , geeks , nerds , stoners , etc... I spent more time making friends than worrying about fitting in , and as I result I fit in everywhere - despite being a dyed in the wool geek .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Truth is, the geek inherited the earth long ago.Nah.
What's happened is the definition of geek has become so rote and watered down, that anyone can be one.
  Used to be that a 'geek' (the old carnie definition notwithstanding) was someone who was not only very smart, but very interested in one or more (usually scholarly) pursuits or interests that were outside the norm.
Hence the term 'computer geek' arose back when few households, offices, or businesses had one.
Back in high school I was the 'space geek' because I was heavily into the space program.
(That was about as high tech as the average person got in the late 70's/early 80's)
  But nowadays all that has changed.
To be a geek you just have to have the 'right' (read: latest) tech toy, watch the 'right' TV programs or movies (how many times have you seen "turn in your geek card if you haven't seen \_\_\_\_"?
), hang out in the 'right' places (like coffee shops), etc...  It's not about intelligence, knowledge, or passion at all.
  As a side note, back in high school I moved freely among jocks, geeks, nerds, stoners, etc...  I spent more time making friends than worrying about fitting in, and as I result I fit in everywhere - despite being a dyed in the wool geek.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912285</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Duradin</author>
	<datestamp>1256838180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jocks won wars back when mankind was pounding on each other with their bare fists. Once we picked up rocks that hit harder than the strongest brawler, the jocks were obsolete...</p><p>Jocks won wars back when mankind was pounding on each other with rocks. Once we stuck the rocks on sticks, the jocks were obsolete...</p><p>Jocks won wars back when mankind was pounding on each other with sticks with rocks attached. Once we figured out we could throw those sticks, the jocks were obsolete...</p><p>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other. Once we figured out that a stick with a string could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete...</p><p>Modern equipment for a soldier is heavy. Soldiers have to be in rather hostile environments. Just because the human isn't providing the power to propel the weapon doesn't mean that Jockish attributes aren't necessary in modern combat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jocks won wars back when mankind was pounding on each other with their bare fists .
Once we picked up rocks that hit harder than the strongest brawler , the jocks were obsolete...Jocks won wars back when mankind was pounding on each other with rocks .
Once we stuck the rocks on sticks , the jocks were obsolete...Jocks won wars back when mankind was pounding on each other with sticks with rocks attached .
Once we figured out we could throw those sticks , the jocks were obsolete...Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other .
Once we figured out that a stick with a string could out-range the strongest spear-thrower , the jocks were obsolete...Modern equipment for a soldier is heavy .
Soldiers have to be in rather hostile environments .
Just because the human is n't providing the power to propel the weapon does n't mean that Jockish attributes are n't necessary in modern combat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jocks won wars back when mankind was pounding on each other with their bare fists.
Once we picked up rocks that hit harder than the strongest brawler, the jocks were obsolete...Jocks won wars back when mankind was pounding on each other with rocks.
Once we stuck the rocks on sticks, the jocks were obsolete...Jocks won wars back when mankind was pounding on each other with sticks with rocks attached.
Once we figured out we could throw those sticks, the jocks were obsolete...Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other.
Once we figured out that a stick with a string could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete...Modern equipment for a soldier is heavy.
Soldiers have to be in rather hostile environments.
Just because the human isn't providing the power to propel the weapon doesn't mean that Jockish attributes aren't necessary in modern combat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921685</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>Eivind</author>
	<datestamp>1256898060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sports ain't unique as status-generator for teenaged males. It may be the most common one, but it's not the only one. Being real good on a cool instrument, for example, works fine.</p><p>No, nobody vares if you're a virtuoso on the violin. But if you can play guitar really well, you're in. And indirectly, anything which impresses girls makes you -in-, even if the other guys don't even know what it is.</p><p>I can pinpoint to the -minute- when my status permanently changed. It was in the shower, after sports. I was 16.</p><p>"Eivind has a hickey !" He went, intending to annoy me. "And you -don't-" I said. 5 seconds of silence. Loud laugther. Game over. Permanent change. The end.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sports ai n't unique as status-generator for teenaged males .
It may be the most common one , but it 's not the only one .
Being real good on a cool instrument , for example , works fine.No , nobody vares if you 're a virtuoso on the violin .
But if you can play guitar really well , you 're in .
And indirectly , anything which impresses girls makes you -in- , even if the other guys do n't even know what it is.I can pinpoint to the -minute- when my status permanently changed .
It was in the shower , after sports .
I was 16 .
" Eivind has a hickey !
" He went , intending to annoy me .
" And you -do n't- " I said .
5 seconds of silence .
Loud laugther .
Game over .
Permanent change .
The end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sports ain't unique as status-generator for teenaged males.
It may be the most common one, but it's not the only one.
Being real good on a cool instrument, for example, works fine.No, nobody vares if you're a virtuoso on the violin.
But if you can play guitar really well, you're in.
And indirectly, anything which impresses girls makes you -in-, even if the other guys don't even know what it is.I can pinpoint to the -minute- when my status permanently changed.
It was in the shower, after sports.
I was 16.
"Eivind has a hickey !
" He went, intending to annoy me.
"And you -don't-" I said.
5 seconds of silence.
Loud laugther.
Game over.
Permanent change.
The end.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917749</id>
	<title>The FALL of geek culture..</title>
	<author>plasmacutter</author>
	<datestamp>1256816040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the 90's we saw the rise of the internet. The internet became the "in thing", and geeks began to receive highly lucrative salaries.</p><p>The consumer markets began to tailor their lines to geek culture. The scifi channel rose to top ratings, jpop and anime even broke into mainstream media, and the list goes on.</p><p>As the internet became passe and the tech bubble burst, however, all of this began to subside. Science fiction, particularly hard scifi, has virtually dried up. Culminating in the recent "SYFY" rebrand in which they called their old target base basement dwelling anti-social stereotypes.</p><p>The lucrative salaries vanished, and with it the market imperative to serve this demographic. Finally, there was the rebellion against all things scientific which continues to this day with the "anti-scifi" of SG:U with its constant vilificaiton of its main scientist protagonist.</p><p>Geek culture is on the fall, not on the rise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the 90 's we saw the rise of the internet .
The internet became the " in thing " , and geeks began to receive highly lucrative salaries.The consumer markets began to tailor their lines to geek culture .
The scifi channel rose to top ratings , jpop and anime even broke into mainstream media , and the list goes on.As the internet became passe and the tech bubble burst , however , all of this began to subside .
Science fiction , particularly hard scifi , has virtually dried up .
Culminating in the recent " SYFY " rebrand in which they called their old target base basement dwelling anti-social stereotypes.The lucrative salaries vanished , and with it the market imperative to serve this demographic .
Finally , there was the rebellion against all things scientific which continues to this day with the " anti-scifi " of SG : U with its constant vilificaiton of its main scientist protagonist.Geek culture is on the fall , not on the rise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the 90's we saw the rise of the internet.
The internet became the "in thing", and geeks began to receive highly lucrative salaries.The consumer markets began to tailor their lines to geek culture.
The scifi channel rose to top ratings, jpop and anime even broke into mainstream media, and the list goes on.As the internet became passe and the tech bubble burst, however, all of this began to subside.
Science fiction, particularly hard scifi, has virtually dried up.
Culminating in the recent "SYFY" rebrand in which they called their old target base basement dwelling anti-social stereotypes.The lucrative salaries vanished, and with it the market imperative to serve this demographic.
Finally, there was the rebellion against all things scientific which continues to this day with the "anti-scifi" of SG:U with its constant vilificaiton of its main scientist protagonist.Geek culture is on the fall, not on the rise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911971</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>jhfry</author>
	<datestamp>1256837280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed.</p><p>However, there is something to be said about the social pariah's ability to focus on pursuits that many social people would never have time to invest in.</p><p>This, I believe is the source for the stereotype.  Essentially, if I am smart but not very social, then I am more likely to achieve a depth of understanding that a more social, athletic, and busy person may... thus I have achieved a level of knowledge that he just didn't  have time for.</p><p>The greatest thing that we can do, and are doing, to help destroy that stereotype, is to make being a nerd a highly social behavior.  Already, tech has come to dominate the wish lists of teens everywhere, which has made it easy for the "nerd" type to be involved socially.  Additionally, there are far more opportunities for "nerds" to find other "nerds" with similar interests and thus socialize about those interests.</p><p>Essentially, the nerds are no longer antisocial, they just spend more time socializing about the things they love... which in turn has greatly torn down the "nerd"/"jock" argument.</p><p>I was one of the first social "nerds" in my high school (class of '95).  To this day, I am uninterested in sports and most of the other subjects that the highly social folks at my school were interested in... but I had a place in their social circles because tech was just becoming something that everyone needed to understand and I was knowledgeable, friendly, and not so embarrassing to be seen with.  However, I did have friends who dedicated far more time to their stereotypical "nerd" hobbies and in a way I was always jealous of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed.However , there is something to be said about the social pariah 's ability to focus on pursuits that many social people would never have time to invest in.This , I believe is the source for the stereotype .
Essentially , if I am smart but not very social , then I am more likely to achieve a depth of understanding that a more social , athletic , and busy person may... thus I have achieved a level of knowledge that he just did n't have time for.The greatest thing that we can do , and are doing , to help destroy that stereotype , is to make being a nerd a highly social behavior .
Already , tech has come to dominate the wish lists of teens everywhere , which has made it easy for the " nerd " type to be involved socially .
Additionally , there are far more opportunities for " nerds " to find other " nerds " with similar interests and thus socialize about those interests.Essentially , the nerds are no longer antisocial , they just spend more time socializing about the things they love... which in turn has greatly torn down the " nerd " / " jock " argument.I was one of the first social " nerds " in my high school ( class of '95 ) .
To this day , I am uninterested in sports and most of the other subjects that the highly social folks at my school were interested in... but I had a place in their social circles because tech was just becoming something that everyone needed to understand and I was knowledgeable , friendly , and not so embarrassing to be seen with .
However , I did have friends who dedicated far more time to their stereotypical " nerd " hobbies and in a way I was always jealous of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.However, there is something to be said about the social pariah's ability to focus on pursuits that many social people would never have time to invest in.This, I believe is the source for the stereotype.
Essentially, if I am smart but not very social, then I am more likely to achieve a depth of understanding that a more social, athletic, and busy person may... thus I have achieved a level of knowledge that he just didn't  have time for.The greatest thing that we can do, and are doing, to help destroy that stereotype, is to make being a nerd a highly social behavior.
Already, tech has come to dominate the wish lists of teens everywhere, which has made it easy for the "nerd" type to be involved socially.
Additionally, there are far more opportunities for "nerds" to find other "nerds" with similar interests and thus socialize about those interests.Essentially, the nerds are no longer antisocial, they just spend more time socializing about the things they love... which in turn has greatly torn down the "nerd"/"jock" argument.I was one of the first social "nerds" in my high school (class of '95).
To this day, I am uninterested in sports and most of the other subjects that the highly social folks at my school were interested in... but I had a place in their social circles because tech was just becoming something that everyone needed to understand and I was knowledgeable, friendly, and not so embarrassing to be seen with.
However, I did have friends who dedicated far more time to their stereotypical "nerd" hobbies and in a way I was always jealous of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915343</id>
	<title>Well I wonder</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1256806980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I highly doubt any of this nonsense is even close to reality. Here in "Real Life" we have gone from Shakespeare, Plato, Bach, Dorvak, Doyle, Poe, Shelly, and other great literary and cultural wonders to Tila Tequila and reality TV.</p><p>Here in "Real Life" the rewarding of the lazy, unproductive, immoral, self destructive, and intolerant has only accelerated in the last 30 years.</p><p>Our 'assaletes' are substance abusing, spouse abusing, liars. Our politicians are corrupt. Our Scientists are too busy pandering and tailoring research to meet grant requirments and political agendas, and our businesses are too busy keeping the contemporary corporate ponzi scheme alfoat to generate any real wealth.</p><p>Between being moral bankrupt, greedy, dihonsest, and hypocritical this Geek veneration smells like more B as in B, S as in S.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I highly doubt any of this nonsense is even close to reality .
Here in " Real Life " we have gone from Shakespeare , Plato , Bach , Dorvak , Doyle , Poe , Shelly , and other great literary and cultural wonders to Tila Tequila and reality TV.Here in " Real Life " the rewarding of the lazy , unproductive , immoral , self destructive , and intolerant has only accelerated in the last 30 years.Our 'assaletes ' are substance abusing , spouse abusing , liars .
Our politicians are corrupt .
Our Scientists are too busy pandering and tailoring research to meet grant requirments and political agendas , and our businesses are too busy keeping the contemporary corporate ponzi scheme alfoat to generate any real wealth.Between being moral bankrupt , greedy , dihonsest , and hypocritical this Geek veneration smells like more B as in B , S as in S .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I highly doubt any of this nonsense is even close to reality.
Here in "Real Life" we have gone from Shakespeare, Plato, Bach, Dorvak, Doyle, Poe, Shelly, and other great literary and cultural wonders to Tila Tequila and reality TV.Here in "Real Life" the rewarding of the lazy, unproductive, immoral, self destructive, and intolerant has only accelerated in the last 30 years.Our 'assaletes' are substance abusing, spouse abusing, liars.
Our politicians are corrupt.
Our Scientists are too busy pandering and tailoring research to meet grant requirments and political agendas, and our businesses are too busy keeping the contemporary corporate ponzi scheme alfoat to generate any real wealth.Between being moral bankrupt, greedy, dihonsest, and hypocritical this Geek veneration smells like more B as in B, S as in S.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915093</id>
	<title>Cultural biases</title>
	<author>rwa2</author>
	<datestamp>1256849220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as I've heard and experienced, the whole "nerd" stigma is an entirely American concept.  There aren't really any such thing as "nerds" in Russian or Asian schools; some kids get better grades than others, but they all play football ("soccer") together or climb mountains or whatever.  Would anyone in the international community care to elaborate?</p><p>I spent about 4 years growing up in Thailand during my childhood and went to an international school.  So my personal sampling is skewed.  I suppose we did make fun of kids with "teh ghey", but that eventually wore off once we realized how popular they were with the girls.</p><p>On returning to the US in 8th grade, the thing that got me the most was that no one played...  back East we'd chomp down our lunches in 5 minutes and run out to spend the rest of our break time playing "balloon" or "rabbit" or "tee" or some other form form of zombie / team tag.  The only form of physical activity was excruciatingly over-organized team sports with lots of rules and very brief bursts of activity followed by protracted yelling and arguments... more of a game for the enjoyment of politicians and lawyers if you ask me.</p><p>Anyway, other countries do have a lot more respect for education and teachers as a profession.  Here they're treated more like some form of social worker, maybe marginally higher than street sweepers or bus drivers.  Although the same thing appears to be happening to medical doctors now (back when I was growing up in Asia, a doctor was about the best thing a kid could grow up to be... so I was actually kinda surprised to find a lot of my childhood friends growing up to be computer programmers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P ).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I 've heard and experienced , the whole " nerd " stigma is an entirely American concept .
There are n't really any such thing as " nerds " in Russian or Asian schools ; some kids get better grades than others , but they all play football ( " soccer " ) together or climb mountains or whatever .
Would anyone in the international community care to elaborate ? I spent about 4 years growing up in Thailand during my childhood and went to an international school .
So my personal sampling is skewed .
I suppose we did make fun of kids with " teh ghey " , but that eventually wore off once we realized how popular they were with the girls.On returning to the US in 8th grade , the thing that got me the most was that no one played... back East we 'd chomp down our lunches in 5 minutes and run out to spend the rest of our break time playing " balloon " or " rabbit " or " tee " or some other form form of zombie / team tag .
The only form of physical activity was excruciatingly over-organized team sports with lots of rules and very brief bursts of activity followed by protracted yelling and arguments... more of a game for the enjoyment of politicians and lawyers if you ask me.Anyway , other countries do have a lot more respect for education and teachers as a profession .
Here they 're treated more like some form of social worker , maybe marginally higher than street sweepers or bus drivers .
Although the same thing appears to be happening to medical doctors now ( back when I was growing up in Asia , a doctor was about the best thing a kid could grow up to be... so I was actually kinda surprised to find a lot of my childhood friends growing up to be computer programmers : P ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I've heard and experienced, the whole "nerd" stigma is an entirely American concept.
There aren't really any such thing as "nerds" in Russian or Asian schools; some kids get better grades than others, but they all play football ("soccer") together or climb mountains or whatever.
Would anyone in the international community care to elaborate?I spent about 4 years growing up in Thailand during my childhood and went to an international school.
So my personal sampling is skewed.
I suppose we did make fun of kids with "teh ghey", but that eventually wore off once we realized how popular they were with the girls.On returning to the US in 8th grade, the thing that got me the most was that no one played...  back East we'd chomp down our lunches in 5 minutes and run out to spend the rest of our break time playing "balloon" or "rabbit" or "tee" or some other form form of zombie / team tag.
The only form of physical activity was excruciatingly over-organized team sports with lots of rules and very brief bursts of activity followed by protracted yelling and arguments... more of a game for the enjoyment of politicians and lawyers if you ask me.Anyway, other countries do have a lot more respect for education and teachers as a profession.
Here they're treated more like some form of social worker, maybe marginally higher than street sweepers or bus drivers.
Although the same thing appears to be happening to medical doctors now (back when I was growing up in Asia, a doctor was about the best thing a kid could grow up to be... so I was actually kinda surprised to find a lot of my childhood friends growing up to be computer programmers :P ).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29919291</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256825160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We don't even have a word for wedgie cause no one gets their underpants pulled up in France,</p><p>No you have 'french fries' essentially the same thing but but using a G-string.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We do n't even have a word for wedgie cause no one gets their underpants pulled up in France,No you have 'french fries ' essentially the same thing but but using a G-string .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We don't even have a word for wedgie cause no one gets their underpants pulled up in France,No you have 'french fries' essentially the same thing but but using a G-string.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914509</id>
	<title>Chinese factory workers?</title>
	<author>jellybear</author>
	<datestamp>1256846880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait, so he's saying jockdom is obsolete because it's the best way to motivate factory workers, but China is overtaking our factories, but the Chinese place their nerds above jocks? Is this a contradiction? If China is still industrial shouldn't they have jocks on pedestals? Or I guess maybe not, because Chinese are automatically nerds?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , so he 's saying jockdom is obsolete because it 's the best way to motivate factory workers , but China is overtaking our factories , but the Chinese place their nerds above jocks ?
Is this a contradiction ?
If China is still industrial should n't they have jocks on pedestals ?
Or I guess maybe not , because Chinese are automatically nerds ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, so he's saying jockdom is obsolete because it's the best way to motivate factory workers, but China is overtaking our factories, but the Chinese place their nerds above jocks?
Is this a contradiction?
If China is still industrial shouldn't they have jocks on pedestals?
Or I guess maybe not, because Chinese are automatically nerds?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29920235</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>shermo</author>
	<datestamp>1256833080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My top-academic-stream class also managed to win our touch rugby competition. Certainly not a bad achievement for a bunch of geeks, and a very fond memory. We also had the player who went on to play halfback and captain our senior rugby team.</p><p>We had our fair share of typical nerd nerds, but we also had a lot of very well rounded over-achievers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My top-academic-stream class also managed to win our touch rugby competition .
Certainly not a bad achievement for a bunch of geeks , and a very fond memory .
We also had the player who went on to play halfback and captain our senior rugby team.We had our fair share of typical nerd nerds , but we also had a lot of very well rounded over-achievers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My top-academic-stream class also managed to win our touch rugby competition.
Certainly not a bad achievement for a bunch of geeks, and a very fond memory.
We also had the player who went on to play halfback and captain our senior rugby team.We had our fair share of typical nerd nerds, but we also had a lot of very well rounded over-achievers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912829</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1256840160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Then you wouldn't be pegged with (and the associated stigmas) of a certain stereotype.</p><p>I was heavy into science in high school, as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities.  I never had a problem with any group of people.</p></div><p>It's not about being well-rounded. You say you were popular because you knew about science, sports, and "other extracurricular activities". If you had known science but not sports, you would have needed to be more well-rounded. had you known sports, but not science, you would have been ok.</p><p>Well-roundedness is only necessary for people who don't play sports.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then you would n't be pegged with ( and the associated stigmas ) of a certain stereotype.I was heavy into science in high school , as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities .
I never had a problem with any group of people.It 's not about being well-rounded .
You say you were popular because you knew about science , sports , and " other extracurricular activities " .
If you had known science but not sports , you would have needed to be more well-rounded .
had you known sports , but not science , you would have been ok.Well-roundedness is only necessary for people who do n't play sports .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then you wouldn't be pegged with (and the associated stigmas) of a certain stereotype.I was heavy into science in high school, as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities.
I never had a problem with any group of people.It's not about being well-rounded.
You say you were popular because you knew about science, sports, and "other extracurricular activities".
If you had known science but not sports, you would have needed to be more well-rounded.
had you known sports, but not science, you would have been ok.Well-roundedness is only necessary for people who don't play sports.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912803</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256840100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The leaders you mention may well have been thoughtful, but you can be sure the soldiers on the line following thier orders were for the most part jocks.  I think that is the point.  Jocks follow orders while geeks look at the situation and say "this way would be easier".  I can tell you from experience that this does not work in the military (try mentioning to your platoon seargent that it's shorter if you turn here durring a formation run and see what happens).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The leaders you mention may well have been thoughtful , but you can be sure the soldiers on the line following thier orders were for the most part jocks .
I think that is the point .
Jocks follow orders while geeks look at the situation and say " this way would be easier " .
I can tell you from experience that this does not work in the military ( try mentioning to your platoon seargent that it 's shorter if you turn here durring a formation run and see what happens ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The leaders you mention may well have been thoughtful, but you can be sure the soldiers on the line following thier orders were for the most part jocks.
I think that is the point.
Jocks follow orders while geeks look at the situation and say "this way would be easier".
I can tell you from experience that this does not work in the military (try mentioning to your platoon seargent that it's shorter if you turn here durring a formation run and see what happens).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912233</id>
	<title>Re:Nonsense.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256838000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Women, despite outnumbering men, have been unable to achieve equality in macho culture despite at least 100 years of effort.  No big reason to think that nerds will do any better.</p></div><p>that's because women have a vagina, a lot of men want it, and the women never really got over it.  so most of their life is centered around getting as much in return for giving up access to the vagina as they can possibly get.  so they want to be the center of attention any chance they get, and they'd rather worry about their makeup than worry about things like the fact that they're driving a moving car, or anything that requires abstract thought like technology.  hey when you're pretty and desirable you never have to grow up, so you can be a 20something female who is childish and superficial and undisciplined and overreacts to everything.  for the tiny percentage of women who understand what's wrong with that, well, they say all the good ones are taken, and it's true.  you can find really, really great women, as long as you're prepared to meet their husbands and boyfriends.</p><p>i don't think this compares with the nerd situation.</p><p>Posted with another browser (so no cookies) and a proxy server.  Why?  Because Slashdot doesn't think that 10 minutes between posts is long enough to wait.  I disagree and the customer is always right.  I encourage others to do the same.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Women , despite outnumbering men , have been unable to achieve equality in macho culture despite at least 100 years of effort .
No big reason to think that nerds will do any better.that 's because women have a vagina , a lot of men want it , and the women never really got over it .
so most of their life is centered around getting as much in return for giving up access to the vagina as they can possibly get .
so they want to be the center of attention any chance they get , and they 'd rather worry about their makeup than worry about things like the fact that they 're driving a moving car , or anything that requires abstract thought like technology .
hey when you 're pretty and desirable you never have to grow up , so you can be a 20something female who is childish and superficial and undisciplined and overreacts to everything .
for the tiny percentage of women who understand what 's wrong with that , well , they say all the good ones are taken , and it 's true .
you can find really , really great women , as long as you 're prepared to meet their husbands and boyfriends.i do n't think this compares with the nerd situation.Posted with another browser ( so no cookies ) and a proxy server .
Why ? Because Slashdot does n't think that 10 minutes between posts is long enough to wait .
I disagree and the customer is always right .
I encourage others to do the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Women, despite outnumbering men, have been unable to achieve equality in macho culture despite at least 100 years of effort.
No big reason to think that nerds will do any better.that's because women have a vagina, a lot of men want it, and the women never really got over it.
so most of their life is centered around getting as much in return for giving up access to the vagina as they can possibly get.
so they want to be the center of attention any chance they get, and they'd rather worry about their makeup than worry about things like the fact that they're driving a moving car, or anything that requires abstract thought like technology.
hey when you're pretty and desirable you never have to grow up, so you can be a 20something female who is childish and superficial and undisciplined and overreacts to everything.
for the tiny percentage of women who understand what's wrong with that, well, they say all the good ones are taken, and it's true.
you can find really, really great women, as long as you're prepared to meet their husbands and boyfriends.i don't think this compares with the nerd situation.Posted with another browser (so no cookies) and a proxy server.
Why?  Because Slashdot doesn't think that 10 minutes between posts is long enough to wait.
I disagree and the customer is always right.
I encourage others to do the same.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913091</id>
	<title>Re:It won't happen</title>
	<author>StikyPad</author>
	<datestamp>1256841180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Individual wealth is mostly a fluke.  It doesn't correlate well with intelligence, education, or experience.  About the only thing self-made wealthy individuals have in common is dedication and motivation, which makes sense because you can't win if you don't play (for values of play excluding tic-tac-toe, global thermonuclear war, and gambling), but there are plenty of people with those traits who *don't* become wealthy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Individual wealth is mostly a fluke .
It does n't correlate well with intelligence , education , or experience .
About the only thing self-made wealthy individuals have in common is dedication and motivation , which makes sense because you ca n't win if you do n't play ( for values of play excluding tic-tac-toe , global thermonuclear war , and gambling ) , but there are plenty of people with those traits who * do n't * become wealthy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Individual wealth is mostly a fluke.
It doesn't correlate well with intelligence, education, or experience.
About the only thing self-made wealthy individuals have in common is dedication and motivation, which makes sense because you can't win if you don't play (for values of play excluding tic-tac-toe, global thermonuclear war, and gambling), but there are plenty of people with those traits who *don't* become wealthy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29919537</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>mattack2</author>
	<datestamp>1256827140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Were you also into glee club?  Did they throw Slushies on you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Were you also into glee club ?
Did they throw Slushies on you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Were you also into glee club?
Did they throw Slushies on you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912425</id>
	<title>Mice vote to bell cat</title>
	<author>thegameiam</author>
	<datestamp>1256838660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>News at 11...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>News at 11.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>News at 11...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29918797</id>
	<title>The ultimate "Revenge of the Nerds"</title>
	<author>garyebickford</author>
	<datestamp>1256822340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When that movie came out, I opined that the ultimate Revenge of the Nerds was that the nerds will grow up to be engineers, and build the world that everybody else has to live in!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When that movie came out , I opined that the ultimate Revenge of the Nerds was that the nerds will grow up to be engineers , and build the world that everybody else has to live in !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When that movie came out, I opined that the ultimate Revenge of the Nerds was that the nerds will grow up to be engineers, and build the world that everybody else has to live in!
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911447</id>
	<title>Hey?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256835360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't that the guy who played spider-man in those movies???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that the guy who played spider-man in those movies ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that the guy who played spider-man in those movies??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433</id>
	<title>I for one</title>
	<author>Asdanf</author>
	<datestamp>1256835300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I, for one, welcome myself as one of our new overlords.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I , for one , welcome myself as one of our new overlords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, for one, welcome myself as one of our new overlords.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913835</id>
	<title>Re:I for one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256844120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>have fun in your fantasy world.</htmltext>
<tokenext>have fun in your fantasy world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>have fun in your fantasy world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912057</id>
	<title>The wise stay fit</title>
	<author>e2d2</author>
	<datestamp>1256837520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes but if you're truly smart then you'll realize that being athletic isn't something to be avoided. It's something you strive for. A healthy body == a healthy mind. Discard those stereotypes and do yourself a favor. Put down the bag of chips and go for a walk. It will pay better dividends than anything you can ever learn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes but if you 're truly smart then you 'll realize that being athletic is n't something to be avoided .
It 's something you strive for .
A healthy body = = a healthy mind .
Discard those stereotypes and do yourself a favor .
Put down the bag of chips and go for a walk .
It will pay better dividends than anything you can ever learn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes but if you're truly smart then you'll realize that being athletic isn't something to be avoided.
It's something you strive for.
A healthy body == a healthy mind.
Discard those stereotypes and do yourself a favor.
Put down the bag of chips and go for a walk.
It will pay better dividends than anything you can ever learn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912597</id>
	<title>Re:Hey?</title>
	<author>el3mentary</author>
	<datestamp>1256839380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He's only the "I'm a PC" guy in the states though the UK gets Mitchell and Webb</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's only the " I 'm a PC " guy in the states though the UK gets Mitchell and Webb</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's only the "I'm a PC" guy in the states though the UK gets Mitchell and Webb</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911573</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911977</id>
	<title>I'm not so sure...</title>
	<author>ThousandStars</author>
	<datestamp>1256837280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Based on essays like Neal Stephenson's <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/17/opinion/17stephenson.html" title="nytimes.com">Turn On, Tune In, Veg Out</a> [nytimes.com], <a href="http://chronicle.com/article/How-Our-Culture-Keeps-Students/36179" title="chronicle.com">How Culture Keeps Students Out of Science</a> [chronicle.com], and Paul Graham's <a href="http://paulgraham.com/nerds.html" title="paulgraham.com">Why Nerds are Unpopular</a> [paulgraham.com], I'm not so sure. Those essays look back, yes, but I don't think I've seen the kind of fundamental shift described in the article. The <a href="http://jseliger.com/2008/12/16/beer-and-circus-how-big-time-sports-is-crippling-undergraduate-education-\%E2\%80\%94\%C2\%A0murray-sperber/" title="jseliger.com">Beer and Circus</a> [jseliger.com] mentality on colleges still seems alive and well. <p>I'd love to be wrong. But I don't think I am.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Based on essays like Neal Stephenson 's Turn On , Tune In , Veg Out [ nytimes.com ] , How Culture Keeps Students Out of Science [ chronicle.com ] , and Paul Graham 's Why Nerds are Unpopular [ paulgraham.com ] , I 'm not so sure .
Those essays look back , yes , but I do n't think I 've seen the kind of fundamental shift described in the article .
The Beer and Circus [ jseliger.com ] mentality on colleges still seems alive and well .
I 'd love to be wrong .
But I do n't think I am .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Based on essays like Neal Stephenson's Turn On, Tune In, Veg Out [nytimes.com], How Culture Keeps Students Out of Science [chronicle.com], and Paul Graham's Why Nerds are Unpopular [paulgraham.com], I'm not so sure.
Those essays look back, yes, but I don't think I've seen the kind of fundamental shift described in the article.
The Beer and Circus [jseliger.com] mentality on colleges still seems alive and well.
I'd love to be wrong.
But I don't think I am.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916313</id>
	<title>Re:It won't happen</title>
	<author>brkello</author>
	<datestamp>1256810400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or maybe not paying the CEO 1000 times what we make would help too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or maybe not paying the CEO 1000 times what we make would help too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or maybe not paying the CEO 1000 times what we make would help too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911623</id>
	<title>Gentlemen, start your D12's.</title>
	<author>MRe\_nl</author>
	<datestamp>1256835960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://odeo.com/episodes/22014686-John-Hodgman-on-Dungeons-and-Dragons" title="odeo.com">http://odeo.com/episodes/22014686-John-Hodgman-on-Dungeons-and-Dragons</a> [odeo.com]</p><p>This man's use of language reminds me of Terry Pratchett somehow. The American version.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //odeo.com/episodes/22014686-John-Hodgman-on-Dungeons-and-Dragons [ odeo.com ] This man 's use of language reminds me of Terry Pratchett somehow .
The American version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://odeo.com/episodes/22014686-John-Hodgman-on-Dungeons-and-Dragons [odeo.com]This man's use of language reminds me of Terry Pratchett somehow.
The American version.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912629</id>
	<title>Don't like the way you're treated? Change.</title>
	<author>$criptah</author>
	<datestamp>1256839500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yet another article about the revenge of the nerds.  Seriously folks, if you don't like the way you're treated you have to do something about it.  Life is not fair and adaptation is the key to success regardless where you stand on a socioeconomic ladder.  Also, it is a pity that Hodgeman misses one critical point:  Geeks or whatever you call people who use brains for living are already paid well enough.
</p><p>I've met really smart people in my life.  Some of them were way to close to either of the ends of autism spectrum.  Those folks were different by nature and to pick on them would be wrong from a purely moral standpoint.  Also I have met plenty of geeks who -- for the lack of better expression -- called for a wrong kind of attention.  Showing up to work wearing the same t-shirt they wore when painting the house a week ago, having no hygiene habits, screaming "Linux!" every time somebody asks for a solution (even if the question is not IT related).  Add a superiority complex on that and you get an individual that is not very nice to deal with.  I tend to avoid those people simply because I know that shit won't stink if you do not touch it.  However, there may be people who intentionally would go out of their way to annoy these outliers...
</p><p>And finally of salaries... If you take a look at the <a href="http://www.payscale.com/best-colleges/degrees.asp" title="payscale.com">degrees</a> [payscale.com] which lead to best paid entry level positions you will see that those degrees are in tech and sciences.  Thus a person who gets a good start in the field of science can further move up and earn more money if they combine science with business down the road. No, you won't earn millions of dollars for throwing a ball but being a lead scientist or a guy who writes top notch trading software is a pretty good thing to have on your resume.  Those positions will be bullet proof careers in the next century.  Too bad football and baseball players can't say the same thing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet another article about the revenge of the nerds .
Seriously folks , if you do n't like the way you 're treated you have to do something about it .
Life is not fair and adaptation is the key to success regardless where you stand on a socioeconomic ladder .
Also , it is a pity that Hodgeman misses one critical point : Geeks or whatever you call people who use brains for living are already paid well enough .
I 've met really smart people in my life .
Some of them were way to close to either of the ends of autism spectrum .
Those folks were different by nature and to pick on them would be wrong from a purely moral standpoint .
Also I have met plenty of geeks who -- for the lack of better expression -- called for a wrong kind of attention .
Showing up to work wearing the same t-shirt they wore when painting the house a week ago , having no hygiene habits , screaming " Linux !
" every time somebody asks for a solution ( even if the question is not IT related ) .
Add a superiority complex on that and you get an individual that is not very nice to deal with .
I tend to avoid those people simply because I know that shit wo n't stink if you do not touch it .
However , there may be people who intentionally would go out of their way to annoy these outliers.. . And finally of salaries... If you take a look at the degrees [ payscale.com ] which lead to best paid entry level positions you will see that those degrees are in tech and sciences .
Thus a person who gets a good start in the field of science can further move up and earn more money if they combine science with business down the road .
No , you wo n't earn millions of dollars for throwing a ball but being a lead scientist or a guy who writes top notch trading software is a pretty good thing to have on your resume .
Those positions will be bullet proof careers in the next century .
Too bad football and baseball players ca n't say the same thing : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet another article about the revenge of the nerds.
Seriously folks, if you don't like the way you're treated you have to do something about it.
Life is not fair and adaptation is the key to success regardless where you stand on a socioeconomic ladder.
Also, it is a pity that Hodgeman misses one critical point:  Geeks or whatever you call people who use brains for living are already paid well enough.
I've met really smart people in my life.
Some of them were way to close to either of the ends of autism spectrum.
Those folks were different by nature and to pick on them would be wrong from a purely moral standpoint.
Also I have met plenty of geeks who -- for the lack of better expression -- called for a wrong kind of attention.
Showing up to work wearing the same t-shirt they wore when painting the house a week ago, having no hygiene habits, screaming "Linux!
" every time somebody asks for a solution (even if the question is not IT related).
Add a superiority complex on that and you get an individual that is not very nice to deal with.
I tend to avoid those people simply because I know that shit won't stink if you do not touch it.
However, there may be people who intentionally would go out of their way to annoy these outliers...
And finally of salaries... If you take a look at the degrees [payscale.com] which lead to best paid entry level positions you will see that those degrees are in tech and sciences.
Thus a person who gets a good start in the field of science can further move up and earn more money if they combine science with business down the road.
No, you won't earn millions of dollars for throwing a ball but being a lead scientist or a guy who writes top notch trading software is a pretty good thing to have on your resume.
Those positions will be bullet proof careers in the next century.
Too bad football and baseball players can't say the same thing :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29918437</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>ifeelswine</author>
	<datestamp>1256820360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you glossed over an important part, pierre. Nerds in the united states typically don't get laid until their 20's, sometimes later, while a typical high school provides your average jock with an atmosphere similar approaching a casting couch for a porno movie. This creates a level of angst that boils over in middle age. Then by the time they're able to score women with their 6-figure IT jobs, the women are what they call 'born again virgins' or have VD.

We're a society that undervalues humanity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you glossed over an important part , pierre .
Nerds in the united states typically do n't get laid until their 20 's , sometimes later , while a typical high school provides your average jock with an atmosphere similar approaching a casting couch for a porno movie .
This creates a level of angst that boils over in middle age .
Then by the time they 're able to score women with their 6-figure IT jobs , the women are what they call 'born again virgins ' or have VD .
We 're a society that undervalues humanity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you glossed over an important part, pierre.
Nerds in the united states typically don't get laid until their 20's, sometimes later, while a typical high school provides your average jock with an atmosphere similar approaching a casting couch for a porno movie.
This creates a level of angst that boils over in middle age.
Then by the time they're able to score women with their 6-figure IT jobs, the women are what they call 'born again virgins' or have VD.
We're a society that undervalues humanity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912087</id>
	<title>Imma PeeCee</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256837640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What does he know, he's a PC...I want Mac's opinion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What does he know , he 's a PC...I want Mac 's opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does he know, he's a PC...I want Mac's opinion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916021</id>
	<title>Imagine tech talent contracted like jocks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256809500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A nerd would sign a $100M contract over 6 years with a guaranteed bonus of $20-some-odd million.</p><p>There would be a nerd-league that would negotiate TV contracts for all nerds.</p><p>ESPN (Entertainment and Sports Programming Network) would be replaced by EFPN (Entertainment and Framework Programming Network).</p><p>News outlets won't have a 'sports' section any longer.  Replaced by the 'geek' section.</p><p>No more Olympics, Superbowl, World Series, Stanley Cup, NBA championships, World Cup, and on and on.  Instead the world's attention would be captured by the "Beautiful Code Competition".</p><p>And with all that change, the guy with the muscles would still beat the geek to a pulp.</p><p>Regards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A nerd would sign a $ 100M contract over 6 years with a guaranteed bonus of $ 20-some-odd million.There would be a nerd-league that would negotiate TV contracts for all nerds.ESPN ( Entertainment and Sports Programming Network ) would be replaced by EFPN ( Entertainment and Framework Programming Network ) .News outlets wo n't have a 'sports ' section any longer .
Replaced by the 'geek ' section.No more Olympics , Superbowl , World Series , Stanley Cup , NBA championships , World Cup , and on and on .
Instead the world 's attention would be captured by the " Beautiful Code Competition " .And with all that change , the guy with the muscles would still beat the geek to a pulp.Regards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A nerd would sign a $100M contract over 6 years with a guaranteed bonus of $20-some-odd million.There would be a nerd-league that would negotiate TV contracts for all nerds.ESPN (Entertainment and Sports Programming Network) would be replaced by EFPN (Entertainment and Framework Programming Network).News outlets won't have a 'sports' section any longer.
Replaced by the 'geek' section.No more Olympics, Superbowl, World Series, Stanley Cup, NBA championships, World Cup, and on and on.
Instead the world's attention would be captured by the "Beautiful Code Competition".And with all that change, the guy with the muscles would still beat the geek to a pulp.Regards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916483</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>AmericanInKiev</author>
	<datestamp>1256810940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Lawyer says he's not a nerd. And in related news, George W. Bush claims that those who think he's a nerd are just plain wrong.</p><p>Perhaps Score 5 Curious is more appropriate?</p><p>
&nbsp; - look, I know lawyers have to pass tough tests, and know some things, but most of lawyering is snowing a jury with your smooth delivery. The nerds Hodgeman is talking about are the people who contribute new and useful ideas to society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Lawyer says he 's not a nerd .
And in related news , George W. Bush claims that those who think he 's a nerd are just plain wrong.Perhaps Score 5 Curious is more appropriate ?
  - look , I know lawyers have to pass tough tests , and know some things , but most of lawyering is snowing a jury with your smooth delivery .
The nerds Hodgeman is talking about are the people who contribute new and useful ideas to society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Lawyer says he's not a nerd.
And in related news, George W. Bush claims that those who think he's a nerd are just plain wrong.Perhaps Score 5 Curious is more appropriate?
  - look, I know lawyers have to pass tough tests, and know some things, but most of lawyering is snowing a jury with your smooth delivery.
The nerds Hodgeman is talking about are the people who contribute new and useful ideas to society.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911791</id>
	<title>Re:Hey?</title>
	<author>Philip K Dickhead</author>
	<datestamp>1256836440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah.</p><p>The royalties from film-stardom paid for his daily doughnut injections.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah.The royalties from film-stardom paid for his daily doughnut injections .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah.The royalties from film-stardom paid for his daily doughnut injections.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911447</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915615</id>
	<title>The Anglosphere is unique...</title>
	<author>ex\_ottoyuhr</author>
	<datestamp>1256807820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>George Orwell wondered why it was that only English-speaking intellectuals hated, rather than loved and were proud of, their home civilization. If he had taken the time to look at other distinctive traits of English-speaking cultures, he would have figured out why: no other civilization has a despised subculture for smart people. Anime is mainstream in Japan; enormous, borderline-crackpot philosophical theories are mainstream in Germany; Fernand Braudel, who wrote <i>The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II</i> (including footnotes) from memory while he was imprisoned by the Nazis, would be among much more similar minds at Google than at Citigroup.</p><p>Note also that if Hodgman really thinks that jockdom wins wars, he hasn't heard of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle\_of\_Leuctra" title="wikipedia.org">the Battle of Leuctra</a> [wikipedia.org], to say nothing of the Vietnam War.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>George Orwell wondered why it was that only English-speaking intellectuals hated , rather than loved and were proud of , their home civilization .
If he had taken the time to look at other distinctive traits of English-speaking cultures , he would have figured out why : no other civilization has a despised subculture for smart people .
Anime is mainstream in Japan ; enormous , borderline-crackpot philosophical theories are mainstream in Germany ; Fernand Braudel , who wrote The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II ( including footnotes ) from memory while he was imprisoned by the Nazis , would be among much more similar minds at Google than at Citigroup.Note also that if Hodgman really thinks that jockdom wins wars , he has n't heard of the Battle of Leuctra [ wikipedia.org ] , to say nothing of the Vietnam War .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>George Orwell wondered why it was that only English-speaking intellectuals hated, rather than loved and were proud of, their home civilization.
If he had taken the time to look at other distinctive traits of English-speaking cultures, he would have figured out why: no other civilization has a despised subculture for smart people.
Anime is mainstream in Japan; enormous, borderline-crackpot philosophical theories are mainstream in Germany; Fernand Braudel, who wrote The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II (including footnotes) from memory while he was imprisoned by the Nazis, would be among much more similar minds at Google than at Citigroup.Note also that if Hodgman really thinks that jockdom wins wars, he hasn't heard of the Battle of Leuctra [wikipedia.org], to say nothing of the Vietnam War.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</id>
	<title>Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>soundhack</author>
	<datestamp>1256835540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't necessarily think "jockdom" is the best way to win wars. Military history is full of examples of headstrong, impulsive leaders losing while the soft spoken, thoughtful (as in deliberative), strategic leader winning. Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Marcus Aurelius, don't seem to me as typical 'jocks'.</p><p>If the previous president is any indication, jocks are more likely to start wars, for inane reasons, and either lose or not finish the job. Not that I think of Bush as a jock, but he certainly wasn't a nerd/geek. There should probably be three categories, 'jock','nerd','loser/lamer'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't necessarily think " jockdom " is the best way to win wars .
Military history is full of examples of headstrong , impulsive leaders losing while the soft spoken , thoughtful ( as in deliberative ) , strategic leader winning .
Sun Tzu , Machiavelli , Marcus Aurelius , do n't seem to me as typical 'jocks'.If the previous president is any indication , jocks are more likely to start wars , for inane reasons , and either lose or not finish the job .
Not that I think of Bush as a jock , but he certainly was n't a nerd/geek .
There should probably be three categories , 'jock','nerd','loser/lamer'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't necessarily think "jockdom" is the best way to win wars.
Military history is full of examples of headstrong, impulsive leaders losing while the soft spoken, thoughtful (as in deliberative), strategic leader winning.
Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Marcus Aurelius, don't seem to me as typical 'jocks'.If the previous president is any indication, jocks are more likely to start wars, for inane reasons, and either lose or not finish the job.
Not that I think of Bush as a jock, but he certainly wasn't a nerd/geek.
There should probably be three categories, 'jock','nerd','loser/lamer'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911653</id>
	<title>Apply Hanlon's razor here</title>
	<author>Xaedalus</author>
	<datestamp>1256836080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think Hodgman has a point. We're steadily embracing geek culture. Interoperable (in an earlier post) also makes a point that we should only take his word so far. Unless we somehow figure out a way to turn geekdom into an ecclesiastical theocracy and imprint our memes upon all of society to forever quash jocks and preppies, there will always be jocks, and there will always be preppies, and there will always be idiots, which is why I'm bringing up Hanlon's Razor here, and General Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord's addendum to Hanlon's Razor. </p><p> Currently "jocks" are in charge (aka the smart and industrious). Let's face it, jocks are smart in their chosen fields. However, geeks are the smart and lazy segment, and we are running the world now. Jocks will always be smart and they will always do things the hard way and expend the most effort. Geeks on the other hand, will always be smart, but we're always looking for the most efficient way to do things. That's why we're currently becoming dominant  <b> IMHO </b>  in the American social structure, and probably why we will continue to be dominant for a while to come </p><p> Now, does anyone have a better view or a better argument? I need to learn something today and (sadly) lately the only place where I've been able to learn new things or realize that my assumptions are wrong is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Hodgman has a point .
We 're steadily embracing geek culture .
Interoperable ( in an earlier post ) also makes a point that we should only take his word so far .
Unless we somehow figure out a way to turn geekdom into an ecclesiastical theocracy and imprint our memes upon all of society to forever quash jocks and preppies , there will always be jocks , and there will always be preppies , and there will always be idiots , which is why I 'm bringing up Hanlon 's Razor here , and General Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord 's addendum to Hanlon 's Razor .
Currently " jocks " are in charge ( aka the smart and industrious ) .
Let 's face it , jocks are smart in their chosen fields .
However , geeks are the smart and lazy segment , and we are running the world now .
Jocks will always be smart and they will always do things the hard way and expend the most effort .
Geeks on the other hand , will always be smart , but we 're always looking for the most efficient way to do things .
That 's why we 're currently becoming dominant IMHO in the American social structure , and probably why we will continue to be dominant for a while to come Now , does anyone have a better view or a better argument ?
I need to learn something today and ( sadly ) lately the only place where I 've been able to learn new things or realize that my assumptions are wrong is / .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Hodgman has a point.
We're steadily embracing geek culture.
Interoperable (in an earlier post) also makes a point that we should only take his word so far.
Unless we somehow figure out a way to turn geekdom into an ecclesiastical theocracy and imprint our memes upon all of society to forever quash jocks and preppies, there will always be jocks, and there will always be preppies, and there will always be idiots, which is why I'm bringing up Hanlon's Razor here, and General Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord's addendum to Hanlon's Razor.
Currently "jocks" are in charge (aka the smart and industrious).
Let's face it, jocks are smart in their chosen fields.
However, geeks are the smart and lazy segment, and we are running the world now.
Jocks will always be smart and they will always do things the hard way and expend the most effort.
Geeks on the other hand, will always be smart, but we're always looking for the most efficient way to do things.
That's why we're currently becoming dominant   IMHO   in the American social structure, and probably why we will continue to be dominant for a while to come  Now, does anyone have a better view or a better argument?
I need to learn something today and (sadly) lately the only place where I've been able to learn new things or realize that my assumptions are wrong is /. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911677</id>
	<title>Can't someone be a jock AND a nerd?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256836140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The fact that someone can be both a jock and a nerd proves that this whole dichotomy of jock vs nerd is wrong.  In my opinion, Nerds and Jocks are more like the opposite ends of a spectrum.  I am definitely more on the nerd end, but I've seen people at all points on that spectrum.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact that someone can be both a jock and a nerd proves that this whole dichotomy of jock vs nerd is wrong .
In my opinion , Nerds and Jocks are more like the opposite ends of a spectrum .
I am definitely more on the nerd end , but I 've seen people at all points on that spectrum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact that someone can be both a jock and a nerd proves that this whole dichotomy of jock vs nerd is wrong.
In my opinion, Nerds and Jocks are more like the opposite ends of a spectrum.
I am definitely more on the nerd end, but I've seen people at all points on that spectrum.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911757</id>
	<title>Only in America...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256836320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the rest of the world we have never been dominated by the whole "jock, nerd, cheerleader" culture that people seem to almost enjoy in the US. For example you ever talk to anyone from Asia and they're already a "nerd culture" with the alpha nerds being the head of the school (*although I'm not sure they get the women).</p><p>I never understood why teachers encourage this in US schools by allowing sporting teams to get more money than science clubs and ignoring bullying so it almost has an international rep'. You guys don't even find it odd that kids can go around assaulting each other or stealing each other's money, it is just very blah.</p><p>In the schools here, if you hit someone else you would likely be removed. If you stole from them they would literally call in the police.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the rest of the world we have never been dominated by the whole " jock , nerd , cheerleader " culture that people seem to almost enjoy in the US .
For example you ever talk to anyone from Asia and they 're already a " nerd culture " with the alpha nerds being the head of the school ( * although I 'm not sure they get the women ) .I never understood why teachers encourage this in US schools by allowing sporting teams to get more money than science clubs and ignoring bullying so it almost has an international rep' .
You guys do n't even find it odd that kids can go around assaulting each other or stealing each other 's money , it is just very blah.In the schools here , if you hit someone else you would likely be removed .
If you stole from them they would literally call in the police .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the rest of the world we have never been dominated by the whole "jock, nerd, cheerleader" culture that people seem to almost enjoy in the US.
For example you ever talk to anyone from Asia and they're already a "nerd culture" with the alpha nerds being the head of the school (*although I'm not sure they get the women).I never understood why teachers encourage this in US schools by allowing sporting teams to get more money than science clubs and ignoring bullying so it almost has an international rep'.
You guys don't even find it odd that kids can go around assaulting each other or stealing each other's money, it is just very blah.In the schools here, if you hit someone else you would likely be removed.
If you stole from them they would literally call in the police.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912887</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>COMON$</author>
	<datestamp>1256840400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fail.  Most all of the great programmers I know are also musicians, or heavily involved in the arts.  Thinking creatively goes hand in hand with being a great IT person.  The worst IT people I know are the morons who memorize every paper they read and do exactly step 1,2,3...I am a great documenter, and I follow RFPs but I also think on my feet, am highly thought of amongst my peers (Network Admin here), I have an interest in the arts, am a decent athlete, and am able to 'correct' 'specialists' issues.  Of course this may be a case where I am hiring the wrong specialists...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fail .
Most all of the great programmers I know are also musicians , or heavily involved in the arts .
Thinking creatively goes hand in hand with being a great IT person .
The worst IT people I know are the morons who memorize every paper they read and do exactly step 1,2,3...I am a great documenter , and I follow RFPs but I also think on my feet , am highly thought of amongst my peers ( Network Admin here ) , I have an interest in the arts , am a decent athlete , and am able to 'correct ' 'specialists ' issues .
Of course this may be a case where I am hiring the wrong specialists.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fail.
Most all of the great programmers I know are also musicians, or heavily involved in the arts.
Thinking creatively goes hand in hand with being a great IT person.
The worst IT people I know are the morons who memorize every paper they read and do exactly step 1,2,3...I am a great documenter, and I follow RFPs but I also think on my feet, am highly thought of amongst my peers (Network Admin here), I have an interest in the arts, am a decent athlete, and am able to 'correct' 'specialists' issues.
Of course this may be a case where I am hiring the wrong specialists...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912463</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks are FEARFUL !</title>
	<author>The Dancing Panda</author>
	<datestamp>1256838840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This sort of shit is why you get picked on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This sort of shit is why you get picked on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sort of shit is why you get picked on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29919997</id>
	<title>Mr. Hodgman</title>
	<author>lanceran</author>
	<datestamp>1256830800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He claims to be a geek, but does he post on Slashdot? Huh? Well, DOES he?! Thought so.  He's gonna have to hand in his geek card, as soon as he receives it, that is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He claims to be a geek , but does he post on Slashdot ?
Huh ? Well , DOES he ? !
Thought so .
He 's gon na have to hand in his geek card , as soon as he receives it , that is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He claims to be a geek, but does he post on Slashdot?
Huh? Well, DOES he?!
Thought so.
He's gonna have to hand in his geek card, as soon as he receives it, that is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911939</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1256837100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I prefer specialization. Someone has to do the IT jobs, and I would prefer it to be someone with a lot of IT experience compared to someone with decent IT experience and decent arts experience and decent sports experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer specialization .
Someone has to do the IT jobs , and I would prefer it to be someone with a lot of IT experience compared to someone with decent IT experience and decent arts experience and decent sports experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer specialization.
Someone has to do the IT jobs, and I would prefer it to be someone with a lot of IT experience compared to someone with decent IT experience and decent arts experience and decent sports experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912579</id>
	<title>Hey guys..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256839320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey guys! You nerds are so cool and the people who used to make fun of you are now uncool.  If you want to learn more about the ways in which you are totally more awesomer than people those stupid people you don't like; then just buy my book!  Only $19.99 at amazon, barnes and noble a other finer book stores.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey guys !
You nerds are so cool and the people who used to make fun of you are now uncool .
If you want to learn more about the ways in which you are totally more awesomer than people those stupid people you do n't like ; then just buy my book !
Only $ 19.99 at amazon , barnes and noble a other finer book stores .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey guys!
You nerds are so cool and the people who used to make fun of you are now uncool.
If you want to learn more about the ways in which you are totally more awesomer than people those stupid people you don't like; then just buy my book!
Only $19.99 at amazon, barnes and noble a other finer book stores.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509</id>
	<title>american labor is too expensive</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1256838960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you could preserve american labor, and someone else would use cheaper overseas labor. then american consumers would buy that cheaper product of which nothing, not even company headquarters, gets a cut of that profit. then the next step is protectionism, where you insist everyone buy more expensive american made goods. then people buy far less, or they buy black market goods, because patriotism does not magically put money into your bank account, and you still need to buy a refrigerator. meanwhile, the rest of the world enjoys better products at cheaper prices while the american economy stagnates and shrinks, cut off from the rest of the world because of protectionism</p><p>i'm sorry, but in the interest of what is best for the united states, fuck american labor. the industrial age is over, let china pollute itself rather than the usa. and unions seem less like their ancestors, out to protect american labor from predatory management, and more like the new predator: upper middle class incomes at the expense of everyone else, including the health of the company, and the country</p><p>goodbye GM, goodbye industrial dinosaurs, good fucking riddance. if that means we are a poorer country for it, fine, no problem. as if the industrial age defines what is best for us, or even the only model for wealth creation possible. no, your lament at the decline of american labor only means that you don't know any better, not that there isn't anything better than what you have unilaterally decided is the come-all be-all of existence. you think the industrial model is only thing that defines wealth creation, and for some reason is fixed in your mind as a golden age, and all that comes after is somehow magically inferior. maybe its superior, and you simply don't see that. superior not in terms of the economic imperialism of past ages, but superior in simple quality of life</p><p>japan is coping with ecnomic decline to a far greater extent than the usa, and for a lot longer (since their economy stagnated in 1990). and maybe it means the japanese aren't seen as ubereconomic imperial masters any more, but maybe it also means less salarymen are having heart attacks and that the japanese have a more mellow, easier and happier life. the europeans have months of vacation time and generous social safety nets. so what exactly should we be fighting to retain in your mind? are we at economic war with the world?</p><p>fuck your fetishization of the industrial age as all we should aspire to. welcome the poorer, more mellower american age. time to step off the world stage as its master, and fuck you to those of you who think we need to stay in that role for some reason</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you could preserve american labor , and someone else would use cheaper overseas labor .
then american consumers would buy that cheaper product of which nothing , not even company headquarters , gets a cut of that profit .
then the next step is protectionism , where you insist everyone buy more expensive american made goods .
then people buy far less , or they buy black market goods , because patriotism does not magically put money into your bank account , and you still need to buy a refrigerator .
meanwhile , the rest of the world enjoys better products at cheaper prices while the american economy stagnates and shrinks , cut off from the rest of the world because of protectionismi 'm sorry , but in the interest of what is best for the united states , fuck american labor .
the industrial age is over , let china pollute itself rather than the usa .
and unions seem less like their ancestors , out to protect american labor from predatory management , and more like the new predator : upper middle class incomes at the expense of everyone else , including the health of the company , and the countrygoodbye GM , goodbye industrial dinosaurs , good fucking riddance .
if that means we are a poorer country for it , fine , no problem .
as if the industrial age defines what is best for us , or even the only model for wealth creation possible .
no , your lament at the decline of american labor only means that you do n't know any better , not that there is n't anything better than what you have unilaterally decided is the come-all be-all of existence .
you think the industrial model is only thing that defines wealth creation , and for some reason is fixed in your mind as a golden age , and all that comes after is somehow magically inferior .
maybe its superior , and you simply do n't see that .
superior not in terms of the economic imperialism of past ages , but superior in simple quality of lifejapan is coping with ecnomic decline to a far greater extent than the usa , and for a lot longer ( since their economy stagnated in 1990 ) .
and maybe it means the japanese are n't seen as ubereconomic imperial masters any more , but maybe it also means less salarymen are having heart attacks and that the japanese have a more mellow , easier and happier life .
the europeans have months of vacation time and generous social safety nets .
so what exactly should we be fighting to retain in your mind ?
are we at economic war with the world ? fuck your fetishization of the industrial age as all we should aspire to .
welcome the poorer , more mellower american age .
time to step off the world stage as its master , and fuck you to those of you who think we need to stay in that role for some reason</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you could preserve american labor, and someone else would use cheaper overseas labor.
then american consumers would buy that cheaper product of which nothing, not even company headquarters, gets a cut of that profit.
then the next step is protectionism, where you insist everyone buy more expensive american made goods.
then people buy far less, or they buy black market goods, because patriotism does not magically put money into your bank account, and you still need to buy a refrigerator.
meanwhile, the rest of the world enjoys better products at cheaper prices while the american economy stagnates and shrinks, cut off from the rest of the world because of protectionismi'm sorry, but in the interest of what is best for the united states, fuck american labor.
the industrial age is over, let china pollute itself rather than the usa.
and unions seem less like their ancestors, out to protect american labor from predatory management, and more like the new predator: upper middle class incomes at the expense of everyone else, including the health of the company, and the countrygoodbye GM, goodbye industrial dinosaurs, good fucking riddance.
if that means we are a poorer country for it, fine, no problem.
as if the industrial age defines what is best for us, or even the only model for wealth creation possible.
no, your lament at the decline of american labor only means that you don't know any better, not that there isn't anything better than what you have unilaterally decided is the come-all be-all of existence.
you think the industrial model is only thing that defines wealth creation, and for some reason is fixed in your mind as a golden age, and all that comes after is somehow magically inferior.
maybe its superior, and you simply don't see that.
superior not in terms of the economic imperialism of past ages, but superior in simple quality of lifejapan is coping with ecnomic decline to a far greater extent than the usa, and for a lot longer (since their economy stagnated in 1990).
and maybe it means the japanese aren't seen as ubereconomic imperial masters any more, but maybe it also means less salarymen are having heart attacks and that the japanese have a more mellow, easier and happier life.
the europeans have months of vacation time and generous social safety nets.
so what exactly should we be fighting to retain in your mind?
are we at economic war with the world?fuck your fetishization of the industrial age as all we should aspire to.
welcome the poorer, more mellower american age.
time to step off the world stage as its master, and fuck you to those of you who think we need to stay in that role for some reason</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914811</id>
	<title>Re:american labor is too expensive</title>
	<author>Thunderman</author>
	<datestamp>1256848080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Very,very interesting post. I agree. The Europeans and their generous social safety nets are actually a good idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Very,very interesting post .
I agree .
The Europeans and their generous social safety nets are actually a good idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very,very interesting post.
I agree.
The Europeans and their generous social safety nets are actually a good idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912711</id>
	<title>the jock...</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1256839740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>aka, the modern gladiator...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>aka , the modern gladiator.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>aka, the modern gladiator...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911911</id>
	<title>Re:I for one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256836980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry will never happen - too many 'B Ark people' hate people who they think are smarter than them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry will never happen - too many 'B Ark people ' hate people who they think are smarter than them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry will never happen - too many 'B Ark people' hate people who they think are smarter than them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916341</id>
	<title>Re:I'm not so sure...</title>
	<author>Have Brain Will Rent</author>
	<datestamp>1256810460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey, watch it! Don't go bad mouthing beer... nerds can booze it up too ya know. Being smart and getting drunk are not mutually exclusive. Neither is being smart and strippers. Or a whole host of other fun things. Despite what popular culture tells us being smart doesn't (have to) mean being a weenie.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , watch it !
Do n't go bad mouthing beer... nerds can booze it up too ya know .
Being smart and getting drunk are not mutually exclusive .
Neither is being smart and strippers .
Or a whole host of other fun things .
Despite what popular culture tells us being smart does n't ( have to ) mean being a weenie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, watch it!
Don't go bad mouthing beer... nerds can booze it up too ya know.
Being smart and getting drunk are not mutually exclusive.
Neither is being smart and strippers.
Or a whole host of other fun things.
Despite what popular culture tells us being smart doesn't (have to) mean being a weenie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912749</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1256839920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other. Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete.</p></div></blockquote><p>Jock characteristics win battles (still do, to this day).  Nerd characteristics win wars.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other .
Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower , the jocks were obsolete.Jock characteristics win battles ( still do , to this day ) .
Nerd characteristics win wars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other.
Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete.Jock characteristics win battles (still do, to this day).
Nerd characteristics win wars.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912021</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1256837400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Way to miss the concept of stereotypes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Way to miss the concept of stereotypes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Way to miss the concept of stereotypes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912839</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1256840220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>but the more I know about the USA the more it sounds like a country of 17-year old self-claimed losers who get publicly humiliated on a daily basis by having their underpants pulled up.</p></div><p>Look at it the other way around. Its a country of losers who think success is running around pulling up the underpants of others. Take a look at our foreign policy, particularly that of the last administration for an example.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but the more I know about the USA the more it sounds like a country of 17-year old self-claimed losers who get publicly humiliated on a daily basis by having their underpants pulled up.Look at it the other way around .
Its a country of losers who think success is running around pulling up the underpants of others .
Take a look at our foreign policy , particularly that of the last administration for an example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but the more I know about the USA the more it sounds like a country of 17-year old self-claimed losers who get publicly humiliated on a daily basis by having their underpants pulled up.Look at it the other way around.
Its a country of losers who think success is running around pulling up the underpants of others.
Take a look at our foreign policy, particularly that of the last administration for an example.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915463</id>
	<title>Re:It won't happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256807400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WHO IS JOHN GALT!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WHO IS JOHN GALT !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WHO IS JOHN GALT!
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411</id>
	<title>Sad</title>
	<author>4D6963</author>
	<datestamp>1256838660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's sad to see middle-aged men still talking about stuff that happened to them in high school. I know John Hodgman is hardly serious, but the more I know about the USA the more it sounds like a country of 17-year old self-claimed losers who get publicly humiliated on a daily basis by having their underpants pulled up.

</p><p>Seriously, it's sad to see grown men still dragging along their high school complexes. Jocks and nerds? Grow the fuck out of it. Not only must every single god damn American TV show plot that's centred around males at school must be about so-called losers who get humiliated by big mean guys and mean "popular girls", on top of that you have a very significant portion of the American adult population who must completely identify and go out of their way to fit the stereotypes, from reading children's comic books about superior men in tight pants who avenge anyone by kicking the arse of the big mean guys (yes, so-called losers enjoy escapism by means of reading about a superior man who kicks all the arse they never had the balls to kick themselves) to being pansies who'll get pushed around by their wife as if they were still 12 and that the chick was their mom, probably because they feel that so-called losers don't need to grow some balls and become a man, so they forever remain whiny overgrown teenagers who play with Star Wars figurines and get flashbacks of having their underpants pulled up. If you're gonna play something that involves dungeons and you're over 20, it'd better involve gags and leather restraints.

</p><p>As an outsider, watching that shit is getting increasingly painful. We don't even have a word for wedgie cause no one gets their underpants pulled up in France, except maybe girls with G-strings that stick out of their pants, so that's hard to relate to your neurosis. It's like your entire culture and civilisation revolves around men with complexes who can't grow out of their teenager bullshit. Look at movies. How many of them are about a loser hero any other loser can relate to and who becomes a loser+ by staying a loser so you can still relate but in the process accomplishing something great? As in "big jewy loser who never kissed a girl and plays WoW goes through a bunch of adventures and in the end he kisses a hot chick whom he thought was "out of his league", whatever the fuck that means". Or "divorced middle-aged loser with a crappy job saves the world and gets with a hot woman". Sometimes it seems like you ALL must think of yourselves as loser, one way or another. That's pathetic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's sad to see middle-aged men still talking about stuff that happened to them in high school .
I know John Hodgman is hardly serious , but the more I know about the USA the more it sounds like a country of 17-year old self-claimed losers who get publicly humiliated on a daily basis by having their underpants pulled up .
Seriously , it 's sad to see grown men still dragging along their high school complexes .
Jocks and nerds ?
Grow the fuck out of it .
Not only must every single god damn American TV show plot that 's centred around males at school must be about so-called losers who get humiliated by big mean guys and mean " popular girls " , on top of that you have a very significant portion of the American adult population who must completely identify and go out of their way to fit the stereotypes , from reading children 's comic books about superior men in tight pants who avenge anyone by kicking the arse of the big mean guys ( yes , so-called losers enjoy escapism by means of reading about a superior man who kicks all the arse they never had the balls to kick themselves ) to being pansies who 'll get pushed around by their wife as if they were still 12 and that the chick was their mom , probably because they feel that so-called losers do n't need to grow some balls and become a man , so they forever remain whiny overgrown teenagers who play with Star Wars figurines and get flashbacks of having their underpants pulled up .
If you 're gon na play something that involves dungeons and you 're over 20 , it 'd better involve gags and leather restraints .
As an outsider , watching that shit is getting increasingly painful .
We do n't even have a word for wedgie cause no one gets their underpants pulled up in France , except maybe girls with G-strings that stick out of their pants , so that 's hard to relate to your neurosis .
It 's like your entire culture and civilisation revolves around men with complexes who ca n't grow out of their teenager bullshit .
Look at movies .
How many of them are about a loser hero any other loser can relate to and who becomes a loser + by staying a loser so you can still relate but in the process accomplishing something great ?
As in " big jewy loser who never kissed a girl and plays WoW goes through a bunch of adventures and in the end he kisses a hot chick whom he thought was " out of his league " , whatever the fuck that means " .
Or " divorced middle-aged loser with a crappy job saves the world and gets with a hot woman " .
Sometimes it seems like you ALL must think of yourselves as loser , one way or another .
That 's pathetic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's sad to see middle-aged men still talking about stuff that happened to them in high school.
I know John Hodgman is hardly serious, but the more I know about the USA the more it sounds like a country of 17-year old self-claimed losers who get publicly humiliated on a daily basis by having their underpants pulled up.
Seriously, it's sad to see grown men still dragging along their high school complexes.
Jocks and nerds?
Grow the fuck out of it.
Not only must every single god damn American TV show plot that's centred around males at school must be about so-called losers who get humiliated by big mean guys and mean "popular girls", on top of that you have a very significant portion of the American adult population who must completely identify and go out of their way to fit the stereotypes, from reading children's comic books about superior men in tight pants who avenge anyone by kicking the arse of the big mean guys (yes, so-called losers enjoy escapism by means of reading about a superior man who kicks all the arse they never had the balls to kick themselves) to being pansies who'll get pushed around by their wife as if they were still 12 and that the chick was their mom, probably because they feel that so-called losers don't need to grow some balls and become a man, so they forever remain whiny overgrown teenagers who play with Star Wars figurines and get flashbacks of having their underpants pulled up.
If you're gonna play something that involves dungeons and you're over 20, it'd better involve gags and leather restraints.
As an outsider, watching that shit is getting increasingly painful.
We don't even have a word for wedgie cause no one gets their underpants pulled up in France, except maybe girls with G-strings that stick out of their pants, so that's hard to relate to your neurosis.
It's like your entire culture and civilisation revolves around men with complexes who can't grow out of their teenager bullshit.
Look at movies.
How many of them are about a loser hero any other loser can relate to and who becomes a loser+ by staying a loser so you can still relate but in the process accomplishing something great?
As in "big jewy loser who never kissed a girl and plays WoW goes through a bunch of adventures and in the end he kisses a hot chick whom he thought was "out of his league", whatever the fuck that means".
Or "divorced middle-aged loser with a crappy job saves the world and gets with a hot woman".
Sometimes it seems like you ALL must think of yourselves as loser, one way or another.
That's pathetic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911719</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>samkass</author>
	<datestamp>1256836200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Marcus Aurelius</p></div></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Genghis-Khan-Making-Modern-World/dp/0609809644/ref=sr\_1\_9?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1256832544&amp;sr=8-9" title="amazon.com">Genghis Khan</a> [amazon.com] was also very much a geek when it comes to war.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sun Tzu , Machiavelli , Marcus AureliusGenghis Khan [ amazon.com ] was also very much a geek when it comes to war .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Marcus AureliusGenghis Khan [amazon.com] was also very much a geek when it comes to war.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911649</id>
	<title>Politics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256836020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering one of our two major political parties seems to take pride in scientific ignorance and encourages its supporters to do the same, the chance of this happening is nil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering one of our two major political parties seems to take pride in scientific ignorance and encourages its supporters to do the same , the chance of this happening is nil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering one of our two major political parties seems to take pride in scientific ignorance and encourages its supporters to do the same, the chance of this happening is nil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916409</id>
	<title>Re:american labor is too expensive</title>
	<author>brkello</author>
	<datestamp>1256810700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, you really read in to a lot of what he said to come up with your little rant.  I think his point was more that companies should respect the people who actually produce work instead of the business/managerish folks who don't really produce anything.  You put a lot of words in his mouth and then shot him down, which just makes you look like a douche.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , you really read in to a lot of what he said to come up with your little rant .
I think his point was more that companies should respect the people who actually produce work instead of the business/managerish folks who do n't really produce anything .
You put a lot of words in his mouth and then shot him down , which just makes you look like a douche .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, you really read in to a lot of what he said to come up with your little rant.
I think his point was more that companies should respect the people who actually produce work instead of the business/managerish folks who don't really produce anything.
You put a lot of words in his mouth and then shot him down, which just makes you look like a douche.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922265</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>skiman1979</author>
	<datestamp>1256907240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(Maybe people should be more well-rounded) Then you wouldn't be pegged with (and the associated stigmas) of a certain stereotype.</p><p>I was heavy into science in high school, as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities.  I never had a problem with any group of people.</p></div><p>When I was in elementary school, I was a smart student, always studied, got really good grades, but was shy, had very few friends, etc. etc.  There was one guy named David who would always bully me, beat me up... He met up with me one time after we graduated high school and finally admitted the only reason he ever did any of that was because he was jealous of me.  He was jealous that I got such good grades and apparently didn't have to try very hard while he struggled throughout our school years just to barely pass each class.</p><p>My guess is a lot of people probably had a similar experience, similar reasons for mistreating a geek or a nerd.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( Maybe people should be more well-rounded ) Then you would n't be pegged with ( and the associated stigmas ) of a certain stereotype.I was heavy into science in high school , as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities .
I never had a problem with any group of people.When I was in elementary school , I was a smart student , always studied , got really good grades , but was shy , had very few friends , etc .
etc. There was one guy named David who would always bully me , beat me up... He met up with me one time after we graduated high school and finally admitted the only reason he ever did any of that was because he was jealous of me .
He was jealous that I got such good grades and apparently did n't have to try very hard while he struggled throughout our school years just to barely pass each class.My guess is a lot of people probably had a similar experience , similar reasons for mistreating a geek or a nerd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(Maybe people should be more well-rounded) Then you wouldn't be pegged with (and the associated stigmas) of a certain stereotype.I was heavy into science in high school, as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities.
I never had a problem with any group of people.When I was in elementary school, I was a smart student, always studied, got really good grades, but was shy, had very few friends, etc.
etc.  There was one guy named David who would always bully me, beat me up... He met up with me one time after we graduated high school and finally admitted the only reason he ever did any of that was because he was jealous of me.
He was jealous that I got such good grades and apparently didn't have to try very hard while he struggled throughout our school years just to barely pass each class.My guess is a lot of people probably had a similar experience, similar reasons for mistreating a geek or a nerd.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912435</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>BooRolla</author>
	<datestamp>1256838720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean seriously.  Checkout Bruce Wayne.  Truly a renaissance man</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean seriously .
Checkout Bruce Wayne .
Truly a renaissance man</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean seriously.
Checkout Bruce Wayne.
Truly a renaissance man</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914355</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>4D6963</author>
	<datestamp>1256846160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, you managed to make fun of France without using the word 'surrender'. I humbly bow to you!

</p><p> <i>Oh, and "big jewy loser"? Really?</i> </p><p>Yep! If you've got a functioning Jewdar you might have noticed that lots of nerds in movies look Jewish (and often enough are played by Jewish actors). I really don't know why, maybe people equate Jews with nerds? Seriously, it's a real trend, and I'm no sure why it is so.

</p><p>And yes, that's exactly it, "rooting for the underdog". We're talking about the same phenomenon here, the difference is that I explained why you root for the underdog. And I know you were joking but in France we're just maybe not as much into that whole David vs Goliath thing, and even if we go for that our David is never as "nerdy" or jewy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , you managed to make fun of France without using the word 'surrender' .
I humbly bow to you !
Oh , and " big jewy loser " ?
Really ? Yep !
If you 've got a functioning Jewdar you might have noticed that lots of nerds in movies look Jewish ( and often enough are played by Jewish actors ) .
I really do n't know why , maybe people equate Jews with nerds ?
Seriously , it 's a real trend , and I 'm no sure why it is so .
And yes , that 's exactly it , " rooting for the underdog " .
We 're talking about the same phenomenon here , the difference is that I explained why you root for the underdog .
And I know you were joking but in France we 're just maybe not as much into that whole David vs Goliath thing , and even if we go for that our David is never as " nerdy " or jewy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, you managed to make fun of France without using the word 'surrender'.
I humbly bow to you!
Oh, and "big jewy loser"?
Really? Yep!
If you've got a functioning Jewdar you might have noticed that lots of nerds in movies look Jewish (and often enough are played by Jewish actors).
I really don't know why, maybe people equate Jews with nerds?
Seriously, it's a real trend, and I'm no sure why it is so.
And yes, that's exactly it, "rooting for the underdog".
We're talking about the same phenomenon here, the difference is that I explained why you root for the underdog.
And I know you were joking but in France we're just maybe not as much into that whole David vs Goliath thing, and even if we go for that our David is never as "nerdy" or jewy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911797</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Daniel Dvorkin</author>
	<datestamp>1256836500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I was kind of thinking that too.</p><p>It varies, and I think jock/nerd is pretty well orthogonal to warfighting ability.  Eisenhower, famously, was a football coach, and Patton on the battlefield was his star player; on the other hand, a succession of distinctly jockish Union commanders failed against the Confederacy's much better lineup of jocks, and it took nerds like Grant and Sherman to show them how it was done.  As far as the front line goes, if you get a bunch of sports-obsessed young men together in an army, making themselves think of themselves as the home team at a the big game is one very effective way to motivate them, but it's not the only way.  Going farther back, the Greeks were jocks, the Romans were nerds; look how that turned out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I was kind of thinking that too.It varies , and I think jock/nerd is pretty well orthogonal to warfighting ability .
Eisenhower , famously , was a football coach , and Patton on the battlefield was his star player ; on the other hand , a succession of distinctly jockish Union commanders failed against the Confederacy 's much better lineup of jocks , and it took nerds like Grant and Sherman to show them how it was done .
As far as the front line goes , if you get a bunch of sports-obsessed young men together in an army , making themselves think of themselves as the home team at a the big game is one very effective way to motivate them , but it 's not the only way .
Going farther back , the Greeks were jocks , the Romans were nerds ; look how that turned out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I was kind of thinking that too.It varies, and I think jock/nerd is pretty well orthogonal to warfighting ability.
Eisenhower, famously, was a football coach, and Patton on the battlefield was his star player; on the other hand, a succession of distinctly jockish Union commanders failed against the Confederacy's much better lineup of jocks, and it took nerds like Grant and Sherman to show them how it was done.
As far as the front line goes, if you get a bunch of sports-obsessed young men together in an army, making themselves think of themselves as the home team at a the big game is one very effective way to motivate them, but it's not the only way.
Going farther back, the Greeks were jocks, the Romans were nerds; look how that turned out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913229</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1256841780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's the model I'd use to re-explain what you've said. There are people who put effort into socializing and those who don't. (We'll ignore the in-betweeners for now because they tend to otherwise blend in at least on the basics.) We can further divide the "social neglectors" into those who excel academically and those who don't.</p><p>My observation is that social neglectors do on average pursue specific interests rather intensely, even if it's not academics. I, for one was considered an "art nerd" rather than an academic nerd, and thus those looking at my grades would not see a whole lot.</p><p>Although I had a reputation for being a decent artist, it was not school-wide. I hadn't done any high-visibility projects. Thus, if you encountered me in math class, you would not have otherwise thought much of me from either a math stand-point or social standard. (I did okay in math, but sometimes got bored of the repetition of problems, which is one of the reasons why computers and automation piqued my interest later.)</p><p>My point here is that the story is not always clear to a casual observer, and your observations may be missing some parts to the puzzle.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's the model I 'd use to re-explain what you 've said .
There are people who put effort into socializing and those who do n't .
( We 'll ignore the in-betweeners for now because they tend to otherwise blend in at least on the basics .
) We can further divide the " social neglectors " into those who excel academically and those who do n't.My observation is that social neglectors do on average pursue specific interests rather intensely , even if it 's not academics .
I , for one was considered an " art nerd " rather than an academic nerd , and thus those looking at my grades would not see a whole lot.Although I had a reputation for being a decent artist , it was not school-wide .
I had n't done any high-visibility projects .
Thus , if you encountered me in math class , you would not have otherwise thought much of me from either a math stand-point or social standard .
( I did okay in math , but sometimes got bored of the repetition of problems , which is one of the reasons why computers and automation piqued my interest later .
) My point here is that the story is not always clear to a casual observer , and your observations may be missing some parts to the puzzle .
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's the model I'd use to re-explain what you've said.
There are people who put effort into socializing and those who don't.
(We'll ignore the in-betweeners for now because they tend to otherwise blend in at least on the basics.
) We can further divide the "social neglectors" into those who excel academically and those who don't.My observation is that social neglectors do on average pursue specific interests rather intensely, even if it's not academics.
I, for one was considered an "art nerd" rather than an academic nerd, and thus those looking at my grades would not see a whole lot.Although I had a reputation for being a decent artist, it was not school-wide.
I hadn't done any high-visibility projects.
Thus, if you encountered me in math class, you would not have otherwise thought much of me from either a math stand-point or social standard.
(I did okay in math, but sometimes got bored of the repetition of problems, which is one of the reasons why computers and automation piqued my interest later.
)My point here is that the story is not always clear to a casual observer, and your observations may be missing some parts to the puzzle.
     </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29919091</id>
	<title>I, for one, welcome</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256823840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the end time for Glasgow</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the end time for Glasgow</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the end time for Glasgow</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921239</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>Jarik\_Tentsu</author>
	<datestamp>1256934060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It has nothing to do with interests at all. Sure, to an extent if you're good at something people admire (ie, something like sports), then sure, people may like you out of respect and admiration. But really, it's how you act, your personality, etc that defines how people deal with you. I've known people who are very popular, despite being epic Maths/Science geeks. But they don't carry themselves like geeks. They're cool guys and fun guys to hang out with.</p><p>Sure, because you may be into that kinda stuff people may *assume* that you may be nerdy based on your interests so on that generalization people may be asses to you and put you lower on the social chain, but mostly, if you have a fun, friendly and cool personality, people aren't gonna socially discriminate against you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It has nothing to do with interests at all .
Sure , to an extent if you 're good at something people admire ( ie , something like sports ) , then sure , people may like you out of respect and admiration .
But really , it 's how you act , your personality , etc that defines how people deal with you .
I 've known people who are very popular , despite being epic Maths/Science geeks .
But they do n't carry themselves like geeks .
They 're cool guys and fun guys to hang out with.Sure , because you may be into that kinda stuff people may * assume * that you may be nerdy based on your interests so on that generalization people may be asses to you and put you lower on the social chain , but mostly , if you have a fun , friendly and cool personality , people are n't gon na socially discriminate against you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has nothing to do with interests at all.
Sure, to an extent if you're good at something people admire (ie, something like sports), then sure, people may like you out of respect and admiration.
But really, it's how you act, your personality, etc that defines how people deal with you.
I've known people who are very popular, despite being epic Maths/Science geeks.
But they don't carry themselves like geeks.
They're cool guys and fun guys to hang out with.Sure, because you may be into that kinda stuff people may *assume* that you may be nerdy based on your interests so on that generalization people may be asses to you and put you lower on the social chain, but mostly, if you have a fun, friendly and cool personality, people aren't gonna socially discriminate against you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911725</id>
	<title>Dear Mr. Hodgman:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256836260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're gimmick about geek culture is very late. I suggest you research the term <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy\_(bureaucratic)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">technocracy</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>Despite your tardiness, you still deserve a C for trying.</p><p>Yours In Novorossisyk,<br>Kilgore Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're gimmick about geek culture is very late .
I suggest you research the term technocracy [ wikipedia.org ] .Despite your tardiness , you still deserve a C for trying.Yours In Novorossisyk,Kilgore Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're gimmick about geek culture is very late.
I suggest you research the term technocracy [wikipedia.org].Despite your tardiness, you still deserve a C for trying.Yours In Novorossisyk,Kilgore Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921225</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>indiechild</author>
	<datestamp>1256933820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're comparing adulthood with teenagehood, rather different phases.</p><p>My school wasn't as bad as some others, but we definitely had the jocks, bullies and surfies. And yes, they really were as one-dimensional as the stereotypes suggest. However, now they're grown up, working in professional jobs and most of them are pretty well-rounded and respectable -- at least, the ones who didn't die or get locked up along the way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're comparing adulthood with teenagehood , rather different phases.My school was n't as bad as some others , but we definitely had the jocks , bullies and surfies .
And yes , they really were as one-dimensional as the stereotypes suggest .
However , now they 're grown up , working in professional jobs and most of them are pretty well-rounded and respectable -- at least , the ones who did n't die or get locked up along the way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're comparing adulthood with teenagehood, rather different phases.My school wasn't as bad as some others, but we definitely had the jocks, bullies and surfies.
And yes, they really were as one-dimensional as the stereotypes suggest.
However, now they're grown up, working in professional jobs and most of them are pretty well-rounded and respectable -- at least, the ones who didn't die or get locked up along the way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29919815</id>
	<title>Rewarding Geeks?</title>
	<author>HockeyPuck</author>
	<datestamp>1256829360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The author really believes that China is rewarding intellects?  According to wikipedia, China spent $40Billion on the 2008 Olympics.</p><p>I don't see intellects in any First world country making the same money as athletes. Nike spends  on sponsorships <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSTRE51A8DI20090211" title="reuters.com">$255 to $260million a year</a> [reuters.com] and spent $143.4 million on advertising in the first nine months of 2008.  Note that Nike is a  <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=NKE" title="yahoo.com">$31Billion</a> [yahoo.com] company.</p><p>In comparison, the National Science Foundation received <a href="http://www.nsf.gov/about/congress/111/highlights/cu09\_0310.jsp" title="nsf.gov">a total of $6.49 billion for FY09.</a> [nsf.gov]</p><p>As a kid growing up?  I don't recall any commercials saying "I wanna be like Stephen [Hawking]" or kids beating up other kids for some intellectual device, but they were sure beating each other up for a pair of Air Jordans.</p><p>Anybody else ever notice that the only commercials on TV for Educational Institutions (besides community or trade schools) are during college football games?  Those commercials are only for the two schools that are playing.  There's a commercial every 5minutes for sneakers, Under Armor shirts, Fitness equipment, sports drinks or sporting events.  (As a side note, anybody recall the last time you saw an advertisement for Educational Software, besides Rosetta Stone? But there's a commercial every hour for some new XBOX/PS3/Wii game).</p><p><b>Intellectuals are enablers of other people to go onto great success.</b>  I guarantee you there were a ton of intellectuals that designed the bike, software to track, study the technique of Lance Armstrong's cycling career and victories in the Tour de France.  But other than the brand, Trek, those big brained people will never be known, nor will someone pay them $50m in endorsements.</p><p>Btw:  It's not just athletes vs intellectuals.  Not all intellectuals are compensated equally either.  I maintain the storage environment for a very large mainframe environment for a household WallStreet financial firm.  Over a PB of online FICON disk much of it synchronously replicated to a remote disaster recovery site, and I can assure that my bonus is not even close to that of an entry level trader.  I'm sure I could do a lot more damage than that 28yr old MBA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The author really believes that China is rewarding intellects ?
According to wikipedia , China spent $ 40Billion on the 2008 Olympics.I do n't see intellects in any First world country making the same money as athletes .
Nike spends on sponsorships $ 255 to $ 260million a year [ reuters.com ] and spent $ 143.4 million on advertising in the first nine months of 2008 .
Note that Nike is a $ 31Billion [ yahoo.com ] company.In comparison , the National Science Foundation received a total of $ 6.49 billion for FY09 .
[ nsf.gov ] As a kid growing up ?
I do n't recall any commercials saying " I wan na be like Stephen [ Hawking ] " or kids beating up other kids for some intellectual device , but they were sure beating each other up for a pair of Air Jordans.Anybody else ever notice that the only commercials on TV for Educational Institutions ( besides community or trade schools ) are during college football games ?
Those commercials are only for the two schools that are playing .
There 's a commercial every 5minutes for sneakers , Under Armor shirts , Fitness equipment , sports drinks or sporting events .
( As a side note , anybody recall the last time you saw an advertisement for Educational Software , besides Rosetta Stone ?
But there 's a commercial every hour for some new XBOX/PS3/Wii game ) .Intellectuals are enablers of other people to go onto great success .
I guarantee you there were a ton of intellectuals that designed the bike , software to track , study the technique of Lance Armstrong 's cycling career and victories in the Tour de France .
But other than the brand , Trek , those big brained people will never be known , nor will someone pay them $ 50m in endorsements.Btw : It 's not just athletes vs intellectuals .
Not all intellectuals are compensated equally either .
I maintain the storage environment for a very large mainframe environment for a household WallStreet financial firm .
Over a PB of online FICON disk much of it synchronously replicated to a remote disaster recovery site , and I can assure that my bonus is not even close to that of an entry level trader .
I 'm sure I could do a lot more damage than that 28yr old MBA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The author really believes that China is rewarding intellects?
According to wikipedia, China spent $40Billion on the 2008 Olympics.I don't see intellects in any First world country making the same money as athletes.
Nike spends  on sponsorships $255 to $260million a year [reuters.com] and spent $143.4 million on advertising in the first nine months of 2008.
Note that Nike is a  $31Billion [yahoo.com] company.In comparison, the National Science Foundation received a total of $6.49 billion for FY09.
[nsf.gov]As a kid growing up?
I don't recall any commercials saying "I wanna be like Stephen [Hawking]" or kids beating up other kids for some intellectual device, but they were sure beating each other up for a pair of Air Jordans.Anybody else ever notice that the only commercials on TV for Educational Institutions (besides community or trade schools) are during college football games?
Those commercials are only for the two schools that are playing.
There's a commercial every 5minutes for sneakers, Under Armor shirts, Fitness equipment, sports drinks or sporting events.
(As a side note, anybody recall the last time you saw an advertisement for Educational Software, besides Rosetta Stone?
But there's a commercial every hour for some new XBOX/PS3/Wii game).Intellectuals are enablers of other people to go onto great success.
I guarantee you there were a ton of intellectuals that designed the bike, software to track, study the technique of Lance Armstrong's cycling career and victories in the Tour de France.
But other than the brand, Trek, those big brained people will never be known, nor will someone pay them $50m in endorsements.Btw:  It's not just athletes vs intellectuals.
Not all intellectuals are compensated equally either.
I maintain the storage environment for a very large mainframe environment for a household WallStreet financial firm.
Over a PB of online FICON disk much of it synchronously replicated to a remote disaster recovery site, and I can assure that my bonus is not even close to that of an entry level trader.
I'm sure I could do a lot more damage than that 28yr old MBA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915993</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256809440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's like your entire culture and civilisation revolves around men with complexes who can't grow out of their teenager bullshit.</p> </div><p>This coming from a guy whose culture and civilization was once ruled by <i>Napolean</i>.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like your entire culture and civilisation revolves around men with complexes who ca n't grow out of their teenager bullshit .
This coming from a guy whose culture and civilization was once ruled by Napolean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like your entire culture and civilisation revolves around men with complexes who can't grow out of their teenager bullshit.
This coming from a guy whose culture and civilization was once ruled by Napolean.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29920193</id>
	<title>Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>aero6dof</author>
	<datestamp>1256832600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Rober Oppenheimer might disagree that jocks are the best way to win wars.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Rober Oppenheimer might disagree that jocks are the best way to win wars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rober Oppenheimer might disagree that jocks are the best way to win wars.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29927463</id>
	<title>Geek friendliness doesn't preclude jock dominance</title>
	<author>leftie</author>
	<datestamp>1256933460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It just makes the jock-dominant culture more courteous and community minded.</p><p>Perfect example of this right here in PDX... the Rasheed Wallace, Bonzi Wells old-style Jail-Blazers is gone The "new" Brandon Roy-led "make-it-better" Portland Trail Blazers 2.0 is now the standard.</p><p><a href="http://www.nba.com/blazers/makeitbetter/" title="nba.com">http://www.nba.com/blazers/makeitbetter/</a> [nba.com]</p><p>Don't even try to pretend the Blazers won't own PDX for a long time into the future, but very public bad behavior isn't tolerated by the fans anymore. The fans have learned they can demand of their team players/staff a certain standard of behavior, and the team management made sure they brought in players who would positive community assets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It just makes the jock-dominant culture more courteous and community minded.Perfect example of this right here in PDX... the Rasheed Wallace , Bonzi Wells old-style Jail-Blazers is gone The " new " Brandon Roy-led " make-it-better " Portland Trail Blazers 2.0 is now the standard.http : //www.nba.com/blazers/makeitbetter/ [ nba.com ] Do n't even try to pretend the Blazers wo n't own PDX for a long time into the future , but very public bad behavior is n't tolerated by the fans anymore .
The fans have learned they can demand of their team players/staff a certain standard of behavior , and the team management made sure they brought in players who would positive community assets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It just makes the jock-dominant culture more courteous and community minded.Perfect example of this right here in PDX... the Rasheed Wallace, Bonzi Wells old-style Jail-Blazers is gone The "new" Brandon Roy-led "make-it-better" Portland Trail Blazers 2.0 is now the standard.http://www.nba.com/blazers/makeitbetter/ [nba.com]Don't even try to pretend the Blazers won't own PDX for a long time into the future, but very public bad behavior isn't tolerated by the fans anymore.
The fans have learned they can demand of their team players/staff a certain standard of behavior, and the team management made sure they brought in players who would positive community assets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912287</id>
	<title>Jockdom?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256838180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You spelled "Jock-dumb" wrong.  Hand in your geek card.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You spelled " Jock-dumb " wrong .
Hand in your geek card .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You spelled "Jock-dumb" wrong.
Hand in your geek card.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917659</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Buelldozer</author>
	<datestamp>1256815560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmmmm, no.</p><p>Please run for three minutes and then attempt to put 10 rounds of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.22 into the bulls-eye of a target that is 100 yards away.</p><p>Or, if you prefer, take up the biathlon. You simply MUST be an athlete, a "jock", in order to be good at it.</p><p>An out of shape couch potato may be able to fire a gun well when at rest but with physical activity they WILL struggle to aim and hit targets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmmm , no.Please run for three minutes and then attempt to put 10 rounds of .22 into the bulls-eye of a target that is 100 yards away.Or , if you prefer , take up the biathlon .
You simply MUST be an athlete , a " jock " , in order to be good at it.An out of shape couch potato may be able to fire a gun well when at rest but with physical activity they WILL struggle to aim and hit targets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmmm, no.Please run for three minutes and then attempt to put 10 rounds of .22 into the bulls-eye of a target that is 100 yards away.Or, if you prefer, take up the biathlon.
You simply MUST be an athlete, a "jock", in order to be good at it.An out of shape couch potato may be able to fire a gun well when at rest but with physical activity they WILL struggle to aim and hit targets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916963</id>
	<title>Physical violence -vs- Verbal Violence</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256812740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Part of the issue is that in American society, physical violence is treated differently from verbal abuse.  Scenario:<br>- Nerd: You don't even know what Plank's constant is?  You are a meathead idiot!<br>- Jock: *punch*<br>- Principal takes Jock to detention, but not Nerd.</p><p>In my oversimplified ideal example, both Nerd and Jock used their own skills to assault the other.  But the physical attack is treated differently.  This may account for some of the social differences.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Part of the issue is that in American society , physical violence is treated differently from verbal abuse .
Scenario : - Nerd : You do n't even know what Plank 's constant is ?
You are a meathead idiot ! - Jock : * punch * - Principal takes Jock to detention , but not Nerd.In my oversimplified ideal example , both Nerd and Jock used their own skills to assault the other .
But the physical attack is treated differently .
This may account for some of the social differences .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Part of the issue is that in American society, physical violence is treated differently from verbal abuse.
Scenario:- Nerd: You don't even know what Plank's constant is?
You are a meathead idiot!- Jock: *punch*- Principal takes Jock to detention, but not Nerd.In my oversimplified ideal example, both Nerd and Jock used their own skills to assault the other.
But the physical attack is treated differently.
This may account for some of the social differences.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917433</id>
	<title>Re:Nonsense.</title>
	<author>bkr1\_2k</author>
	<datestamp>1256814600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I forgot to mention, this is about Geeks, not Nerds.  There is a difference, despite what Hollywood wants you to believe.  I think we're all fairly familiar with the nuances of someone geeky versus nerdy...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I forgot to mention , this is about Geeks , not Nerds .
There is a difference , despite what Hollywood wants you to believe .
I think we 're all fairly familiar with the nuances of someone geeky versus nerdy.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I forgot to mention, this is about Geeks, not Nerds.
There is a difference, despite what Hollywood wants you to believe.
I think we're all fairly familiar with the nuances of someone geeky versus nerdy...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912639</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>t34g4rd3n</author>
	<datestamp>1256839500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Militaries have always had champions of the smash-mouth, "Wherever the enemy be, let us go there and fight him" style of direct confrontation that gets the troops' blood flowing.

But it's equally true that there have been many great strategic generals and commanders, and I'm not certain that people appreciate the strategy that was present even in the early days of martial conflict.  After all, the Romans had their full complement well-armed, able-bodied jocks at Cannae, and Hannibal annihilated them by tricking them, and using against them their 'jockish' instincts of constant attack.

Generals more disposed to defensive tactics, or deception, rather than a straight-out brawl were often looked down upon by outsiders and sometimes by their own troops i.e. Fabius - but they won.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Militaries have always had champions of the smash-mouth , " Wherever the enemy be , let us go there and fight him " style of direct confrontation that gets the troops ' blood flowing .
But it 's equally true that there have been many great strategic generals and commanders , and I 'm not certain that people appreciate the strategy that was present even in the early days of martial conflict .
After all , the Romans had their full complement well-armed , able-bodied jocks at Cannae , and Hannibal annihilated them by tricking them , and using against them their 'jockish ' instincts of constant attack .
Generals more disposed to defensive tactics , or deception , rather than a straight-out brawl were often looked down upon by outsiders and sometimes by their own troops i.e .
Fabius - but they won .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Militaries have always had champions of the smash-mouth, "Wherever the enemy be, let us go there and fight him" style of direct confrontation that gets the troops' blood flowing.
But it's equally true that there have been many great strategic generals and commanders, and I'm not certain that people appreciate the strategy that was present even in the early days of martial conflict.
After all, the Romans had their full complement well-armed, able-bodied jocks at Cannae, and Hannibal annihilated them by tricking them, and using against them their 'jockish' instincts of constant attack.
Generals more disposed to defensive tactics, or deception, rather than a straight-out brawl were often looked down upon by outsiders and sometimes by their own troops i.e.
Fabius - but they won.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921491</id>
	<title>Re:Geeks wake up!</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1256894940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>2. The feature in men that women are most attracted to: intelligence.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Wrong.<br> <br>

what women are after is security, then comfort. Now in the olden days when it was entirely possible that a lady may be manhandled by some unruly brute then the woman would pick the strongest man to protect her. In modern days the same thing happens except it's no longer physical security that is paramount, it's financial security thus the definition of the "alpha male" has changed to be the most successful men. The pay scale has placed geeks significantly higher then jocks however.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>2 .
The feature in men that women are most attracted to : intelligence .
Wrong . what women are after is security , then comfort .
Now in the olden days when it was entirely possible that a lady may be manhandled by some unruly brute then the woman would pick the strongest man to protect her .
In modern days the same thing happens except it 's no longer physical security that is paramount , it 's financial security thus the definition of the " alpha male " has changed to be the most successful men .
The pay scale has placed geeks significantly higher then jocks however .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2.
The feature in men that women are most attracted to: intelligence.
Wrong. 

what women are after is security, then comfort.
Now in the olden days when it was entirely possible that a lady may be manhandled by some unruly brute then the woman would pick the strongest man to protect her.
In modern days the same thing happens except it's no longer physical security that is paramount, it's financial security thus the definition of the "alpha male" has changed to be the most successful men.
The pay scale has placed geeks significantly higher then jocks however.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913185</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934323</id>
	<title>Re:Physical violence -vs- Verbal Violence</title>
	<author>Eli Gottlieb</author>
	<datestamp>1257002220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?  I've had the opposite problem in my life.</p><p>Jock: You don't like the Red Sox? *multiple punches*<br>Me (geek): *Punch back, break nose*.<br>Principal suspends both of us for equal periods of time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
I 've had the opposite problem in my life.Jock : You do n't like the Red Sox ?
* multiple punches * Me ( geek ) : * Punch back , break nose * .Principal suspends both of us for equal periods of time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
I've had the opposite problem in my life.Jock: You don't like the Red Sox?
*multiple punches*Me (geek): *Punch back, break nose*.Principal suspends both of us for equal periods of time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915777</id>
	<title>Re:Bush was a jock wannabe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256808660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people."- Unknown, often wrongly attributed to H. G. Rickover.<br> <br>
See which category you fall into?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Great minds discuss ideas , average minds discuss events , small minds discuss people .
" - Unknown , often wrongly attributed to H. G. Rickover .
See which category you fall into ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people.
"- Unknown, often wrongly attributed to H. G. Rickover.
See which category you fall into?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911917</id>
	<title>Re:I for one</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1256837040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, I'm just gonna repost something I wrote a while back that sums up why I think this will never happen:
<br> <br>
It's time for nerds to rise up yet again. Throughout modern history in the US, celebration of the nerd has resulted in unprecedented economic prosperity and global economic domination.
<br> <br>
From the idolization of Einstein, Feynman, and other physicists, arose the economic superpower that dominated much of the world in the 1950s and 60s.
<br> <br>
In the 80s, we were captivated by the message of Revenge of the Nerds, and on the shoulders of this movie we came to dominate the new era of Information.
<br> <br>
Ladies, gentlemen: Now is the time. Now is the time to rise up from our comfy chairs, to rise up from our futons, to rise up from the depths of our basements! We must rise up as one united voice of nerd-dom, and speak to the mouthbreathers who have ground us beneath their bootheels since time immemorial. We must tell them:<blockquote><div><p>ENOUGH! Take your stupid sports and shove them. Take your stupid pop music TV shows and shove them. Take your idolization of stupidity and sacrifice it on the altar of curiosity, the altar of edification, and the altar of neckbeards and cheetos!
<br> <br>
WE MUST DEFEAT THE...
<br> <br>
What's that mom? Yeah... OK... I'll be up for dinner as soon as I finish this level. Did you get some Mountain Dew?</p></div> </blockquote><p>
Sorry, gotta go AFK.<br> <br>Originally posted <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1262853&amp;cid=28272037" title="slashdot.org">here</a> [slashdot.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I 'm just gon na repost something I wrote a while back that sums up why I think this will never happen : It 's time for nerds to rise up yet again .
Throughout modern history in the US , celebration of the nerd has resulted in unprecedented economic prosperity and global economic domination .
From the idolization of Einstein , Feynman , and other physicists , arose the economic superpower that dominated much of the world in the 1950s and 60s .
In the 80s , we were captivated by the message of Revenge of the Nerds , and on the shoulders of this movie we came to dominate the new era of Information .
Ladies , gentlemen : Now is the time .
Now is the time to rise up from our comfy chairs , to rise up from our futons , to rise up from the depths of our basements !
We must rise up as one united voice of nerd-dom , and speak to the mouthbreathers who have ground us beneath their bootheels since time immemorial .
We must tell them : ENOUGH !
Take your stupid sports and shove them .
Take your stupid pop music TV shows and shove them .
Take your idolization of stupidity and sacrifice it on the altar of curiosity , the altar of edification , and the altar of neckbeards and cheetos !
WE MUST DEFEAT THE.. . What 's that mom ?
Yeah... OK... I 'll be up for dinner as soon as I finish this level .
Did you get some Mountain Dew ?
Sorry , got ta go AFK .
Originally posted here [ slashdot.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I'm just gonna repost something I wrote a while back that sums up why I think this will never happen:
 
It's time for nerds to rise up yet again.
Throughout modern history in the US, celebration of the nerd has resulted in unprecedented economic prosperity and global economic domination.
From the idolization of Einstein, Feynman, and other physicists, arose the economic superpower that dominated much of the world in the 1950s and 60s.
In the 80s, we were captivated by the message of Revenge of the Nerds, and on the shoulders of this movie we came to dominate the new era of Information.
Ladies, gentlemen: Now is the time.
Now is the time to rise up from our comfy chairs, to rise up from our futons, to rise up from the depths of our basements!
We must rise up as one united voice of nerd-dom, and speak to the mouthbreathers who have ground us beneath their bootheels since time immemorial.
We must tell them:ENOUGH!
Take your stupid sports and shove them.
Take your stupid pop music TV shows and shove them.
Take your idolization of stupidity and sacrifice it on the altar of curiosity, the altar of edification, and the altar of neckbeards and cheetos!
WE MUST DEFEAT THE...
 
What's that mom?
Yeah... OK... I'll be up for dinner as soon as I finish this level.
Did you get some Mountain Dew?
Sorry, gotta go AFK.
Originally posted here [slashdot.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914635</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>MrCrassic</author>
	<datestamp>1256847360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I think this perception is wholly dependent on how you categorize "nerds" and "jocks." In my high school, it was well understood that the jocks were the sports stars that were terrible academically, but were very physically attractive and socially savvy. Many of these folks are catching up now, though some have done exceptionally well for themselves.</p><p>Then you had the "nerds," who usually had their own clique going. They were all very intelligent, though you'd never know it amongst all of the self-deprivation they imposed on themselves. Almost all of them went on to well-recognized universities and are doing well today.</p><p>I've noticed over the years that this dichotomy is much more prevalent in public schools were there are rash differences in academic abilities amongst their students. It's kind of like an ego complex: if the academically poor students can't compete on smarts with the "geeks," they instead turn to physical prowess and social influence to shut them out. In private schools or schools with a more even distribution of academic ability, I see that the "jocks" of the school are actually pretty geeky, but seem to do well overall.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I think this perception is wholly dependent on how you categorize " nerds " and " jocks .
" In my high school , it was well understood that the jocks were the sports stars that were terrible academically , but were very physically attractive and socially savvy .
Many of these folks are catching up now , though some have done exceptionally well for themselves.Then you had the " nerds , " who usually had their own clique going .
They were all very intelligent , though you 'd never know it amongst all of the self-deprivation they imposed on themselves .
Almost all of them went on to well-recognized universities and are doing well today.I 've noticed over the years that this dichotomy is much more prevalent in public schools were there are rash differences in academic abilities amongst their students .
It 's kind of like an ego complex : if the academically poor students ca n't compete on smarts with the " geeks , " they instead turn to physical prowess and social influence to shut them out .
In private schools or schools with a more even distribution of academic ability , I see that the " jocks " of the school are actually pretty geeky , but seem to do well overall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I think this perception is wholly dependent on how you categorize "nerds" and "jocks.
" In my high school, it was well understood that the jocks were the sports stars that were terrible academically, but were very physically attractive and socially savvy.
Many of these folks are catching up now, though some have done exceptionally well for themselves.Then you had the "nerds," who usually had their own clique going.
They were all very intelligent, though you'd never know it amongst all of the self-deprivation they imposed on themselves.
Almost all of them went on to well-recognized universities and are doing well today.I've noticed over the years that this dichotomy is much more prevalent in public schools were there are rash differences in academic abilities amongst their students.
It's kind of like an ego complex: if the academically poor students can't compete on smarts with the "geeks," they instead turn to physical prowess and social influence to shut them out.
In private schools or schools with a more even distribution of academic ability, I see that the "jocks" of the school are actually pretty geeky, but seem to do well overall.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911399</id>
	<title>moar spams for you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256835180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look At My Hearse (A GOMH Tribute)</p><p><a href="http://lookatmyhearse.googlepages.com/index.html" title="googlepages.com" rel="nofollow">http://lookatmyhearse.googlepages.com/index.html</a> [googlepages.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look At My Hearse ( A GOMH Tribute ) http : //lookatmyhearse.googlepages.com/index.html [ googlepages.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look At My Hearse (A GOMH Tribute)http://lookatmyhearse.googlepages.com/index.html [googlepages.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915601</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256807820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I was heavy into science in high school, as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities. I never had a problem with any group of people.</p></div><p>I was heavy into computers.  I was also into track (100 and 200M, plus winning several county events for high jump) and sports (football and soccer.)  I learned martial arts.  I was into Drama.  I played D&amp;D.  Is that diverse enough for you?</p><p>I still got picked on by bullies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was heavy into science in high school , as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities .
I never had a problem with any group of people.I was heavy into computers .
I was also into track ( 100 and 200M , plus winning several county events for high jump ) and sports ( football and soccer .
) I learned martial arts .
I was into Drama .
I played D&amp;D .
Is that diverse enough for you ? I still got picked on by bullies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was heavy into science in high school, as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities.
I never had a problem with any group of people.I was heavy into computers.
I was also into track (100 and 200M, plus winning several county events for high jump) and sports (football and soccer.
)  I learned martial arts.
I was into Drama.
I played D&amp;D.
Is that diverse enough for you?I still got picked on by bullies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913175</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>Stalyn</author>
	<datestamp>1256841480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Now that I'm in law school, it's clear that my fellow students value intelligence (including technical knowledge) right along with social prowess and appearance.</i></p><p>I won't deny that social skills and appearance are very important. But maybe I'm old fashioned; growing up when the Internet didn't have a facebook. Where we could only judge a person by what they said and how they said it. It the end it shouldn't matter what you look like or your amount of friends. If you say something... something that is True; that is what is most important.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that I 'm in law school , it 's clear that my fellow students value intelligence ( including technical knowledge ) right along with social prowess and appearance.I wo n't deny that social skills and appearance are very important .
But maybe I 'm old fashioned ; growing up when the Internet did n't have a facebook .
Where we could only judge a person by what they said and how they said it .
It the end it should n't matter what you look like or your amount of friends .
If you say something... something that is True ; that is what is most important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that I'm in law school, it's clear that my fellow students value intelligence (including technical knowledge) right along with social prowess and appearance.I won't deny that social skills and appearance are very important.
But maybe I'm old fashioned; growing up when the Internet didn't have a facebook.
Where we could only judge a person by what they said and how they said it.
It the end it shouldn't matter what you look like or your amount of friends.
If you say something... something that is True; that is what is most important.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913257</id>
	<title>Need a Geek System</title>
	<author>IronSilk</author>
	<datestamp>1256841900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The new model of human personality <a href="http://bit.ly/L1iM5" title="bit.ly" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/L1iM5</a> [bit.ly] suggests that jocks would tend to be high in extraversion and low in agreeableness; whereas nerds would be low in extraversion and high in agreeableness. CEO's, political leaders and pro athletes tend toward the jock version. So if the geeks want to rule, they (ahem, I ) have to create a system that pushes power toward modes of action and decision-making that favor intelligence and agreeableness over bluster and force. Open source government, anyone?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The new model of human personality http : //bit.ly/L1iM5 [ bit.ly ] suggests that jocks would tend to be high in extraversion and low in agreeableness ; whereas nerds would be low in extraversion and high in agreeableness .
CEO 's , political leaders and pro athletes tend toward the jock version .
So if the geeks want to rule , they ( ahem , I ) have to create a system that pushes power toward modes of action and decision-making that favor intelligence and agreeableness over bluster and force .
Open source government , anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The new model of human personality http://bit.ly/L1iM5 [bit.ly] suggests that jocks would tend to be high in extraversion and low in agreeableness; whereas nerds would be low in extraversion and high in agreeableness.
CEO's, political leaders and pro athletes tend toward the jock version.
So if the geeks want to rule, they (ahem, I ) have to create a system that pushes power toward modes of action and decision-making that favor intelligence and agreeableness over bluster and force.
Open source government, anyone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471</id>
	<title>Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>schnikies79</author>
	<datestamp>1256835480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then you wouldn't be pegged with (and the associated stigmas) of a certain stereotype.</p><p>I was heavy into science in high school, as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities.  I never had a problem with any group of people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then you would n't be pegged with ( and the associated stigmas ) of a certain stereotype.I was heavy into science in high school , as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities .
I never had a problem with any group of people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then you wouldn't be pegged with (and the associated stigmas) of a certain stereotype.I was heavy into science in high school, as well as sports and other extra-curricular activities.
I never had a problem with any group of people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915909</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>jc42</author>
	<datestamp>1256809200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Not that I think of Bush as a jock, but he certainly wasn't a nerd/geek. There should probably be three categories, 'jock','nerd','loser/lamer'</i></p><p>Maybe Americans should pick up on the Brits' "UCT" label.  It stands for "Upper Class Twit", and George W is pretty much a prototype for the label.  Check with Monty Python for more information about UCTs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not that I think of Bush as a jock , but he certainly was n't a nerd/geek .
There should probably be three categories , 'jock','nerd','loser/lamer'Maybe Americans should pick up on the Brits ' " UCT " label .
It stands for " Upper Class Twit " , and George W is pretty much a prototype for the label .
Check with Monty Python for more information about UCTs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not that I think of Bush as a jock, but he certainly wasn't a nerd/geek.
There should probably be three categories, 'jock','nerd','loser/lamer'Maybe Americans should pick up on the Brits' "UCT" label.
It stands for "Upper Class Twit", and George W is pretty much a prototype for the label.
Check with Monty Python for more information about UCTs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911779</id>
	<title>Re:I for one</title>
	<author>olingern</author>
	<datestamp>1256836440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I, for one, welcome myself as one of our new overlords.</p></div><p>Well, I welcome myself as one of the new supply depots</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I , for one , welcome myself as one of our new overlords.Well , I welcome myself as one of the new supply depots</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, for one, welcome myself as one of our new overlords.Well, I welcome myself as one of the new supply depots
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914337</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256846100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another European speaking here. I do not share your boredom of the American high school stereotypes. In fact, I secretly enjoy all the high school movies from US. In my opinion, they are very similar to computer RPG-s, in that the protagonist is thrown into a harsh world of clans and factions and he must make it to the top (you can tell I'm an Elder Scrolls fan, can't you?).</p><p>You are correct, we do not see anything that extreme in Europe, and the TV translators have a hard time translating "wedgie" in a short and exact manner. Of course, cliques form from time to time, but they remain in the generation that produced them. You don't see gangs of jocks running around bullying everyone that looks nerdy. You might see particular groups of people forming and remaining together for years, but you can't identify them as "preppies" or "hot chicks" (usually, a hot chick is accompanied by her less handsome friends), they are just a bunch of guys.</p><p>As an outsider, I like to visit this surreal world through movies and games ("Bully" from the authors of GTA). But I am glad that when the film is over, I can resume to be a normal person and be identified by different qualities in each separate social group I communicate with. At the university I am your typical lazy but capable student, who drinks a lot of beer at parties. In my condominium, I am an elected and respected member of our management. At work I am the meek newbie who always needs directions. And with my family and close friends, I am the wise-cracking center of everyone's attention. But if all my acquaintances were to write down on a paper the social group that I belong to, you would get lots of different answers, because we don't live in a society where everybody has a certain status. People act various roles in different companies and if you have a bad reputation in one social group, then you start anew in another group.</p><p>I hope my explanation does not sound too arrogant. Sometimes it is hard to believe the things going on in US, because it does not seem like what regular people would do. But I guess common sense is quite a cultural thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another European speaking here .
I do not share your boredom of the American high school stereotypes .
In fact , I secretly enjoy all the high school movies from US .
In my opinion , they are very similar to computer RPG-s , in that the protagonist is thrown into a harsh world of clans and factions and he must make it to the top ( you can tell I 'm an Elder Scrolls fan , ca n't you ?
) .You are correct , we do not see anything that extreme in Europe , and the TV translators have a hard time translating " wedgie " in a short and exact manner .
Of course , cliques form from time to time , but they remain in the generation that produced them .
You do n't see gangs of jocks running around bullying everyone that looks nerdy .
You might see particular groups of people forming and remaining together for years , but you ca n't identify them as " preppies " or " hot chicks " ( usually , a hot chick is accompanied by her less handsome friends ) , they are just a bunch of guys.As an outsider , I like to visit this surreal world through movies and games ( " Bully " from the authors of GTA ) .
But I am glad that when the film is over , I can resume to be a normal person and be identified by different qualities in each separate social group I communicate with .
At the university I am your typical lazy but capable student , who drinks a lot of beer at parties .
In my condominium , I am an elected and respected member of our management .
At work I am the meek newbie who always needs directions .
And with my family and close friends , I am the wise-cracking center of everyone 's attention .
But if all my acquaintances were to write down on a paper the social group that I belong to , you would get lots of different answers , because we do n't live in a society where everybody has a certain status .
People act various roles in different companies and if you have a bad reputation in one social group , then you start anew in another group.I hope my explanation does not sound too arrogant .
Sometimes it is hard to believe the things going on in US , because it does not seem like what regular people would do .
But I guess common sense is quite a cultural thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another European speaking here.
I do not share your boredom of the American high school stereotypes.
In fact, I secretly enjoy all the high school movies from US.
In my opinion, they are very similar to computer RPG-s, in that the protagonist is thrown into a harsh world of clans and factions and he must make it to the top (you can tell I'm an Elder Scrolls fan, can't you?
).You are correct, we do not see anything that extreme in Europe, and the TV translators have a hard time translating "wedgie" in a short and exact manner.
Of course, cliques form from time to time, but they remain in the generation that produced them.
You don't see gangs of jocks running around bullying everyone that looks nerdy.
You might see particular groups of people forming and remaining together for years, but you can't identify them as "preppies" or "hot chicks" (usually, a hot chick is accompanied by her less handsome friends), they are just a bunch of guys.As an outsider, I like to visit this surreal world through movies and games ("Bully" from the authors of GTA).
But I am glad that when the film is over, I can resume to be a normal person and be identified by different qualities in each separate social group I communicate with.
At the university I am your typical lazy but capable student, who drinks a lot of beer at parties.
In my condominium, I am an elected and respected member of our management.
At work I am the meek newbie who always needs directions.
And with my family and close friends, I am the wise-cracking center of everyone's attention.
But if all my acquaintances were to write down on a paper the social group that I belong to, you would get lots of different answers, because we don't live in a society where everybody has a certain status.
People act various roles in different companies and if you have a bad reputation in one social group, then you start anew in another group.I hope my explanation does not sound too arrogant.
Sometimes it is hard to believe the things going on in US, because it does not seem like what regular people would do.
But I guess common sense is quite a cultural thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913185</id>
	<title>Geeks wake up!</title>
	<author>sp3d2orbit</author>
	<datestamp>1256841540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're a geek and not getting laid, then listen closely because you should be.</p><p>1. Popular culture lies. Dumb, muscle bound meat heads and frat-boys don't get the girl.<br>2. The feature in men that women are most attracted to: intelligence.<br>3. Studies show that intelligent men, over the course  of their life, get to have more sex, more regularly than those who are less intelligent.</p><p>If your a geek and don't think you can get a girl, you're wrong. All those popped-collared frat boys want you to think you aren't going to be successful because, if the truth got out, THEY would never get laid. So instead of trying, you sit home and play WoW.</p><p>If you don't believe me consider this (proposed by a evolutionary biologist): women are beautiful, men are ugly. Agreed? OK. Therefore, men must be choosing mates based on looks (that's why women get more beautiful every generation) and women must be choosing mates based on other features (intelligence).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're a geek and not getting laid , then listen closely because you should be.1 .
Popular culture lies .
Dumb , muscle bound meat heads and frat-boys do n't get the girl.2 .
The feature in men that women are most attracted to : intelligence.3 .
Studies show that intelligent men , over the course of their life , get to have more sex , more regularly than those who are less intelligent.If your a geek and do n't think you can get a girl , you 're wrong .
All those popped-collared frat boys want you to think you are n't going to be successful because , if the truth got out , THEY would never get laid .
So instead of trying , you sit home and play WoW.If you do n't believe me consider this ( proposed by a evolutionary biologist ) : women are beautiful , men are ugly .
Agreed ? OK. Therefore , men must be choosing mates based on looks ( that 's why women get more beautiful every generation ) and women must be choosing mates based on other features ( intelligence ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're a geek and not getting laid, then listen closely because you should be.1.
Popular culture lies.
Dumb, muscle bound meat heads and frat-boys don't get the girl.2.
The feature in men that women are most attracted to: intelligence.3.
Studies show that intelligent men, over the course  of their life, get to have more sex, more regularly than those who are less intelligent.If your a geek and don't think you can get a girl, you're wrong.
All those popped-collared frat boys want you to think you aren't going to be successful because, if the truth got out, THEY would never get laid.
So instead of trying, you sit home and play WoW.If you don't believe me consider this (proposed by a evolutionary biologist): women are beautiful, men are ugly.
Agreed? OK. Therefore, men must be choosing mates based on looks (that's why women get more beautiful every generation) and women must be choosing mates based on other features (intelligence).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912259</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>schnikies79</author>
	<datestamp>1256838120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Specialization means no ability to think outside the box.  Knowledge is overlapping.</p><p>I don't work in IT, but if I had to hire someone that has knowledge of IT and art, or just IT.  I would pick the IT and art person.  They are most likely more creative and can come up with better solutions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Specialization means no ability to think outside the box .
Knowledge is overlapping.I do n't work in IT , but if I had to hire someone that has knowledge of IT and art , or just IT .
I would pick the IT and art person .
They are most likely more creative and can come up with better solutions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Specialization means no ability to think outside the box.
Knowledge is overlapping.I don't work in IT, but if I had to hire someone that has knowledge of IT and art, or just IT.
I would pick the IT and art person.
They are most likely more creative and can come up with better solutions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912035</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>TheGuapo</author>
	<datestamp>1256837460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Now that I'm in law school"...
<br> <br>
Maybe law is one of those special places where the dichotomy falls apart.  To be completely honest, my experience (through high school, college, and even into my professional life) have been nearly the opposite of yours.  I think the socially adept, athletic, outgoing yet book-smart intellectual individual is much more of the exception.  I know 1 person that truly fits that description.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Now that I 'm in law school " .. . Maybe law is one of those special places where the dichotomy falls apart .
To be completely honest , my experience ( through high school , college , and even into my professional life ) have been nearly the opposite of yours .
I think the socially adept , athletic , outgoing yet book-smart intellectual individual is much more of the exception .
I know 1 person that truly fits that description .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Now that I'm in law school"...
 
Maybe law is one of those special places where the dichotomy falls apart.
To be completely honest, my experience (through high school, college, and even into my professional life) have been nearly the opposite of yours.
I think the socially adept, athletic, outgoing yet book-smart intellectual individual is much more of the exception.
I know 1 person that truly fits that description.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911573</id>
	<title>Re:Hey?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256835780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is that a joke?  If not please turn in your slashdot card.  You have no business being here.  If it was, it was terrible.  You're right where you belong.
<p>
He's not the spiderman guy.  He's the "I'm a PC" guy from the Apple commercials.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that a joke ?
If not please turn in your slashdot card .
You have no business being here .
If it was , it was terrible .
You 're right where you belong .
He 's not the spiderman guy .
He 's the " I 'm a PC " guy from the Apple commercials .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that a joke?
If not please turn in your slashdot card.
You have no business being here.
If it was, it was terrible.
You're right where you belong.
He's not the spiderman guy.
He's the "I'm a PC" guy from the Apple commercials.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911447</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914075</id>
	<title>Re:Sad</title>
	<author>dargaud</author>
	<datestamp>1256845080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's sad to see middle-aged men still talking about stuff that happened to them in high school.</p></div><p>Why, if you spent 15 years being pushed around, it will certainly leave a mark longer than that. My being bullied only stopped the day I fought back and cracked the skull of one of the jocks. After that I was their 'friend'. Go figure. The lesson is: fight back and fight early.</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...from reading children's comic books about superior men in tight pants who avenge anyone by kicking the arse of the big mean guys</p></div><p>One thing I could never understand.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If you're gonna play something that involves dungeons and you're over 20, it'd better involve gags and leather restraints.</p></div><p>Haha, best quote of the month.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Sometimes it seems like you ALL must think of yourselves as loser, one way or another. That's pathetic.</p></div><p>That's because the entire culture is oriented towards being a 'winner'. But people always forget that for <i>one</i> winner, well, <i>everybody</i> else is a loser. I always found this concept of winner the summit of idioticy. Other cultures have pushed more towards fitting the mold (communism), accepting  things as they are (confucianism), but where is the culture that values doing things well without boasting about it ?!?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's sad to see middle-aged men still talking about stuff that happened to them in high school.Why , if you spent 15 years being pushed around , it will certainly leave a mark longer than that .
My being bullied only stopped the day I fought back and cracked the skull of one of the jocks .
After that I was their 'friend' .
Go figure .
The lesson is : fight back and fight early .
...from reading children 's comic books about superior men in tight pants who avenge anyone by kicking the arse of the big mean guysOne thing I could never understand.If you 're gon na play something that involves dungeons and you 're over 20 , it 'd better involve gags and leather restraints.Haha , best quote of the month.Sometimes it seems like you ALL must think of yourselves as loser , one way or another .
That 's pathetic.That 's because the entire culture is oriented towards being a 'winner' .
But people always forget that for one winner , well , everybody else is a loser .
I always found this concept of winner the summit of idioticy .
Other cultures have pushed more towards fitting the mold ( communism ) , accepting things as they are ( confucianism ) , but where is the culture that values doing things well without boasting about it ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's sad to see middle-aged men still talking about stuff that happened to them in high school.Why, if you spent 15 years being pushed around, it will certainly leave a mark longer than that.
My being bullied only stopped the day I fought back and cracked the skull of one of the jocks.
After that I was their 'friend'.
Go figure.
The lesson is: fight back and fight early.
...from reading children's comic books about superior men in tight pants who avenge anyone by kicking the arse of the big mean guysOne thing I could never understand.If you're gonna play something that involves dungeons and you're over 20, it'd better involve gags and leather restraints.Haha, best quote of the month.Sometimes it seems like you ALL must think of yourselves as loser, one way or another.
That's pathetic.That's because the entire culture is oriented towards being a 'winner'.
But people always forget that for one winner, well, everybody else is a loser.
I always found this concept of winner the summit of idioticy.
Other cultures have pushed more towards fitting the mold (communism), accepting  things as they are (confucianism), but where is the culture that values doing things well without boasting about it ?!
?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914501</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks are FEARFUL !</title>
	<author>lenester</author>
	<datestamp>1256846820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This sort of shit is why you get picked on.</p></div></blockquote><p>And that is the jock/geek dichotomy in a nutshell. It is socially acceptable, even admired, to flaunt one's muscle and belittle others for having less.</p><p>It is absolutely unacceptable to flaunt one's <i>intelligence</i> and belittle others for having less.</p><p>Belittling others is, of course, central to American society. So the jocks hold all the cards.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This sort of shit is why you get picked on.And that is the jock/geek dichotomy in a nutshell .
It is socially acceptable , even admired , to flaunt one 's muscle and belittle others for having less.It is absolutely unacceptable to flaunt one 's intelligence and belittle others for having less.Belittling others is , of course , central to American society .
So the jocks hold all the cards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sort of shit is why you get picked on.And that is the jock/geek dichotomy in a nutshell.
It is socially acceptable, even admired, to flaunt one's muscle and belittle others for having less.It is absolutely unacceptable to flaunt one's intelligence and belittle others for having less.Belittling others is, of course, central to American society.
So the jocks hold all the cards.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912463</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29923811</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256917800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other.  Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete.</p></div><p>Not remotely true.</p><p>With soldiers carrying between 50 to 100 pounds of equipment, athleticism is still a required component for warfare.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other .
Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower , the jocks were obsolete.Not remotely true.With soldiers carrying between 50 to 100 pounds of equipment , athleticism is still a required component for warfare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other.
Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete.Not remotely true.With soldiers carrying between 50 to 100 pounds of equipment, athleticism is still a required component for warfare.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911955</id>
	<title>Re:Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256837160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You make a good argument, but it is simply not believable. I refuse to believe that Hollywood would have lied to me this badly for no other reason than to take my money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You make a good argument , but it is simply not believable .
I refuse to believe that Hollywood would have lied to me this badly for no other reason than to take my money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You make a good argument, but it is simply not believable.
I refuse to believe that Hollywood would have lied to me this badly for no other reason than to take my money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911965</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe people should be more well-rounded</title>
	<author>SirWhoopass</author>
	<datestamp>1256837220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree completely. In fact, I seem to recall this whole thread about <a href="http://features.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=8643&amp;cid=650979" title="slashdot.org">nine years ago</a> [slashdot.org]...</p><blockquote><div><p>What's the big obsession on Slashdot with perpetuating silly stereotypes? It's like people here actually believe that they are B-movie nerds, waging an eternal war against jocks. My friends and I played role-playing games in high school, we liked to mess with the computers. A wild Saturday night was some Pepsi, pizza, and a game of Starfleet Battles.We also played varsity football, basketball, and track. We were in the weight room three days a week.People who thought they were "nerds" thought we were "jocks". The people who thought they were "jocks" thought we were "nerds". I had a lot of fun playing sports and a lot of fun in other activities. You only hurt yourself by letting someone label you.</p></div></blockquote><p>I think the biggest problem is the labels would appear to identify academic and athletic achievements. When, in reality, they're just certain fringe social groups and kids often allow themselves to be identified as one or the other, to their own loss. The most successful people I know were both in academic and athletic activities while in school, and continue to pursue both physical and mental growth as adults.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree completely .
In fact , I seem to recall this whole thread about nine years ago [ slashdot.org ] ...What 's the big obsession on Slashdot with perpetuating silly stereotypes ?
It 's like people here actually believe that they are B-movie nerds , waging an eternal war against jocks .
My friends and I played role-playing games in high school , we liked to mess with the computers .
A wild Saturday night was some Pepsi , pizza , and a game of Starfleet Battles.We also played varsity football , basketball , and track .
We were in the weight room three days a week.People who thought they were " nerds " thought we were " jocks " .
The people who thought they were " jocks " thought we were " nerds " .
I had a lot of fun playing sports and a lot of fun in other activities .
You only hurt yourself by letting someone label you.I think the biggest problem is the labels would appear to identify academic and athletic achievements .
When , in reality , they 're just certain fringe social groups and kids often allow themselves to be identified as one or the other , to their own loss .
The most successful people I know were both in academic and athletic activities while in school , and continue to pursue both physical and mental growth as adults .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree completely.
In fact, I seem to recall this whole thread about nine years ago [slashdot.org]...What's the big obsession on Slashdot with perpetuating silly stereotypes?
It's like people here actually believe that they are B-movie nerds, waging an eternal war against jocks.
My friends and I played role-playing games in high school, we liked to mess with the computers.
A wild Saturday night was some Pepsi, pizza, and a game of Starfleet Battles.We also played varsity football, basketball, and track.
We were in the weight room three days a week.People who thought they were "nerds" thought we were "jocks".
The people who thought they were "jocks" thought we were "nerds".
I had a lot of fun playing sports and a lot of fun in other activities.
You only hurt yourself by letting someone label you.I think the biggest problem is the labels would appear to identify academic and athletic achievements.
When, in reality, they're just certain fringe social groups and kids often allow themselves to be identified as one or the other, to their own loss.
The most successful people I know were both in academic and athletic activities while in school, and continue to pursue both physical and mental growth as adults.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256836860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other.  Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other .
Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower , the jocks were obsolete .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jocks won wars back when mankind was throwing spears at each other.
Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915157</id>
	<title>Aah What Does He Know?</title>
	<author>Greyfox</author>
	<datestamp>1256849460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He's a PC...</htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's a PC.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's a PC...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912147</id>
	<title>Nothing new to Asia</title>
	<author>butabozuhi</author>
	<datestamp>1256837820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Asia has traditionally rewarded intelligence and hard work (versus jockdom). The smart ones (who score really high on standardized tests) get that way from hours (had been 12+ hour days of before school, school, and after school including weekends) of studying. Less so now, but in the past if you scored well you got into the best schools, best universities, then automatically into the best jobs in the country. Take baseball in Japan as an example of their 'jockdom.' They're paid well, but no where near UH levels. They play hard (practices are grueling) and people expect them to essentially 'use themselves up' during the course of their careers. US ballplayers (in the 80s) who went over had 'special treatment' as they were excused from the more rigorous work by the Japan players.

Other cultures and nations simply do not put athletes on pedestals like we do in the US. They admire their skill but don't treat them like they're the most important people in the country. People who work hard, are skilled (craftsmen, artisans), or smart (scientists, engineers) are appropriately valued.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Asia has traditionally rewarded intelligence and hard work ( versus jockdom ) .
The smart ones ( who score really high on standardized tests ) get that way from hours ( had been 12 + hour days of before school , school , and after school including weekends ) of studying .
Less so now , but in the past if you scored well you got into the best schools , best universities , then automatically into the best jobs in the country .
Take baseball in Japan as an example of their 'jockdom .
' They 're paid well , but no where near UH levels .
They play hard ( practices are grueling ) and people expect them to essentially 'use themselves up ' during the course of their careers .
US ballplayers ( in the 80s ) who went over had 'special treatment ' as they were excused from the more rigorous work by the Japan players .
Other cultures and nations simply do not put athletes on pedestals like we do in the US .
They admire their skill but do n't treat them like they 're the most important people in the country .
People who work hard , are skilled ( craftsmen , artisans ) , or smart ( scientists , engineers ) are appropriately valued .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Asia has traditionally rewarded intelligence and hard work (versus jockdom).
The smart ones (who score really high on standardized tests) get that way from hours (had been 12+ hour days of before school, school, and after school including weekends) of studying.
Less so now, but in the past if you scored well you got into the best schools, best universities, then automatically into the best jobs in the country.
Take baseball in Japan as an example of their 'jockdom.
' They're paid well, but no where near UH levels.
They play hard (practices are grueling) and people expect them to essentially 'use themselves up' during the course of their careers.
US ballplayers (in the 80s) who went over had 'special treatment' as they were excused from the more rigorous work by the Japan players.
Other cultures and nations simply do not put athletes on pedestals like we do in the US.
They admire their skill but don't treat them like they're the most important people in the country.
People who work hard, are skilled (craftsmen, artisans), or smart (scientists, engineers) are appropriately valued.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29918291</id>
	<title>Re:american labor is too expensive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256819340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you were a politician, I would vote for you. But of course you aren't, because you couldn't possibly be stupid enough to be a politician.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you were a politician , I would vote for you .
But of course you are n't , because you could n't possibly be stupid enough to be a politician .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you were a politician, I would vote for you.
But of course you aren't, because you couldn't possibly be stupid enough to be a politician.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29929827</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>Mex</author>
	<datestamp>1256903460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I dunno about Marcus Aurelius, but I can assure you Machiavelli was no leader, and he never won anything of note besides a couple of skirmishes.</p><p>In fact, most of his life he was sort of a loser, working for a government that got deposed, and then being denied from working in government again for the rest of his life. "The Prince" was written pretty much as a job application for the Medici (didn't work), and while his writings are preserved today for their uncanny relevance to human nature and politics regardless of age, he wasn't exactly a "winner of wars". He was a great renaissance man, but in his time he wasn't very appreciated the way other people were (like the Medici or the Borgias). His appreciation came with time, but I don't know that he wouldn't have loved some recognition while he was alive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I dunno about Marcus Aurelius , but I can assure you Machiavelli was no leader , and he never won anything of note besides a couple of skirmishes.In fact , most of his life he was sort of a loser , working for a government that got deposed , and then being denied from working in government again for the rest of his life .
" The Prince " was written pretty much as a job application for the Medici ( did n't work ) , and while his writings are preserved today for their uncanny relevance to human nature and politics regardless of age , he was n't exactly a " winner of wars " .
He was a great renaissance man , but in his time he was n't very appreciated the way other people were ( like the Medici or the Borgias ) .
His appreciation came with time , but I do n't know that he would n't have loved some recognition while he was alive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dunno about Marcus Aurelius, but I can assure you Machiavelli was no leader, and he never won anything of note besides a couple of skirmishes.In fact, most of his life he was sort of a loser, working for a government that got deposed, and then being denied from working in government again for the rest of his life.
"The Prince" was written pretty much as a job application for the Medici (didn't work), and while his writings are preserved today for their uncanny relevance to human nature and politics regardless of age, he wasn't exactly a "winner of wars".
He was a great renaissance man, but in his time he wasn't very appreciated the way other people were (like the Medici or the Borgias).
His appreciation came with time, but I don't know that he wouldn't have loved some recognition while he was alive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611</id>
	<title>Not mutually exclusive</title>
	<author>mpoulton</author>
	<datestamp>1256835900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The dichotomy between nerds and jocks is a false one, and it has been for some time.  The stereotypes assert that "jocks" who are socially active, athletic, and attractive must not have any interest in technology, be smart, or value intellectual pursuits.  Likewise, "nerds" who are smart and dedicated to learning must be slobs, socially awkward, and unattractive.  This hasn't been the case at any time in the last decade or so that I've been paying attention.  Some of the smartest and most academically successful people at my high school, who went on to attend highly prestigious universities, some to study science and engineering, were also athletic, social, attractive people.  Many of the socially awkward nerds were not smart and did not value learning.  In college, a significant percentage of my incredibly smart engineering colleagues had been high school football stars, loved to party, and were quite successful in relationships.<br> <br>

Now that I'm in law school, it's clear that my fellow students value intelligence (including technical knowledge) right along with social prowess and appearance.  The entire spectrum of personal attributes is not only respected, but expected in these circles.  I believe this has been the norm among high-performing, successful people for quite some time now - it's not even clear that the jock-nerd dichotomy every really existed the way it is portrayed.  As far as I can tell, the real divide has everything to do with social skills and nothing to do with intelligence.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The dichotomy between nerds and jocks is a false one , and it has been for some time .
The stereotypes assert that " jocks " who are socially active , athletic , and attractive must not have any interest in technology , be smart , or value intellectual pursuits .
Likewise , " nerds " who are smart and dedicated to learning must be slobs , socially awkward , and unattractive .
This has n't been the case at any time in the last decade or so that I 've been paying attention .
Some of the smartest and most academically successful people at my high school , who went on to attend highly prestigious universities , some to study science and engineering , were also athletic , social , attractive people .
Many of the socially awkward nerds were not smart and did not value learning .
In college , a significant percentage of my incredibly smart engineering colleagues had been high school football stars , loved to party , and were quite successful in relationships .
Now that I 'm in law school , it 's clear that my fellow students value intelligence ( including technical knowledge ) right along with social prowess and appearance .
The entire spectrum of personal attributes is not only respected , but expected in these circles .
I believe this has been the norm among high-performing , successful people for quite some time now - it 's not even clear that the jock-nerd dichotomy every really existed the way it is portrayed .
As far as I can tell , the real divide has everything to do with social skills and nothing to do with intelligence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The dichotomy between nerds and jocks is a false one, and it has been for some time.
The stereotypes assert that "jocks" who are socially active, athletic, and attractive must not have any interest in technology, be smart, or value intellectual pursuits.
Likewise, "nerds" who are smart and dedicated to learning must be slobs, socially awkward, and unattractive.
This hasn't been the case at any time in the last decade or so that I've been paying attention.
Some of the smartest and most academically successful people at my high school, who went on to attend highly prestigious universities, some to study science and engineering, were also athletic, social, attractive people.
Many of the socially awkward nerds were not smart and did not value learning.
In college, a significant percentage of my incredibly smart engineering colleagues had been high school football stars, loved to party, and were quite successful in relationships.
Now that I'm in law school, it's clear that my fellow students value intelligence (including technical knowledge) right along with social prowess and appearance.
The entire spectrum of personal attributes is not only respected, but expected in these circles.
I believe this has been the norm among high-performing, successful people for quite some time now - it's not even clear that the jock-nerd dichotomy every really existed the way it is portrayed.
As far as I can tell, the real divide has everything to do with social skills and nothing to do with intelligence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922307</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>skiman1979</author>
	<datestamp>1256908020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it wasn't for us nerds and geeks designing military weapon systems with their fancy software to calculate ballistic solutions, enemy tracking devices, etc., the jocks out in the fields carrying their guns and driving those tanks would have a much harder time winning those wars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it was n't for us nerds and geeks designing military weapon systems with their fancy software to calculate ballistic solutions , enemy tracking devices , etc. , the jocks out in the fields carrying their guns and driving those tanks would have a much harder time winning those wars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it wasn't for us nerds and geeks designing military weapon systems with their fancy software to calculate ballistic solutions, enemy tracking devices, etc., the jocks out in the fields carrying their guns and driving those tanks would have a much harder time winning those wars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912009</id>
	<title>Can't we be both?</title>
	<author>Caue</author>
	<datestamp>1256837400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Am I the only one that know "jocks" that exceled in science, math or eny other geek domain as well? I love sports; as a brazilian, soccer mostly. But I played rugby when I lived in australia, and I surf every other weekend. I was never a bully, by the way. I guess in america all jocks are dumb and bullies. Geek, jock, we are all just plain old "people" in Brazil. My closest friends are all sports-lovers and/or geeks. No segregation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one that know " jocks " that exceled in science , math or eny other geek domain as well ?
I love sports ; as a brazilian , soccer mostly .
But I played rugby when I lived in australia , and I surf every other weekend .
I was never a bully , by the way .
I guess in america all jocks are dumb and bullies .
Geek , jock , we are all just plain old " people " in Brazil .
My closest friends are all sports-lovers and/or geeks .
No segregation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one that know "jocks" that exceled in science, math or eny other geek domain as well?
I love sports; as a brazilian, soccer mostly.
But I played rugby when I lived in australia, and I surf every other weekend.
I was never a bully, by the way.
I guess in america all jocks are dumb and bullies.
Geek, jock, we are all just plain old "people" in Brazil.
My closest friends are all sports-lovers and/or geeks.
No segregation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912855</id>
	<title>Re:Jocks win wars?</title>
	<author>StikyPad</author>
	<datestamp>1256840280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete.</i></p><p>Uh, yeah..  the Army is always like "Stop doing all those pushups and break out the algebra already... gosh!!!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower , the jocks were obsolete.Uh , yeah.. the Army is always like " Stop doing all those pushups and break out the algebra already.. .
gosh ! ! ! "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once we got guns that could out-range the strongest spear-thrower, the jocks were obsolete.Uh, yeah..  the Army is always like "Stop doing all those pushups and break out the algebra already...
gosh!!!"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911631</id>
	<title>He's a Writer!?!</title>
	<author>aliases</author>
	<datestamp>1256836020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That explains why he does Apple commercials.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That explains why he does Apple commercials .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That explains why he does Apple commercials.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711</id>
	<title>It won't happen</title>
	<author>MikeRT</author>
	<datestamp>1256836200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Our culture does not respect those whose labor directly produces wealth. In fact, it doesn't even have a clue about how to become wealthy and stay wealthy now. The very fact that companies look at their domestic wealth-producing workers and think "these guys are optional" rather than going to H.R., middle management, etc. for budget cuts is proof of that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our culture does not respect those whose labor directly produces wealth .
In fact , it does n't even have a clue about how to become wealthy and stay wealthy now .
The very fact that companies look at their domestic wealth-producing workers and think " these guys are optional " rather than going to H.R. , middle management , etc .
for budget cuts is proof of that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our culture does not respect those whose labor directly produces wealth.
In fact, it doesn't even have a clue about how to become wealthy and stay wealthy now.
The very fact that companies look at their domestic wealth-producing workers and think "these guys are optional" rather than going to H.R., middle management, etc.
for budget cuts is proof of that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911971
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916963
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934323
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912285
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911939
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913097
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913513
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911939
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915463
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912829
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921239
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29919291
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913253
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915093
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934285
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29918291
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29918133
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915287
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922433
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914823
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912481
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917477
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29929739
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29919537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914569
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922265
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911939
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913175
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912639
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911955
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916093
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911939
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916409
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913185
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934251
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912233
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914399
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29923811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29926483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29918437
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917739
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922023
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913185
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917837
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911965
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922461
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29929827
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912611
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911939
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913185
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921491
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912829
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922291
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911675
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915601
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914337
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915337
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911919
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29932747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917733
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914355
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912597
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913263
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912273
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913185
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922067
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912399
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912829
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914033
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922307
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911447
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911791
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917433
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29927463
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911797
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912839
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914635
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911779
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916241
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29920235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_29_1413249_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915683
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912057
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911447
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911573
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913263
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912597
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911791
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912411
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913631
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914355
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29926483
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922909
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914867
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915993
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29918437
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914337
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915337
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912839
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29919291
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915683
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911919
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911917
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917477
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914823
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917749
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911677
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917739
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913253
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913185
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922067
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921491
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934251
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917837
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916963
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934323
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915093
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29934285
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911653
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912591
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912367
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915777
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911607
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911675
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922307
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914033
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29929827
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916231
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915909
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911873
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912749
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912285
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29929739
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917659
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912855
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912353
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912783
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912639
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29923811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922023
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912803
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922829
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916341
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911471
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911939
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912259
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914005
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913097
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912887
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913191
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917619
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917603
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912829
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922291
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921685
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921239
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29919537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922265
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912481
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911965
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915601
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911711
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916313
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913091
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915463
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912509
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29932747
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914399
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914451
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916409
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914811
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29918291
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916241
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911707
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911683
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911821
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912463
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914501
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29927463
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914569
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911403
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915287
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922433
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911761
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915399
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29915343
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911651
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29922461
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29917413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916093
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911955
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912035
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29921225
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914635
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912399
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913513
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29916483
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29914243
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29920235
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912991
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912435
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29913037
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29918133
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912021
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29911971
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_29_1413249.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_29_1413249.29912937
</commentlist>
</conversation>
