<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_19_1511255</id>
	<title>Secret UK Plan To Appoint "Pirate Finder General"</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1258647720000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:doctorow@craphound.com" rel="nofollow">mouthbeef</a> writes <i>"A source very close to the UK Labour government just called me to leak the fact that Secretary of State Lord Mandelson is trying to <a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/19/breaking-leaked-uk-g.html">sneak a revision into the Digital Economy Bill</a> that would give him and his successors the power to create future copyright law without debate. Mandelson goes on to explain that he wants this so he can create private copyright militias with investigatory and enforcement powers, and so he can create new copyright punishments as he sees fit (e.g., jail time, three strikes)."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>mouthbeef writes " A source very close to the UK Labour government just called me to leak the fact that Secretary of State Lord Mandelson is trying to sneak a revision into the Digital Economy Bill that would give him and his successors the power to create future copyright law without debate .
Mandelson goes on to explain that he wants this so he can create private copyright militias with investigatory and enforcement powers , and so he can create new copyright punishments as he sees fit ( e.g. , jail time , three strikes ) .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mouthbeef writes "A source very close to the UK Labour government just called me to leak the fact that Secretary of State Lord Mandelson is trying to sneak a revision into the Digital Economy Bill that would give him and his successors the power to create future copyright law without debate.
Mandelson goes on to explain that he wants this so he can create private copyright militias with investigatory and enforcement powers, and so he can create new copyright punishments as he sees fit (e.g., jail time, three strikes).
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158866</id>
	<title>Yeah, and you were expecting what?</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1258653960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Innappropriate appropriation of materials, i.e., copyright infringement or piracy is a pretty significant threat these days.  It is easy to take down a company simply by redistributing their products for free.  The number of people that will pay when the same product is available for free is shrinking.  Really now, why would someone pay when in the bin right next to the one they are looking at is the same thing for free?</p><p>The threat of loss of most, if not all, revenue is very real in the software world.  It has come home to the music business in China such that recorded music is simply not produced any longer.  It will come to the US and Western Europe.  Movies are probably not far behind - why pay $20 to visit a noisy theater when you can have equivalent sound and picture in your home for free?</p><p>With this firmly in mind, why wouldn't the copyright holders be pushing for all the legal enforcement they can get?  Since the government's position is pretty much that this is (a) a violation of the law and (b) loss of tax revenues so they are likely to be on the side of the copyright holder, not the citizen violators in every case.  So of course there are going to be draconian laws that have little or no effect because, like speeding laws, they catch 1\% of the people violating the law and can't ever do better than that.</p><p>You might consider this the last gasp of copyright enforcement, but it is likely to last a very long time.  In the US it is generally known that almost everyone speeds and have for 80 years or so.  Law enforcement has been "cracking down" and imposing draconian penalties on speeders since the beginning of the automobile era.  So don't expect copyright enforcement to just fade away anytime soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Innappropriate appropriation of materials , i.e. , copyright infringement or piracy is a pretty significant threat these days .
It is easy to take down a company simply by redistributing their products for free .
The number of people that will pay when the same product is available for free is shrinking .
Really now , why would someone pay when in the bin right next to the one they are looking at is the same thing for free ? The threat of loss of most , if not all , revenue is very real in the software world .
It has come home to the music business in China such that recorded music is simply not produced any longer .
It will come to the US and Western Europe .
Movies are probably not far behind - why pay $ 20 to visit a noisy theater when you can have equivalent sound and picture in your home for free ? With this firmly in mind , why would n't the copyright holders be pushing for all the legal enforcement they can get ?
Since the government 's position is pretty much that this is ( a ) a violation of the law and ( b ) loss of tax revenues so they are likely to be on the side of the copyright holder , not the citizen violators in every case .
So of course there are going to be draconian laws that have little or no effect because , like speeding laws , they catch 1 \ % of the people violating the law and ca n't ever do better than that.You might consider this the last gasp of copyright enforcement , but it is likely to last a very long time .
In the US it is generally known that almost everyone speeds and have for 80 years or so .
Law enforcement has been " cracking down " and imposing draconian penalties on speeders since the beginning of the automobile era .
So do n't expect copyright enforcement to just fade away anytime soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Innappropriate appropriation of materials, i.e., copyright infringement or piracy is a pretty significant threat these days.
It is easy to take down a company simply by redistributing their products for free.
The number of people that will pay when the same product is available for free is shrinking.
Really now, why would someone pay when in the bin right next to the one they are looking at is the same thing for free?The threat of loss of most, if not all, revenue is very real in the software world.
It has come home to the music business in China such that recorded music is simply not produced any longer.
It will come to the US and Western Europe.
Movies are probably not far behind - why pay $20 to visit a noisy theater when you can have equivalent sound and picture in your home for free?With this firmly in mind, why wouldn't the copyright holders be pushing for all the legal enforcement they can get?
Since the government's position is pretty much that this is (a) a violation of the law and (b) loss of tax revenues so they are likely to be on the side of the copyright holder, not the citizen violators in every case.
So of course there are going to be draconian laws that have little or no effect because, like speeding laws, they catch 1\% of the people violating the law and can't ever do better than that.You might consider this the last gasp of copyright enforcement, but it is likely to last a very long time.
In the US it is generally known that almost everyone speeds and have for 80 years or so.
Law enforcement has been "cracking down" and imposing draconian penalties on speeders since the beginning of the automobile era.
So don't expect copyright enforcement to just fade away anytime soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159032</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous Brave Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1258654500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[Mandelson is] an out-of-control power-crazed sociopath and should never have been allowed back into government.</p></div><p>We didn't allow him back in. In fact, he resigned twice already under dubious circumstances. Then he got <em>appointed</em> to Europe, and now he's been <em>appointed</em> to a very senior position in Parliament after being <em>appointed</em> to the House of Lords. Note that the term "appointed" here implies that the people never got a vote, he was put into those positions by the Prime Minister and his chums. Oh, and the Prime Minister was <em>appointed</em> as Tony Blair's successor, in direction contradiction of a Labour Party manifesto promise to voters at the last general election, which they won with such a huge majority because of funny electoral math and not popular support (having actually lost the popular vote in England to the Conservatives, in fact).</p><p>Basically, these guys don't even have a shadow of a mandate for what they're doing in the first place, but since they're already a lame duck administration they seem to feel they have little to lose by wading in with the most illiberal, draconian legislation they can shove through in the final parliamentary session before the general election. Thus we get resistance to court rulings on cleaning up the DNA database, a roll-out of trials for an expensive ID card scheme that both the major opposition parties in England have long since pledged to scrap, and now this.</p><p>My personal favourite from this week's Queen's Speech was the bill to make it a legal requirement to half the budget deficit within four years, which would conveniently mean that having destroyed our economy themselves, they could then pass a poison pill to their successors when they inevitably lose the next general election. Presumably they will then claim in four years that whoever won the election has broken the law by being unable to do the impossible, and pretend that in some alternate reality Labour would somehow have been able to fix the problems they were unable to prevent in the first place.</p><p>The various extreme anti-copyright-infringement policies flying around at the moment sound like much the same thing: having mostly ignored or actively gone against the recommendations of their own Gowers Review when it comes to IP laws, they are now setting up back channel ways to suck up to big business while they still can, knowing that if they tried to push these things through Parliament properly they would face stiff opposition (not to mention probably losing even more votes, since post-Gowers they pretty much know that people overwhelmingly oppose things like copyright term extension).</p><p>As a final note, the <a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/disconnection" title="openrightsgroup.org">Open Rights Group</a> [openrightsgroup.org] are pretty dumb if they think invoking the recent XBox cut-offs supports the case against this. I haven't seen a single report that suggests there were people cut off by Microsoft inappropriately (i.e., not after breaking the rules), the cut-off only affected their use of the XBox and not unrelated Internet services, and even the BBC carried an article based on one such person, who admitted freely that he was ripping off games illegally because it saved him money, which is exactly what the cut-off was intended to obstruct.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ Mandelson is ] an out-of-control power-crazed sociopath and should never have been allowed back into government.We did n't allow him back in .
In fact , he resigned twice already under dubious circumstances .
Then he got appointed to Europe , and now he 's been appointed to a very senior position in Parliament after being appointed to the House of Lords .
Note that the term " appointed " here implies that the people never got a vote , he was put into those positions by the Prime Minister and his chums .
Oh , and the Prime Minister was appointed as Tony Blair 's successor , in direction contradiction of a Labour Party manifesto promise to voters at the last general election , which they won with such a huge majority because of funny electoral math and not popular support ( having actually lost the popular vote in England to the Conservatives , in fact ) .Basically , these guys do n't even have a shadow of a mandate for what they 're doing in the first place , but since they 're already a lame duck administration they seem to feel they have little to lose by wading in with the most illiberal , draconian legislation they can shove through in the final parliamentary session before the general election .
Thus we get resistance to court rulings on cleaning up the DNA database , a roll-out of trials for an expensive ID card scheme that both the major opposition parties in England have long since pledged to scrap , and now this.My personal favourite from this week 's Queen 's Speech was the bill to make it a legal requirement to half the budget deficit within four years , which would conveniently mean that having destroyed our economy themselves , they could then pass a poison pill to their successors when they inevitably lose the next general election .
Presumably they will then claim in four years that whoever won the election has broken the law by being unable to do the impossible , and pretend that in some alternate reality Labour would somehow have been able to fix the problems they were unable to prevent in the first place.The various extreme anti-copyright-infringement policies flying around at the moment sound like much the same thing : having mostly ignored or actively gone against the recommendations of their own Gowers Review when it comes to IP laws , they are now setting up back channel ways to suck up to big business while they still can , knowing that if they tried to push these things through Parliament properly they would face stiff opposition ( not to mention probably losing even more votes , since post-Gowers they pretty much know that people overwhelmingly oppose things like copyright term extension ) .As a final note , the Open Rights Group [ openrightsgroup.org ] are pretty dumb if they think invoking the recent XBox cut-offs supports the case against this .
I have n't seen a single report that suggests there were people cut off by Microsoft inappropriately ( i.e. , not after breaking the rules ) , the cut-off only affected their use of the XBox and not unrelated Internet services , and even the BBC carried an article based on one such person , who admitted freely that he was ripping off games illegally because it saved him money , which is exactly what the cut-off was intended to obstruct .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[Mandelson is] an out-of-control power-crazed sociopath and should never have been allowed back into government.We didn't allow him back in.
In fact, he resigned twice already under dubious circumstances.
Then he got appointed to Europe, and now he's been appointed to a very senior position in Parliament after being appointed to the House of Lords.
Note that the term "appointed" here implies that the people never got a vote, he was put into those positions by the Prime Minister and his chums.
Oh, and the Prime Minister was appointed as Tony Blair's successor, in direction contradiction of a Labour Party manifesto promise to voters at the last general election, which they won with such a huge majority because of funny electoral math and not popular support (having actually lost the popular vote in England to the Conservatives, in fact).Basically, these guys don't even have a shadow of a mandate for what they're doing in the first place, but since they're already a lame duck administration they seem to feel they have little to lose by wading in with the most illiberal, draconian legislation they can shove through in the final parliamentary session before the general election.
Thus we get resistance to court rulings on cleaning up the DNA database, a roll-out of trials for an expensive ID card scheme that both the major opposition parties in England have long since pledged to scrap, and now this.My personal favourite from this week's Queen's Speech was the bill to make it a legal requirement to half the budget deficit within four years, which would conveniently mean that having destroyed our economy themselves, they could then pass a poison pill to their successors when they inevitably lose the next general election.
Presumably they will then claim in four years that whoever won the election has broken the law by being unable to do the impossible, and pretend that in some alternate reality Labour would somehow have been able to fix the problems they were unable to prevent in the first place.The various extreme anti-copyright-infringement policies flying around at the moment sound like much the same thing: having mostly ignored or actively gone against the recommendations of their own Gowers Review when it comes to IP laws, they are now setting up back channel ways to suck up to big business while they still can, knowing that if they tried to push these things through Parliament properly they would face stiff opposition (not to mention probably losing even more votes, since post-Gowers they pretty much know that people overwhelmingly oppose things like copyright term extension).As a final note, the Open Rights Group [openrightsgroup.org] are pretty dumb if they think invoking the recent XBox cut-offs supports the case against this.
I haven't seen a single report that suggests there were people cut off by Microsoft inappropriately (i.e., not after breaking the rules), the cut-off only affected their use of the XBox and not unrelated Internet services, and even the BBC carried an article based on one such person, who admitted freely that he was ripping off games illegally because it saved him money, which is exactly what the cut-off was intended to obstruct.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159226</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1258655100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away, or you might have other options available to you. (At the very least, the UK government might fear the people instead of the other way around)</p></div><p>They always have <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V\_for\_Vendetta" title="wikipedia.org">throwing knives and bombs.</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away , or you might have other options available to you .
( At the very least , the UK government might fear the people instead of the other way around ) They always have throwing knives and bombs .
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away, or you might have other options available to you.
(At the very least, the UK government might fear the people instead of the other way around)They always have throwing knives and bombs.
[wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30168078</id>
	<title>Fascism = unlelected copratist seeking scapegoats</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258651980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Copyright monopoloies were given to the press owners in return for censorship of what was printed by Queen Anne.</p><p>It was an attempt by the state to stamp on the Guternberg press before pamfleteering got the people riled up.</p><p>Now Mandelson is the King and he bargains to control bloggers so the truth can be presented to us by Murdoch the Kingmaker.</p><p>Imagine what the world would be without this network or any implementation of Fidonet.</p><p>Knowledge was hard to get, took a while to travel, urban myths went unchallenged for decades.</p><p>That is what Mandy wants, the chattel to do what they are bloody told - Manufacture Consent.</p><p>He is the enemy of any future for humanity for without the universality of knowledge we will not get into space.</p><p>The truth is governments achieve very little of consequence, they take credit for things people do and embezzle money.</p><p>And they should be replaced with open source lawmaking.</p><p>The civil service runs the country.</p><p>Pirate Party FTW</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Copyright monopoloies were given to the press owners in return for censorship of what was printed by Queen Anne.It was an attempt by the state to stamp on the Guternberg press before pamfleteering got the people riled up.Now Mandelson is the King and he bargains to control bloggers so the truth can be presented to us by Murdoch the Kingmaker.Imagine what the world would be without this network or any implementation of Fidonet.Knowledge was hard to get , took a while to travel , urban myths went unchallenged for decades.That is what Mandy wants , the chattel to do what they are bloody told - Manufacture Consent.He is the enemy of any future for humanity for without the universality of knowledge we will not get into space.The truth is governments achieve very little of consequence , they take credit for things people do and embezzle money.And they should be replaced with open source lawmaking.The civil service runs the country.Pirate Party FTW</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Copyright monopoloies were given to the press owners in return for censorship of what was printed by Queen Anne.It was an attempt by the state to stamp on the Guternberg press before pamfleteering got the people riled up.Now Mandelson is the King and he bargains to control bloggers so the truth can be presented to us by Murdoch the Kingmaker.Imagine what the world would be without this network or any implementation of Fidonet.Knowledge was hard to get, took a while to travel, urban myths went unchallenged for decades.That is what Mandy wants, the chattel to do what they are bloody told - Manufacture Consent.He is the enemy of any future for humanity for without the universality of knowledge we will not get into space.The truth is governments achieve very little of consequence, they take credit for things people do and embezzle money.And they should be replaced with open source lawmaking.The civil service runs the country.Pirate Party FTW</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160920</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, and you were expecting what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258660320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The internet is a negligible threat on the grand scale of things. What destroyed new production in China is that there's no enforcement against owning a CD/DVD pressing factory and churning out endless copies of music/video/software and selling them for 1/20th the price.</p><p>Everywhere *else*, both the factories and the sellers would be in major trouble under existing laws and enforcement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet is a negligible threat on the grand scale of things .
What destroyed new production in China is that there 's no enforcement against owning a CD/DVD pressing factory and churning out endless copies of music/video/software and selling them for 1/20th the price.Everywhere * else * , both the factories and the sellers would be in major trouble under existing laws and enforcement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet is a negligible threat on the grand scale of things.
What destroyed new production in China is that there's no enforcement against owning a CD/DVD pressing factory and churning out endless copies of music/video/software and selling them for 1/20th the price.Everywhere *else*, both the factories and the sellers would be in major trouble under existing laws and enforcement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158272</id>
	<title>So confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258652160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought piracy was the key to stopping global warming. Why are they trying to speed up global warming?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought piracy was the key to stopping global warming .
Why are they trying to speed up global warming ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought piracy was the key to stopping global warming.
Why are they trying to speed up global warming?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158536</id>
	<title>Re:you know</title>
	<author>Attila Dimedici</author>
	<datestamp>1258653000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are wrong about the purpose/origin of copyright law. Copyright law was written to protect against someone else profiting from "stealing" your creative work. It was not designed to keep me from copying your stuff for my own use. Until the advent of computers it to some degree it had that effect. The cost of producing copies was high enough that, for most people, it was more cost efficient (counting both time and money) to buy a copy from the copyright holder (although with the advent of home recording devices that began to change).<br>
As the cost of copying dropped with modern technology, many companies that based their business on distributing copyrighted material wanted to use the reduced cost of producing copies to increase their profit, intending to use copyright law to prevent people from using the now affordable methods to produce copies for their own personal use from obtaining copies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are wrong about the purpose/origin of copyright law .
Copyright law was written to protect against someone else profiting from " stealing " your creative work .
It was not designed to keep me from copying your stuff for my own use .
Until the advent of computers it to some degree it had that effect .
The cost of producing copies was high enough that , for most people , it was more cost efficient ( counting both time and money ) to buy a copy from the copyright holder ( although with the advent of home recording devices that began to change ) .
As the cost of copying dropped with modern technology , many companies that based their business on distributing copyrighted material wanted to use the reduced cost of producing copies to increase their profit , intending to use copyright law to prevent people from using the now affordable methods to produce copies for their own personal use from obtaining copies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are wrong about the purpose/origin of copyright law.
Copyright law was written to protect against someone else profiting from "stealing" your creative work.
It was not designed to keep me from copying your stuff for my own use.
Until the advent of computers it to some degree it had that effect.
The cost of producing copies was high enough that, for most people, it was more cost efficient (counting both time and money) to buy a copy from the copyright holder (although with the advent of home recording devices that began to change).
As the cost of copying dropped with modern technology, many companies that based their business on distributing copyrighted material wanted to use the reduced cost of producing copies to increase their profit, intending to use copyright law to prevent people from using the now affordable methods to produce copies for their own personal use from obtaining copies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163580</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it...</title>
	<author>Petrushka</author>
	<datestamp>1258625760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How do you SNEAK something into a law?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... If the system is set up in such a way that people can put in new constraints without anyone noticing it, I'd say thats pretty broken.</p></div><p>One quote for you:</p><p>"It's now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury. Councillors' expenses?"<br>
-- Jo Moore, Labour Party spin doctor, September 11, 2001</p><p>The key is distraction. (Note that Moore's advice was followed to the letter.) As far as I'm aware US politicians have several further methods in addition to distraction: such as pork, or the way that the PATRIOT Act was handled (voting on laws before anyone has time to read them).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you SNEAK something into a law ?
... If the system is set up in such a way that people can put in new constraints without anyone noticing it , I 'd say thats pretty broken.One quote for you : " It 's now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury .
Councillors ' expenses ?
" -- Jo Moore , Labour Party spin doctor , September 11 , 2001The key is distraction .
( Note that Moore 's advice was followed to the letter .
) As far as I 'm aware US politicians have several further methods in addition to distraction : such as pork , or the way that the PATRIOT Act was handled ( voting on laws before anyone has time to read them ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you SNEAK something into a law?
... If the system is set up in such a way that people can put in new constraints without anyone noticing it, I'd say thats pretty broken.One quote for you:"It's now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury.
Councillors' expenses?
"
-- Jo Moore, Labour Party spin doctor, September 11, 2001The key is distraction.
(Note that Moore's advice was followed to the letter.
) As far as I'm aware US politicians have several further methods in addition to distraction: such as pork, or the way that the PATRIOT Act was handled (voting on laws before anyone has time to read them).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158638</id>
	<title>Re:Mandelson - Palin Cage Fight</title>
	<author>peterprior</author>
	<datestamp>1258653300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He came in through the back door<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He came in through the back door ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He came in through the back door ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158210</id>
	<title>sneaking ....</title>
	<author>NoYob</author>
	<datestamp>1258651980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>When a politician sneaks anything into law, I have to wonder what nefarious reasons he could have for doing it.<p>Why does it have to be sneaked in?<br>Is there something that is undemocratic about it?<br>What is being hidden from debate?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>This is as bad as I've ever seen, folks. It's a declaration of war by the entertainment industry and their captured regulators against the principles of free speech, privacy, freedom of assembly, the presumption of innocence, and competition.</p></div><p>I see. The entertainment industry is calling the shots. </p><p>For Queen, Country and the Entertainment Industry.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When a politician sneaks anything into law , I have to wonder what nefarious reasons he could have for doing it.Why does it have to be sneaked in ? Is there something that is undemocratic about it ? What is being hidden from debate ? This is as bad as I 've ever seen , folks .
It 's a declaration of war by the entertainment industry and their captured regulators against the principles of free speech , privacy , freedom of assembly , the presumption of innocence , and competition.I see .
The entertainment industry is calling the shots .
For Queen , Country and the Entertainment Industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When a politician sneaks anything into law, I have to wonder what nefarious reasons he could have for doing it.Why does it have to be sneaked in?Is there something that is undemocratic about it?What is being hidden from debate?This is as bad as I've ever seen, folks.
It's a declaration of war by the entertainment industry and their captured regulators against the principles of free speech, privacy, freedom of assembly, the presumption of innocence, and competition.I see.
The entertainment industry is calling the shots.
For Queen, Country and the Entertainment Industry.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158782</id>
	<title>Re:Undemocratic</title>
	<author>mbone</author>
	<datestamp>1258653720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except for sometimes in military affairs, it is an iron law that secrecy in Government is intended to cover up malfeasance. Like the <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/stopping-acta-juggernaut" title="eff.org">ACTA</a> [eff.org], if it's secret it's bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except for sometimes in military affairs , it is an iron law that secrecy in Government is intended to cover up malfeasance .
Like the ACTA [ eff.org ] , if it 's secret it 's bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except for sometimes in military affairs, it is an iron law that secrecy in Government is intended to cover up malfeasance.
Like the ACTA [eff.org], if it's secret it's bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158804</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>Jeff Carr</author>
	<datestamp>1258653780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Certainly.  I plan to launch a series of 25 geosynchronous satellites providing broadband internet access to the entire world.  It will be independent from any government's control or oversight.  I'm going to call it the Archangel Network.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...What?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Certainly .
I plan to launch a series of 25 geosynchronous satellites providing broadband internet access to the entire world .
It will be independent from any government 's control or oversight .
I 'm going to call it the Archangel Network .
...What ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Certainly.
I plan to launch a series of 25 geosynchronous satellites providing broadband internet access to the entire world.
It will be independent from any government's control or oversight.
I'm going to call it the Archangel Network.
...What?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159520</id>
	<title>Guy Fawkes</title>
	<author>Houndofhell</author>
	<datestamp>1258656120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the thing the politicans don't understand.</p><p>We celebrate Bonfire night not because he failed to blow up parliament but because he had the idea.</p><p>We're all just waiting for the next guy to come along and pull it off</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the thing the politicans do n't understand.We celebrate Bonfire night not because he failed to blow up parliament but because he had the idea.We 're all just waiting for the next guy to come along and pull it off</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the thing the politicans don't understand.We celebrate Bonfire night not because he failed to blow up parliament but because he had the idea.We're all just waiting for the next guy to come along and pull it off</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158158</id>
	<title>He's got about 70 days to do it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258651860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>UK elections due May. Gives ~70 days of parliamentary time left before this 'government' and all its legislative programme is gone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>UK elections due May .
Gives ~ 70 days of parliamentary time left before this 'government ' and all its legislative programme is gone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UK elections due May.
Gives ~70 days of parliamentary time left before this 'government' and all its legislative programme is gone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161972</id>
	<title>Why this was leaked, and why it sounds so bad</title>
	<author>internewt</author>
	<datestamp>1258663740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The way this government brings in unpleasant legislation follows certain patterns, and I would bet that this plan by Vold^WMandelson is going to fit the model.</p><p>What they do is come up with what the goals they want to achieve in private. They know what they come up with, no matter how "good" or "bad", it will come under attack from groups with vested interests and political opposition, and what they want will inevitably get scaled back.</p><p>So they come up with their plan, and come up with a version 3 times worse than they want. They leak the extra bad idea to the press (or to a blog this time), and the press and internet go nuts in reaction to the plan. But the politicians can hide behind the fact it was leaked and deny that is their plan at all.</p><p>The vitriol generated tells them which parts of the plan will not fly, and which they can deal with with some spin. They announce their revised plan (now at 2x what they want), roll things back a bit (to 1 times) as a token lip service to democracy, and then go on to implement what they wanted in the first place.</p><p>We've seen it before, and we'll see it again: this system works for getting unpopular legislation on the books.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The way this government brings in unpleasant legislation follows certain patterns , and I would bet that this plan by Vold ^ WMandelson is going to fit the model.What they do is come up with what the goals they want to achieve in private .
They know what they come up with , no matter how " good " or " bad " , it will come under attack from groups with vested interests and political opposition , and what they want will inevitably get scaled back.So they come up with their plan , and come up with a version 3 times worse than they want .
They leak the extra bad idea to the press ( or to a blog this time ) , and the press and internet go nuts in reaction to the plan .
But the politicians can hide behind the fact it was leaked and deny that is their plan at all.The vitriol generated tells them which parts of the plan will not fly , and which they can deal with with some spin .
They announce their revised plan ( now at 2x what they want ) , roll things back a bit ( to 1 times ) as a token lip service to democracy , and then go on to implement what they wanted in the first place.We 've seen it before , and we 'll see it again : this system works for getting unpopular legislation on the books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way this government brings in unpleasant legislation follows certain patterns, and I would bet that this plan by Vold^WMandelson is going to fit the model.What they do is come up with what the goals they want to achieve in private.
They know what they come up with, no matter how "good" or "bad", it will come under attack from groups with vested interests and political opposition, and what they want will inevitably get scaled back.So they come up with their plan, and come up with a version 3 times worse than they want.
They leak the extra bad idea to the press (or to a blog this time), and the press and internet go nuts in reaction to the plan.
But the politicians can hide behind the fact it was leaked and deny that is their plan at all.The vitriol generated tells them which parts of the plan will not fly, and which they can deal with with some spin.
They announce their revised plan (now at 2x what they want), roll things back a bit (to 1 times) as a token lip service to democracy, and then go on to implement what they wanted in the first place.We've seen it before, and we'll see it again: this system works for getting unpopular legislation on the books.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30162386</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1258622040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know what's funny was that was the exact same sentiment held by the Brits before the Revolutionary War.
<br> <br>
"The colonists? What threat could they pose? We have the entire British Army and Navy with mounted cavalry and well armed and supplied troops. The colonists have a few hunting rifles and tomahawks..."
<br> <br>
Not saying we are going to start another war or anything, but never underestimate American inventiveness. Our society may be inflated with a lot of cruft, laziness, and uselessness now, but put our backs against the wall and quite a few of us yanks still know how to bring the raucous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know what 's funny was that was the exact same sentiment held by the Brits before the Revolutionary War .
" The colonists ?
What threat could they pose ?
We have the entire British Army and Navy with mounted cavalry and well armed and supplied troops .
The colonists have a few hunting rifles and tomahawks... " Not saying we are going to start another war or anything , but never underestimate American inventiveness .
Our society may be inflated with a lot of cruft , laziness , and uselessness now , but put our backs against the wall and quite a few of us yanks still know how to bring the raucous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know what's funny was that was the exact same sentiment held by the Brits before the Revolutionary War.
"The colonists?
What threat could they pose?
We have the entire British Army and Navy with mounted cavalry and well armed and supplied troops.
The colonists have a few hunting rifles and tomahawks..."
 
Not saying we are going to start another war or anything, but never underestimate American inventiveness.
Our society may be inflated with a lot of cruft, laziness, and uselessness now, but put our backs against the wall and quite a few of us yanks still know how to bring the raucous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158144</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>gedrin</author>
	<datestamp>1258651800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The internet is not the problem.  The people of Great Britian need new governance that doesn't think Hobbes had the right idea.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet is not the problem .
The people of Great Britian need new governance that does n't think Hobbes had the right idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet is not the problem.
The people of Great Britian need new governance that doesn't think Hobbes had the right idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159530</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah yeah - every damn time something on the UK comes up, some nutter attributes it to our lack of firearms.</p><p>Tell you what - try actually doing something against your own Governments anti-liberty antics with your oh-so-precious guns before coming back and suggesting we lament the loss of ours*.</p><p>*Not that we ever actually had them - please remember the UK and its Government pre-dates guns.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah yeah - every damn time something on the UK comes up , some nutter attributes it to our lack of firearms.Tell you what - try actually doing something against your own Governments anti-liberty antics with your oh-so-precious guns before coming back and suggesting we lament the loss of ours * .
* Not that we ever actually had them - please remember the UK and its Government pre-dates guns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah yeah - every damn time something on the UK comes up, some nutter attributes it to our lack of firearms.Tell you what - try actually doing something against your own Governments anti-liberty antics with your oh-so-precious guns before coming back and suggesting we lament the loss of ours*.
*Not that we ever actually had them - please remember the UK and its Government pre-dates guns.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159634</id>
	<title>Yar!</title>
	<author>StikyPad</author>
	<datestamp>1258656480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Mandelson goes on to explain that he wants this so he can create private copyright militias</i></p><p>Ah, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privateer" title="wikipedia.org">Privateers!</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mandelson goes on to explain that he wants this so he can create private copyright militiasAh , Privateers !
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mandelson goes on to explain that he wants this so he can create private copyright militiasAh, Privateers!
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160420</id>
	<title>Hat</title>
	<author>jDeepbeep</author>
	<datestamp>1258658820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> I'd tip my hat to him, if I wore one</p></div><p>He does wear one occasionally, when he feels like concealing his horns.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd tip my hat to him , if I wore oneHe does wear one occasionally , when he feels like concealing his horns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I'd tip my hat to him, if I wore oneHe does wear one occasionally, when he feels like concealing his horns.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163084</id>
	<title>Re:you know</title>
	<author>Tim C</author>
	<datestamp>1258624380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's as may be, but there's nothing in copyright law that says that it's ok as long as you can do it cheaply. (In fact under UK copyright law you are not allowed to rip CDs to other formats for use on an iPod, etc - there is no personal use exception.)</p><p>Intent is worthless if the language doesn't back it up by codifying it in the law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's as may be , but there 's nothing in copyright law that says that it 's ok as long as you can do it cheaply .
( In fact under UK copyright law you are not allowed to rip CDs to other formats for use on an iPod , etc - there is no personal use exception .
) Intent is worthless if the language does n't back it up by codifying it in the law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's as may be, but there's nothing in copyright law that says that it's ok as long as you can do it cheaply.
(In fact under UK copyright law you are not allowed to rip CDs to other formats for use on an iPod, etc - there is no personal use exception.
)Intent is worthless if the language doesn't back it up by codifying it in the law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159024</id>
	<title>Re:IP log at http://www.barbrastreisand.com/??</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1258654500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, they do wear poofy shirts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , they do wear poofy shirts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, they do wear poofy shirts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159186</id>
	<title>Fuck</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258654980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the Police!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the Police !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the Police!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163080</id>
	<title>Lord Mandelson is an idiot, a dangerous one</title>
	<author>omb</author>
	<datestamp>1258624380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who will hopefully be out of office before he can do much more damage</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who will hopefully be out of office before he can do much more damage</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who will hopefully be out of office before he can do much more damage</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159172</id>
	<title>Hey, I Know! We'll Send You Geithner...</title>
	<author>RobotRunAmok</author>
	<datestamp>1258654920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...kill two birds with one stone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...kill two birds with one stone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...kill two birds with one stone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158070</id>
	<title>There is a solution</title>
	<author>For a Free Internet</author>
	<datestamp>1258651620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Italians, as it is well known, are the cause of 98 percent of piracy that they mastermind from their terrorist caves deep in the mountains of Mexico. Smoke 'em out and say good-night to internet theft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Italians , as it is well known , are the cause of 98 percent of piracy that they mastermind from their terrorist caves deep in the mountains of Mexico .
Smoke 'em out and say good-night to internet theft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Italians, as it is well known, are the cause of 98 percent of piracy that they mastermind from their terrorist caves deep in the mountains of Mexico.
Smoke 'em out and say good-night to internet theft.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160314</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>HangingChad</author>
	<datestamp>1258658340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>We need a new Internet.</i>

</p><p>I told them letting in all those AOL users was going to trash the place.

</p><p>Whatever we come up with next, just make sure users have to pass a really difficult intelligence test before they get a login.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We need a new Internet .
I told them letting in all those AOL users was going to trash the place .
Whatever we come up with next , just make sure users have to pass a really difficult intelligence test before they get a login .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> We need a new Internet.
I told them letting in all those AOL users was going to trash the place.
Whatever we come up with next, just make sure users have to pass a really difficult intelligence test before they get a login.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159482</id>
	<title>England has a great history of piracy</title>
	<author>Megane</author>
	<datestamp>1258655940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis\_Drake" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">...er I mean "privateers".</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>...er I mean " privateers " .
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...er I mean "privateers".
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158116</id>
	<title>I don't think they really care....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258651740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They have over 5 million camera's with face recognition following their every move...

Seriously, they just don't care.

(And this is coming from a Dutchman where there are even more phonetaps and as of 2012 mandatory GPS in every car)</htmltext>
<tokenext>They have over 5 million camera 's with face recognition following their every move.. . Seriously , they just do n't care .
( And this is coming from a Dutchman where there are even more phonetaps and as of 2012 mandatory GPS in every car )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have over 5 million camera's with face recognition following their every move...

Seriously, they just don't care.
(And this is coming from a Dutchman where there are even more phonetaps and as of 2012 mandatory GPS in every car)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159506</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>Anonymous Brave Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1258656060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away, or you might have other options available to you.</p></div><p>Which explains why the US was led by George W. Bush for such a short period: you have guns available, so as your nation gave up even the pretense of due process and respect for your own Constitution in the name of wars on abstract nouns, watched your economy crumble and the ongoing rise of the mighty corporations, and introduced infringements of privacy and civil liberties at least as draconian as many of those going on elsewhere in the world, you... elected the guy a second time, let him serve a full second term, and then let him retire quietly to a life of riches with no apparent remorse for the mess he made during his time in office. Yeah, guns are definitely the answer to people like this. Right. Absolutely.</p><p>In the real world, violence rarely helps anything. At best, it provides a temporary respite or a catalyst for change that already had a solid basis. You have to be in a pretty extreme position, effectively civil war and changing your entire system of government forcibly, before violence really gains you anything, and even then it's only good for creating an opportunity to change and not much use if the change isn't a good one in its own right. If the only way you can make your point is through violence then the chances are that once you stop beating it into people you'll lose the debate again anyway. This is true of anything from police abusing their authority to waging war to physical abuse of public officials.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away , or you might have other options available to you.Which explains why the US was led by George W. Bush for such a short period : you have guns available , so as your nation gave up even the pretense of due process and respect for your own Constitution in the name of wars on abstract nouns , watched your economy crumble and the ongoing rise of the mighty corporations , and introduced infringements of privacy and civil liberties at least as draconian as many of those going on elsewhere in the world , you... elected the guy a second time , let him serve a full second term , and then let him retire quietly to a life of riches with no apparent remorse for the mess he made during his time in office .
Yeah , guns are definitely the answer to people like this .
Right. Absolutely.In the real world , violence rarely helps anything .
At best , it provides a temporary respite or a catalyst for change that already had a solid basis .
You have to be in a pretty extreme position , effectively civil war and changing your entire system of government forcibly , before violence really gains you anything , and even then it 's only good for creating an opportunity to change and not much use if the change is n't a good one in its own right .
If the only way you can make your point is through violence then the chances are that once you stop beating it into people you 'll lose the debate again anyway .
This is true of anything from police abusing their authority to waging war to physical abuse of public officials .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away, or you might have other options available to you.Which explains why the US was led by George W. Bush for such a short period: you have guns available, so as your nation gave up even the pretense of due process and respect for your own Constitution in the name of wars on abstract nouns, watched your economy crumble and the ongoing rise of the mighty corporations, and introduced infringements of privacy and civil liberties at least as draconian as many of those going on elsewhere in the world, you... elected the guy a second time, let him serve a full second term, and then let him retire quietly to a life of riches with no apparent remorse for the mess he made during his time in office.
Yeah, guns are definitely the answer to people like this.
Right. Absolutely.In the real world, violence rarely helps anything.
At best, it provides a temporary respite or a catalyst for change that already had a solid basis.
You have to be in a pretty extreme position, effectively civil war and changing your entire system of government forcibly, before violence really gains you anything, and even then it's only good for creating an opportunity to change and not much use if the change isn't a good one in its own right.
If the only way you can make your point is through violence then the chances are that once you stop beating it into people you'll lose the debate again anyway.
This is true of anything from police abusing their authority to waging war to physical abuse of public officials.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30170818</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1258731300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, it's good to know that if such plans were proposed in the US, you would descend into civil war to prevent it.</p><p>I mean, that's what happened when the DMCA was proposed wasn't it? Thank heavens for the right to bear arms, it's so great that the DMCA was dropped, and that Mickey Mouse is now finally in the public domain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , it 's good to know that if such plans were proposed in the US , you would descend into civil war to prevent it.I mean , that 's what happened when the DMCA was proposed was n't it ?
Thank heavens for the right to bear arms , it 's so great that the DMCA was dropped , and that Mickey Mouse is now finally in the public domain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, it's good to know that if such plans were proposed in the US, you would descend into civil war to prevent it.I mean, that's what happened when the DMCA was proposed wasn't it?
Thank heavens for the right to bear arms, it's so great that the DMCA was dropped, and that Mickey Mouse is now finally in the public domain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159338</id>
	<title>"Pirate finder general"</title>
	<author>tdobson</author>
	<datestamp>1258655460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't think finding Pirates was difficult.</p><p>Buy a boat, sail past somalia, and THEY'LL COME TO YOU!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't think finding Pirates was difficult.Buy a boat , sail past somalia , and THEY 'LL COME TO YOU !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't think finding Pirates was difficult.Buy a boat, sail past somalia, and THEY'LL COME TO YOU!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30188838</id>
	<title>Whats the balance back?</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1258804800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1450972&amp;cid=30167330" title="slashdot.org">I Want My Public Domain</a> [slashdot.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>I Want My Public Domain [ slashdot.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I Want My Public Domain [slashdot.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161056</id>
	<title>So, is his Letter of Marque and Reprisal</title>
	<author>Reziac</author>
	<datestamp>1258660740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... in PDF format??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... in PDF format ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... in PDF format?
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161384</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258661940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sheesh. He's a COMPETENT out-of-control power-crazed sociopath where as the rest of the cabinet are incompetent out-of-control power-crazed sociopaths.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sheesh .
He 's a COMPETENT out-of-control power-crazed sociopath where as the rest of the cabinet are incompetent out-of-control power-crazed sociopaths .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sheesh.
He's a COMPETENT out-of-control power-crazed sociopath where as the rest of the cabinet are incompetent out-of-control power-crazed sociopaths.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165366</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>AHuxley</author>
	<datestamp>1258631820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am sure the GCHQ would love to roll out a good network.   Like the phone system was.<br>
Lots of choke points in and out of the UK.  Perfect for 24/7 interception.  If you want to know what the old version of this looked like try: <br>
<a href="http://www.lamont.me.uk/capenhurst/original.html" title="lamont.me.uk">http://www.lamont.me.uk/capenhurst/original.html</a> [lamont.me.uk] <br>
Using land on a British Nuclear Fuels Ltd site, they built a tower to tap the microwave line-of-sight trunk phone lines running through Britain to the Republic of Ireland.<br>Now think of that for p2p.  They dont want to have p2p reported in the wild, they want to watch everything all the time and then pick out p2p.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am sure the GCHQ would love to roll out a good network .
Like the phone system was .
Lots of choke points in and out of the UK .
Perfect for 24/7 interception .
If you want to know what the old version of this looked like try : http : //www.lamont.me.uk/capenhurst/original.html [ lamont.me.uk ] Using land on a British Nuclear Fuels Ltd site , they built a tower to tap the microwave line-of-sight trunk phone lines running through Britain to the Republic of Ireland.Now think of that for p2p .
They dont want to have p2p reported in the wild , they want to watch everything all the time and then pick out p2p .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am sure the GCHQ would love to roll out a good network.
Like the phone system was.
Lots of choke points in and out of the UK.
Perfect for 24/7 interception.
If you want to know what the old version of this looked like try: 
http://www.lamont.me.uk/capenhurst/original.html [lamont.me.uk] 
Using land on a British Nuclear Fuels Ltd site, they built a tower to tap the microwave line-of-sight trunk phone lines running through Britain to the Republic of Ireland.Now think of that for p2p.
They dont want to have p2p reported in the wild, they want to watch everything all the time and then pick out p2p.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158052</id>
	<title>Great Idea</title>
	<author>behemoth64</author>
	<datestamp>1258651560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Another great idea signed by UK's gov</htmltext>
<tokenext>Another great idea signed by UK 's gov</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another great idea signed by UK's gov</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159478</id>
	<title>Finally</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1258655940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>   I think it's great that the UK is going to dedicate a whole branch of government to fight something as important as piracy off the coast of Somalia...</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Oh wait, what?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's great that the UK is going to dedicate a whole branch of government to fight something as important as piracy off the coast of Somalia.. .       Oh wait , what ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>   I think it's great that the UK is going to dedicate a whole branch of government to fight something as important as piracy off the coast of Somalia...
      Oh wait, what?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158658</id>
	<title>Opposites?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258653360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Mandelson - Palin Cage Fight</i></p><p><i>I guess you must have put that pairing together because Palin is the natural enemy of this kind of liberal fascism - Palin is a small government Libertarian, not some maniacal power-seeking despot.</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mandelson - Palin Cage FightI guess you must have put that pairing together because Palin is the natural enemy of this kind of liberal fascism - Palin is a small government Libertarian , not some maniacal power-seeking despot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mandelson - Palin Cage FightI guess you must have put that pairing together because Palin is the natural enemy of this kind of liberal fascism - Palin is a small government Libertarian, not some maniacal power-seeking despot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163004</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>The Master Control P</author>
	<datestamp>1258624140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because terrorism historically results in hard-right authoritarian douches being thrown out of power and kept out of power.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because terrorism historically results in hard-right authoritarian douches being thrown out of power and kept out of power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because terrorism historically results in hard-right authoritarian douches being thrown out of power and kept out of power.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163648</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, and you were expecting what?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1258625940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm trying to figure out if I'll get a "woosh". Can you cite anything about China's once booming recording industry that's now died? The facts are that pirates (and I'm not one) spend more on music than non-pirates. Here are some citations:<br><a href="http://www.switched.com/2009/11/03/music-pirates-also-buy-more-tunes-than-others-poll-finds/" title="switched.com">http://www.switched.com/2009/11/03/music-pirates-also-buy-more-tunes-than-others-poll-finds/</a> [switched.com]<br><a href="http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Pirate-Fileshare-Music-Download-Illegal,news-5001.html" title="tomsguide.com">http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Pirate-Fileshare-Music-Download-Illegal,news-5001.html</a> [tomsguide.com]<br><a href="http://www.mixx.com/stories/9014955/music\_pirates\_spend\_more\_on\_tunes\_than\_non\_pirates\_finds\_poll" title="mixx.com">http://www.mixx.com/stories/9014955/music\_pirates\_spend\_more\_on\_tunes\_than\_non\_pirates\_finds\_poll</a> [mixx.com]<br><a href="http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show\_msgs.php?topic\_id=27090916" title="gamespot.com">http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show\_msgs.php?topic\_id=27090916</a> [gamespot.com]<br><a href="http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/11/02/music-pirates-spend-more-on-music-than-their-legal-law-abiding/" title="downloadsquad.com">http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/11/02/music-pirates-spend-more-on-music-than-their-legal-law-abiding/</a> [downloadsquad.com]<br><a href="http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/04/study-pirates-buy-tons-more-music-than-average-folks.ars" title="arstechnica.com">http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/04/study-pirates-buy-tons-more-music-than-average-folks.ars</a> [arstechnica.com]</p><p><i>In the US it is generally known that almost everyone speeds and have for 80 years or so</i></p><p>In some places where it's obvious that the speed limit for the road conditions are way too low. Especially during the '70s when the national speed limit was 55 and had been reduced from 70 or higher in most places. here in town I notice that people drive well UNDER the limit most of the time; the speeding is mostly on straight interstates.</p><p><i>Law enforcement has been "cracking down" and imposing draconian penalties on speeders since the beginning of the automobile era.</i></p><p>A hundred dollar fine is a draconian penalty? When I'm travelling I notice that the speeders are all driving Hummers and Escalades and the like -- to these people, a hundred bucks is NOTHING.</p><p>Are you trolling, joking, or just ignorant?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm trying to figure out if I 'll get a " woosh " .
Can you cite anything about China 's once booming recording industry that 's now died ?
The facts are that pirates ( and I 'm not one ) spend more on music than non-pirates .
Here are some citations : http : //www.switched.com/2009/11/03/music-pirates-also-buy-more-tunes-than-others-poll-finds/ [ switched.com ] http : //www.tomsguide.com/us/Pirate-Fileshare-Music-Download-Illegal,news-5001.html [ tomsguide.com ] http : //www.mixx.com/stories/9014955/music \ _pirates \ _spend \ _more \ _on \ _tunes \ _than \ _non \ _pirates \ _finds \ _poll [ mixx.com ] http : //www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show \ _msgs.php ? topic \ _id = 27090916 [ gamespot.com ] http : //www.downloadsquad.com/2009/11/02/music-pirates-spend-more-on-music-than-their-legal-law-abiding/ [ downloadsquad.com ] http : //arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/04/study-pirates-buy-tons-more-music-than-average-folks.ars [ arstechnica.com ] In the US it is generally known that almost everyone speeds and have for 80 years or soIn some places where it 's obvious that the speed limit for the road conditions are way too low .
Especially during the '70s when the national speed limit was 55 and had been reduced from 70 or higher in most places .
here in town I notice that people drive well UNDER the limit most of the time ; the speeding is mostly on straight interstates.Law enforcement has been " cracking down " and imposing draconian penalties on speeders since the beginning of the automobile era.A hundred dollar fine is a draconian penalty ?
When I 'm travelling I notice that the speeders are all driving Hummers and Escalades and the like -- to these people , a hundred bucks is NOTHING.Are you trolling , joking , or just ignorant ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm trying to figure out if I'll get a "woosh".
Can you cite anything about China's once booming recording industry that's now died?
The facts are that pirates (and I'm not one) spend more on music than non-pirates.
Here are some citations:http://www.switched.com/2009/11/03/music-pirates-also-buy-more-tunes-than-others-poll-finds/ [switched.com]http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Pirate-Fileshare-Music-Download-Illegal,news-5001.html [tomsguide.com]http://www.mixx.com/stories/9014955/music\_pirates\_spend\_more\_on\_tunes\_than\_non\_pirates\_finds\_poll [mixx.com]http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show\_msgs.php?topic\_id=27090916 [gamespot.com]http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/11/02/music-pirates-spend-more-on-music-than-their-legal-law-abiding/ [downloadsquad.com]http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/04/study-pirates-buy-tons-more-music-than-average-folks.ars [arstechnica.com]In the US it is generally known that almost everyone speeds and have for 80 years or soIn some places where it's obvious that the speed limit for the road conditions are way too low.
Especially during the '70s when the national speed limit was 55 and had been reduced from 70 or higher in most places.
here in town I notice that people drive well UNDER the limit most of the time; the speeding is mostly on straight interstates.Law enforcement has been "cracking down" and imposing draconian penalties on speeders since the beginning of the automobile era.A hundred dollar fine is a draconian penalty?
When I'm travelling I notice that the speeders are all driving Hummers and Escalades and the like -- to these people, a hundred bucks is NOTHING.Are you trolling, joking, or just ignorant?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163700</id>
	<title>Witch Hunt</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258626120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This feels very much like McCarthyism and witch hunting. Soon I will be able to accuse anyone of not paying for media without proof and they will be burnt at the stake.</p><p>Do we learn nothing from history?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This feels very much like McCarthyism and witch hunting .
Soon I will be able to accuse anyone of not paying for media without proof and they will be burnt at the stake.Do we learn nothing from history ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This feels very much like McCarthyism and witch hunting.
Soon I will be able to accuse anyone of not paying for media without proof and they will be burnt at the stake.Do we learn nothing from history?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30169242</id>
	<title>Brits! Get a constitution</title>
	<author>JAlexoi</author>
	<datestamp>1258712880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I really pity the fools that think that constitutionless country can exist without any negative side-effects. Brits, get a constitution in ASAP. So that idiots like this guy, who is also a Business Secretary, don't think they can just push through anything past the parliament.<br>
Constitution basically defines a country, while your parliament is basically uncontrolled.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really pity the fools that think that constitutionless country can exist without any negative side-effects .
Brits , get a constitution in ASAP .
So that idiots like this guy , who is also a Business Secretary , do n't think they can just push through anything past the parliament .
Constitution basically defines a country , while your parliament is basically uncontrolled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really pity the fools that think that constitutionless country can exist without any negative side-effects.
Brits, get a constitution in ASAP.
So that idiots like this guy, who is also a Business Secretary, don't think they can just push through anything past the parliament.
Constitution basically defines a country, while your parliament is basically uncontrolled.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140</id>
	<title>WTF?</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1258651800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Okay, this comes from BoingBoing so it may be nonsense, but what does the government think they're doing appointing Sith Lord Mandleson?  He's an out-of-control power-crazed sociopath and should never have been allowed back into government.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , this comes from BoingBoing so it may be nonsense , but what does the government think they 're doing appointing Sith Lord Mandleson ?
He 's an out-of-control power-crazed sociopath and should never have been allowed back into government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, this comes from BoingBoing so it may be nonsense, but what does the government think they're doing appointing Sith Lord Mandleson?
He's an out-of-control power-crazed sociopath and should never have been allowed back into government.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160698</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258659600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Excuse me? Us yanks can buy assault rifles, and everything we need to make them automatic, as well as armor piercing rounds. So, those swat teams with their crappy kevlar armor are no use against an AK-47 shooting armor piercing rounds... and as far as helicopters go... we have<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.50 BMG rounds for a reason. At waco there wasn't much of a gunfight, and they were a bunch of woman and children with some men, and they were getting busted for having automatic weapons illegally, so you can assume handguns weren't much of a factor..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Excuse me ?
Us yanks can buy assault rifles , and everything we need to make them automatic , as well as armor piercing rounds .
So , those swat teams with their crappy kevlar armor are no use against an AK-47 shooting armor piercing rounds... and as far as helicopters go... we have .50 BMG rounds for a reason .
At waco there was n't much of a gunfight , and they were a bunch of woman and children with some men , and they were getting busted for having automatic weapons illegally , so you can assume handguns were n't much of a factor. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Excuse me?
Us yanks can buy assault rifles, and everything we need to make them automatic, as well as armor piercing rounds.
So, those swat teams with their crappy kevlar armor are no use against an AK-47 shooting armor piercing rounds... and as far as helicopters go... we have .50 BMG rounds for a reason.
At waco there wasn't much of a gunfight, and they were a bunch of woman and children with some men, and they were getting busted for having automatic weapons illegally, so you can assume handguns weren't much of a factor..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160270</id>
	<title>Re:Lame Duck Government</title>
	<author>asc99c</author>
	<datestamp>1258658220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not really a lame duck government in comparison to the last republican government after the midterms.  Most of the recent local elections have gone to the conservatives, but the vast majority of seats are still occupied by Labour - according to parliament.uk:<br>Labour: 350<br>Conservative: 193<br>Liberal Democrat: 63<br>Total Seats: 646</p><p>The government still has a substantial absolute majority - enough to push through just about any laws they want as long as they can pressure their own MPs into voting along party lines.</p><p>Somehow the current government has tweaked the voting areas to give themselves an ever bigger advantage and not many people seem to have noticed or care - and they already had a substantial advantage in this regard before the changes.</p><p>At the 2005 general election, Labour won just 36\% of the popular vote, which gave them 355 seats.  Conservatives won 33\% to get 198 seats.  So a fairly close  result gave Labour a massive parliamentary majority.  By comparison in 1992, when the Conservatives last won a general election, they took 42\% of the vote (much better than Labour in 2005) and won 336 seats (only just a majority and less than Labour gets from a 36\% vote!).  Labour's 34\% gave them 271 seats (nearly 50\% more for 1\% of popular vote).</p><p>Factors like this mean the Conservatives aren't yet 100\% sure they can win the next election, even though the popular vote looks certain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not really a lame duck government in comparison to the last republican government after the midterms .
Most of the recent local elections have gone to the conservatives , but the vast majority of seats are still occupied by Labour - according to parliament.uk : Labour : 350Conservative : 193Liberal Democrat : 63Total Seats : 646The government still has a substantial absolute majority - enough to push through just about any laws they want as long as they can pressure their own MPs into voting along party lines.Somehow the current government has tweaked the voting areas to give themselves an ever bigger advantage and not many people seem to have noticed or care - and they already had a substantial advantage in this regard before the changes.At the 2005 general election , Labour won just 36 \ % of the popular vote , which gave them 355 seats .
Conservatives won 33 \ % to get 198 seats .
So a fairly close result gave Labour a massive parliamentary majority .
By comparison in 1992 , when the Conservatives last won a general election , they took 42 \ % of the vote ( much better than Labour in 2005 ) and won 336 seats ( only just a majority and less than Labour gets from a 36 \ % vote ! ) .
Labour 's 34 \ % gave them 271 seats ( nearly 50 \ % more for 1 \ % of popular vote ) .Factors like this mean the Conservatives are n't yet 100 \ % sure they can win the next election , even though the popular vote looks certain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not really a lame duck government in comparison to the last republican government after the midterms.
Most of the recent local elections have gone to the conservatives, but the vast majority of seats are still occupied by Labour - according to parliament.uk:Labour: 350Conservative: 193Liberal Democrat: 63Total Seats: 646The government still has a substantial absolute majority - enough to push through just about any laws they want as long as they can pressure their own MPs into voting along party lines.Somehow the current government has tweaked the voting areas to give themselves an ever bigger advantage and not many people seem to have noticed or care - and they already had a substantial advantage in this regard before the changes.At the 2005 general election, Labour won just 36\% of the popular vote, which gave them 355 seats.
Conservatives won 33\% to get 198 seats.
So a fairly close  result gave Labour a massive parliamentary majority.
By comparison in 1992, when the Conservatives last won a general election, they took 42\% of the vote (much better than Labour in 2005) and won 336 seats (only just a majority and less than Labour gets from a 36\% vote!).
Labour's 34\% gave them 271 seats (nearly 50\% more for 1\% of popular vote).Factors like this mean the Conservatives aren't yet 100\% sure they can win the next election, even though the popular vote looks certain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164</id>
	<title>If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak"</title>
	<author>Rogerborg</author>
	<datestamp>1258651860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But this is exactly up Darth Mandelson's alley.  He truly and passionately believes in the utter dominance of the State over the individual.  Of course, he plans to be a most <em>benign</em> dictator.

</p><p>For those not in the know, Lord Mandelson is the <em>de facto</em> ruler of the United Kingdom, and one of the chief architects of the European super state under the (also "benign") dictatorship of the unelected, unaccountable European Council of Ministers.

</p><p>He is the #1 threat to individual rights and freedoms in the UK and possibly in the whole of Europe.  Think Palpatine, only with fruitier ties.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But this is exactly up Darth Mandelson 's alley .
He truly and passionately believes in the utter dominance of the State over the individual .
Of course , he plans to be a most benign dictator .
For those not in the know , Lord Mandelson is the de facto ruler of the United Kingdom , and one of the chief architects of the European super state under the ( also " benign " ) dictatorship of the unelected , unaccountable European Council of Ministers .
He is the # 1 threat to individual rights and freedoms in the UK and possibly in the whole of Europe .
Think Palpatine , only with fruitier ties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But this is exactly up Darth Mandelson's alley.
He truly and passionately believes in the utter dominance of the State over the individual.
Of course, he plans to be a most benign dictator.
For those not in the know, Lord Mandelson is the de facto ruler of the United Kingdom, and one of the chief architects of the European super state under the (also "benign") dictatorship of the unelected, unaccountable European Council of Ministers.
He is the #1 threat to individual rights and freedoms in the UK and possibly in the whole of Europe.
Think Palpatine, only with fruitier ties.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158586</id>
	<title>This is why leaks are important.</title>
	<author>MickyTheIdiot</author>
	<datestamp>1258653120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the subject says...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the subject says.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the subject says...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165462</id>
	<title>Re:Could someone please explain why...</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1258632240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not just the UK though, sadly...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not just the UK though , sadly.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not just the UK though, sadly...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163324</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>VJ42</author>
	<datestamp>1258624980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away, or you might have other options available to you. (At the very least, the UK government might fear the people instead of the other way around)</p></div><p>If a revolution ever comes, you can keep the guns, I'll have IEDs. far more effective and I'm less of a target (therefore less likely to end up dead).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away , or you might have other options available to you .
( At the very least , the UK government might fear the people instead of the other way around ) If a revolution ever comes , you can keep the guns , I 'll have IEDs .
far more effective and I 'm less of a target ( therefore less likely to end up dead ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away, or you might have other options available to you.
(At the very least, the UK government might fear the people instead of the other way around)If a revolution ever comes, you can keep the guns, I'll have IEDs.
far more effective and I'm less of a target (therefore less likely to end up dead).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158672</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258653360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've been needing new politicians for thousands of years now, why break tradition?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've been needing new politicians for thousands of years now , why break tradition ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've been needing new politicians for thousands of years now, why break tradition?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158288</id>
	<title>I don't get it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258652280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you SNEAK something into a law? Doesn't it have to go through a ton of revisions and get voted on and all that jazz?</p><p>If the system is set up in such a way that people can put in new constraints without anyone noticing it, I'd say thats pretty broken.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you SNEAK something into a law ?
Does n't it have to go through a ton of revisions and get voted on and all that jazz ? If the system is set up in such a way that people can put in new constraints without anyone noticing it , I 'd say thats pretty broken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you SNEAK something into a law?
Doesn't it have to go through a ton of revisions and get voted on and all that jazz?If the system is set up in such a way that people can put in new constraints without anyone noticing it, I'd say thats pretty broken.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158778</id>
	<title>Re:A Tad Biased</title>
	<author>dissy</author>
	<datestamp>1258653720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Are you aware what "declaration of war" and "captured" mean? How about swapping that out with "threat of control" and "purchased"? I mean, if it's a declaration of war then the populace should just capture their parliament as prisoners of war, right?</p></div><p>I know you were being sarcastic, but actually I like your idea!</p><p>Quick, someone photoshop up a declaration of war from the media cartels, and lets get to work.<br>I'll go warm up the waterboards!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you aware what " declaration of war " and " captured " mean ?
How about swapping that out with " threat of control " and " purchased " ?
I mean , if it 's a declaration of war then the populace should just capture their parliament as prisoners of war , right ? I know you were being sarcastic , but actually I like your idea ! Quick , someone photoshop up a declaration of war from the media cartels , and lets get to work.I 'll go warm up the waterboards !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you aware what "declaration of war" and "captured" mean?
How about swapping that out with "threat of control" and "purchased"?
I mean, if it's a declaration of war then the populace should just capture their parliament as prisoners of war, right?I know you were being sarcastic, but actually I like your idea!Quick, someone photoshop up a declaration of war from the media cartels, and lets get to work.I'll go warm up the waterboards!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159068</id>
	<title>Lower Tadfield needs it</title>
	<author>Bold\_Cucumber</author>
	<datestamp>1258654620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now they just need to appoint a new witchfinder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now they just need to appoint a new witchfinder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now they just need to appoint a new witchfinder.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158112</id>
	<title>IP log at http://www.barbrastreisand.com/??</title>
	<author>AmigaHeretic</author>
	<datestamp>1258651740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh, not those kind of Pirates.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , not those kind of Pirates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, not those kind of Pirates.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158350</id>
	<title>Mandelson - Palin Cage Fight</title>
	<author>QuoteMstr</author>
	<datestamp>1258652460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know your government is truly in the gutter when an American begins to criticize its brazen corruption and abject stupidity. How the hell are you guys still stuck with Mandelson?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know your government is truly in the gutter when an American begins to criticize its brazen corruption and abject stupidity .
How the hell are you guys still stuck with Mandelson ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know your government is truly in the gutter when an American begins to criticize its brazen corruption and abject stupidity.
How the hell are you guys still stuck with Mandelson?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159900</id>
	<title>Re:Lame Duck Government</title>
	<author>damburger</author>
	<datestamp>1258657200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are starting from a false assumption; that the election will result in a change of government. Don't get me wrong, the Tories are certain to win - but there will be no real change in government.</p><p>Consider that <i>The Sun</i>, owned by News International, has publicly changed its allegiance from Labour to Tory, indicating that the Tories are now in Murdoch's pocket; given that we know well the views News International have about the Internet, do you not think the next government will continue the same anti-freedom policies and abuse the laws that Mandelson is proposing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are starting from a false assumption ; that the election will result in a change of government .
Do n't get me wrong , the Tories are certain to win - but there will be no real change in government.Consider that The Sun , owned by News International , has publicly changed its allegiance from Labour to Tory , indicating that the Tories are now in Murdoch 's pocket ; given that we know well the views News International have about the Internet , do you not think the next government will continue the same anti-freedom policies and abuse the laws that Mandelson is proposing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are starting from a false assumption; that the election will result in a change of government.
Don't get me wrong, the Tories are certain to win - but there will be no real change in government.Consider that The Sun, owned by News International, has publicly changed its allegiance from Labour to Tory, indicating that the Tories are now in Murdoch's pocket; given that we know well the views News International have about the Internet, do you not think the next government will continue the same anti-freedom policies and abuse the laws that Mandelson is proposing?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30162966</id>
	<title>Timing is everything</title>
	<author>hyades1</author>
	<datestamp>1258624020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> The Nazis didn't have to go to war with England to turn it into a fascist state.  All they had to do was sit back patiently and wait for England to make the change all by itself.  Somewhere in hell, Hitler's nodding and smiling. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Nazis did n't have to go to war with England to turn it into a fascist state .
All they had to do was sit back patiently and wait for England to make the change all by itself .
Somewhere in hell , Hitler 's nodding and smiling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The Nazis didn't have to go to war with England to turn it into a fascist state.
All they had to do was sit back patiently and wait for England to make the change all by itself.
Somewhere in hell, Hitler's nodding and smiling. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158788</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>pilgrim23</author>
	<datestamp>1258653720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems some look back to the simple days of Oliver Cromwell...</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems some look back to the simple days of Oliver Cromwell.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems some look back to the simple days of Oliver Cromwell...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158510</id>
	<title>Apple has it right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258652880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But unfortunately, not the media companies.</p><p>You cannot eliminate copyright infringement. It's too late, forget it.</p><p>The only way to lower the number of copyright infringements is to offer your media at <b>sane prices</b>. Apple had it right when it forced the media companies to sell tunes at 99 cents. Unfortunately, next thing you know, Apple asks for DRM removal so the media companies ask for tiered pricing with hits at $1.29.</p><p>And TV shows episodes are priced from $1.99 to $2.49... are the media companies fucking insane? Only a few will pay those amounts for TV shows. TV shows are "watch it and forget it" media, it's not like music which can be used as a background media (listening to music while coding, for example).</p><p>Put TV ads in it and give them for free (no DRM, no godamn Windows media format, we're not all Microsoft zombies) or sell the episodes for a decent price that almost nobody would even bother to get them illegally (say, $0.25 per episode).</p><p>Please don't put dumb replies such as "there's no way they can finance a TV show by selling episodes for $0.25 each", because that logic doesn't work. Just because you get 100 people to pay $1.99 doesn't mean you'll still only get 100 people at $0.25. And it's going to be a lot more than 800 too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But unfortunately , not the media companies.You can not eliminate copyright infringement .
It 's too late , forget it.The only way to lower the number of copyright infringements is to offer your media at sane prices .
Apple had it right when it forced the media companies to sell tunes at 99 cents .
Unfortunately , next thing you know , Apple asks for DRM removal so the media companies ask for tiered pricing with hits at $ 1.29.And TV shows episodes are priced from $ 1.99 to $ 2.49... are the media companies fucking insane ?
Only a few will pay those amounts for TV shows .
TV shows are " watch it and forget it " media , it 's not like music which can be used as a background media ( listening to music while coding , for example ) .Put TV ads in it and give them for free ( no DRM , no godamn Windows media format , we 're not all Microsoft zombies ) or sell the episodes for a decent price that almost nobody would even bother to get them illegally ( say , $ 0.25 per episode ) .Please do n't put dumb replies such as " there 's no way they can finance a TV show by selling episodes for $ 0.25 each " , because that logic does n't work .
Just because you get 100 people to pay $ 1.99 does n't mean you 'll still only get 100 people at $ 0.25 .
And it 's going to be a lot more than 800 too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But unfortunately, not the media companies.You cannot eliminate copyright infringement.
It's too late, forget it.The only way to lower the number of copyright infringements is to offer your media at sane prices.
Apple had it right when it forced the media companies to sell tunes at 99 cents.
Unfortunately, next thing you know, Apple asks for DRM removal so the media companies ask for tiered pricing with hits at $1.29.And TV shows episodes are priced from $1.99 to $2.49... are the media companies fucking insane?
Only a few will pay those amounts for TV shows.
TV shows are "watch it and forget it" media, it's not like music which can be used as a background media (listening to music while coding, for example).Put TV ads in it and give them for free (no DRM, no godamn Windows media format, we're not all Microsoft zombies) or sell the episodes for a decent price that almost nobody would even bother to get them illegally (say, $0.25 per episode).Please don't put dumb replies such as "there's no way they can finance a TV show by selling episodes for $0.25 each", because that logic doesn't work.
Just because you get 100 people to pay $1.99 doesn't mean you'll still only get 100 people at $0.25.
And it's going to be a lot more than 800 too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158044</id>
	<title>I don't like to use this word but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258651560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>retarded.</htmltext>
<tokenext>retarded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>retarded.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158798</id>
	<title>Re:you know</title>
	<author>JockTroll</author>
	<datestamp>1258653780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My money is on the rich goons. You can be as technologically savvy as you want, but it doesn't do you much good when your computer is seized, your family's assets are confiscated and you're basically dead as far as society is concerned, because you're now unemployable for life. The side with money and brute strength will always win. This is the reality, not some matrix- or star wars-influenced fantasy.<br>In real life, the strong and rich goon beats up the technologically savvy underlings, rips him to shreds, takes all of his possession, smashes his head against a wall and shits on his face. Deal with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My money is on the rich goons .
You can be as technologically savvy as you want , but it does n't do you much good when your computer is seized , your family 's assets are confiscated and you 're basically dead as far as society is concerned , because you 're now unemployable for life .
The side with money and brute strength will always win .
This is the reality , not some matrix- or star wars-influenced fantasy.In real life , the strong and rich goon beats up the technologically savvy underlings , rips him to shreds , takes all of his possession , smashes his head against a wall and shits on his face .
Deal with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My money is on the rich goons.
You can be as technologically savvy as you want, but it doesn't do you much good when your computer is seized, your family's assets are confiscated and you're basically dead as far as society is concerned, because you're now unemployable for life.
The side with money and brute strength will always win.
This is the reality, not some matrix- or star wars-influenced fantasy.In real life, the strong and rich goon beats up the technologically savvy underlings, rips him to shreds, takes all of his possession, smashes his head against a wall and shits on his face.
Deal with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30172828</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>s0l1dsnak3123</author>
	<datestamp>1258739580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>A mantra that has sadly (never?) been implemented. Was that a notion of the enlightenment, by the way?</htmltext>
<tokenext>A mantra that has sadly ( never ?
) been implemented .
Was that a notion of the enlightenment , by the way ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A mantra that has sadly (never?
) been implemented.
Was that a notion of the enlightenment, by the way?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158590</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>ByOhTek</author>
	<datestamp>1258653120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack\_Hobbs" title="wikipedia.org">While I don't understand it, what's so back about cricket?</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I do n't understand it , what 's so back about cricket ?
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I don't understand it, what's so back about cricket?
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165944</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>Andy\_R</author>
	<datestamp>1258634400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, we do need new politicians, that's why I'm standing for parliament as a Pirate Party candidate.</p><p>I'm well aware that I don't have the slightest chance of being elected, but I believe that the Pirate Party can demonstrate to the next government, and to the newly elected members of parliament that are replacing those standing down after the expenses scandal, that a significant portion of the voting public cares about Mandelson's plans.</p><p>If you're in the UK and want to do something positive about this story, we need memberships and donations to help fund the &pound;500 per seat deposit needed to get our place on the ballot papers, and if you feel strongly enough to put yourself forward as a Pirate Candidate we are about to start our candidate selection process, so now is the time to get involved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , we do need new politicians , that 's why I 'm standing for parliament as a Pirate Party candidate.I 'm well aware that I do n't have the slightest chance of being elected , but I believe that the Pirate Party can demonstrate to the next government , and to the newly elected members of parliament that are replacing those standing down after the expenses scandal , that a significant portion of the voting public cares about Mandelson 's plans.If you 're in the UK and want to do something positive about this story , we need memberships and donations to help fund the   500 per seat deposit needed to get our place on the ballot papers , and if you feel strongly enough to put yourself forward as a Pirate Candidate we are about to start our candidate selection process , so now is the time to get involved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, we do need new politicians, that's why I'm standing for parliament as a Pirate Party candidate.I'm well aware that I don't have the slightest chance of being elected, but I believe that the Pirate Party can demonstrate to the next government, and to the newly elected members of parliament that are replacing those standing down after the expenses scandal, that a significant portion of the voting public cares about Mandelson's plans.If you're in the UK and want to do something positive about this story, we need memberships and donations to help fund the £500 per seat deposit needed to get our place on the ballot papers, and if you feel strongly enough to put yourself forward as a Pirate Candidate we are about to start our candidate selection process, so now is the time to get involved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160114</id>
	<title>Obligatory Gilbert and Sullivan</title>
	<author>dkleinsc</author>
	<datestamp>1258657800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am the very model of a Pirate Finder General<br>I've information that makes me extrem-ely tyrranical<br>For studios and patent trolls I infringe upon the people's rights<br>And make sure that these practices will never really come to light.<br>Creative use of copyrights and patents and all trademark laws<br>Ensures that all will pay to watch another re-release of <i>Jaws</i>.<br>To plug all analog holes is the highest honor I can reach<br>So stop whistling that music in Phil Glass's <i>Einstein on the Beach</i>.</p><p>[I'm done for the moment, but feel free to add your own verses]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am the very model of a Pirate Finder GeneralI 've information that makes me extrem-ely tyrranicalFor studios and patent trolls I infringe upon the people 's rightsAnd make sure that these practices will never really come to light.Creative use of copyrights and patents and all trademark lawsEnsures that all will pay to watch another re-release of Jaws.To plug all analog holes is the highest honor I can reachSo stop whistling that music in Phil Glass 's Einstein on the Beach .
[ I 'm done for the moment , but feel free to add your own verses ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am the very model of a Pirate Finder GeneralI've information that makes me extrem-ely tyrranicalFor studios and patent trolls I infringe upon the people's rightsAnd make sure that these practices will never really come to light.Creative use of copyrights and patents and all trademark lawsEnsures that all will pay to watch another re-release of Jaws.To plug all analog holes is the highest honor I can reachSo stop whistling that music in Phil Glass's Einstein on the Beach.
[I'm done for the moment, but feel free to add your own verses]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161664</id>
	<title>When I first glanced at the headline...</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1258662780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...I thought they were talking about Somali pirates, which, it seems to me, is a genuine problem that needs a genuine solution.  Then I read the article.  Oh, that.  As usual, busybodies mucking about as the hard questions go unanswered.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...I thought they were talking about Somali pirates , which , it seems to me , is a genuine problem that needs a genuine solution .
Then I read the article .
Oh , that .
As usual , busybodies mucking about as the hard questions go unanswered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...I thought they were talking about Somali pirates, which, it seems to me, is a genuine problem that needs a genuine solution.
Then I read the article.
Oh, that.
As usual, busybodies mucking about as the hard questions go unanswered.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160170</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258657980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>this comes from BoingBoing so it may be nonsense</i></p><p>Please to explain their lack of credibility.</p></div><p>Cory Doctorow. Employment thereof.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>this comes from BoingBoing so it may be nonsensePlease to explain their lack of credibility.Cory Doctorow .
Employment thereof .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> this comes from BoingBoing so it may be nonsensePlease to explain their lack of credibility.Cory Doctorow.
Employment thereof.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163062</id>
	<title>Re:Lame Duck Government</title>
	<author>jimicus</author>
	<datestamp>1258624320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They've proposed a list of legislation as long as your arm and there has to be an election at some point before July next year - which means any legislation realistically needs to be passed before then.  My guess is they'll have to prioritise and I'm not sure how high this would be on the priorities list.</p><p>It's not a vote winner, but at the same time it's being put forward by Mandelson, who is the original zombie politician - just when you thought he was dead he comes back again.</p><p>The consensus of opinion is, IMO, that this government will lose the next election.  But don't count your chickens - it wouldn't be the first time a government which most people thought was in its dying gasps somehow got re-elected.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 've proposed a list of legislation as long as your arm and there has to be an election at some point before July next year - which means any legislation realistically needs to be passed before then .
My guess is they 'll have to prioritise and I 'm not sure how high this would be on the priorities list.It 's not a vote winner , but at the same time it 's being put forward by Mandelson , who is the original zombie politician - just when you thought he was dead he comes back again.The consensus of opinion is , IMO , that this government will lose the next election .
But do n't count your chickens - it would n't be the first time a government which most people thought was in its dying gasps somehow got re-elected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They've proposed a list of legislation as long as your arm and there has to be an election at some point before July next year - which means any legislation realistically needs to be passed before then.
My guess is they'll have to prioritise and I'm not sure how high this would be on the priorities list.It's not a vote winner, but at the same time it's being put forward by Mandelson, who is the original zombie politician - just when you thought he was dead he comes back again.The consensus of opinion is, IMO, that this government will lose the next election.
But don't count your chickens - it wouldn't be the first time a government which most people thought was in its dying gasps somehow got re-elected.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>apmonte</author>
	<datestamp>1258654680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>He is the #1 threat to individual rights and freedoms in the UK and possibly in the whole of Europe.  Think Palpatine, only with fruitier ties.</p></div><p>It's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away, or you might have other options available to you. (At the very least, the UK government might fear the people instead of the other way around)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He is the # 1 threat to individual rights and freedoms in the UK and possibly in the whole of Europe .
Think Palpatine , only with fruitier ties.It 's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away , or you might have other options available to you .
( At the very least , the UK government might fear the people instead of the other way around )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He is the #1 threat to individual rights and freedoms in the UK and possibly in the whole of Europe.
Think Palpatine, only with fruitier ties.It's too bad you folks in the UK let them take your guns away, or you might have other options available to you.
(At the very least, the UK government might fear the people instead of the other way around)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160138</id>
	<title>Re:IP log at http://www.barbrastreisand.com/??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258657860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn... I was going to apply.  What a great job, hunting pirates on the high seas.  Daily opportunities to say stuff like "Arrrrrr Matey, let's scubber the plankers and down some rum."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn... I was going to apply .
What a great job , hunting pirates on the high seas .
Daily opportunities to say stuff like " Arrrrrr Matey , let 's scubber the plankers and down some rum .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn... I was going to apply.
What a great job, hunting pirates on the high seas.
Daily opportunities to say stuff like "Arrrrrr Matey, let's scubber the plankers and down some rum.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158722</id>
	<title>Lame Duck Government</title>
	<author>mbone</author>
	<datestamp>1258653540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The UK just had the Queen's speech, which was widely regarded as full of things that will never come to pass, as this government most likely has only a few months to live. Even <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/matthew-norman/matthew-norman-no-wonder-the-queen-raised-an-eyebrow-while-she-read-it-1823094.html" title="independent.co.uk">the Queen</a> [independent.co.uk] seemed dubious.</p><p>Can someone who is actually plugged into UK politics tell us the likelihood that this would be passed by the current lame-duck government ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The UK just had the Queen 's speech , which was widely regarded as full of things that will never come to pass , as this government most likely has only a few months to live .
Even the Queen [ independent.co.uk ] seemed dubious.Can someone who is actually plugged into UK politics tell us the likelihood that this would be passed by the current lame-duck government ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The UK just had the Queen's speech, which was widely regarded as full of things that will never come to pass, as this government most likely has only a few months to live.
Even the Queen [independent.co.uk] seemed dubious.Can someone who is actually plugged into UK politics tell us the likelihood that this would be passed by the current lame-duck government ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165784</id>
	<title>Dark days ahead</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258633680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Greedy, evil, deceiving, corrupted people in power; secret copyright treaties and laws; internet and other media censorship; entertainment and temporary satisfaction obsessed society; inevitably increasing reliance on technology; evil corporations bullying the helpless; power, money and resources being slowly but forcefully (and inexorably) stolen from the majority into the greedy minority...

If you ask me, there are dark days ahead for this world.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Greedy , evil , deceiving , corrupted people in power ; secret copyright treaties and laws ; internet and other media censorship ; entertainment and temporary satisfaction obsessed society ; inevitably increasing reliance on technology ; evil corporations bullying the helpless ; power , money and resources being slowly but forcefully ( and inexorably ) stolen from the majority into the greedy minority.. . If you ask me , there are dark days ahead for this world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Greedy, evil, deceiving, corrupted people in power; secret copyright treaties and laws; internet and other media censorship; entertainment and temporary satisfaction obsessed society; inevitably increasing reliance on technology; evil corporations bullying the helpless; power, money and resources being slowly but forcefully (and inexorably) stolen from the majority into the greedy minority...

If you ask me, there are dark days ahead for this world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158746</id>
	<title>Re:War is being declared on UK citizens.</title>
	<author>LSD-OBS</author>
	<datestamp>1258653600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wish we could work out how the c**t keeps getting back into powerful positions</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wish we could work out how the c * * t keeps getting back into powerful positions</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wish we could work out how the c**t keeps getting back into powerful positions</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158664</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>kickedfortrolling</author>
	<datestamp>1258653360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would almost garuntee that the incoming conservative government would abolish this as an unnecessary cost, its just another quango for the bonfire <br> <br> I'd also point out that we'd struggle to do worse under cameron than we have under brown..</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would almost garuntee that the incoming conservative government would abolish this as an unnecessary cost , its just another quango for the bonfire I 'd also point out that we 'd struggle to do worse under cameron than we have under brown. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would almost garuntee that the incoming conservative government would abolish this as an unnecessary cost, its just another quango for the bonfire   I'd also point out that we'd struggle to do worse under cameron than we have under brown..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158428</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1258652700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Guy Fawkes? The man burned in effigy to underline his failure to accomplish his goals? I can think of better symbols!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Guy Fawkes ?
The man burned in effigy to underline his failure to accomplish his goals ?
I can think of better symbols !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guy Fawkes?
The man burned in effigy to underline his failure to accomplish his goals?
I can think of better symbols!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165300</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1258631640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In terms of parties that actually make a Government, the UK has been swinging between two parties for god knows how long, so yes, we have the same problem - perhaps not as extreme as the US, but it's still present. Thanks to the backwards FPTP system, the Lib Dems can't influence anything the Government wants, because the Government have a majority in Parliament. They can only have an influence when there's a split even within the Government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In terms of parties that actually make a Government , the UK has been swinging between two parties for god knows how long , so yes , we have the same problem - perhaps not as extreme as the US , but it 's still present .
Thanks to the backwards FPTP system , the Lib Dems ca n't influence anything the Government wants , because the Government have a majority in Parliament .
They can only have an influence when there 's a split even within the Government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In terms of parties that actually make a Government, the UK has been swinging between two parties for god knows how long, so yes, we have the same problem - perhaps not as extreme as the US, but it's still present.
Thanks to the backwards FPTP system, the Lib Dems can't influence anything the Government wants, because the Government have a majority in Parliament.
They can only have an influence when there's a split even within the Government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158150</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>Jaysyn</author>
	<datestamp>1258651860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The UK needs a successful non-religious Guy Fawkes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The UK needs a successful non-religious Guy Fawkes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The UK needs a successful non-religious Guy Fawkes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159260</id>
	<title>Re:Mandelson - Palin Cage Fight</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258655220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You know your government is truly in the gutter when an American begins to criticize its brazen corruption and abject stupidity. How the hell are you guys still stuck with Mandelson?</p></div><p>Mandelson is the representative of the true powers behind UK politics.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know your government is truly in the gutter when an American begins to criticize its brazen corruption and abject stupidity .
How the hell are you guys still stuck with Mandelson ? Mandelson is the representative of the true powers behind UK politics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know your government is truly in the gutter when an American begins to criticize its brazen corruption and abject stupidity.
How the hell are you guys still stuck with Mandelson?Mandelson is the representative of the true powers behind UK politics.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160042</id>
	<title>Re:No consequences.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258657560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Look at Tony Blair. He lied to start an illegal war </i></p><p>Bush was going to attack Iraq irrespective of the Blair Dossier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at Tony Blair .
He lied to start an illegal war Bush was going to attack Iraq irrespective of the Blair Dossier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at Tony Blair.
He lied to start an illegal war Bush was going to attack Iraq irrespective of the Blair Dossier.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158748</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158572</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258653120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>No, you need new politicians. Which, in the UK's case, means you're due for another round of governance by the Tories. So you're basically fucked.</i>
<br>
<br>
But...but...the UK has more than two major political parties.  Doesn't that mean they have a utopia?  Because that's what everyone here likes to say the US' problem is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , you need new politicians .
Which , in the UK 's case , means you 're due for another round of governance by the Tories .
So you 're basically fucked .
But...but...the UK has more than two major political parties .
Does n't that mean they have a utopia ?
Because that 's what everyone here likes to say the US ' problem is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, you need new politicians.
Which, in the UK's case, means you're due for another round of governance by the Tories.
So you're basically fucked.
But...but...the UK has more than two major political parties.
Doesn't that mean they have a utopia?
Because that's what everyone here likes to say the US' problem is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30162494</id>
	<title>A technical workaround</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258622400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Direct SSH tunnels between groups of mates and a file encryption system whereby an encrypted file contains both the real downloaded file, and non-copyrighted spoof file. The decrypted payload which can be shown to 'enforcement officers' depends on the password entered into the decryption program.</p><p>Easy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Direct SSH tunnels between groups of mates and a file encryption system whereby an encrypted file contains both the real downloaded file , and non-copyrighted spoof file .
The decrypted payload which can be shown to 'enforcement officers ' depends on the password entered into the decryption program.Easy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Direct SSH tunnels between groups of mates and a file encryption system whereby an encrypted file contains both the real downloaded file, and non-copyrighted spoof file.
The decrypted payload which can be shown to 'enforcement officers' depends on the password entered into the decryption program.Easy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160794</id>
	<title>Re:Great Idea</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1258659960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I went fishing in the Atlantic with a friend in his small boat and the RIAA sued me!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I went fishing in the Atlantic with a friend in his small boat and the RIAA sued me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I went fishing in the Atlantic with a friend in his small boat and the RIAA sued me!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30170434</id>
	<title>Re:No consequences.</title>
	<author>horza</author>
	<datestamp>1258729020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What does the Iraq war have to do a Digital Rights bill? The war wasn't illegal as it passed through Parliament. Same as if this bill gets altered and passed then the government will be legally allowed to send random people back into the information stone age. Mandelson will get rewarded by his buddies, much like Tony Blair is being rewarded by probably becoming President of Europe.</p><p>You do know you can become a politician yourself if you want to change things. Put down a &pound;500 deposit and your name on the ballot paper. Or you can be a journalist and work for a non-Murdoch paper. Or run a political blog. Or create a lobby group along the lines of the EFF. A sane enlightened way is to get off your arse and do something yourself.</p><p>Phillip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What does the Iraq war have to do a Digital Rights bill ?
The war was n't illegal as it passed through Parliament .
Same as if this bill gets altered and passed then the government will be legally allowed to send random people back into the information stone age .
Mandelson will get rewarded by his buddies , much like Tony Blair is being rewarded by probably becoming President of Europe.You do know you can become a politician yourself if you want to change things .
Put down a   500 deposit and your name on the ballot paper .
Or you can be a journalist and work for a non-Murdoch paper .
Or run a political blog .
Or create a lobby group along the lines of the EFF .
A sane enlightened way is to get off your arse and do something yourself.Phillip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does the Iraq war have to do a Digital Rights bill?
The war wasn't illegal as it passed through Parliament.
Same as if this bill gets altered and passed then the government will be legally allowed to send random people back into the information stone age.
Mandelson will get rewarded by his buddies, much like Tony Blair is being rewarded by probably becoming President of Europe.You do know you can become a politician yourself if you want to change things.
Put down a £500 deposit and your name on the ballot paper.
Or you can be a journalist and work for a non-Murdoch paper.
Or run a political blog.
Or create a lobby group along the lines of the EFF.
A sane enlightened way is to get off your arse and do something yourself.Phillip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158748</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30162024</id>
	<title>Re:Mandelson - Palin Cage Fight</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258663980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You know your government is truly in the gutter when an American begins to criticize its brazen corruption and abject stupidity. How the hell are you guys still stuck with Mandelson?</p></div><p>Be patient. In just a short while, we will no longer be stuck with him. The clock is ticking to the next election, and irrespective of how well Labour did in Glasgow recently, make no mistake, they are about to be tossed out on their bums. At that point, all the people baying for Mandelson's blood will realise that Cameron's party is exactly the same, especially their views on pirating / copyright / intellectual property. As a nation, we have spent the last few hundred years creating the Industrial Revolution, then looking down our noses at anybody vulgar enough to take part in it by actually making anything. Now, reduced to a nation of estate agents buying Chinese made goods, the only things we have left of any value are music / film / stage / art / design related. You can bet your pirated CD collection that whoever takes over Mandelson's job in a Tory government will be just the same, irrespective of whether they are elected or not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know your government is truly in the gutter when an American begins to criticize its brazen corruption and abject stupidity .
How the hell are you guys still stuck with Mandelson ? Be patient .
In just a short while , we will no longer be stuck with him .
The clock is ticking to the next election , and irrespective of how well Labour did in Glasgow recently , make no mistake , they are about to be tossed out on their bums .
At that point , all the people baying for Mandelson 's blood will realise that Cameron 's party is exactly the same , especially their views on pirating / copyright / intellectual property .
As a nation , we have spent the last few hundred years creating the Industrial Revolution , then looking down our noses at anybody vulgar enough to take part in it by actually making anything .
Now , reduced to a nation of estate agents buying Chinese made goods , the only things we have left of any value are music / film / stage / art / design related .
You can bet your pirated CD collection that whoever takes over Mandelson 's job in a Tory government will be just the same , irrespective of whether they are elected or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know your government is truly in the gutter when an American begins to criticize its brazen corruption and abject stupidity.
How the hell are you guys still stuck with Mandelson?Be patient.
In just a short while, we will no longer be stuck with him.
The clock is ticking to the next election, and irrespective of how well Labour did in Glasgow recently, make no mistake, they are about to be tossed out on their bums.
At that point, all the people baying for Mandelson's blood will realise that Cameron's party is exactly the same, especially their views on pirating / copyright / intellectual property.
As a nation, we have spent the last few hundred years creating the Industrial Revolution, then looking down our noses at anybody vulgar enough to take part in it by actually making anything.
Now, reduced to a nation of estate agents buying Chinese made goods, the only things we have left of any value are music / film / stage / art / design related.
You can bet your pirated CD collection that whoever takes over Mandelson's job in a Tory government will be just the same, irrespective of whether they are elected or not.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158850</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>TheMeuge</author>
	<datestamp>1258653960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually I think the people of Great Britain need new governance that doesn't think that Aldous Huxley had the right idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I think the people of Great Britain need new governance that does n't think that Aldous Huxley had the right idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I think the people of Great Britain need new governance that doesn't think that Aldous Huxley had the right idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160508</id>
	<title>Don't worry too much about it...</title>
	<author>hot soldering iron</author>
	<datestamp>1258659000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Come 2012 the world (as we know it) will end... Because we'll be so fed up with governmental BS we rise up and kill the bastards, leading to a golden age of ?anarchy? WTF? My brain just reset, damnit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come 2012 the world ( as we know it ) will end... Because we 'll be so fed up with governmental BS we rise up and kill the bastards , leading to a golden age of ? anarchy ?
WTF ? My brain just reset , damnit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come 2012 the world (as we know it) will end... Because we'll be so fed up with governmental BS we rise up and kill the bastards, leading to a golden age of ?anarchy?
WTF? My brain just reset, damnit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988</id>
	<title>New internet</title>
	<author>cellurl</author>
	<datestamp>1258651320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>We need a new Internet. Any ideas?</htmltext>
<tokenext>We need a new Internet .
Any ideas ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need a new Internet.
Any ideas?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161386</id>
	<title>Re:Lame Duck Government</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258661940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The UK parliamentry system was copied fairly closely by america, (the only difference was the house of lords was unelected but tended to contain former judges, ministers and speakers of the house(of commons) which was replaced with the senate).</p><p>To pass a law it will first have to:</p><p>a)be read by the commons (read congress)<br>b) pass the house of commons<br>c) be read by the lords<br>d) pass the lords<br>e) not be sent back to a) by the queen (who can send it back for discussion a certain number of times before it can be forced through)</p><p>each reading takes 2ish months, laws can be passed upto when the general election is announced at which point all motions of the house are stopped including the passing of laws i believe that the latest this election can be called is in may-july so with any luck this bill will be in its second reading/already failed when the election starts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The UK parliamentry system was copied fairly closely by america , ( the only difference was the house of lords was unelected but tended to contain former judges , ministers and speakers of the house ( of commons ) which was replaced with the senate ) .To pass a law it will first have to : a ) be read by the commons ( read congress ) b ) pass the house of commonsc ) be read by the lordsd ) pass the lordse ) not be sent back to a ) by the queen ( who can send it back for discussion a certain number of times before it can be forced through ) each reading takes 2ish months , laws can be passed upto when the general election is announced at which point all motions of the house are stopped including the passing of laws i believe that the latest this election can be called is in may-july so with any luck this bill will be in its second reading/already failed when the election starts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The UK parliamentry system was copied fairly closely by america, (the only difference was the house of lords was unelected but tended to contain former judges, ministers and speakers of the house(of commons) which was replaced with the senate).To pass a law it will first have to:a)be read by the commons (read congress)b) pass the house of commonsc) be read by the lordsd) pass the lordse) not be sent back to a) by the queen (who can send it back for discussion a certain number of times before it can be forced through)each reading takes 2ish months, laws can be passed upto when the general election is announced at which point all motions of the house are stopped including the passing of laws i believe that the latest this election can be called is in may-july so with any luck this bill will be in its second reading/already failed when the election starts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165368</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think they really care....</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1258631820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By your logic, "they" in the US don't care either, about all the nonsense that gets posted here?</p><p>Or, last time I looked, perhaps laws were passed by Governments, and not Slashdot readers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By your logic , " they " in the US do n't care either , about all the nonsense that gets posted here ? Or , last time I looked , perhaps laws were passed by Governments , and not Slashdot readers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By your logic, "they" in the US don't care either, about all the nonsense that gets posted here?Or, last time I looked, perhaps laws were passed by Governments, and not Slashdot readers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159580</id>
	<title>UK is taking the express bus to the third world.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The UK is taking the express bus to becoming a third world nation.</p><p>The totalitarian government is securely in place. Innocent people are shot and killed in the Underground by police, and innocent bystanders are attacked and killed by police on the streets during protests. Everyone is watched continuously by the ever-present "security" cameras.</p><p>Poor immigration policies have let in too many third world scum. Roving gangs of youth, many who are refugees and immigrants from existing third world nations, continually bother and attack UK-born citizens. Of course, the police are too busy watching the natives to actually deal with these criminal yobs and chavs.</p><p>Now they're cracking down on the Internet, because it is one of the last bastions of freedom left.</p><p>The UK is now a mere shell of its former self. There is no longer anything to be proud of there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The UK is taking the express bus to becoming a third world nation.The totalitarian government is securely in place .
Innocent people are shot and killed in the Underground by police , and innocent bystanders are attacked and killed by police on the streets during protests .
Everyone is watched continuously by the ever-present " security " cameras.Poor immigration policies have let in too many third world scum .
Roving gangs of youth , many who are refugees and immigrants from existing third world nations , continually bother and attack UK-born citizens .
Of course , the police are too busy watching the natives to actually deal with these criminal yobs and chavs.Now they 're cracking down on the Internet , because it is one of the last bastions of freedom left.The UK is now a mere shell of its former self .
There is no longer anything to be proud of there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The UK is taking the express bus to becoming a third world nation.The totalitarian government is securely in place.
Innocent people are shot and killed in the Underground by police, and innocent bystanders are attacked and killed by police on the streets during protests.
Everyone is watched continuously by the ever-present "security" cameras.Poor immigration policies have let in too many third world scum.
Roving gangs of youth, many who are refugees and immigrants from existing third world nations, continually bother and attack UK-born citizens.
Of course, the police are too busy watching the natives to actually deal with these criminal yobs and chavs.Now they're cracking down on the Internet, because it is one of the last bastions of freedom left.The UK is now a mere shell of its former self.
There is no longer anything to be proud of there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163684</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>Marcika</author>
	<datestamp>1258626060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Actually I think the people of Great Britain need new governance that doesn't think that Aldous Huxley had the right idea.</p></div><p>I just wish they would model it after Huxley! Then at least we'd have free recreational drugs for everyone, relaxed sexual mores and yobs that are actually conditioned to like doing menial jobs instead of being anti-social...</p><p>Instead we get a re-imagining of Orwell - Animal Farm or Nineteen-Eightyfour, take your pick.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I think the people of Great Britain need new governance that does n't think that Aldous Huxley had the right idea.I just wish they would model it after Huxley !
Then at least we 'd have free recreational drugs for everyone , relaxed sexual mores and yobs that are actually conditioned to like doing menial jobs instead of being anti-social...Instead we get a re-imagining of Orwell - Animal Farm or Nineteen-Eightyfour , take your pick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I think the people of Great Britain need new governance that doesn't think that Aldous Huxley had the right idea.I just wish they would model it after Huxley!
Then at least we'd have free recreational drugs for everyone, relaxed sexual mores and yobs that are actually conditioned to like doing menial jobs instead of being anti-social...Instead we get a re-imagining of Orwell - Animal Farm or Nineteen-Eightyfour, take your pick.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161860</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>IamTheRealMike</author>
	<datestamp>1258663440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The story has no credibility by itself. It comes from an anonymous source. It could just be made up, or some heavily garbled version of the truth.</p><p>Nonetheless, anonymous sources are useful in reporting. When they are used, the author of the story is making an implicit request to the reader - you can't trust my source, but <i>you can trust me instead</i>. You need a high degree of trust for this to work - we are being asked to transitively trust the source through the reporter. Some reporters have enough integrity, neutrality and respect to do this. Most don't.</p><p>Cory Doctorow in particular (a) has a very strong agenda and (b) has a habit of reporting stories about Evil Government Plans from anonymous sources, probably because they drive traffic. He isn't a respected journalist or otherwise highly trustable figure. He is most noted for writing some fairly far out sci-fi, and working for the EFF.</p><p>In short, this appears to be a repeat of the ACTA situation. Somebody says some government employees are planning something evil, but the exact nature of who or what cannot be reliably pinned down. Doctorow then reports it as fact.</p><p>Boils down to who do I trust less - Mandelson or Doctorow? That's tough. Neither of them can be trusted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The story has no credibility by itself .
It comes from an anonymous source .
It could just be made up , or some heavily garbled version of the truth.Nonetheless , anonymous sources are useful in reporting .
When they are used , the author of the story is making an implicit request to the reader - you ca n't trust my source , but you can trust me instead .
You need a high degree of trust for this to work - we are being asked to transitively trust the source through the reporter .
Some reporters have enough integrity , neutrality and respect to do this .
Most do n't.Cory Doctorow in particular ( a ) has a very strong agenda and ( b ) has a habit of reporting stories about Evil Government Plans from anonymous sources , probably because they drive traffic .
He is n't a respected journalist or otherwise highly trustable figure .
He is most noted for writing some fairly far out sci-fi , and working for the EFF.In short , this appears to be a repeat of the ACTA situation .
Somebody says some government employees are planning something evil , but the exact nature of who or what can not be reliably pinned down .
Doctorow then reports it as fact.Boils down to who do I trust less - Mandelson or Doctorow ?
That 's tough .
Neither of them can be trusted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The story has no credibility by itself.
It comes from an anonymous source.
It could just be made up, or some heavily garbled version of the truth.Nonetheless, anonymous sources are useful in reporting.
When they are used, the author of the story is making an implicit request to the reader - you can't trust my source, but you can trust me instead.
You need a high degree of trust for this to work - we are being asked to transitively trust the source through the reporter.
Some reporters have enough integrity, neutrality and respect to do this.
Most don't.Cory Doctorow in particular (a) has a very strong agenda and (b) has a habit of reporting stories about Evil Government Plans from anonymous sources, probably because they drive traffic.
He isn't a respected journalist or otherwise highly trustable figure.
He is most noted for writing some fairly far out sci-fi, and working for the EFF.In short, this appears to be a repeat of the ACTA situation.
Somebody says some government employees are planning something evil, but the exact nature of who or what cannot be reliably pinned down.
Doctorow then reports it as fact.Boils down to who do I trust less - Mandelson or Doctorow?
That's tough.
Neither of them can be trusted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160952</id>
	<title>Oh Yeah!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258660380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, our Sith Lord Cheney can beat your Sith Lord Mandleson any day of the week!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , our Sith Lord Cheney can beat your Sith Lord Mandleson any day of the week !
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, our Sith Lord Cheney can beat your Sith Lord Mandleson any day of the week!
:P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158702</id>
	<title>RE:"Pirate Finder General"</title>
	<author>Ruvim</author>
	<datestamp>1258653480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Very well... It should greatly improve UK's chances of apprehending Somali pirates and preventing any further boardings and hijackings! I just don't understand why it's filed under "Your Rights Online" section?
<br> <br>
Oh....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Very well... It should greatly improve UK 's chances of apprehending Somali pirates and preventing any further boardings and hijackings !
I just do n't understand why it 's filed under " Your Rights Online " section ?
Oh... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very well... It should greatly improve UK's chances of apprehending Somali pirates and preventing any further boardings and hijackings!
I just don't understand why it's filed under "Your Rights Online" section?
Oh....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158078</id>
	<title>Film at 11</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258651620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sith Lord Mandelson wants sweeping powers that any sensible person would consider grossly out of all proportion? Film at 11!<br>
<br>
He can want all he likes: this shower of bastards, including Sith Lord Mandelson himself, is unlikely to be in a job by the summer of next year anyway. With Christmas and the General Election they wont have the time to enact much of any legislation anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sith Lord Mandelson wants sweeping powers that any sensible person would consider grossly out of all proportion ?
Film at 11 !
He can want all he likes : this shower of bastards , including Sith Lord Mandelson himself , is unlikely to be in a job by the summer of next year anyway .
With Christmas and the General Election they wont have the time to enact much of any legislation anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sith Lord Mandelson wants sweeping powers that any sensible person would consider grossly out of all proportion?
Film at 11!
He can want all he likes: this shower of bastards, including Sith Lord Mandelson himself, is unlikely to be in a job by the summer of next year anyway.
With Christmas and the General Election they wont have the time to enact much of any legislation anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30168792</id>
	<title>Poor Brit's</title>
	<author>twoHats</author>
	<datestamp>1258660500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The poor Brit's are really taking it these days.  Stiff upper lip boys and girls - fight the power.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The poor Brit 's are really taking it these days .
Stiff upper lip boys and girls - fight the power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The poor Brit's are really taking it these days.
Stiff upper lip boys and girls - fight the power.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160860</id>
	<title>Re:A Tad Biased</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258660140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even more so when you consider that leaking future plans is SOP for Labour, its their way of doing market research. "leak" some kind of proposal and see what the "public opinion" is and then adjust accordingly.</p><p>Its very rare that something "leaked" in this fashion ever becomes law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even more so when you consider that leaking future plans is SOP for Labour , its their way of doing market research .
" leak " some kind of proposal and see what the " public opinion " is and then adjust accordingly.Its very rare that something " leaked " in this fashion ever becomes law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even more so when you consider that leaking future plans is SOP for Labour, its their way of doing market research.
"leak" some kind of proposal and see what the "public opinion" is and then adjust accordingly.Its very rare that something "leaked" in this fashion ever becomes law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165954</id>
	<title>Pirate-finder.. Paedofinder.. Hmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258634460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they got the idea from the TV program Monkey Dust and their Paedofinder General?</p><p>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCywGhHQMEw</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they got the idea from the TV program Monkey Dust and their Paedofinder General ? http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = XCywGhHQMEw</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they got the idea from the TV program Monkey Dust and their Paedofinder General?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCywGhHQMEw</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158578</id>
	<title>A General?</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1258653120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Shouldn't that be an Admiral? Much better for chasing Johnny Depp around the Caribbean.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Should n't that be an Admiral ?
Much better for chasing Johnny Depp around the Caribbean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shouldn't that be an Admiral?
Much better for chasing Johnny Depp around the Caribbean.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159344</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1258655520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Think Palpatine, only with fruitier ties.</i></p><p>with love and respect John, "think Palpatine, only fruitier" is more appropriate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Think Palpatine , only with fruitier ties.with love and respect John , " think Palpatine , only fruitier " is more appropriate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Think Palpatine, only with fruitier ties.with love and respect John, "think Palpatine, only fruitier" is more appropriate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30199608</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>rdnetto</author>
	<datestamp>1258914480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately, that just means the next ones will be Orwellians.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , that just means the next ones will be Orwellians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, that just means the next ones will be Orwellians.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30167664</id>
	<title>Re:Undemocratic</title>
	<author>ignavus</author>
	<datestamp>1258647240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is actually a cunning plot: to make the people SO sick of copyright that we abolish it.</p><p>So far, the plot is on course. We are sick of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is actually a cunning plot : to make the people SO sick of copyright that we abolish it.So far , the plot is on course .
We are sick of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is actually a cunning plot: to make the people SO sick of copyright that we abolish it.So far, the plot is on course.
We are sick of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163240</id>
	<title>Re:No consequences.</title>
	<author>PeterAitch</author>
	<datestamp>1258624800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed, it is well-established that the catch-22 of politics is that those who want the top jobs shouln't be allowed anywhere near them because they are simply too dangerous once in office.</p><p>For the benefit of our American cousins, just think of Mandelson as an unholy combination of Rasputin and Goebbels.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , it is well-established that the catch-22 of politics is that those who want the top jobs shoul n't be allowed anywhere near them because they are simply too dangerous once in office.For the benefit of our American cousins , just think of Mandelson as an unholy combination of Rasputin and Goebbels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, it is well-established that the catch-22 of politics is that those who want the top jobs shouln't be allowed anywhere near them because they are simply too dangerous once in office.For the benefit of our American cousins, just think of Mandelson as an unholy combination of Rasputin and Goebbels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158748</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30170742</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1258730880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure what the Xbox story has to do with any of this. The Open Rights Group campaign on broader issues than just what the Government does, and things like allowing modding (which might be done for reasons other than piracy - e.g., running non-approved software such as Linux) or DRM seem perfectly valid causes for the ORG.</p><p>I'm not sure that the BBC's poor straw man coverage of their side of the argument is the fault of the ORG - that's the fault of the BBC being biased.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure what the Xbox story has to do with any of this .
The Open Rights Group campaign on broader issues than just what the Government does , and things like allowing modding ( which might be done for reasons other than piracy - e.g. , running non-approved software such as Linux ) or DRM seem perfectly valid causes for the ORG.I 'm not sure that the BBC 's poor straw man coverage of their side of the argument is the fault of the ORG - that 's the fault of the BBC being biased .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure what the Xbox story has to do with any of this.
The Open Rights Group campaign on broader issues than just what the Government does, and things like allowing modding (which might be done for reasons other than piracy - e.g., running non-approved software such as Linux) or DRM seem perfectly valid causes for the ORG.I'm not sure that the BBC's poor straw man coverage of their side of the argument is the fault of the ORG - that's the fault of the BBC being biased.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158588</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258653120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>He is the #1 threat to individual rights and freedoms in the UK</i></p><p>And that's with some pretty damn stiff competition for the title from Jack "Boots" Straw and Blunkett, too. I'd tip my hat to him, if I wore one, and didn't despise pretty-much everything he stands for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He is the # 1 threat to individual rights and freedoms in the UKAnd that 's with some pretty damn stiff competition for the title from Jack " Boots " Straw and Blunkett , too .
I 'd tip my hat to him , if I wore one , and did n't despise pretty-much everything he stands for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He is the #1 threat to individual rights and freedoms in the UKAnd that's with some pretty damn stiff competition for the title from Jack "Boots" Straw and Blunkett, too.
I'd tip my hat to him, if I wore one, and didn't despise pretty-much everything he stands for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158922</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>bth</author>
	<datestamp>1258654200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>kheldan - is it ok if we are afraid of some of the people in our government?  and if they are afraid of some of us?  I am sure we can satisfy that statement easily.</htmltext>
<tokenext>kheldan - is it ok if we are afraid of some of the people in our government ?
and if they are afraid of some of us ?
I am sure we can satisfy that statement easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>kheldan - is it ok if we are afraid of some of the people in our government?
and if they are afraid of some of us?
I am sure we can satisfy that statement easily.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158478</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158252</id>
	<title>Re:Great Idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258652100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering the proud history of the British navy, it would make sense of them to appoint a person in charge of finding pirates on the high seas. I don't see how this is relevant to Slashdot, though. Nor do I see why they should keep such a role secret. Keeping our oceans save is a noble job.</p><p>If pirates and piracy is measurably affecting ocean travel and commerce, someone should get on doing something about it. If not, then this ocean pirate hunter idea seems kind of pointless.</p><p>I'm sure they have reliable data from the people who use the oceans which affirm that ocean piracy is a big issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering the proud history of the British navy , it would make sense of them to appoint a person in charge of finding pirates on the high seas .
I do n't see how this is relevant to Slashdot , though .
Nor do I see why they should keep such a role secret .
Keeping our oceans save is a noble job.If pirates and piracy is measurably affecting ocean travel and commerce , someone should get on doing something about it .
If not , then this ocean pirate hunter idea seems kind of pointless.I 'm sure they have reliable data from the people who use the oceans which affirm that ocean piracy is a big issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering the proud history of the British navy, it would make sense of them to appoint a person in charge of finding pirates on the high seas.
I don't see how this is relevant to Slashdot, though.
Nor do I see why they should keep such a role secret.
Keeping our oceans save is a noble job.If pirates and piracy is measurably affecting ocean travel and commerce, someone should get on doing something about it.
If not, then this ocean pirate hunter idea seems kind of pointless.I'm sure they have reliable data from the people who use the oceans which affirm that ocean piracy is a big issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159734</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>ShieldW0lf</author>
	<datestamp>1258656780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes... I've been thinking that if I were to distribute a home aquaponics system that had some automation and was controlled by a dedicated low-end computer that had wireless networking and allowed you to supervise your food production remotely, if there was enough penetration, they could be modified via a software update to form a citizens mesh network without having to actually convince the public that they should spend money upfront to create said network.  The technology is already proven, it's just a matter of getting enough units in the hands of the public.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes... I 've been thinking that if I were to distribute a home aquaponics system that had some automation and was controlled by a dedicated low-end computer that had wireless networking and allowed you to supervise your food production remotely , if there was enough penetration , they could be modified via a software update to form a citizens mesh network without having to actually convince the public that they should spend money upfront to create said network .
The technology is already proven , it 's just a matter of getting enough units in the hands of the public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes... I've been thinking that if I were to distribute a home aquaponics system that had some automation and was controlled by a dedicated low-end computer that had wireless networking and allowed you to supervise your food production remotely, if there was enough penetration, they could be modified via a software update to form a citizens mesh network without having to actually convince the public that they should spend money upfront to create said network.
The technology is already proven, it's just a matter of getting enough units in the hands of the public.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161694</id>
	<title>Could someone please explain why...</title>
	<author>Raisey-raison</author>
	<datestamp>1258662900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am not interested in conspiracy theories, I just want to know the UK is freaken draconian when it comes to copyright. This despite the fact that there is lots of evidence that the increased terms for copyright and increased stringencies ae actually harmful. Also don't they also realize that they are potentially criminalizing a whole generation? It seems that they keep on wanting to extend copyright forever and would be quite happy if people were still paying copyright fees for the beetles in the 22nd century. Seriously I don't get it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not interested in conspiracy theories , I just want to know the UK is freaken draconian when it comes to copyright .
This despite the fact that there is lots of evidence that the increased terms for copyright and increased stringencies ae actually harmful .
Also do n't they also realize that they are potentially criminalizing a whole generation ?
It seems that they keep on wanting to extend copyright forever and would be quite happy if people were still paying copyright fees for the beetles in the 22nd century .
Seriously I do n't get it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not interested in conspiracy theories, I just want to know the UK is freaken draconian when it comes to copyright.
This despite the fact that there is lots of evidence that the increased terms for copyright and increased stringencies ae actually harmful.
Also don't they also realize that they are potentially criminalizing a whole generation?
It seems that they keep on wanting to extend copyright forever and would be quite happy if people were still paying copyright fees for the beetles in the 22nd century.
Seriously I don't get it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159562</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>hoggoth</author>
	<datestamp>1258656300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, 'cause you Yanks can sure show 'em a thing or two with your handguns against squads of armored SWAT teams with grenades and automatic weapons, helicopter support, and the latest in anti-riot gear. Worked well at WACO. Good luck with that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , 'cause you Yanks can sure show 'em a thing or two with your handguns against squads of armored SWAT teams with grenades and automatic weapons , helicopter support , and the latest in anti-riot gear .
Worked well at WACO .
Good luck with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, 'cause you Yanks can sure show 'em a thing or two with your handguns against squads of armored SWAT teams with grenades and automatic weapons, helicopter support, and the latest in anti-riot gear.
Worked well at WACO.
Good luck with that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165574</id>
	<title>Re:A Tad Biased</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1258632840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I mean, if it's a declaration of war then the populace should just capture their parliament as prisoners of war, right?</p></div><p>That's a pretty darned good idea.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , if it 's a declaration of war then the populace should just capture their parliament as prisoners of war , right ? That 's a pretty darned good idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, if it's a declaration of war then the populace should just capture their parliament as prisoners of war, right?That's a pretty darned good idea.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158204</id>
	<title>Undemocratic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258651980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"What that means is that an unelected official would have the power to do anything without Parliamentary oversight or debate, provided it was done in the name of protecting copyright"</i>
<br> <br>
Which means that it's undemocratic. If nobody can control this unelected official, what's to stop them from abusing their position? In my opinion, that's a bit too much power to be given to any individual. <br> <br>Would the (supposedly democratic) government be so kind to please start representing the people again already?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" What that means is that an unelected official would have the power to do anything without Parliamentary oversight or debate , provided it was done in the name of protecting copyright " Which means that it 's undemocratic .
If nobody can control this unelected official , what 's to stop them from abusing their position ?
In my opinion , that 's a bit too much power to be given to any individual .
Would the ( supposedly democratic ) government be so kind to please start representing the people again already ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"What that means is that an unelected official would have the power to do anything without Parliamentary oversight or debate, provided it was done in the name of protecting copyright"
 
Which means that it's undemocratic.
If nobody can control this unelected official, what's to stop them from abusing their position?
In my opinion, that's a bit too much power to be given to any individual.
Would the (supposedly democratic) government be so kind to please start representing the people again already?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163020</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>Tim C</author>
	<datestamp>1258624200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you seriously believe the public would take up arms against this? <b>Seriously</b>?</p><p>The vast majority of the population won't care at all, let alone enough to pick up a gun and go up against armed police officers (or the army, if things really got that bad).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you seriously believe the public would take up arms against this ?
Seriously ? The vast majority of the population wo n't care at all , let alone enough to pick up a gun and go up against armed police officers ( or the army , if things really got that bad ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you seriously believe the public would take up arms against this?
Seriously?The vast majority of the population won't care at all, let alone enough to pick up a gun and go up against armed police officers (or the army, if things really got that bad).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>Captain Splendid</author>
	<datestamp>1258651680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, you need new politicians.  Which, in the UK's case, means you're due for another round of governance by the Tories.  So you're basically fucked.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , you need new politicians .
Which , in the UK 's case , means you 're due for another round of governance by the Tories .
So you 're basically fucked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, you need new politicians.
Which, in the UK's case, means you're due for another round of governance by the Tories.
So you're basically fucked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158114</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>KitsuneSoftware</author>
	<datestamp>1258651740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nevermind that, we need a new government.

I don't know how well-known Mandy is outside of the UK, but here... well, our satire shows were calling him a "Lord of Darkness" well before he became a Lord. By all rights he shouldn't have any power, he's lost his job several times already due to scandals, but seems to keep coming back.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nevermind that , we need a new government .
I do n't know how well-known Mandy is outside of the UK , but here... well , our satire shows were calling him a " Lord of Darkness " well before he became a Lord .
By all rights he should n't have any power , he 's lost his job several times already due to scandals , but seems to keep coming back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nevermind that, we need a new government.
I don't know how well-known Mandy is outside of the UK, but here... well, our satire shows were calling him a "Lord of Darkness" well before he became a Lord.
By all rights he shouldn't have any power, he's lost his job several times already due to scandals, but seems to keep coming back.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165412</id>
	<title>Re:A Tad Biased</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1258632000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If not, I would expect parliament to be highly suspect of the introduction of something designed to give the Secretary of State such power<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... when it's introduced by the Secretary of State.</i></p><p>Ha! I wish.</p><p>Various MPs might - if the changes are even debated - express suspicion, but that means nothing when the majority Government can vote the new bill in. The only real hope to bring in amendments to bills is in the House of Lords.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If not , I would expect parliament to be highly suspect of the introduction of something designed to give the Secretary of State such power ... when it 's introduced by the Secretary of State.Ha !
I wish.Various MPs might - if the changes are even debated - express suspicion , but that means nothing when the majority Government can vote the new bill in .
The only real hope to bring in amendments to bills is in the House of Lords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If not, I would expect parliament to be highly suspect of the introduction of something designed to give the Secretary of State such power ... when it's introduced by the Secretary of State.Ha!
I wish.Various MPs might - if the changes are even debated - express suspicion, but that means nothing when the majority Government can vote the new bill in.
The only real hope to bring in amendments to bills is in the House of Lords.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158592</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>tsm\_sf</author>
	<datestamp>1258653120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>this comes from BoingBoing so it may be nonsense</i> <br> <br>

Please to explain their lack of credibility.</htmltext>
<tokenext>this comes from BoingBoing so it may be nonsense Please to explain their lack of credibility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this comes from BoingBoing so it may be nonsense  

Please to explain their lack of credibility.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158124</id>
	<title>Same old, same old</title>
	<author>BC\_Man</author>
	<datestamp>1258651740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who is this "source". Someone trying to create more hysteria ? An atmosphere where legislation can be rushed through while everyone is distracted by a false debate ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who is this " source " .
Someone trying to create more hysteria ?
An atmosphere where legislation can be rushed through while everyone is distracted by a false debate ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who is this "source".
Someone trying to create more hysteria ?
An atmosphere where legislation can be rushed through while everyone is distracted by a false debate ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159538</id>
	<title>Re:If it were anyone else, I'd scoff at this "leak</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258656180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whenever I think the US has finally turned full "Big Brother", all I have to do is look at the UK and I can fool myself for another year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whenever I think the US has finally turned full " Big Brother " , all I have to do is look at the UK and I can fool myself for another year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whenever I think the US has finally turned full "Big Brother", all I have to do is look at the UK and I can fool myself for another year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158478</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>kheldan</author>
	<datestamp>1258652820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People should not be afraid of their governments .
Governments should be afraid of their people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People should not be afraid of their governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158372</id>
	<title>A Tad Biased</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1258652520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Secretary of State Peter Mandelson is planning to introduce changes to the Digital Economy Bill now under debate in Parliament.</p></div><p>So that's what you consider secret?  I mean, it sounds bad but I probably wouldn't flip out until it's actually introduced and added to the bill.  I guess I'm not an expert on UK law<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... by saying "planning to introduce" do you mean it's already law?  If not, I would expect parliament to be highly suspect of the introduction of something designed to give the Secretary of State such power<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... when it's introduced by the Secretary of State.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>This is as bad as I've ever seen, folks.</p></div><p>So, it's worse than <a href="http://boingboing.net/2009/11/03/secret-copyright-tre.html" title="boingboing.net">ACTA</a> [boingboing.net] (which affects the entire world)?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It's a declaration of war by the entertainment industry and their captured regulators against the principles of free speech, privacy, freedom of assembly, the presumption of innocence, and competition.</p></div><p>Are you aware what "declaration of war" and "captured" mean?  How about swapping that out with "threat of control" and "purchased"?  I mean, if it's a declaration of war then the populace should just capture their parliament as prisoners of war, right?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>This proposal creates the office of Pirate-Finder General, with unlimited power to appoint militias who are above the law, who can pry into every corner of your life, who can disconnect you from your family, job, education and government, who can fine you or put you in jail.</p></div><p>That's it.  You had a really informative post going there but that last part is a level of fear mongering I haven't seen since the United States invaded Iraq.  <br> <br>

I heavily suspect you are being played as an unwitting rube by the party opposite of those planning to introduce this.  If you had kept your post informative I'd have gobbled it up but at this point I'm dubious that another propaganda tool isn't at work somewhere along this channel.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Secretary of State Peter Mandelson is planning to introduce changes to the Digital Economy Bill now under debate in Parliament.So that 's what you consider secret ?
I mean , it sounds bad but I probably would n't flip out until it 's actually introduced and added to the bill .
I guess I 'm not an expert on UK law ... by saying " planning to introduce " do you mean it 's already law ?
If not , I would expect parliament to be highly suspect of the introduction of something designed to give the Secretary of State such power ... when it 's introduced by the Secretary of State.This is as bad as I 've ever seen , folks.So , it 's worse than ACTA [ boingboing.net ] ( which affects the entire world ) ? It 's a declaration of war by the entertainment industry and their captured regulators against the principles of free speech , privacy , freedom of assembly , the presumption of innocence , and competition.Are you aware what " declaration of war " and " captured " mean ?
How about swapping that out with " threat of control " and " purchased " ?
I mean , if it 's a declaration of war then the populace should just capture their parliament as prisoners of war , right ? This proposal creates the office of Pirate-Finder General , with unlimited power to appoint militias who are above the law , who can pry into every corner of your life , who can disconnect you from your family , job , education and government , who can fine you or put you in jail.That 's it .
You had a really informative post going there but that last part is a level of fear mongering I have n't seen since the United States invaded Iraq .
I heavily suspect you are being played as an unwitting rube by the party opposite of those planning to introduce this .
If you had kept your post informative I 'd have gobbled it up but at this point I 'm dubious that another propaganda tool is n't at work somewhere along this channel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Secretary of State Peter Mandelson is planning to introduce changes to the Digital Economy Bill now under debate in Parliament.So that's what you consider secret?
I mean, it sounds bad but I probably wouldn't flip out until it's actually introduced and added to the bill.
I guess I'm not an expert on UK law ... by saying "planning to introduce" do you mean it's already law?
If not, I would expect parliament to be highly suspect of the introduction of something designed to give the Secretary of State such power ... when it's introduced by the Secretary of State.This is as bad as I've ever seen, folks.So, it's worse than ACTA [boingboing.net] (which affects the entire world)?It's a declaration of war by the entertainment industry and their captured regulators against the principles of free speech, privacy, freedom of assembly, the presumption of innocence, and competition.Are you aware what "declaration of war" and "captured" mean?
How about swapping that out with "threat of control" and "purchased"?
I mean, if it's a declaration of war then the populace should just capture their parliament as prisoners of war, right?This proposal creates the office of Pirate-Finder General, with unlimited power to appoint militias who are above the law, who can pry into every corner of your life, who can disconnect you from your family, job, education and government, who can fine you or put you in jail.That's it.
You had a really informative post going there but that last part is a level of fear mongering I haven't seen since the United States invaded Iraq.
I heavily suspect you are being played as an unwitting rube by the party opposite of those planning to introduce this.
If you had kept your post informative I'd have gobbled it up but at this point I'm dubious that another propaganda tool isn't at work somewhere along this channel.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158248</id>
	<title>you know</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1258652100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the law versus technological progress is a pretty heavily loaded contest</p><p>please study your history on the outcome of these contests</p><p>a lot of supposedly smart, but hopelessly old (not necessarily chronologically, just in terms of anyone set in their thinking) people just do NOT understand the full implications of the internet</p><p>again, for anyone who's missed it, even though hearing it for the 1,000th time isn't probably going to finally open your eyes:</p><p>the internet has effectively replaced pre-internet distribution models. copyright law consists of gentleman's agreements between major publishers from that era. you cannot extend those gentleman's agreements to random anonymous teenagers the world over. rather, random anonymous teenagers the world over will compel you to rewrite fundamental copyright law, simply because its completely unenforceable in a new technological reality</p><p>were you listening? do you get it yet? do you understand?</p><p>no?</p><p>well then onward with the fucking copyright secret police then brave soldier. whatever. fucking retarded. i guess we just need to wait for certain closed minds to just fucking die already like the ossified dinosaurs they are then. stubborn ignorant blind obstacles to progress</p><p>ten thousand lawyers, government paper pushers, and enforcement goons</p><p>versus</p><p>ten million media hungry, technologically savvy, and most importantly, POOR teenagers</p><p>figure it out</p><p>you lose, you fucking morons</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the law versus technological progress is a pretty heavily loaded contestplease study your history on the outcome of these contestsa lot of supposedly smart , but hopelessly old ( not necessarily chronologically , just in terms of anyone set in their thinking ) people just do NOT understand the full implications of the internetagain , for anyone who 's missed it , even though hearing it for the 1,000th time is n't probably going to finally open your eyes : the internet has effectively replaced pre-internet distribution models .
copyright law consists of gentleman 's agreements between major publishers from that era .
you can not extend those gentleman 's agreements to random anonymous teenagers the world over .
rather , random anonymous teenagers the world over will compel you to rewrite fundamental copyright law , simply because its completely unenforceable in a new technological realitywere you listening ?
do you get it yet ?
do you understand ? no ? well then onward with the fucking copyright secret police then brave soldier .
whatever. fucking retarded .
i guess we just need to wait for certain closed minds to just fucking die already like the ossified dinosaurs they are then .
stubborn ignorant blind obstacles to progressten thousand lawyers , government paper pushers , and enforcement goonsversusten million media hungry , technologically savvy , and most importantly , POOR teenagersfigure it outyou lose , you fucking morons</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the law versus technological progress is a pretty heavily loaded contestplease study your history on the outcome of these contestsa lot of supposedly smart, but hopelessly old (not necessarily chronologically, just in terms of anyone set in their thinking) people just do NOT understand the full implications of the internetagain, for anyone who's missed it, even though hearing it for the 1,000th time isn't probably going to finally open your eyes:the internet has effectively replaced pre-internet distribution models.
copyright law consists of gentleman's agreements between major publishers from that era.
you cannot extend those gentleman's agreements to random anonymous teenagers the world over.
rather, random anonymous teenagers the world over will compel you to rewrite fundamental copyright law, simply because its completely unenforceable in a new technological realitywere you listening?
do you get it yet?
do you understand?no?well then onward with the fucking copyright secret police then brave soldier.
whatever. fucking retarded.
i guess we just need to wait for certain closed minds to just fucking die already like the ossified dinosaurs they are then.
stubborn ignorant blind obstacles to progressten thousand lawyers, government paper pushers, and enforcement goonsversusten million media hungry, technologically savvy, and most importantly, POOR teenagersfigure it outyou lose, you fucking morons</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160264</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it...</title>
	<author>Wowsers</author>
	<datestamp>1258658220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How to sneak something into UK law, easy, you use what's called the "Statutory Instrument". It was beefed up and abused by the current crooked government, and it allows ANY law to be passed without anyone in The House of Commons or House of Lords EVER having seen it.</p><p>

<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/henryporter/2009/jan/14/statutory-instruments-parliament" title="guardian.co.uk">http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/henryporter/2009/jan/14/statutory-instruments-parliament</a> [guardian.co.uk] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>If you're looking for an answer to the question - how does Labour make so much law without anyone noticing? - and if you want to know how 3,000 new offences have been created, over a third of which carry prison sentences, then you are half way there. The shocking abuse of secondary legislation, usually referred to by the term "statutory instruments", is one of the scandals of our time.

</p><p>Statutory instruments - ministerial diktats by any other name - are a way of making sure that little is debated or scrutinised by MPs. With their increasing use, power passes from the chamber of the House of Commons and parliamentary committees to ministers and ultimately to senior civil servants, a naturally undemocratic group who think of the public as an awkward managerial problem.</p><p>

The provisions, which are inserted in a bill and allow the government to amend or repeal the legislation without debate are known as Henry VIII clauses. With good reason: they were named after Henry VIII's Statute of Proclamation of 1539, which gave him the power to make law by proclamation.</p> </div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How to sneak something into UK law , easy , you use what 's called the " Statutory Instrument " .
It was beefed up and abused by the current crooked government , and it allows ANY law to be passed without anyone in The House of Commons or House of Lords EVER having seen it .
http : //www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/henryporter/2009/jan/14/statutory-instruments-parliament [ guardian.co.uk ] If you 're looking for an answer to the question - how does Labour make so much law without anyone noticing ?
- and if you want to know how 3,000 new offences have been created , over a third of which carry prison sentences , then you are half way there .
The shocking abuse of secondary legislation , usually referred to by the term " statutory instruments " , is one of the scandals of our time .
Statutory instruments - ministerial diktats by any other name - are a way of making sure that little is debated or scrutinised by MPs .
With their increasing use , power passes from the chamber of the House of Commons and parliamentary committees to ministers and ultimately to senior civil servants , a naturally undemocratic group who think of the public as an awkward managerial problem .
The provisions , which are inserted in a bill and allow the government to amend or repeal the legislation without debate are known as Henry VIII clauses .
With good reason : they were named after Henry VIII 's Statute of Proclamation of 1539 , which gave him the power to make law by proclamation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How to sneak something into UK law, easy, you use what's called the "Statutory Instrument".
It was beefed up and abused by the current crooked government, and it allows ANY law to be passed without anyone in The House of Commons or House of Lords EVER having seen it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/henryporter/2009/jan/14/statutory-instruments-parliament [guardian.co.uk] If you're looking for an answer to the question - how does Labour make so much law without anyone noticing?
- and if you want to know how 3,000 new offences have been created, over a third of which carry prison sentences, then you are half way there.
The shocking abuse of secondary legislation, usually referred to by the term "statutory instruments", is one of the scandals of our time.
Statutory instruments - ministerial diktats by any other name - are a way of making sure that little is debated or scrutinised by MPs.
With their increasing use, power passes from the chamber of the House of Commons and parliamentary committees to ministers and ultimately to senior civil servants, a naturally undemocratic group who think of the public as an awkward managerial problem.
The provisions, which are inserted in a bill and allow the government to amend or repeal the legislation without debate are known as Henry VIII clauses.
With good reason: they were named after Henry VIII's Statute of Proclamation of 1539, which gave him the power to make law by proclamation. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158646</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think they really care....</title>
	<author>HungryHobo</author>
	<datestamp>1258653300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you guys handle the GPS thing?<br>I mean I really can't see a way of making a system that could tell the difference between driving through a tunnel/parking inside and wrapping a tin foil bag around the antennae.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you guys handle the GPS thing ? I mean I really ca n't see a way of making a system that could tell the difference between driving through a tunnel/parking inside and wrapping a tin foil bag around the antennae .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you guys handle the GPS thing?I mean I really can't see a way of making a system that could tell the difference between driving through a tunnel/parking inside and wrapping a tin foil bag around the antennae.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158632</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1258653240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>V?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>V ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>V?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158748</id>
	<title>No consequences.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258653600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Politicians are offered incentives to fuck over human beings, but face no consequences for doing so. Now, I'm not normally one to consider people as pure incentive-following machines - but politicians aren't people in the strictest sense. They are psychopaths.</p><p>Look at Tony Blair. He lied to start an illegal war which killed probably hundreds of thousands of people. He left office when he chose to, and is now living comfortably, despite what he did. Why wouldn't a British politician simply do as they will? They know they are fucking untouchable.</p><p>I'm trying to think of sane and enlightened ways the people can deal with this situation, but the only thing running through my mind is <i>sic semper tyrannis</i>. They need, somehow, to fear the consequences of their actions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Politicians are offered incentives to fuck over human beings , but face no consequences for doing so .
Now , I 'm not normally one to consider people as pure incentive-following machines - but politicians are n't people in the strictest sense .
They are psychopaths.Look at Tony Blair .
He lied to start an illegal war which killed probably hundreds of thousands of people .
He left office when he chose to , and is now living comfortably , despite what he did .
Why would n't a British politician simply do as they will ?
They know they are fucking untouchable.I 'm trying to think of sane and enlightened ways the people can deal with this situation , but the only thing running through my mind is sic semper tyrannis .
They need , somehow , to fear the consequences of their actions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Politicians are offered incentives to fuck over human beings, but face no consequences for doing so.
Now, I'm not normally one to consider people as pure incentive-following machines - but politicians aren't people in the strictest sense.
They are psychopaths.Look at Tony Blair.
He lied to start an illegal war which killed probably hundreds of thousands of people.
He left office when he chose to, and is now living comfortably, despite what he did.
Why wouldn't a British politician simply do as they will?
They know they are fucking untouchable.I'm trying to think of sane and enlightened ways the people can deal with this situation, but the only thing running through my mind is sic semper tyrannis.
They need, somehow, to fear the consequences of their actions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159952</id>
	<title>Meanwhile in a cave in Afghanistan....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258657320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Osama bin laden says "hahahaha! Those stupid western infidels are more worried about catching 14yo Billy Johnson than they are of catching me or my 18 virgins! I knew that buying stock in the world wide movie industry would pay off.. now, you, child of allah, did you get my copy of the movie 2012 from Mandelson???"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Osama bin laden says " hahahaha !
Those stupid western infidels are more worried about catching 14yo Billy Johnson than they are of catching me or my 18 virgins !
I knew that buying stock in the world wide movie industry would pay off.. now , you , child of allah , did you get my copy of the movie 2012 from Mandelson ? ? ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Osama bin laden says "hahahaha!
Those stupid western infidels are more worried about catching 14yo Billy Johnson than they are of catching me or my 18 virgins!
I knew that buying stock in the world wide movie industry would pay off.. now, you, child of allah, did you get my copy of the movie 2012 from Mandelson???
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158344</id>
	<title>Cute name</title>
	<author>R2.0</author>
	<datestamp>1258652460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will Major Major Major report to him?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will Major Major Major report to him ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will Major Major Major report to him?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163184</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>jimicus</author>
	<datestamp>1258624620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Guy Fawkes? The man burned in effigy to underline his failure to accomplish his goals? I can think of better symbols!</p></div><p>Yet people complain that we need another one every year.</p><p>In fact, I recall when I was a kid reading the Just William books where William mentioned that his father "thought we needed someone to do the same again" (or words to that effect) - and they were mostly written in the 1930's-50s.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Guy Fawkes ?
The man burned in effigy to underline his failure to accomplish his goals ?
I can think of better symbols ! Yet people complain that we need another one every year.In fact , I recall when I was a kid reading the Just William books where William mentioned that his father " thought we needed someone to do the same again " ( or words to that effect ) - and they were mostly written in the 1930 's-50s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guy Fawkes?
The man burned in effigy to underline his failure to accomplish his goals?
I can think of better symbols!Yet people complain that we need another one every year.In fact, I recall when I was a kid reading the Just William books where William mentioned that his father "thought we needed someone to do the same again" (or words to that effect) - and they were mostly written in the 1930's-50s.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158176</id>
	<title>War is being declared on UK citizens.</title>
	<author>elucido</author>
	<datestamp>1258651920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the same sort of moves that were made during prohibitions and during the war on drugs. They do not care about the consequences to the economy or about the UK citizen. He only cares about the people he really works for and thats the copyright cartel. This Mandelson works for the RIAA/MPAA. He is their man, not yours. If you want this to change then your man will have to be in that position.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the same sort of moves that were made during prohibitions and during the war on drugs .
They do not care about the consequences to the economy or about the UK citizen .
He only cares about the people he really works for and thats the copyright cartel .
This Mandelson works for the RIAA/MPAA .
He is their man , not yours .
If you want this to change then your man will have to be in that position .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the same sort of moves that were made during prohibitions and during the war on drugs.
They do not care about the consequences to the economy or about the UK citizen.
He only cares about the people he really works for and thats the copyright cartel.
This Mandelson works for the RIAA/MPAA.
He is their man, not yours.
If you want this to change then your man will have to be in that position.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158842</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>Ephemeriis</author>
	<datestamp>1258653900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No, you need new politicians.  Which, in the UK's case, means you're due for another round of governance by the Tories.  So you're basically fucked.</p></div><p>The problem with that is, if the UK is anything like the US, a new batch of politicians isn't going to be any better than the old batch.</p><p>Sure, each party is going to have its own pet ideological projects...  They'll push for some kind of reform or regulation, or less of those, or whatever.  But, ultimately, politicians really don't seem to be terribly interested in what the average citizen has to say.  They just wind up doing whatever their lobbyists and corporate interests tell them to.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , you need new politicians .
Which , in the UK 's case , means you 're due for another round of governance by the Tories .
So you 're basically fucked.The problem with that is , if the UK is anything like the US , a new batch of politicians is n't going to be any better than the old batch.Sure , each party is going to have its own pet ideological projects... They 'll push for some kind of reform or regulation , or less of those , or whatever .
But , ultimately , politicians really do n't seem to be terribly interested in what the average citizen has to say .
They just wind up doing whatever their lobbyists and corporate interests tell them to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, you need new politicians.
Which, in the UK's case, means you're due for another round of governance by the Tories.
So you're basically fucked.The problem with that is, if the UK is anything like the US, a new batch of politicians isn't going to be any better than the old batch.Sure, each party is going to have its own pet ideological projects...  They'll push for some kind of reform or regulation, or less of those, or whatever.
But, ultimately, politicians really don't seem to be terribly interested in what the average citizen has to say.
They just wind up doing whatever their lobbyists and corporate interests tell them to.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158518</id>
	<title>Re:New internet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258652940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They should elect <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cd/DavyJones400px.jpg" title="wikimedia.org" rel="nofollow">this guy</a> [wikimedia.org] to take care of their pirate problem. Eh, you could do worse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They should elect this guy [ wikimedia.org ] to take care of their pirate problem .
Eh , you could do worse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should elect this guy [wikimedia.org] to take care of their pirate problem.
Eh, you could do worse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30162358</id>
	<title>Re:WTF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258621920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>and pretend that in some alternate reality Labour would somehow have been able to fix the problems they were unable to prevent in the first place.</p></div></blockquote><p>They have a plan for that. They're going to change the size of the variable in the treasury computer which keeps the total in the public kitty, then spend, spend, spend until it wraps around, and we'll be rich again!</p><p>Sadly, this is going to be a government IT project, so it'll be outsourced to EDS, cost 10-20 more than they said it would, be a decade overdue and will never actually work.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and pretend that in some alternate reality Labour would somehow have been able to fix the problems they were unable to prevent in the first place.They have a plan for that .
They 're going to change the size of the variable in the treasury computer which keeps the total in the public kitty , then spend , spend , spend until it wraps around , and we 'll be rich again ! Sadly , this is going to be a government IT project , so it 'll be outsourced to EDS , cost 10-20 more than they said it would , be a decade overdue and will never actually work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and pretend that in some alternate reality Labour would somehow have been able to fix the problems they were unable to prevent in the first place.They have a plan for that.
They're going to change the size of the variable in the treasury computer which keeps the total in the public kitty, then spend, spend, spend until it wraps around, and we'll be rich again!Sadly, this is going to be a government IT project, so it'll be outsourced to EDS, cost 10-20 more than they said it would, be a decade overdue and will never actually work.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159032</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158112
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158590
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30199608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30172828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163084
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30170818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158112
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30162386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165574
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158664
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30162024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30170742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30170434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163020
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158804
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160860
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30162358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161860
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_19_1511255_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30167664
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159338
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30157988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158144
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158850
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30199608
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163684
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158590
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158150
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163004
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158428
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163184
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158092
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158788
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158672
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158842
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158664
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165944
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159172
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158518
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158572
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158478
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30172828
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158922
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159032
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30162358
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30170742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158592
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161860
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160952
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160508
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163062
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159520
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158044
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158252
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160794
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158116
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165368
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159952
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160138
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160860
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30167664
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30161694
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160264
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158248
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158536
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158798
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159098
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30170818
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159562
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160698
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30162386
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159226
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163020
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163324
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159530
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158588
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160420
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30162024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30159260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158638
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158746
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163648
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30165954
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158272
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_19_1511255.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30158748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30160042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30163240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_19_1511255.30170434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
