<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_08_211240</id>
	<title>Mozilla Thunderbird 3 Released</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1260269280000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>supersloshy writes <i>Today Mozilla released <a href="http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/">Thunderbird 3</a>.
Many <a href="http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/features/">new features</a> are available, including Tabs and enhanced search features, a message archive for emails you don't want to delete but still want to keep, Firefox 3's improved Add-ons Manager, Personas support, and many other improvements. <a href="http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/all.html">Download here</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>supersloshy writes Today Mozilla released Thunderbird 3 .
Many new features are available , including Tabs and enhanced search features , a message archive for emails you do n't want to delete but still want to keep , Firefox 3 's improved Add-ons Manager , Personas support , and many other improvements .
Download here .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>supersloshy writes Today Mozilla released Thunderbird 3.
Many new features are available, including Tabs and enhanced search features, a message archive for emails you don't want to delete but still want to keep, Firefox 3's improved Add-ons Manager, Personas support, and many other improvements.
Download here.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372282</id>
	<title>Re:Lightning....</title>
	<author>naveenkumar.s</author>
	<datestamp>1260277080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That seems quite an important extension - any idea when (or if) it will be supported by TB3?</p></div><p>Try the lightning nightly builds. It worked with TB3 beta.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That seems quite an important extension - any idea when ( or if ) it will be supported by TB3 ? Try the lightning nightly builds .
It worked with TB3 beta .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That seems quite an important extension - any idea when (or if) it will be supported by TB3?Try the lightning nightly builds.
It worked with TB3 beta.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30380190</id>
	<title>Re:Hopefully improved.</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1259571780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are checkboxes that control that you know, they are there in 2.0 as well.</p><p>Account Settings -&gt; select an account -&gt; Offline and Disk Space</p><p>It does occasionally download messages multiple times if your mail server is retarded and doesn't use the same message id for some weird reason for each new connection, but thats a mail server issue and will effect clients other than thunderbird since it breaks the protocol.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are checkboxes that control that you know , they are there in 2.0 as well.Account Settings - &gt; select an account - &gt; Offline and Disk SpaceIt does occasionally download messages multiple times if your mail server is retarded and does n't use the same message id for some weird reason for each new connection , but thats a mail server issue and will effect clients other than thunderbird since it breaks the protocol .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are checkboxes that control that you know, they are there in 2.0 as well.Account Settings -&gt; select an account -&gt; Offline and Disk SpaceIt does occasionally download messages multiple times if your mail server is retarded and doesn't use the same message id for some weird reason for each new connection, but thats a mail server issue and will effect clients other than thunderbird since it breaks the protocol.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746</id>
	<title>A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260273780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been using Thunderbird 3 in beta for the last few months on an ubuntu system. TB 3 doesn't look dramatically different than TB 2, but the performance difference is *enormous*. TB 2 would crash frequently, it would periodically use all resources while it did heaven knows what, and Gmail IMAP was a disaster.</p><p>TB 3 is responsive, hardly ever crashes (perhaps twice in 3 months), search is *way* improved, and it finally feels like first-rate software. My hat is off to the Thunderbird team.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using Thunderbird 3 in beta for the last few months on an ubuntu system .
TB 3 does n't look dramatically different than TB 2 , but the performance difference is * enormous * .
TB 2 would crash frequently , it would periodically use all resources while it did heaven knows what , and Gmail IMAP was a disaster.TB 3 is responsive , hardly ever crashes ( perhaps twice in 3 months ) , search is * way * improved , and it finally feels like first-rate software .
My hat is off to the Thunderbird team .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using Thunderbird 3 in beta for the last few months on an ubuntu system.
TB 3 doesn't look dramatically different than TB 2, but the performance difference is *enormous*.
TB 2 would crash frequently, it would periodically use all resources while it did heaven knows what, and Gmail IMAP was a disaster.TB 3 is responsive, hardly ever crashes (perhaps twice in 3 months), search is *way* improved, and it finally feels like first-rate software.
My hat is off to the Thunderbird team.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372590</id>
	<title>Re:Conversation view != threads</title>
	<author>mrand</author>
	<datestamp>1260278760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does ANY client do gmail like conversation views?  Zimbra didn't have it as of mid 2009.  Does Horde have it?  Anything?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does ANY client do gmail like conversation views ?
Zimbra did n't have it as of mid 2009 .
Does Horde have it ?
Anything ? !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does ANY client do gmail like conversation views?
Zimbra didn't have it as of mid 2009.
Does Horde have it?
Anything?!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376180</id>
	<title>Re:New quick search sucks big time</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259589960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bet the old functionality is still in there somewhere.<br>How about doing a diff of the UI files (basically XML) of the old and new version of the search, and making an extension out of it?<br>That should be pretty easy. If the C code is there, it will work.</p><p>If not, then you would need to patch that. And only then gets it harder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet the old functionality is still in there somewhere.How about doing a diff of the UI files ( basically XML ) of the old and new version of the search , and making an extension out of it ? That should be pretty easy .
If the C code is there , it will work.If not , then you would need to patch that .
And only then gets it harder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet the old functionality is still in there somewhere.How about doing a diff of the UI files (basically XML) of the old and new version of the search, and making an extension out of it?That should be pretty easy.
If the C code is there, it will work.If not, then you would need to patch that.
And only then gets it harder.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372450</id>
	<title>Re:I blame the cold weather</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260277980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>youre forgetting addons for chrome</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>youre forgetting addons for chrome</tokentext>
<sentencetext>youre forgetting addons for chrome</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372018</id>
	<title>Re:Sometimes there are ...</title>
	<author>Jugalator</author>
	<datestamp>1260275400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Haha, I had an idiocracy monent there</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Haha , I had an idiocracy monent there</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Haha, I had an idiocracy monent there</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372240</id>
	<title>Re:A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>DynamiteNeon</author>
	<datestamp>1260276780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GMail IMAP still has problems though.  I've been tracking it since the betas, and they haven't fixed the issues with checking folders for new mail.  So, if you subscribe to the "All Mail" folder, you get a notification in your inbox and "All Mail."  It basically ignores the checkbox right now for "check this folder for new mail" in the properties.</p><p>You could always unsubscribe to "all mail" but that kind of defeats the purpose of the new search and archive features.</p><p>I still like it overall, but the multiple notifications are a little annoying.  I'm hoping they resolve them soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GMail IMAP still has problems though .
I 've been tracking it since the betas , and they have n't fixed the issues with checking folders for new mail .
So , if you subscribe to the " All Mail " folder , you get a notification in your inbox and " All Mail .
" It basically ignores the checkbox right now for " check this folder for new mail " in the properties.You could always unsubscribe to " all mail " but that kind of defeats the purpose of the new search and archive features.I still like it overall , but the multiple notifications are a little annoying .
I 'm hoping they resolve them soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GMail IMAP still has problems though.
I've been tracking it since the betas, and they haven't fixed the issues with checking folders for new mail.
So, if you subscribe to the "All Mail" folder, you get a notification in your inbox and "All Mail.
"  It basically ignores the checkbox right now for "check this folder for new mail" in the properties.You could always unsubscribe to "all mail" but that kind of defeats the purpose of the new search and archive features.I still like it overall, but the multiple notifications are a little annoying.
I'm hoping they resolve them soon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>Misanthrope</author>
	<datestamp>1260273420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's had that for ages<br>To view emails as conversation threads, go to View, Sort By, and choose Threaded, (Unthreaded to stop showing threads.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's had that for agesTo view emails as conversation threads , go to View , Sort By , and choose Threaded , ( Unthreaded to stop showing threads .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's had that for agesTo view emails as conversation threads, go to View, Sort By, and choose Threaded, (Unthreaded to stop showing threads.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373120</id>
	<title>Account Creator is a Pain</title>
	<author>neoform</author>
	<datestamp>1260283140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just installed it. The account creator tool is a real pain in the ass. There's no simple option to just create a regular IMAP account. The menus kept resetting on me.

They needa work out the bugs and let people skip those auto-wizards more easily.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just installed it .
The account creator tool is a real pain in the ass .
There 's no simple option to just create a regular IMAP account .
The menus kept resetting on me .
They needa work out the bugs and let people skip those auto-wizards more easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just installed it.
The account creator tool is a real pain in the ass.
There's no simple option to just create a regular IMAP account.
The menus kept resetting on me.
They needa work out the bugs and let people skip those auto-wizards more easily.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30380274</id>
	<title>Glad to see they haven't fixed my bug...</title>
	<author>MoNsTeR</author>
	<datestamp>1259572380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...wherein when you set up a new IMAP account it purges all the messages you had marked-as-deleted without asking you.  Or in this case does it when migrating settings from version 2, again without asking you.</p><p>I actually had a developer try to argue this wasn't a bug.  Are you fucking serious, guys?  Permanently deleting 10,000+ messages with no confirmation is a FEATURE?</p><p>I also like how it had to re-download all my folders for no good reason.</p><p>Pretty close to re-installing 2.x at this point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...wherein when you set up a new IMAP account it purges all the messages you had marked-as-deleted without asking you .
Or in this case does it when migrating settings from version 2 , again without asking you.I actually had a developer try to argue this was n't a bug .
Are you fucking serious , guys ?
Permanently deleting 10,000 + messages with no confirmation is a FEATURE ? I also like how it had to re-download all my folders for no good reason.Pretty close to re-installing 2.x at this point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...wherein when you set up a new IMAP account it purges all the messages you had marked-as-deleted without asking you.
Or in this case does it when migrating settings from version 2, again without asking you.I actually had a developer try to argue this wasn't a bug.
Are you fucking serious, guys?
Permanently deleting 10,000+ messages with no confirmation is a FEATURE?I also like how it had to re-download all my folders for no good reason.Pretty close to re-installing 2.x at this point.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</id>
	<title>Tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260272880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>a message archive for emails <i>you don't want to delete but still want to keep</i></p> </div><p>Well that was cleverly written<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>But tabbed email sounds interesting. It makes text editors, web browsers and many other apps so much better and makes so much sense for email application that I'm thinking why didn't Thunderbird have it before.</p><p>One thing I would surely like to see in email clients however - the gmail like threaded conversation view. It's just so much better and nicer to use, but still many email applications tend to have the plain-list-of-messages view.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>a message archive for emails you do n't want to delete but still want to keep Well that was cleverly written : ) But tabbed email sounds interesting .
It makes text editors , web browsers and many other apps so much better and makes so much sense for email application that I 'm thinking why did n't Thunderbird have it before.One thing I would surely like to see in email clients however - the gmail like threaded conversation view .
It 's just so much better and nicer to use , but still many email applications tend to have the plain-list-of-messages view .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a message archive for emails you don't want to delete but still want to keep Well that was cleverly written :)But tabbed email sounds interesting.
It makes text editors, web browsers and many other apps so much better and makes so much sense for email application that I'm thinking why didn't Thunderbird have it before.One thing I would surely like to see in email clients however - the gmail like threaded conversation view.
It's just so much better and nicer to use, but still many email applications tend to have the plain-list-of-messages view.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372108</id>
	<title>Great</title>
	<author>Ark42</author>
	<datestamp>1260275880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now I can't get to my calendar anymore. Thanks for synchronizing an update with the Lightning extension</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I ca n't get to my calendar anymore .
Thanks for synchronizing an update with the Lightning extension</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I can't get to my calendar anymore.
Thanks for synchronizing an update with the Lightning extension</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371930</id>
	<title>to head</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*holds gun to head*</p><p>Persona!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* holds gun to head * Persona !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*holds gun to head*Persona!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30377190</id>
	<title>Re:Lightning....</title>
	<author>dhammond</author>
	<datestamp>1259598000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, I was initially excited to hear that Thunderbird 3 was released, but I didn't get the memo about Lightning not being bundled as promised a while ago.  I will certainly be waiting for a stable version of Lightning (and Google Calendar Provider) before trying TB3.  Lightning works really well with Google Calendar in TB2.  So I guess for me, there's nothing to see here and I'm moving along.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I was initially excited to hear that Thunderbird 3 was released , but I did n't get the memo about Lightning not being bundled as promised a while ago .
I will certainly be waiting for a stable version of Lightning ( and Google Calendar Provider ) before trying TB3 .
Lightning works really well with Google Calendar in TB2 .
So I guess for me , there 's nothing to see here and I 'm moving along .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I was initially excited to hear that Thunderbird 3 was released, but I didn't get the memo about Lightning not being bundled as promised a while ago.
I will certainly be waiting for a stable version of Lightning (and Google Calendar Provider) before trying TB3.
Lightning works really well with Google Calendar in TB2.
So I guess for me, there's nothing to see here and I'm moving along.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372370</id>
	<title>is a big step up UI-wise, too?</title>
	<author>SuperBanana</author>
	<datestamp>1260277620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...because the UI for Thunderbird is THE.  WORST.</p><p>For example, want to copy the people who have been cc'd on a message so you can paste it into a new one?  BZZZZT. Can't do it.</p><p>Only in the open source world would it be normal to have to do about 3-4 steps to add "cc" or "bcc" to an email, instead of one tab or click.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...because the UI for Thunderbird is THE .
WORST.For example , want to copy the people who have been cc 'd on a message so you can paste it into a new one ?
BZZZZT. Ca n't do it.Only in the open source world would it be normal to have to do about 3-4 steps to add " cc " or " bcc " to an email , instead of one tab or click .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...because the UI for Thunderbird is THE.
WORST.For example, want to copy the people who have been cc'd on a message so you can paste it into a new one?
BZZZZT. Can't do it.Only in the open source world would it be normal to have to do about 3-4 steps to add "cc" or "bcc" to an email, instead of one tab or click.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376072</id>
	<title>Re:4GB limit and attachment handling?</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1259588940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just confirmed a folder with 6.8 G is now showing mail going back to 2002 on an IMAP server. I never could see that in Thunderbird 2.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just confirmed a folder with 6.8 G is now showing mail going back to 2002 on an IMAP server .
I never could see that in Thunderbird 2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just confirmed a folder with 6.8 G is now showing mail going back to 2002 on an IMAP server.
I never could see that in Thunderbird 2.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371866</id>
	<title>Re:A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Too little too late. I switched to mail.app on my mac last week because i was sick of thunderbird having no meaningful updates in years. I checked the new features list for TB3 and none of it was compelling enough to make me stay.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too little too late .
I switched to mail.app on my mac last week because i was sick of thunderbird having no meaningful updates in years .
I checked the new features list for TB3 and none of it was compelling enough to make me stay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too little too late.
I switched to mail.app on my mac last week because i was sick of thunderbird having no meaningful updates in years.
I checked the new features list for TB3 and none of it was compelling enough to make me stay.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372878</id>
	<title>No add-on support . . .</title>
	<author>structengineer</author>
	<datestamp>1260281040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dear Mozilla, let me know when you've added the functionality of my add-ons (Lightning, Minimize-to-Tray, Remember Mismatched Domains, Contacts Sidebar, Mail Redirect and Import/Export Tools) to your base program and I'll think about upgrading . . .</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear Mozilla , let me know when you 've added the functionality of my add-ons ( Lightning , Minimize-to-Tray , Remember Mismatched Domains , Contacts Sidebar , Mail Redirect and Import/Export Tools ) to your base program and I 'll think about upgrading .
. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear Mozilla, let me know when you've added the functionality of my add-ons (Lightning, Minimize-to-Tray, Remember Mismatched Domains, Contacts Sidebar, Mail Redirect and Import/Export Tools) to your base program and I'll think about upgrading .
. .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372360</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>caseih</author>
	<datestamp>1260277560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gmail's conversation view would be better if it actually was threaded.  As it is it is just a flat he said you said view (like an IM log).  This doesn't work well at all for mailing lists, or for any conversation involving more than 2 people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gmail 's conversation view would be better if it actually was threaded .
As it is it is just a flat he said you said view ( like an IM log ) .
This does n't work well at all for mailing lists , or for any conversation involving more than 2 people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gmail's conversation view would be better if it actually was threaded.
As it is it is just a flat he said you said view (like an IM log).
This doesn't work well at all for mailing lists, or for any conversation involving more than 2 people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373404</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260285420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AKA "a message archive for emails you want to keep"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AKA " a message archive for emails you want to keep "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AKA "a message archive for emails you want to keep"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30510208</id>
	<title>attachment size - WTF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261392000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no way to know the file size of attachments for incoming or outgoing mails in TB 3</p><p>For that single reason I reinstalled TB 2 and added the add-on for this - it only works in ver. 2</p><p>IMO It's the craziest and most stupid omission I've seen in 20 years of computing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no way to know the file size of attachments for incoming or outgoing mails in TB 3For that single reason I reinstalled TB 2 and added the add-on for this - it only works in ver .
2IMO It 's the craziest and most stupid omission I 've seen in 20 years of computing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no way to know the file size of attachments for incoming or outgoing mails in TB 3For that single reason I reinstalled TB 2 and added the add-on for this - it only works in ver.
2IMO It's the craziest and most stupid omission I've seen in 20 years of computing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372026</id>
	<title>Message Archive.</title>
	<author>supersloshy</author>
	<datestamp>1260275460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>a message archive for emails you don&rsquo;t want to delete but still want to keep</p><p>To be more specific, the message archive is for emails that you want to get rid of, but don't exactly want to delete. Like if you're in a mailing list and want to clean out your inbox, but you don't want to delete all of (or at least some of) your messages in that mailing list. It's basically just another way of organizing things. Sorry if I didn't make any sense before<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:\.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a message archive for emails you don    t want to delete but still want to keepTo be more specific , the message archive is for emails that you want to get rid of , but do n't exactly want to delete .
Like if you 're in a mailing list and want to clean out your inbox , but you do n't want to delete all of ( or at least some of ) your messages in that mailing list .
It 's basically just another way of organizing things .
Sorry if I did n't make any sense before : \ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a message archive for emails you don’t want to delete but still want to keepTo be more specific, the message archive is for emails that you want to get rid of, but don't exactly want to delete.
Like if you're in a mailing list and want to clean out your inbox, but you don't want to delete all of (or at least some of) your messages in that mailing list.
It's basically just another way of organizing things.
Sorry if I didn't make any sense before :\.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375088</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259573160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can copy and paste an image, or part of an image into a thunderbird email body in a moment. With Gmail you have to crop the image, save another copy and then upload it to gmail. This takes longer and is a pain to explain to beginner computer users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can copy and paste an image , or part of an image into a thunderbird email body in a moment .
With Gmail you have to crop the image , save another copy and then upload it to gmail .
This takes longer and is a pain to explain to beginner computer users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can copy and paste an image, or part of an image into a thunderbird email body in a moment.
With Gmail you have to crop the image, save another copy and then upload it to gmail.
This takes longer and is a pain to explain to beginner computer users.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374010</id>
	<title>Re:Conversation view != threads</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260291900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can be done. I do so myself to have a gmail like conversation view. All you have to do is mark All Mail as a Favourite folders, make fav folder view your default view. Threads in this folder will be exactly like in gmail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can be done .
I do so myself to have a gmail like conversation view .
All you have to do is mark All Mail as a Favourite folders , make fav folder view your default view .
Threads in this folder will be exactly like in gmail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can be done.
I do so myself to have a gmail like conversation view.
All you have to do is mark All Mail as a Favourite folders, make fav folder view your default view.
Threads in this folder will be exactly like in gmail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372642</id>
	<title>Re:I blame the cold weather</title>
	<author>AmberBlackCat</author>
	<datestamp>1260279120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think that's going to be in development a while, but for now you can play their smaller game, Duke Nukem For A Long Time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that 's going to be in development a while , but for now you can play their smaller game , Duke Nukem For A Long Time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that's going to be in development a while, but for now you can play their smaller game, Duke Nukem For A Long Time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372562</id>
	<title>4GB limit and attachment handling?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260278580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have they done something about the 4GB mailbox limit? Are they still living in the FAT32 world or whats the deal with that anyways?</p><p>What about automatically moving attachments out of the bloated mbox file and into their own directory? I know they have extensions to do this manually, but tedious tasks such as these are what computers are good at, it should be automatic, especially if they limit the size of a mailbox to something archaic like 4gb.</p><p>As much as I would like to use Thunderbird, these two things are pretty much deal breakers for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have they done something about the 4GB mailbox limit ?
Are they still living in the FAT32 world or whats the deal with that anyways ? What about automatically moving attachments out of the bloated mbox file and into their own directory ?
I know they have extensions to do this manually , but tedious tasks such as these are what computers are good at , it should be automatic , especially if they limit the size of a mailbox to something archaic like 4gb.As much as I would like to use Thunderbird , these two things are pretty much deal breakers for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have they done something about the 4GB mailbox limit?
Are they still living in the FAT32 world or whats the deal with that anyways?What about automatically moving attachments out of the bloated mbox file and into their own directory?
I know they have extensions to do this manually, but tedious tasks such as these are what computers are good at, it should be automatic, especially if they limit the size of a mailbox to something archaic like 4gb.As much as I would like to use Thunderbird, these two things are pretty much deal breakers for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376844</id>
	<title>word wrap!!!</title>
	<author>gm0e</author>
	<datestamp>1259595780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They finally fixed word wrap! In TB 2, saved message drafts were stuck with carriage returns at the end of each line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They finally fixed word wrap !
In TB 2 , saved message drafts were stuck with carriage returns at the end of each line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They finally fixed word wrap!
In TB 2, saved message drafts were stuck with carriage returns at the end of each line.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30381686</id>
	<title>Re:New quick search sucks big time</title>
	<author>RedBear</author>
	<datestamp>1259578920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Thunderbird 2 had a fairly useful quick search bar. Type a word, hit enter, and your email list was filtered for just the search term. The list could be multi-selected, moved around and general managed in a normal fashion. The feature was handy for bulk operations since it was fast.</p><p><strong>Thunderbird 3 still has the search bar but results appear in a new tab. This tab does not show results as a list but in a fancy HTML based summary view. </strong>That's great if you were searching for a particular message but utterly useless for bulk operations. What if I want to drag and drop a few files around, or delete them or flag them as junk? Even as a summary view it is stupid since it only shows 10 results at a time with a More button at the bottom. FFS, stop mimicking an AJAX web application - the results are RIGHT THERE on the disk and you can certainly show more than 10 results at a time.</p><p><strong>The workaround is to create a saved search</strong> but that's even more hassle for something that could be achieved in seconds in v2.0. So much for progress. I suggest if Thunderbird 3.1 turns up, they put an option or two in to control this behaviour and remember what the user has chosen. There is even a "save search as virtual folder" option in the quick search menu suggesting someone was thinking of doing something like this, it just appears to be inexplicably greyed out.</p><p>Thunderbird 3 has potential but it really feels like a regression in several important respects. It also inexplicably lacks things I would have expected to be improved. For example, you still can't select an email, and right mouse and create a filter from it. This is something that Outlook has had for donkey's years.</p></div><p>You have GOT to be KIDDING me. Why does it always seem like "one step forward, two steps back" with software these days? Is Thunderbird the new GNOME? How can such an idiotic idea survive the entire development cycle from concept to release?</p><p>I'm constantly doing a search-drag-drop kind of operation to sort mail into subfolders that I don't necessarily want to sort automatically with a filter. Looks like TB3 will be, well, fairly useless for this task. Even Outlook can handle finding messages without creating a separate link-based view. Thanks, Mozilla. Way to create an Outlook-killer.</p><p>Am I the only one that just wants to put down my head and cry every time I see stuff like this?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thunderbird 2 had a fairly useful quick search bar .
Type a word , hit enter , and your email list was filtered for just the search term .
The list could be multi-selected , moved around and general managed in a normal fashion .
The feature was handy for bulk operations since it was fast.Thunderbird 3 still has the search bar but results appear in a new tab .
This tab does not show results as a list but in a fancy HTML based summary view .
That 's great if you were searching for a particular message but utterly useless for bulk operations .
What if I want to drag and drop a few files around , or delete them or flag them as junk ?
Even as a summary view it is stupid since it only shows 10 results at a time with a More button at the bottom .
FFS , stop mimicking an AJAX web application - the results are RIGHT THERE on the disk and you can certainly show more than 10 results at a time.The workaround is to create a saved search but that 's even more hassle for something that could be achieved in seconds in v2.0 .
So much for progress .
I suggest if Thunderbird 3.1 turns up , they put an option or two in to control this behaviour and remember what the user has chosen .
There is even a " save search as virtual folder " option in the quick search menu suggesting someone was thinking of doing something like this , it just appears to be inexplicably greyed out.Thunderbird 3 has potential but it really feels like a regression in several important respects .
It also inexplicably lacks things I would have expected to be improved .
For example , you still ca n't select an email , and right mouse and create a filter from it .
This is something that Outlook has had for donkey 's years.You have GOT to be KIDDING me .
Why does it always seem like " one step forward , two steps back " with software these days ?
Is Thunderbird the new GNOME ?
How can such an idiotic idea survive the entire development cycle from concept to release ? I 'm constantly doing a search-drag-drop kind of operation to sort mail into subfolders that I do n't necessarily want to sort automatically with a filter .
Looks like TB3 will be , well , fairly useless for this task .
Even Outlook can handle finding messages without creating a separate link-based view .
Thanks , Mozilla .
Way to create an Outlook-killer.Am I the only one that just wants to put down my head and cry every time I see stuff like this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thunderbird 2 had a fairly useful quick search bar.
Type a word, hit enter, and your email list was filtered for just the search term.
The list could be multi-selected, moved around and general managed in a normal fashion.
The feature was handy for bulk operations since it was fast.Thunderbird 3 still has the search bar but results appear in a new tab.
This tab does not show results as a list but in a fancy HTML based summary view.
That's great if you were searching for a particular message but utterly useless for bulk operations.
What if I want to drag and drop a few files around, or delete them or flag them as junk?
Even as a summary view it is stupid since it only shows 10 results at a time with a More button at the bottom.
FFS, stop mimicking an AJAX web application - the results are RIGHT THERE on the disk and you can certainly show more than 10 results at a time.The workaround is to create a saved search but that's even more hassle for something that could be achieved in seconds in v2.0.
So much for progress.
I suggest if Thunderbird 3.1 turns up, they put an option or two in to control this behaviour and remember what the user has chosen.
There is even a "save search as virtual folder" option in the quick search menu suggesting someone was thinking of doing something like this, it just appears to be inexplicably greyed out.Thunderbird 3 has potential but it really feels like a regression in several important respects.
It also inexplicably lacks things I would have expected to be improved.
For example, you still can't select an email, and right mouse and create a filter from it.
This is something that Outlook has had for donkey's years.You have GOT to be KIDDING me.
Why does it always seem like "one step forward, two steps back" with software these days?
Is Thunderbird the new GNOME?
How can such an idiotic idea survive the entire development cycle from concept to release?I'm constantly doing a search-drag-drop kind of operation to sort mail into subfolders that I don't necessarily want to sort automatically with a filter.
Looks like TB3 will be, well, fairly useless for this task.
Even Outlook can handle finding messages without creating a separate link-based view.
Thanks, Mozilla.
Way to create an Outlook-killer.Am I the only one that just wants to put down my head and cry every time I see stuff like this?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372466</id>
	<title>gave up on 2, is 3 worth it (format msgs, contacts</title>
	<author>cinnamon colbert</author>
	<datestamp>1260278100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i used thunderbird for several years, really tried, but never liked it like outlook, then when i had to get a job, the deficiencys were to much.<br>in particular, the inability to easily control the format of mgs drove me nuts; i'm sure there is some complex command line driven descended setting somewhere, but who has the time ?<br>and a host of other problems - it was never clear to me how to backup msgs, the search function sucked bigtime (you could teach a course on bad gui with the thunderbird search feature) crappy calendar and contact support....</p><p>of course my new laptop with vista is fubared and my old outlook 2000 won't load,  but even the builtin vista windows mail program is better then thunderbird</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i used thunderbird for several years , really tried , but never liked it like outlook , then when i had to get a job , the deficiencys were to much.in particular , the inability to easily control the format of mgs drove me nuts ; i 'm sure there is some complex command line driven descended setting somewhere , but who has the time ? and a host of other problems - it was never clear to me how to backup msgs , the search function sucked bigtime ( you could teach a course on bad gui with the thunderbird search feature ) crappy calendar and contact support....of course my new laptop with vista is fubared and my old outlook 2000 wo n't load , but even the builtin vista windows mail program is better then thunderbird</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i used thunderbird for several years, really tried, but never liked it like outlook, then when i had to get a job, the deficiencys were to much.in particular, the inability to easily control the format of mgs drove me nuts; i'm sure there is some complex command line driven descended setting somewhere, but who has the time ?and a host of other problems - it was never clear to me how to backup msgs, the search function sucked bigtime (you could teach a course on bad gui with the thunderbird search feature) crappy calendar and contact support....of course my new laptop with vista is fubared and my old outlook 2000 won't load,  but even the builtin vista windows mail program is better then thunderbird</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372106</id>
	<title>Re:A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>ddegirmenci</author>
	<datestamp>1260275880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not only for linux. I am using Windows XP, and definitely agreed about the Gmail IMAP side, it's so much better now. It finally gives a real reason not to use the url ever again on my PC.

I have yet to check the other things though, and it still doesn't do too good on newsgroups refreshing (in terms of speed) as far as I've seen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only for linux .
I am using Windows XP , and definitely agreed about the Gmail IMAP side , it 's so much better now .
It finally gives a real reason not to use the url ever again on my PC .
I have yet to check the other things though , and it still does n't do too good on newsgroups refreshing ( in terms of speed ) as far as I 've seen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only for linux.
I am using Windows XP, and definitely agreed about the Gmail IMAP side, it's so much better now.
It finally gives a real reason not to use the url ever again on my PC.
I have yet to check the other things though, and it still doesn't do too good on newsgroups refreshing (in terms of speed) as far as I've seen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375372</id>
	<title>Eh, is this beta?</title>
	<author>Eraesr</author>
	<datestamp>1259578140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, I've always been a huge Thunderbird fan but my gosh, does Thunderbird 3.0 feel like a beta product. There's dialogs whose buttons won't fit. In the account settings dialog there's several submenu items that contain combo boxes that don't fit inside the dialog. Also, the buttons for replying and forwarding are moved to a really awkward position, not to mention the fact that the reply button has an expand feature that only shows a "reply" option while the reply all button shows both "reply" and "reply all". What's the use of that? Why would I expand the reply all button to click reply when there's also a reply button? The fancy search feature doesn't seem to turn up any results here either. I want the fancy bar graphs too<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-(</p><p>I know, I know. It's open source so "go fix it yourself". In response to that, a simple "no" should suffice. These are all flaws that are of such a level that they shouldn't be let through by the Mozilla foundation. Besides, I have zero C++ experience, so I'm pretty sure they wouldn't like it if I went stampeding through their code and end up breaking everything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , I 've always been a huge Thunderbird fan but my gosh , does Thunderbird 3.0 feel like a beta product .
There 's dialogs whose buttons wo n't fit .
In the account settings dialog there 's several submenu items that contain combo boxes that do n't fit inside the dialog .
Also , the buttons for replying and forwarding are moved to a really awkward position , not to mention the fact that the reply button has an expand feature that only shows a " reply " option while the reply all button shows both " reply " and " reply all " .
What 's the use of that ?
Why would I expand the reply all button to click reply when there 's also a reply button ?
The fancy search feature does n't seem to turn up any results here either .
I want the fancy bar graphs too : - ( I know , I know .
It 's open source so " go fix it yourself " .
In response to that , a simple " no " should suffice .
These are all flaws that are of such a level that they should n't be let through by the Mozilla foundation .
Besides , I have zero C + + experience , so I 'm pretty sure they would n't like it if I went stampeding through their code and end up breaking everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, I've always been a huge Thunderbird fan but my gosh, does Thunderbird 3.0 feel like a beta product.
There's dialogs whose buttons won't fit.
In the account settings dialog there's several submenu items that contain combo boxes that don't fit inside the dialog.
Also, the buttons for replying and forwarding are moved to a really awkward position, not to mention the fact that the reply button has an expand feature that only shows a "reply" option while the reply all button shows both "reply" and "reply all".
What's the use of that?
Why would I expand the reply all button to click reply when there's also a reply button?
The fancy search feature doesn't seem to turn up any results here either.
I want the fancy bar graphs too :-(I know, I know.
It's open source so "go fix it yourself".
In response to that, a simple "no" should suffice.
These are all flaws that are of such a level that they shouldn't be let through by the Mozilla foundation.
Besides, I have zero C++ experience, so I'm pretty sure they wouldn't like it if I went stampeding through their code and end up breaking everything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374150</id>
	<title>Re:I blame the cold weather</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260294000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i know, right. it's like christmas!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i know , right .
it 's like christmas !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i know, right.
it's like christmas!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374808</id>
	<title>Re:Account Creator is a Pain</title>
	<author>WuphonsReach</author>
	<datestamp>1259611620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>The account creator tool is a real pain in the ass. There's no simple option to just create a regular IMAP account. The menus kept resetting on me. </i> <br>
<br>
Yeah, it looks like a race-condition.  There's some sort of background task that tries to verify that the settings will work, but it doesn't grey out the UI boxes while it does that.<br>
<br>
It works well enough if:<br>
<br>
- You prefer IMAP<br>
- Your account domain matches up with the mail server domain<br>
<br>
But I could regularly get it confused.<br>
<br>
They're already working on 3.0.1.  Figure out how to make it happen repeatedly, then submit a bug report.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The account creator tool is a real pain in the ass .
There 's no simple option to just create a regular IMAP account .
The menus kept resetting on me .
Yeah , it looks like a race-condition .
There 's some sort of background task that tries to verify that the settings will work , but it does n't grey out the UI boxes while it does that .
It works well enough if : - You prefer IMAP - Your account domain matches up with the mail server domain But I could regularly get it confused .
They 're already working on 3.0.1 .
Figure out how to make it happen repeatedly , then submit a bug report .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The account creator tool is a real pain in the ass.
There's no simple option to just create a regular IMAP account.
The menus kept resetting on me.
Yeah, it looks like a race-condition.
There's some sort of background task that tries to verify that the settings will work, but it doesn't grey out the UI boxes while it does that.
It works well enough if:

- You prefer IMAP
- Your account domain matches up with the mail server domain

But I could regularly get it confused.
They're already working on 3.0.1.
Figure out how to make it happen repeatedly, then submit a bug report.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956</id>
	<title>Hopefully improved.</title>
	<author>jwriney</author>
	<datestamp>1260275040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the early releases I downloaded had the amusing "feature" of downloading every message in the background - not just headers, full messages, with attachments. According to the bug report, this was intentional, so that your folders would be accessible without being connected to the network, but it never seemed to know where to stop. It was *constantly* and repeatedly downloading messages, and ate 40 some-odd gigs before I noticed it and went back to 2.</p><p>--riney</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the early releases I downloaded had the amusing " feature " of downloading every message in the background - not just headers , full messages , with attachments .
According to the bug report , this was intentional , so that your folders would be accessible without being connected to the network , but it never seemed to know where to stop .
It was * constantly * and repeatedly downloading messages , and ate 40 some-odd gigs before I noticed it and went back to 2.--riney</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the early releases I downloaded had the amusing "feature" of downloading every message in the background - not just headers, full messages, with attachments.
According to the bug report, this was intentional, so that your folders would be accessible without being connected to the network, but it never seemed to know where to stop.
It was *constantly* and repeatedly downloading messages, and ate 40 some-odd gigs before I noticed it and went back to 2.--riney</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376810</id>
	<title>Re:Conversation view != threads</title>
	<author>AmiMoJo</author>
	<datestamp>1259595480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rather than trying to get TB to do things the way gmail does I think it might be a better idea to make gmail do some things the way TB does.</p><p>If gmail had a preview pane with 3 column view it would instantly replace my current choice of desktop email client (The Bat). Even better I could use it anywhere without having to rely on the less than perfect IMAP implementation. Are you listen Google?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rather than trying to get TB to do things the way gmail does I think it might be a better idea to make gmail do some things the way TB does.If gmail had a preview pane with 3 column view it would instantly replace my current choice of desktop email client ( The Bat ) .
Even better I could use it anywhere without having to rely on the less than perfect IMAP implementation .
Are you listen Google ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rather than trying to get TB to do things the way gmail does I think it might be a better idea to make gmail do some things the way TB does.If gmail had a preview pane with 3 column view it would instantly replace my current choice of desktop email client (The Bat).
Even better I could use it anywhere without having to rely on the less than perfect IMAP implementation.
Are you listen Google?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371932</id>
	<title>Thunderbird 2?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does the download link say "Thunderbird 2"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does the download link say " Thunderbird 2 " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does the download link say "Thunderbird 2"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372436</id>
	<title>Synchronise?</title>
	<author>HBoar</author>
	<datestamp>1260277920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The new features sound good, but does it have some way of synchronising address books/settings etc. over multiple computers? Something like Xmarks for firefox/Operas built in bookmark synchronisation. It's one thing all the mail clients I've used are missing.  Seems silly I'd have to resort to a horrible web based email system to get this feature...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The new features sound good , but does it have some way of synchronising address books/settings etc .
over multiple computers ?
Something like Xmarks for firefox/Operas built in bookmark synchronisation .
It 's one thing all the mail clients I 've used are missing .
Seems silly I 'd have to resort to a horrible web based email system to get this feature.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The new features sound good, but does it have some way of synchronising address books/settings etc.
over multiple computers?
Something like Xmarks for firefox/Operas built in bookmark synchronisation.
It's one thing all the mail clients I've used are missing.
Seems silly I'd have to resort to a horrible web based email system to get this feature...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373370</id>
	<title>Re:Lightning....</title>
	<author>Khopesh</author>
	<datestamp>1260285120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't find any info on recent Lightning work (aside from the fact that the <a href="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/lightning/download.html" title="mozilla.org">nightlies</a> [mozilla.org] are still being pumped out)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the <a href="http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/calendar/" title="mozillazine.org">developer blog</a> [mozillazine.org] is offline (is mozillazine dead?  their <a href="http://www.mozillazine.org/" title="mozillazine.org">front page</a> [mozillazine.org] last speaks from June 2009...), and the <a href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/Calendar:Roadmap" title="mozilla.org">Mozilla Calendar development roadmap</a> [mozilla.org] was last updated about year ago.

</p><p>Nevertheless, the roadmap's stated plan is to release Lightning 1.0 shortly after Thunderbird 3.0<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... no idea if that's still on track.  If I recall correctly, the calendaring portion was so side-tracked that they removed it from TB3 altogether, also shunting all(?) Mozilla-(corporate)-sponsored time away from it.  OpenOffice.org is actually the bigger pushing body for TB3 as an MS Outlook killer (which means a calendar is desired), but Oracle's purchase of Sun may have rearranged (or deferred) priorities.

</p><p>When TB gets native calendaring, I'll push hard on migration from Outlook for my corporation.  If Lightning becomes as stable and ready as Enigmail (which is to say that politics are the only barring element from inclusion), I may make that push anyway<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but a streamlined integration is essential in the long run, and resistance to that makes me balk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't find any info on recent Lightning work ( aside from the fact that the nightlies [ mozilla.org ] are still being pumped out ) ... the developer blog [ mozillazine.org ] is offline ( is mozillazine dead ?
their front page [ mozillazine.org ] last speaks from June 2009... ) , and the Mozilla Calendar development roadmap [ mozilla.org ] was last updated about year ago .
Nevertheless , the roadmap 's stated plan is to release Lightning 1.0 shortly after Thunderbird 3.0 ... no idea if that 's still on track .
If I recall correctly , the calendaring portion was so side-tracked that they removed it from TB3 altogether , also shunting all ( ?
) Mozilla- ( corporate ) -sponsored time away from it .
OpenOffice.org is actually the bigger pushing body for TB3 as an MS Outlook killer ( which means a calendar is desired ) , but Oracle 's purchase of Sun may have rearranged ( or deferred ) priorities .
When TB gets native calendaring , I 'll push hard on migration from Outlook for my corporation .
If Lightning becomes as stable and ready as Enigmail ( which is to say that politics are the only barring element from inclusion ) , I may make that push anyway ... but a streamlined integration is essential in the long run , and resistance to that makes me balk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't find any info on recent Lightning work (aside from the fact that the nightlies [mozilla.org] are still being pumped out) ... the developer blog [mozillazine.org] is offline (is mozillazine dead?
their front page [mozillazine.org] last speaks from June 2009...), and the Mozilla Calendar development roadmap [mozilla.org] was last updated about year ago.
Nevertheless, the roadmap's stated plan is to release Lightning 1.0 shortly after Thunderbird 3.0 ... no idea if that's still on track.
If I recall correctly, the calendaring portion was so side-tracked that they removed it from TB3 altogether, also shunting all(?
) Mozilla-(corporate)-sponsored time away from it.
OpenOffice.org is actually the bigger pushing body for TB3 as an MS Outlook killer (which means a calendar is desired), but Oracle's purchase of Sun may have rearranged (or deferred) priorities.
When TB gets native calendaring, I'll push hard on migration from Outlook for my corporation.
If Lightning becomes as stable and ready as Enigmail (which is to say that politics are the only barring element from inclusion), I may make that push anyway ... but a streamlined integration is essential in the long run, and resistance to that makes me balk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374932</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>gullevek</author>
	<datestamp>1259613720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So was I. Although I still feel a bit strange about having my mail at google, it is just so useful to have the same UI, the same info and everything always available everywhere, from whatever OS/Browser you come.</p><p>I haven't launched Mail.app or Thunderbird for almost a year now. There is just no reason. In my opinion stand alone mail apps are a dying bread.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So was I. Although I still feel a bit strange about having my mail at google , it is just so useful to have the same UI , the same info and everything always available everywhere , from whatever OS/Browser you come.I have n't launched Mail.app or Thunderbird for almost a year now .
There is just no reason .
In my opinion stand alone mail apps are a dying bread .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So was I. Although I still feel a bit strange about having my mail at google, it is just so useful to have the same UI, the same info and everything always available everywhere, from whatever OS/Browser you come.I haven't launched Mail.app or Thunderbird for almost a year now.
There is just no reason.
In my opinion stand alone mail apps are a dying bread.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372180</id>
	<title>Have they fixed the data loss bugs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous Brave Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1260276420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first thing I want from a new version of Thunderbird is fixing the data loss bugs, because right now I'm on the point of moving to another e-mail client.</p><p>(For the uninitiated, Thunderbird can literally nuke your e-mails without trace under some circumstances, such as if you move it from one folder to another. This is not just the old problems with the silly approach to indexing and "compacting", this is an actual, irretrievable, without-warning, 100\% data loss. That's just not acceptable in this kind of software.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first thing I want from a new version of Thunderbird is fixing the data loss bugs , because right now I 'm on the point of moving to another e-mail client .
( For the uninitiated , Thunderbird can literally nuke your e-mails without trace under some circumstances , such as if you move it from one folder to another .
This is not just the old problems with the silly approach to indexing and " compacting " , this is an actual , irretrievable , without-warning , 100 \ % data loss .
That 's just not acceptable in this kind of software .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first thing I want from a new version of Thunderbird is fixing the data loss bugs, because right now I'm on the point of moving to another e-mail client.
(For the uninitiated, Thunderbird can literally nuke your e-mails without trace under some circumstances, such as if you move it from one folder to another.
This is not just the old problems with the silly approach to indexing and "compacting", this is an actual, irretrievable, without-warning, 100\% data loss.
That's just not acceptable in this kind of software.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375150</id>
	<title>Where are the new mail indicators on the folders?</title>
	<author>mrawl</author>
	<datestamp>1259574300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I love tbird, but this release has some big issues for me. They've sacrificed too much message viewing space with tab bar and enlarged header display. These things should be configurable (I need to check advanced config properties). But ok, I could live with that. The grouped inboxes are nice.</p><p>But....</p><p>They have broken the new mail indicator on folders. WHY??? WHYYYYYYYYYY????? Argh!!!! The best feature of tbird is gone. How could they commit this crime? I might have to go back to 2. This is just shocking to me. It was so awesome to just scan the folders down the side, even when just peaking out from behind another window, and see those red stars on the folders with new mail. Now they're gone. For no reason. They're still on the messages, but not the folders. Who makes these decisions? Seriously? Who in their right mind would decide to throw out this feature??? Meanwhile, they've gone crazy copying Gmail features, and they leave out the main feature they have that Gmail doesn't have. Incredible.</p><p>Fix it. Please. Put the stars back. ASAP. Or I'm switching to Gmail client. Thanks in advance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I love tbird , but this release has some big issues for me .
They 've sacrificed too much message viewing space with tab bar and enlarged header display .
These things should be configurable ( I need to check advanced config properties ) .
But ok , I could live with that .
The grouped inboxes are nice.But....They have broken the new mail indicator on folders .
WHY ? ? ? WHYYYYYYYYYY ? ? ? ? ?
Argh ! ! ! ! The best feature of tbird is gone .
How could they commit this crime ?
I might have to go back to 2 .
This is just shocking to me .
It was so awesome to just scan the folders down the side , even when just peaking out from behind another window , and see those red stars on the folders with new mail .
Now they 're gone .
For no reason .
They 're still on the messages , but not the folders .
Who makes these decisions ?
Seriously ? Who in their right mind would decide to throw out this feature ? ? ?
Meanwhile , they 've gone crazy copying Gmail features , and they leave out the main feature they have that Gmail does n't have .
Incredible.Fix it .
Please. Put the stars back .
ASAP. Or I 'm switching to Gmail client .
Thanks in advance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I love tbird, but this release has some big issues for me.
They've sacrificed too much message viewing space with tab bar and enlarged header display.
These things should be configurable (I need to check advanced config properties).
But ok, I could live with that.
The grouped inboxes are nice.But....They have broken the new mail indicator on folders.
WHY??? WHYYYYYYYYYY?????
Argh!!!! The best feature of tbird is gone.
How could they commit this crime?
I might have to go back to 2.
This is just shocking to me.
It was so awesome to just scan the folders down the side, even when just peaking out from behind another window, and see those red stars on the folders with new mail.
Now they're gone.
For no reason.
They're still on the messages, but not the folders.
Who makes these decisions?
Seriously? Who in their right mind would decide to throw out this feature???
Meanwhile, they've gone crazy copying Gmail features, and they leave out the main feature they have that Gmail doesn't have.
Incredible.Fix it.
Please. Put the stars back.
ASAP. Or I'm switching to Gmail client.
Thanks in advance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374078</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>triplepoint217</author>
	<datestamp>1260292860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I personally prefer to know that I have a copy of my own emails stored on a computer that I control.  Sure google is good at what they do and all and they are not evil, but server foul ups happen.  It is also nice for when my laptop is not connected to the internet.</p><p>Web apps also have some usability issues: no right click, usually less good keyboard shortcuts and/or clashes with browser.  They loose screen real estate that the browser takes up.  A tab within  can't be easily alt tabbed to.   There are not as many good options for say notification about new mail.</p><p>Gmail and the like are nice for when I am not on one of my computers, but there are still many advantages to having an actual local client, some can probably be mitigated by browser interface improvements, but some are going to be a lot harder.</p><p>So I for one am glad to see thunderbird is still being developed</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I personally prefer to know that I have a copy of my own emails stored on a computer that I control .
Sure google is good at what they do and all and they are not evil , but server foul ups happen .
It is also nice for when my laptop is not connected to the internet.Web apps also have some usability issues : no right click , usually less good keyboard shortcuts and/or clashes with browser .
They loose screen real estate that the browser takes up .
A tab within ca n't be easily alt tabbed to .
There are not as many good options for say notification about new mail.Gmail and the like are nice for when I am not on one of my computers , but there are still many advantages to having an actual local client , some can probably be mitigated by browser interface improvements , but some are going to be a lot harder.So I for one am glad to see thunderbird is still being developed</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I personally prefer to know that I have a copy of my own emails stored on a computer that I control.
Sure google is good at what they do and all and they are not evil, but server foul ups happen.
It is also nice for when my laptop is not connected to the internet.Web apps also have some usability issues: no right click, usually less good keyboard shortcuts and/or clashes with browser.
They loose screen real estate that the browser takes up.
A tab within  can't be easily alt tabbed to.
There are not as many good options for say notification about new mail.Gmail and the like are nice for when I am not on one of my computers, but there are still many advantages to having an actual local client, some can probably be mitigated by browser interface improvements, but some are going to be a lot harder.So I for one am glad to see thunderbird is still being developed</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30399502</id>
	<title>Re:New quick search sucks big time</title>
	<author>fearlezz</author>
	<datestamp>1260527340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry, maybe the old search worked for you. But I have a personal IMAP account, a business IMAP account and a special charity projects account, all with 15+ folders. For my situation the old search was absolutely and completely useless. When I need to find a message, the best way to get results, is to ssh to the imap server and <i>grep -ir</i>.
<br>
Too bad I also use a lot of plugins, and the most important ones are not yet supported in TB3.<br>
<br>
I was seriously considering switching to outlook on wine, but if all important plugins are working within a few weeks, I might give TB3 another try.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , maybe the old search worked for you .
But I have a personal IMAP account , a business IMAP account and a special charity projects account , all with 15 + folders .
For my situation the old search was absolutely and completely useless .
When I need to find a message , the best way to get results , is to ssh to the imap server and grep -ir .
Too bad I also use a lot of plugins , and the most important ones are not yet supported in TB3 .
I was seriously considering switching to outlook on wine , but if all important plugins are working within a few weeks , I might give TB3 another try .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, maybe the old search worked for you.
But I have a personal IMAP account, a business IMAP account and a special charity projects account, all with 15+ folders.
For my situation the old search was absolutely and completely useless.
When I need to find a message, the best way to get results, is to ssh to the imap server and grep -ir.
Too bad I also use a lot of plugins, and the most important ones are not yet supported in TB3.
I was seriously considering switching to outlook on wine, but if all important plugins are working within a few weeks, I might give TB3 another try.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374032</id>
	<title>Outbox</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260292140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's still no outbox it seems. While it's not an essential feature, it would certainly be nice to have the message disappear and take care of the sending process while you move on to other tasks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's still no outbox it seems .
While it 's not an essential feature , it would certainly be nice to have the message disappear and take care of the sending process while you move on to other tasks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's still no outbox it seems.
While it's not an essential feature, it would certainly be nice to have the message disappear and take care of the sending process while you move on to other tasks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371974</id>
	<title>vCard support yet?</title>
	<author>metamatic</author>
	<datestamp>1260275100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone check if it supports address cards yet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone check if it supports address cards yet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone check if it supports address cards yet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372776</id>
	<title>Re:No mbox?</title>
	<author>ZosX</author>
	<datestamp>1260280260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bad for security, but agreed it would be ideal as a hard to find option.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bad for security , but agreed it would be ideal as a hard to find option .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bad for security, but agreed it would be ideal as a hard to find option.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372128</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>mirix</author>
	<datestamp>1260276060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stuff you don't want to have handy, but don't want to get rid of either was my interpretation. Like taking ancient files and putting them in a box in the basement, instead of taking up prime real estate in the filing cabinet. right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stuff you do n't want to have handy , but do n't want to get rid of either was my interpretation .
Like taking ancient files and putting them in a box in the basement , instead of taking up prime real estate in the filing cabinet .
right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stuff you don't want to have handy, but don't want to get rid of either was my interpretation.
Like taking ancient files and putting them in a box in the basement, instead of taking up prime real estate in the filing cabinet.
right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375840</id>
	<title>Re:A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259585280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never had a crash in TB2. I'd be happy if instead of introducing more complexity with threading messages or whatnot, TB3 stopped defaulting to US Letter for print size and trying to open pdfs in Gimp.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never had a crash in TB2 .
I 'd be happy if instead of introducing more complexity with threading messages or whatnot , TB3 stopped defaulting to US Letter for print size and trying to open pdfs in Gimp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never had a crash in TB2.
I'd be happy if instead of introducing more complexity with threading messages or whatnot, TB3 stopped defaulting to US Letter for print size and trying to open pdfs in Gimp.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372250</id>
	<title>Re:A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1260276840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is definitely much better than TB2 on Windows and OSX too.  Strangely, I still kind of prefer <a href="http://www.postbox-inc.com/" title="postbox-inc.com">Postbox</a> [postbox-inc.com] to Thunderbird even though it doesn't really add any features that I use, and I don't find it to be worth the purchase price.  I guess it's a look and feel thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is definitely much better than TB2 on Windows and OSX too .
Strangely , I still kind of prefer Postbox [ postbox-inc.com ] to Thunderbird even though it does n't really add any features that I use , and I do n't find it to be worth the purchase price .
I guess it 's a look and feel thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is definitely much better than TB2 on Windows and OSX too.
Strangely, I still kind of prefer Postbox [postbox-inc.com] to Thunderbird even though it doesn't really add any features that I use, and I don't find it to be worth the purchase price.
I guess it's a look and feel thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372916</id>
	<title>No .deb?</title>
	<author>phantomcircuit</author>
	<datestamp>1260281280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are none of the mozilla programs ever packaged for download?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are none of the mozilla programs ever packaged for download ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are none of the mozilla programs ever packaged for download?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371918</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Claws Mail has thread support as well, although that's not the same thing as gmail conversation view...<br>The Win client is awful but the linux client is pretty slick.  Minimalist client as far as user interface but still quite configurable - plus regex filtering and such.</p><p>http://www.claws-mail.org/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Claws Mail has thread support as well , although that 's not the same thing as gmail conversation view...The Win client is awful but the linux client is pretty slick .
Minimalist client as far as user interface but still quite configurable - plus regex filtering and such.http : //www.claws-mail.org/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Claws Mail has thread support as well, although that's not the same thing as gmail conversation view...The Win client is awful but the linux client is pretty slick.
Minimalist client as far as user interface but still quite configurable - plus regex filtering and such.http://www.claws-mail.org/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376056</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259588700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good luck keeping all <em>your</em> data on the server of a company who is also the biggest internet advertisement company. Good luck when they switch things off. Good luck making backups. Good luck keeping your privacy. Good luck owning your data. And have fun with yet another pointless layer of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner-platform\_effect" title="wikipedia.org">inner platform</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>Sorry, but web-based e-mail, instant-messaging, p2p file-sharing, etc, is just plain stupid because of exactly these things. Opera is going the right way, by allowing users to stay on their systems and not become dependent on someone else. And by providing a real interface/software instead of crap that is interpreted by an interpreted interpreter that gets interpreted in a interpreted virtual machine running in Emacs in a VM (on a mobile phone).<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good luck keeping all your data on the server of a company who is also the biggest internet advertisement company .
Good luck when they switch things off .
Good luck making backups .
Good luck keeping your privacy .
Good luck owning your data .
And have fun with yet another pointless layer of inner platform [ wikipedia.org ] .Sorry , but web-based e-mail , instant-messaging , p2p file-sharing , etc , is just plain stupid because of exactly these things .
Opera is going the right way , by allowing users to stay on their systems and not become dependent on someone else .
And by providing a real interface/software instead of crap that is interpreted by an interpreted interpreter that gets interpreted in a interpreted virtual machine running in Emacs in a VM ( on a mobile phone ) .
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good luck keeping all your data on the server of a company who is also the biggest internet advertisement company.
Good luck when they switch things off.
Good luck making backups.
Good luck keeping your privacy.
Good luck owning your data.
And have fun with yet another pointless layer of inner platform [wikipedia.org].Sorry, but web-based e-mail, instant-messaging, p2p file-sharing, etc, is just plain stupid because of exactly these things.
Opera is going the right way, by allowing users to stay on their systems and not become dependent on someone else.
And by providing a real interface/software instead of crap that is interpreted by an interpreted interpreter that gets interpreted in a interpreted virtual machine running in Emacs in a VM (on a mobile phone).
:P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30395916</id>
	<title>Re:vCard support yet?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260446100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nope... I really hate All the Email programs under Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope... I really hate All the Email programs under Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope... I really hate All the Email programs under Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30394998</id>
	<title>Re:New quick search sucks big time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260442680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just click on the icon to the left of the search field and select any other option. The messages will be filtered directly without even needing to press enter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just click on the icon to the left of the search field and select any other option .
The messages will be filtered directly without even needing to press enter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just click on the icon to the left of the search field and select any other option.
The messages will be filtered directly without even needing to press enter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30381922</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>dotancohen</author>
	<datestamp>1259580120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>One thing I would surely like to see in email clients however - the gmail like threaded conversation view. It's just so much better and nicer to use, but still many email applications tend to have the plain-list-of-messages view.</p></div><p>Have you voted and commented on the relevant bug:<br><a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=241197" title="mozilla.org">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=241197</a> [mozilla.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One thing I would surely like to see in email clients however - the gmail like threaded conversation view .
It 's just so much better and nicer to use , but still many email applications tend to have the plain-list-of-messages view.Have you voted and commented on the relevant bug : https : //bugzilla.mozilla.org/show \ _bug.cgi ? id = 241197 [ mozilla.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One thing I would surely like to see in email clients however - the gmail like threaded conversation view.
It's just so much better and nicer to use, but still many email applications tend to have the plain-list-of-messages view.Have you voted and commented on the relevant bug:https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=241197 [mozilla.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373174</id>
	<title>Re:Lightning....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260283500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is why they should continue Sunbird.  When you rely on the integration of two separate products you're going to have bullshit like this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why they should continue Sunbird .
When you rely on the integration of two separate products you 're going to have bullshit like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why they should continue Sunbird.
When you rely on the integration of two separate products you're going to have bullshit like this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372356</id>
	<title>No mbox?</title>
	<author>Aoet\_325</author>
	<datestamp>1260277560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The last time I looked into thunderbird 3 all the mail was no going to be stored in an mbox format and wouldn't be stored in anything close to plain text. That's a deal breaker for me. I love the ability to grep a folder or even the entire inbox. The search in thunderbird has always been lacking but no matter how much the search is improved in thunderbird 3 it can't be good enough to replace the speed and power of what can be done on the command line.</p><p>If that's still the case and I had to switch to anything I'd go back to using to fetchmail</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The last time I looked into thunderbird 3 all the mail was no going to be stored in an mbox format and would n't be stored in anything close to plain text .
That 's a deal breaker for me .
I love the ability to grep a folder or even the entire inbox .
The search in thunderbird has always been lacking but no matter how much the search is improved in thunderbird 3 it ca n't be good enough to replace the speed and power of what can be done on the command line.If that 's still the case and I had to switch to anything I 'd go back to using to fetchmail</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last time I looked into thunderbird 3 all the mail was no going to be stored in an mbox format and wouldn't be stored in anything close to plain text.
That's a deal breaker for me.
I love the ability to grep a folder or even the entire inbox.
The search in thunderbird has always been lacking but no matter how much the search is improved in thunderbird 3 it can't be good enough to replace the speed and power of what can be done on the command line.If that's still the case and I had to switch to anything I'd go back to using to fetchmail</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373692</id>
	<title>Re:Conversation view != threads</title>
	<author>Achromatic1978</author>
	<datestamp>1260288420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.postbox-inc.com/" title="postbox-inc.com">Postbox</a> [postbox-inc.com] does. My new favorite email client. And it's written by Thunderbird developers and based on Thunderbird. But is not free...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Postbox [ postbox-inc.com ] does .
My new favorite email client .
And it 's written by Thunderbird developers and based on Thunderbird .
But is not free.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Postbox [postbox-inc.com] does.
My new favorite email client.
And it's written by Thunderbird developers and based on Thunderbird.
But is not free...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372234</id>
	<title>I don't get smart folders</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260276780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It consolidates all the messages from different accounts' inbox folders into one common inbox folder.</p><p>What I don't get is, if I wanted to receive all my messages in a single inbox, I would have used only one email address. This feature sounds totally useless to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It consolidates all the messages from different accounts ' inbox folders into one common inbox folder.What I do n't get is , if I wanted to receive all my messages in a single inbox , I would have used only one email address .
This feature sounds totally useless to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It consolidates all the messages from different accounts' inbox folders into one common inbox folder.What I don't get is, if I wanted to receive all my messages in a single inbox, I would have used only one email address.
This feature sounds totally useless to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371810</id>
	<title>Serious problems on Fedora Core 12?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just installed it on Fedora Core 12 and I'm having some serious problems. I don't know if these are Thunderbird problems or Fedora problems, but maybe you guys can help.</p><p>I'm connecting to my college's IMAP account. I currently use Evolution and it works mostly fine.</p><p>When I first installed it, it crashed half way through the process of configuring it. So I removed the ~/.mozilla-thunderbird directory it created and tried again. It worked the second time.</p><p>Now that I've been using it for a few minutes, it keeps frightening me. It gets my messages from the IMAP server and lets me view some of them, but as soon as I send a message, it says that my inbox has 0 messages in it! The first time I was scared shitless so I checked using Evolution and all my messages were still there. So I opened up Thunderbird again and it saw the messages too. But after I sent another email using Thunderbird, it said there were no messages in my inbox! So I checked again with Evolution and they're all there.</p><p>Frankly, I don't know what to think at this point. I'm not going to be using it any longer. I'm thinking it might just be Fedora Core 12. I've had a lot of other problems with it, and earlier today was thinking about going to back Ubuntu.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just installed it on Fedora Core 12 and I 'm having some serious problems .
I do n't know if these are Thunderbird problems or Fedora problems , but maybe you guys can help.I 'm connecting to my college 's IMAP account .
I currently use Evolution and it works mostly fine.When I first installed it , it crashed half way through the process of configuring it .
So I removed the ~ /.mozilla-thunderbird directory it created and tried again .
It worked the second time.Now that I 've been using it for a few minutes , it keeps frightening me .
It gets my messages from the IMAP server and lets me view some of them , but as soon as I send a message , it says that my inbox has 0 messages in it !
The first time I was scared shitless so I checked using Evolution and all my messages were still there .
So I opened up Thunderbird again and it saw the messages too .
But after I sent another email using Thunderbird , it said there were no messages in my inbox !
So I checked again with Evolution and they 're all there.Frankly , I do n't know what to think at this point .
I 'm not going to be using it any longer .
I 'm thinking it might just be Fedora Core 12 .
I 've had a lot of other problems with it , and earlier today was thinking about going to back Ubuntu .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just installed it on Fedora Core 12 and I'm having some serious problems.
I don't know if these are Thunderbird problems or Fedora problems, but maybe you guys can help.I'm connecting to my college's IMAP account.
I currently use Evolution and it works mostly fine.When I first installed it, it crashed half way through the process of configuring it.
So I removed the ~/.mozilla-thunderbird directory it created and tried again.
It worked the second time.Now that I've been using it for a few minutes, it keeps frightening me.
It gets my messages from the IMAP server and lets me view some of them, but as soon as I send a message, it says that my inbox has 0 messages in it!
The first time I was scared shitless so I checked using Evolution and all my messages were still there.
So I opened up Thunderbird again and it saw the messages too.
But after I sent another email using Thunderbird, it said there were no messages in my inbox!
So I checked again with Evolution and they're all there.Frankly, I don't know what to think at this point.
I'm not going to be using it any longer.
I'm thinking it might just be Fedora Core 12.
I've had a lot of other problems with it, and earlier today was thinking about going to back Ubuntu.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372096</id>
	<title>How to downgrade from FF 3.5 to FF3.0 ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260275820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is there a way to downgrade from FF 3.5 to FF 3.0 ?</p><p>My computer was happy with FF 3.0, and then I screwed up.</p><p>A window telling me there is a new version of FF, and I thought a new version of FF 3.0, so I clicked the upgrade button.</p><p>Lo and behold the thing upgraded the FF to version 3.5, and now my computer isn't happy.</p><p>Is there a way to downgrade FF from 3.5 back to 3.0, without having to uninstall FF and re-install it?</p><p>Please help !!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there a way to downgrade from FF 3.5 to FF 3.0 ? My computer was happy with FF 3.0 , and then I screwed up.A window telling me there is a new version of FF , and I thought a new version of FF 3.0 , so I clicked the upgrade button.Lo and behold the thing upgraded the FF to version 3.5 , and now my computer is n't happy.Is there a way to downgrade FF from 3.5 back to 3.0 , without having to uninstall FF and re-install it ? Please help !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there a way to downgrade from FF 3.5 to FF 3.0 ?My computer was happy with FF 3.0, and then I screwed up.A window telling me there is a new version of FF, and I thought a new version of FF 3.0, so I clicked the upgrade button.Lo and behold the thing upgraded the FF to version 3.5, and now my computer isn't happy.Is there a way to downgrade FF from 3.5 back to 3.0, without having to uninstall FF and re-install it?Please help !
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374486</id>
	<title>Re:A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>mb1</author>
	<datestamp>1260298800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>vanilla Thunderbird 2 on win xp never caused me any trouble - I've got a handful of pop and gmail imap accounts, and everything's been fine... maybe my epic data loss is waiting to strike at upgrade time<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>vanilla Thunderbird 2 on win xp never caused me any trouble - I 've got a handful of pop and gmail imap accounts , and everything 's been fine... maybe my epic data loss is waiting to strike at upgrade time : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>vanilla Thunderbird 2 on win xp never caused me any trouble - I've got a handful of pop and gmail imap accounts, and everything's been fine... maybe my epic data loss is waiting to strike at upgrade time :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373592</id>
	<title>Re:Hopefully improved.</title>
	<author>dr00p</author>
	<datestamp>1260287400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can configure this feature from the account or folder properties...  It is called offline access.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can configure this feature from the account or folder properties... It is called offline access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can configure this feature from the account or folder properties...  It is called offline access.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374030</id>
	<title>Re:Hopefully improved.</title>
	<author>greg1104</author>
	<datestamp>1260292140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Account Settings/Offline &amp; Disk Space controls this feature now.  "Available for offline use" defaults to off, you have to toggle it on for all folders you want that behavior for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Account Settings/Offline &amp; Disk Space controls this feature now .
" Available for offline use " defaults to off , you have to toggle it on for all folders you want that behavior for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Account Settings/Offline &amp; Disk Space controls this feature now.
"Available for offline use" defaults to off, you have to toggle it on for all folders you want that behavior for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30377182</id>
	<title>Date/time received?</title>
	<author>Tonik, the</author>
	<datestamp>1259597940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does it have the option to show the date and time when the message was received, and sort messages accodring to that and *not* the "sent" timestamp?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does it have the option to show the date and time when the message was received , and sort messages accodring to that and * not * the " sent " timestamp ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does it have the option to show the date and time when the message was received, and sort messages accodring to that and *not* the "sent" timestamp?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30379132</id>
	<title>Re:No .deb?</title>
	<author>Ant P.</author>
	<datestamp>1259608680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are you using Debian and expecting zero-day release packages?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are you using Debian and expecting zero-day release packages ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are you using Debian and expecting zero-day release packages?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372290</id>
	<title>Re:I blame the cold weather</title>
	<author>shewfig</author>
	<datestamp>1260277080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>&gt; What next, Duke Nukem Forever?</i> <br>
<br>
What, no one told you that "Forever" is how long we have to wait for it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; What next , Duke Nukem Forever ?
What , no one told you that " Forever " is how long we have to wait for it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; What next, Duke Nukem Forever?
What, no one told you that "Forever" is how long we have to wait for it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372158</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260276300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Outlook 2010 has something pretty close to that, including reading in from multiple folders.  It's not perfect, but it's miles ahead of what previous versions of Outlook and just about every other standalone client have (at least in Windows).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Outlook 2010 has something pretty close to that , including reading in from multiple folders .
It 's not perfect , but it 's miles ahead of what previous versions of Outlook and just about every other standalone client have ( at least in Windows ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Outlook 2010 has something pretty close to that, including reading in from multiple folders.
It's not perfect, but it's miles ahead of what previous versions of Outlook and just about every other standalone client have (at least in Windows).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371972</id>
	<title>Minimize to tray</title>
	<author>Renozhin</author>
	<datestamp>1260275100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>still isn't included, and none of the add-ons that enable it are updated yet. I knew updating this soon was a bad idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>still is n't included , and none of the add-ons that enable it are updated yet .
I knew updating this soon was a bad idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>still isn't included, and none of the add-ons that enable it are updated yet.
I knew updating this soon was a bad idea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372910</id>
	<title>Re:A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous Struct</author>
	<datestamp>1260281220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll second that TB2 has some problems, actually.  I've used it for about three years now with an Exchange and gmail account, both IMAP, and Lightning for calendaring.  By and large it does just fine, but every once in a while it just chokes and becomes unresponsive.  It doesn't always recover very gracefully from connection problems, either.  I really do like Thunderbird, and I haven't given much thought to using anything else, but even I wouldn't say it's problem-free.  If the new release cleans up some of the rough edges for performance and stability, then I'll gladly take it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll second that TB2 has some problems , actually .
I 've used it for about three years now with an Exchange and gmail account , both IMAP , and Lightning for calendaring .
By and large it does just fine , but every once in a while it just chokes and becomes unresponsive .
It does n't always recover very gracefully from connection problems , either .
I really do like Thunderbird , and I have n't given much thought to using anything else , but even I would n't say it 's problem-free .
If the new release cleans up some of the rough edges for performance and stability , then I 'll gladly take it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll second that TB2 has some problems, actually.
I've used it for about three years now with an Exchange and gmail account, both IMAP, and Lightning for calendaring.
By and large it does just fine, but every once in a while it just chokes and becomes unresponsive.
It doesn't always recover very gracefully from connection problems, either.
I really do like Thunderbird, and I haven't given much thought to using anything else, but even I wouldn't say it's problem-free.
If the new release cleans up some of the rough edges for performance and stability, then I'll gladly take it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371926</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1260274800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>a message archive for emails you don't want to delete but still want to keep</i></p><p>What about for messages I don't want to keep but still want to delete? Does it handle those?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a message archive for emails you do n't want to delete but still want to keepWhat about for messages I do n't want to keep but still want to delete ?
Does it handle those ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a message archive for emails you don't want to delete but still want to keepWhat about for messages I don't want to keep but still want to delete?
Does it handle those?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374352</id>
	<title>Mailtweak</title>
	<author>Whiteox</author>
	<datestamp>1260296820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TB3 has issues with mailtweak <a href="http://mailtweak.mozdev.org/tweaks.html#personal" title="mozdev.org">http://mailtweak.mozdev.org/tweaks.html#personal</a> [mozdev.org] - at least for me. I can't email merge with it now and had to roll back to TB2</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TB3 has issues with mailtweak http : //mailtweak.mozdev.org/tweaks.html # personal [ mozdev.org ] - at least for me .
I ca n't email merge with it now and had to roll back to TB2</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TB3 has issues with mailtweak http://mailtweak.mozdev.org/tweaks.html#personal [mozdev.org] - at least for me.
I can't email merge with it now and had to roll back to TB2</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373316</id>
	<title>Lost mail?</title>
	<author>MikeFM</author>
	<datestamp>1260284580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm more worried about the messages I want to keep but that it decides to blindly delete anyway when a folder goes over 2GB in size. Did they fix that bug yet? IMO any product that knows it has that serious a bug - for years - and does nothing is not trustworthy enough to use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm more worried about the messages I want to keep but that it decides to blindly delete anyway when a folder goes over 2GB in size .
Did they fix that bug yet ?
IMO any product that knows it has that serious a bug - for years - and does nothing is not trustworthy enough to use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm more worried about the messages I want to keep but that it decides to blindly delete anyway when a folder goes over 2GB in size.
Did they fix that bug yet?
IMO any product that knows it has that serious a bug - for years - and does nothing is not trustworthy enough to use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126</id>
	<title>Lightning....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260276000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That seems quite an important extension - any idea when (or if) it will be supported by TB3?</p><p>To me, it seems like an error of judgement to mainstream release a new version when key addons have not been satisfactorily updated. For the likes of Lightening, it isn't just eye-candy... and, for many, I suspect, breaking existing (addon) functionality will be unacceptable.</p><p>That said, I'm looking forward to 'conversation' view - and I've craved an improved address book for years... though what I saw when I last took a peek at the Beta wasn't much better than in TB2.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That seems quite an important extension - any idea when ( or if ) it will be supported by TB3 ? To me , it seems like an error of judgement to mainstream release a new version when key addons have not been satisfactorily updated .
For the likes of Lightening , it is n't just eye-candy... and , for many , I suspect , breaking existing ( addon ) functionality will be unacceptable.That said , I 'm looking forward to 'conversation ' view - and I 've craved an improved address book for years... though what I saw when I last took a peek at the Beta was n't much better than in TB2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That seems quite an important extension - any idea when (or if) it will be supported by TB3?To me, it seems like an error of judgement to mainstream release a new version when key addons have not been satisfactorily updated.
For the likes of Lightening, it isn't just eye-candy... and, for many, I suspect, breaking existing (addon) functionality will be unacceptable.That said, I'm looking forward to 'conversation' view - and I've craved an improved address book for years... though what I saw when I last took a peek at the Beta wasn't much better than in TB2.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376694</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259594520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't move messages in and out of threads or merge threads in Firefox. This is the only feature I miss from Outlook, where it has been for ages (I switched a long time ago). People use "reply" to start a new unrelated thread, or they continue a thread by copying the subject to a new message instead of replying, or Gmail mangles headers. This happens so often that a threaded view that relies entirely on message IDs is near useless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't move messages in and out of threads or merge threads in Firefox .
This is the only feature I miss from Outlook , where it has been for ages ( I switched a long time ago ) .
People use " reply " to start a new unrelated thread , or they continue a thread by copying the subject to a new message instead of replying , or Gmail mangles headers .
This happens so often that a threaded view that relies entirely on message IDs is near useless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't move messages in and out of threads or merge threads in Firefox.
This is the only feature I miss from Outlook, where it has been for ages (I switched a long time ago).
People use "reply" to start a new unrelated thread, or they continue a thread by copying the subject to a new message instead of replying, or Gmail mangles headers.
This happens so often that a threaded view that relies entirely on message IDs is near useless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373942</id>
	<title>Re:Great</title>
	<author>Wizarth</author>
	<datestamp>1260291240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372764</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260280140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, to be fair, pine was the best thing around for a long time. I used to like eudora on my mac back in the day, but pine was pretty great too. I pretty much used pine and mutt for years until I started using gmail. Web mail used to suck in a lot of ways until gmail came out. I think a yahoo account only had a 5 megabyte limit or so at the time. 1gig was incredibly large and the interface is still better than anything else. Even the classic html only version is decent and certainly lightweight. Gmail is easily the best thing google has come up with other than search. I'd argue google maps (and earth) as well, but people use e-mail far more than maps.</p><p>Ooooh....pine with google imap.....hmmmm....is there a pine port for windows?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , to be fair , pine was the best thing around for a long time .
I used to like eudora on my mac back in the day , but pine was pretty great too .
I pretty much used pine and mutt for years until I started using gmail .
Web mail used to suck in a lot of ways until gmail came out .
I think a yahoo account only had a 5 megabyte limit or so at the time .
1gig was incredibly large and the interface is still better than anything else .
Even the classic html only version is decent and certainly lightweight .
Gmail is easily the best thing google has come up with other than search .
I 'd argue google maps ( and earth ) as well , but people use e-mail far more than maps.Ooooh....pine with google imap.....hmmmm....is there a pine port for windows ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, to be fair, pine was the best thing around for a long time.
I used to like eudora on my mac back in the day, but pine was pretty great too.
I pretty much used pine and mutt for years until I started using gmail.
Web mail used to suck in a lot of ways until gmail came out.
I think a yahoo account only had a 5 megabyte limit or so at the time.
1gig was incredibly large and the interface is still better than anything else.
Even the classic html only version is decent and certainly lightweight.
Gmail is easily the best thing google has come up with other than search.
I'd argue google maps (and earth) as well, but people use e-mail far more than maps.Ooooh....pine with google imap.....hmmmm....is there a pine port for windows?
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372256</id>
	<title>Re:Great</title>
	<author>rmcd</author>
	<datestamp>1260276900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should try one of these:</p><p><a href="http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/calendar/lightning/nightly/latest-comm-1.9.1/" title="mozilla.org">http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/calendar/lightning/nightly/latest-comm-1.9.1/</a> [mozilla.org]</p><p>I've found Lightning betas to be solid and have been using them for several months (I use GCalDaemon to sync with Google Calendar). I'd back up first just to be safe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should try one of these : http : //ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/calendar/lightning/nightly/latest-comm-1.9.1/ [ mozilla.org ] I 've found Lightning betas to be solid and have been using them for several months ( I use GCalDaemon to sync with Google Calendar ) .
I 'd back up first just to be safe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should try one of these:http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/calendar/lightning/nightly/latest-comm-1.9.1/ [mozilla.org]I've found Lightning betas to be solid and have been using them for several months (I use GCalDaemon to sync with Google Calendar).
I'd back up first just to be safe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373118</id>
	<title>Gmail "conversations" don't sound like they scale.</title>
	<author>jbn-o</author>
	<datestamp>1260283140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <a href="/comments.pl?sid=1471542&amp;cid=30372702" title="slashdot.org">From another poster in this discussion</a> [slashdot.org], it sounds like Gmail's conversation view is not threaded.  One can mail a response with a different subject header and that email is still in the same thread (because threads are tracked by ordered lists of message-IDs, not the subject header).  From what it sounds like, Gmail, sorts emails into "conversations" by subjects and date/timestamps.</p><p>So asking for Gmail-style conversations means giving up something quite valuable Thunderbird has provided for a long time (possibly for as long as it has been available), which can scale up to handling discussions with more than 2 participants, and handle participants who edit the subject header reflect what they're talking about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From another poster in this discussion [ slashdot.org ] , it sounds like Gmail 's conversation view is not threaded .
One can mail a response with a different subject header and that email is still in the same thread ( because threads are tracked by ordered lists of message-IDs , not the subject header ) .
From what it sounds like , Gmail , sorts emails into " conversations " by subjects and date/timestamps.So asking for Gmail-style conversations means giving up something quite valuable Thunderbird has provided for a long time ( possibly for as long as it has been available ) , which can scale up to handling discussions with more than 2 participants , and handle participants who edit the subject header reflect what they 're talking about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> From another poster in this discussion [slashdot.org], it sounds like Gmail's conversation view is not threaded.
One can mail a response with a different subject header and that email is still in the same thread (because threads are tracked by ordered lists of message-IDs, not the subject header).
From what it sounds like, Gmail, sorts emails into "conversations" by subjects and date/timestamps.So asking for Gmail-style conversations means giving up something quite valuable Thunderbird has provided for a long time (possibly for as long as it has been available), which can scale up to handling discussions with more than 2 participants, and handle participants who edit the subject header reflect what they're talking about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373932</id>
	<title>Why the uber downloads</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1260291120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>(Note for those backwards people who still use POP: IMAP users normally download their message bodies on the fly.)</p><p>Sigh. Been using the beta for a couple of weeks, so I'm familiar with this download-everything behavior. This is not actually a new feature. What's changed is that it's enabled by default. Which is, I agree, pretty dumb.</p><p>Here's why they did this. This version has <i>vastly</i> improved searching (far and away, my favorite new feature) which doesn't work unless you have a local copy of the mailbox for indexing.</p><p>(I find this a godsend. In the past, I've turned on the local copy feature and then used Google desktop search. The problem here is that the user interface for GD sucks. Also, on one of my machines, I can't get GD to even look at the local mailbox file &mdash; no idea why.)</p><p>The way Firefox 3 does searching is Ultimately Kewl. (Won't try to describe it, go give it a try.) Naturally, they were proud of this feature and wanted everybody to try it. But just enabling such a potential bandwidth raper was dumb. Somebody should have designed a wizard or something so you could select the mailbox folders you wanted to index.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( Note for those backwards people who still use POP : IMAP users normally download their message bodies on the fly. ) Sigh .
Been using the beta for a couple of weeks , so I 'm familiar with this download-everything behavior .
This is not actually a new feature .
What 's changed is that it 's enabled by default .
Which is , I agree , pretty dumb.Here 's why they did this .
This version has vastly improved searching ( far and away , my favorite new feature ) which does n't work unless you have a local copy of the mailbox for indexing .
( I find this a godsend .
In the past , I 've turned on the local copy feature and then used Google desktop search .
The problem here is that the user interface for GD sucks .
Also , on one of my machines , I ca n't get GD to even look at the local mailbox file    no idea why .
) The way Firefox 3 does searching is Ultimately Kewl .
( Wo n't try to describe it , go give it a try .
) Naturally , they were proud of this feature and wanted everybody to try it .
But just enabling such a potential bandwidth raper was dumb .
Somebody should have designed a wizard or something so you could select the mailbox folders you wanted to index .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(Note for those backwards people who still use POP: IMAP users normally download their message bodies on the fly.)Sigh.
Been using the beta for a couple of weeks, so I'm familiar with this download-everything behavior.
This is not actually a new feature.
What's changed is that it's enabled by default.
Which is, I agree, pretty dumb.Here's why they did this.
This version has vastly improved searching (far and away, my favorite new feature) which doesn't work unless you have a local copy of the mailbox for indexing.
(I find this a godsend.
In the past, I've turned on the local copy feature and then used Google desktop search.
The problem here is that the user interface for GD sucks.
Also, on one of my machines, I can't get GD to even look at the local mailbox file — no idea why.
)The way Firefox 3 does searching is Ultimately Kewl.
(Won't try to describe it, go give it a try.
) Naturally, they were proud of this feature and wanted everybody to try it.
But just enabling such a potential bandwidth raper was dumb.
Somebody should have designed a wizard or something so you could select the mailbox folders you wanted to index.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348</id>
	<title>New quick search sucks big time</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1259577780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thunderbird 2 had a fairly useful quick search bar. Type a word, hit enter, and your email list was filtered for just the search term. The list could be multi-selected, moved around and general managed in a normal fashion. The feature was handy for bulk operations since it was fast.
<p>
Thunderbird 3 still has the search bar but results appear in a new tab. This tab does not show results as a list but in a fancy HTML based summary view. That's great if you were searching for a particular message but utterly useless for bulk operations. What if I want to drag and drop a few files around, or delete them or flag them as junk? Even as a summary view it is stupid since it only shows 10 results at a time with a More button at the bottom. FFS, stop mimicking an AJAX web application - the results are RIGHT THERE on the disk and you can certainly show more than 10 results at a time.
</p><p>
The workaround is to create a saved search but that's even more hassle for something that could be achieved in seconds in v2.0. So much for progress. I suggest if Thunderbird 3.1 turns up, they put an option or two in to control this behaviour and remember what the user has chosen. There is even a "save search as virtual folder" option in the quick search menu suggesting someone was thinking of doing something like this, it just appears to be inexplicably greyed out.
</p><p>
Thunderbird 3 has potential but it really feels like a regression in several important respects. It also inexplicably lacks things I would have expected to be improved. For example, you still can't select an email, and right mouse and create a filter from it. This is something that Outlook has had for donkey's years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thunderbird 2 had a fairly useful quick search bar .
Type a word , hit enter , and your email list was filtered for just the search term .
The list could be multi-selected , moved around and general managed in a normal fashion .
The feature was handy for bulk operations since it was fast .
Thunderbird 3 still has the search bar but results appear in a new tab .
This tab does not show results as a list but in a fancy HTML based summary view .
That 's great if you were searching for a particular message but utterly useless for bulk operations .
What if I want to drag and drop a few files around , or delete them or flag them as junk ?
Even as a summary view it is stupid since it only shows 10 results at a time with a More button at the bottom .
FFS , stop mimicking an AJAX web application - the results are RIGHT THERE on the disk and you can certainly show more than 10 results at a time .
The workaround is to create a saved search but that 's even more hassle for something that could be achieved in seconds in v2.0 .
So much for progress .
I suggest if Thunderbird 3.1 turns up , they put an option or two in to control this behaviour and remember what the user has chosen .
There is even a " save search as virtual folder " option in the quick search menu suggesting someone was thinking of doing something like this , it just appears to be inexplicably greyed out .
Thunderbird 3 has potential but it really feels like a regression in several important respects .
It also inexplicably lacks things I would have expected to be improved .
For example , you still ca n't select an email , and right mouse and create a filter from it .
This is something that Outlook has had for donkey 's years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thunderbird 2 had a fairly useful quick search bar.
Type a word, hit enter, and your email list was filtered for just the search term.
The list could be multi-selected, moved around and general managed in a normal fashion.
The feature was handy for bulk operations since it was fast.
Thunderbird 3 still has the search bar but results appear in a new tab.
This tab does not show results as a list but in a fancy HTML based summary view.
That's great if you were searching for a particular message but utterly useless for bulk operations.
What if I want to drag and drop a few files around, or delete them or flag them as junk?
Even as a summary view it is stupid since it only shows 10 results at a time with a More button at the bottom.
FFS, stop mimicking an AJAX web application - the results are RIGHT THERE on the disk and you can certainly show more than 10 results at a time.
The workaround is to create a saved search but that's even more hassle for something that could be achieved in seconds in v2.0.
So much for progress.
I suggest if Thunderbird 3.1 turns up, they put an option or two in to control this behaviour and remember what the user has chosen.
There is even a "save search as virtual folder" option in the quick search menu suggesting someone was thinking of doing something like this, it just appears to be inexplicably greyed out.
Thunderbird 3 has potential but it really feels like a regression in several important respects.
It also inexplicably lacks things I would have expected to be improved.
For example, you still can't select an email, and right mouse and create a filter from it.
This is something that Outlook has had for donkey's years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373294</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260284400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess that's ok if you trust Google with your privacy.  I don't think that I do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess that 's ok if you trust Google with your privacy .
I do n't think that I do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess that's ok if you trust Google with your privacy.
I don't think that I do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371822</id>
	<title>RFC-822 compatible format message</title>
	<author>Malc</author>
	<datestamp>1260274200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this version get rid of or offer a way to disable the message that says: <i>"The current command did not succeed.  The mail server responded: The requested message could not be converted to RFC-822 compatible formate.."</i>  Thunderbird 2.0 seems like a bad choice for accessing Exchange (via IMAP) - is 3.0 any better?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this version get rid of or offer a way to disable the message that says : " The current command did not succeed .
The mail server responded : The requested message could not be converted to RFC-822 compatible formate.. " Thunderbird 2.0 seems like a bad choice for accessing Exchange ( via IMAP ) - is 3.0 any better ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this version get rid of or offer a way to disable the message that says: "The current command did not succeed.
The mail server responded: The requested message could not be converted to RFC-822 compatible formate.."  Thunderbird 2.0 seems like a bad choice for accessing Exchange (via IMAP) - is 3.0 any better?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372738</id>
	<title>Re:A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>iris-n</author>
	<datestamp>1260279900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's good. But have they fixed the bug where TB would mysteriously swallow your address book? Last time I checked, the bug was already 3 years old, and no sign of the developers.</p><p>I mean. Is there a feature more important than not losing data?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's good .
But have they fixed the bug where TB would mysteriously swallow your address book ?
Last time I checked , the bug was already 3 years old , and no sign of the developers.I mean .
Is there a feature more important than not losing data ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's good.
But have they fixed the bug where TB would mysteriously swallow your address book?
Last time I checked, the bug was already 3 years old, and no sign of the developers.I mean.
Is there a feature more important than not losing data?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374334</id>
	<title>Re:TB3 Upgrade Warning - You'll need your password</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260296640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.smartcomputing.com/techsupport/detail.aspx?guid=&amp;ErrorID=29874" title="smartcomputing.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.smartcomputing.com/techsupport/detail.aspx?guid=&amp;ErrorID=29874</a> [smartcomputing.com]</p><p>Will help.<br>The problem is that TB3 has Master Password clicked on by default. The bug is that if you didn't have a master password set (just keeps your pop passwords), then your stuffed.<br>Back up your emails, uninstall TB3, reinstall TB2, assign a master password, reinstall TB3.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.smartcomputing.com/techsupport/detail.aspx ? guid = &amp;ErrorID = 29874 [ smartcomputing.com ] Will help.The problem is that TB3 has Master Password clicked on by default .
The bug is that if you did n't have a master password set ( just keeps your pop passwords ) , then your stuffed.Back up your emails , uninstall TB3 , reinstall TB2 , assign a master password , reinstall TB3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.smartcomputing.com/techsupport/detail.aspx?guid=&amp;ErrorID=29874 [smartcomputing.com]Will help.The problem is that TB3 has Master Password clicked on by default.
The bug is that if you didn't have a master password set (just keeps your pop passwords), then your stuffed.Back up your emails, uninstall TB3, reinstall TB2, assign a master password, reinstall TB3.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372624</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>AmberBlackCat</author>
	<datestamp>1260279000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oddly enough, just as with tabbed web browsing, this is something Opera did before Mozilla...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oddly enough , just as with tabbed web browsing , this is something Opera did before Mozilla.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oddly enough, just as with tabbed web browsing, this is something Opera did before Mozilla...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373520</id>
	<title>Download is a 404 Thunderbird (3.0) in US-English</title>
	<author>udippel</author>
	<datestamp>1260286560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/download/?product=thunderbird-3.0&amp;os=linux&amp;lang=en-US" title="mozillamessaging.com">http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/download/?product=thunderbird-3.0&amp;os=linux&amp;lang=en-US</a> [mozillamessaging.com]</p><p>is a beauty. Then clicking Linux or - cough-cough - Windows, results in</p><p><i> <b>Hmmm, we're having trouble finding that one.</b></i> </p><p>No cigar. More of a brown bag.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/download/ ? product = thunderbird-3.0&amp;os = linux&amp;lang = en-US [ mozillamessaging.com ] is a beauty .
Then clicking Linux or - cough-cough - Windows , results in Hmmm , we 're having trouble finding that one .
No cigar .
More of a brown bag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/download/?product=thunderbird-3.0&amp;os=linux&amp;lang=en-US [mozillamessaging.com]is a beauty.
Then clicking Linux or - cough-cough - Windows, results in Hmmm, we're having trouble finding that one.
No cigar.
More of a brown bag.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371686</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>ZERO1ZERO</author>
	<datestamp>1260273420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps it should have read <i> you don't want to delete but still want to delete</i> <p>That would have made more sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps it should have read you do n't want to delete but still want to delete That would have made more sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps it should have read  you don't want to delete but still want to delete That would have made more sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374074</id>
	<title>Newsgroups...</title>
	<author>WeblionX</author>
	<datestamp>1260292860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, are they ever going to add combine-and-decode support?  Maybe even support for other encoding formats?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , are they ever going to add combine-and-decode support ?
Maybe even support for other encoding formats ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, are they ever going to add combine-and-decode support?
Maybe even support for other encoding formats?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373210</id>
	<title>Re:How to downgrade from FF 3.5 to FF3.0 ?</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1260283740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are running XP you <em> might</em> be able to pull it off using system restore, but there isn't any way of doing a fall back through Firefox, no. Are you on dialup? As I have found FF 3.5 sucks on slower connections and has to be seriously tweaked to regain its former speed, it uses too many connections for slower connections with low bandwidth on the newer version. </p><p>

<a href="http://forums.cnet.com/5208-7584\_102-0.html?messageID=3121407" title="cnet.com">Here</a> [cnet.com] is the tweaks I use for my customers on slower connections. I hope this helps!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are running XP you might be able to pull it off using system restore , but there is n't any way of doing a fall back through Firefox , no .
Are you on dialup ?
As I have found FF 3.5 sucks on slower connections and has to be seriously tweaked to regain its former speed , it uses too many connections for slower connections with low bandwidth on the newer version .
Here [ cnet.com ] is the tweaks I use for my customers on slower connections .
I hope this helps !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are running XP you  might be able to pull it off using system restore, but there isn't any way of doing a fall back through Firefox, no.
Are you on dialup?
As I have found FF 3.5 sucks on slower connections and has to be seriously tweaked to regain its former speed, it uses too many connections for slower connections with low bandwidth on the newer version.
Here [cnet.com] is the tweaks I use for my customers on slower connections.
I hope this helps!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372096</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373346</id>
	<title>OSX: Some good, some bad</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1260284880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just tried it out under OS X and my verdict is mixed.<br>
<br>
Good: Thunderbird 3 allows you to scroll widgets even when it doesn't have focus. This was something that always annoyed me with TB2. Also, TB3 says it has Spotlight integration although it seems that Spotlight hasn't yet deemed my mail boxes index-worthy. Maybe it only works for new mails.<br>
<br>
Bad: Thunderbird 3 covers the entire screen when it starts up. There doesn't seem to be a way to get it to stop doing that.<br>
<br>
Worth noting: If you use the "TB Change From and Fcc on Compose Extension" it won't work anymore as it's not rated for TB3 (and unmaintained). However, if you install the Nightly Tester Tools and override the compatibility check it will work just fine. I tested it (version 0.1.7) and it worked just like it did before.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just tried it out under OS X and my verdict is mixed .
Good : Thunderbird 3 allows you to scroll widgets even when it does n't have focus .
This was something that always annoyed me with TB2 .
Also , TB3 says it has Spotlight integration although it seems that Spotlight has n't yet deemed my mail boxes index-worthy .
Maybe it only works for new mails .
Bad : Thunderbird 3 covers the entire screen when it starts up .
There does n't seem to be a way to get it to stop doing that .
Worth noting : If you use the " TB Change From and Fcc on Compose Extension " it wo n't work anymore as it 's not rated for TB3 ( and unmaintained ) .
However , if you install the Nightly Tester Tools and override the compatibility check it will work just fine .
I tested it ( version 0.1.7 ) and it worked just like it did before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just tried it out under OS X and my verdict is mixed.
Good: Thunderbird 3 allows you to scroll widgets even when it doesn't have focus.
This was something that always annoyed me with TB2.
Also, TB3 says it has Spotlight integration although it seems that Spotlight hasn't yet deemed my mail boxes index-worthy.
Maybe it only works for new mails.
Bad: Thunderbird 3 covers the entire screen when it starts up.
There doesn't seem to be a way to get it to stop doing that.
Worth noting: If you use the "TB Change From and Fcc on Compose Extension" it won't work anymore as it's not rated for TB3 (and unmaintained).
However, if you install the Nightly Tester Tools and override the compatibility check it will work just fine.
I tested it (version 0.1.7) and it worked just like it did before.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373710</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>threexk</author>
	<datestamp>1260288600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ok, does anyone know how to turn off the tabs bar, or at least hide it when there is only one tab, like firefox does?</p></div><p>In about:config, change mail.tabs.autoHide to true.</p><p>(Tools-&gt;Options...-&gt;Advanced-&gt;Config Editor...)</p><p>I personally wish you could disable tabs completely.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , does anyone know how to turn off the tabs bar , or at least hide it when there is only one tab , like firefox does ? In about : config , change mail.tabs.autoHide to true .
( Tools- &gt; Options...- &gt; Advanced- &gt; Config Editor... ) I personally wish you could disable tabs completely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, does anyone know how to turn off the tabs bar, or at least hide it when there is only one tab, like firefox does?In about:config, change mail.tabs.autoHide to true.
(Tools-&gt;Options...-&gt;Advanced-&gt;Config Editor...)I personally wish you could disable tabs completely.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373510</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260286380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed. I was a holdout too. I finally switched to gmail this past summer. Now you couldn't pay me to go back to a desktop application for mail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
I was a holdout too .
I finally switched to gmail this past summer .
Now you could n't pay me to go back to a desktop application for mail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
I was a holdout too.
I finally switched to gmail this past summer.
Now you couldn't pay me to go back to a desktop application for mail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30380908</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>RedBear</author>
	<datestamp>1259575680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Desktop email clients, even if they are just accessing large hosted IMAP accounts that are also available through webmail, still have distinct advantages over webmail.</p><p>As has been brought up by others, if you have more than one email account it is trivial to monitor them all from the same email application using the same interface versus having different tabs open in a browser to different webmail interfaces.</p><p>Another advantage is speed, if the desktop client is set up to download body and attachments any email that shows up in your inbox will quickly open up and the attachment will be available for viewing and automatically gets stored in a temporary cache folder when opened. With webmail you usually have to do the whole Save-As bit to download the attachment separately.</p><p>I side benefit of downloading body and attachments automatically is that all of your mail is available even when your computer is offline. I know, scary concept, but a lot of people need access to their email for reference even when disconnected from the Internet. It also serves as a backup for times when the email server might go down temporarily, or Heaven forbid lose your mail in a server crash. A business could be down for days in some cases if they had to wait for a webmail provider to restore from backups.</p><p>Students, who are often going from one machine to another, will naturally gravitate to the portability of webmail interfaces. I use them myself quite often but still have Thunderbird set up on my personal/work computer simply because it's easier to have a single place to go to monitor several accounts. As you said, staff and faculty are still sticking with desktop email, probably because they tend to use a single computer and don't see enough benefit to webmail to move away from what they have been using forever.</p><p>Searching often works better/faster or has more options in a desktop client versus webmail interfaces. I've seen a lot of webmail with not just clunky search interfaces but clunky interfaces overall. I've seen a lot of webmail that is abysmally slow even on a fast connection, also. Not to mention the fact that pretty much every email service that provides webmail uses a different interface.</p><p>In other words, just because in your specific situation there are a lot of people who don't prefer a desktop email client anymore doesn't mean there is no longer a reason for them to exist. People have been predicting the death of things like local computer storage and desktop-based applications for a decade or longer but there will always be a subset of people for whom web-based stuff just doesn't do the job. Thinking otherwise is just short-sighted. We're all glad that you are happy with Gmail, but Google does not encompass the needs of the entire world. Yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Desktop email clients , even if they are just accessing large hosted IMAP accounts that are also available through webmail , still have distinct advantages over webmail.As has been brought up by others , if you have more than one email account it is trivial to monitor them all from the same email application using the same interface versus having different tabs open in a browser to different webmail interfaces.Another advantage is speed , if the desktop client is set up to download body and attachments any email that shows up in your inbox will quickly open up and the attachment will be available for viewing and automatically gets stored in a temporary cache folder when opened .
With webmail you usually have to do the whole Save-As bit to download the attachment separately.I side benefit of downloading body and attachments automatically is that all of your mail is available even when your computer is offline .
I know , scary concept , but a lot of people need access to their email for reference even when disconnected from the Internet .
It also serves as a backup for times when the email server might go down temporarily , or Heaven forbid lose your mail in a server crash .
A business could be down for days in some cases if they had to wait for a webmail provider to restore from backups.Students , who are often going from one machine to another , will naturally gravitate to the portability of webmail interfaces .
I use them myself quite often but still have Thunderbird set up on my personal/work computer simply because it 's easier to have a single place to go to monitor several accounts .
As you said , staff and faculty are still sticking with desktop email , probably because they tend to use a single computer and do n't see enough benefit to webmail to move away from what they have been using forever.Searching often works better/faster or has more options in a desktop client versus webmail interfaces .
I 've seen a lot of webmail with not just clunky search interfaces but clunky interfaces overall .
I 've seen a lot of webmail that is abysmally slow even on a fast connection , also .
Not to mention the fact that pretty much every email service that provides webmail uses a different interface.In other words , just because in your specific situation there are a lot of people who do n't prefer a desktop email client anymore does n't mean there is no longer a reason for them to exist .
People have been predicting the death of things like local computer storage and desktop-based applications for a decade or longer but there will always be a subset of people for whom web-based stuff just does n't do the job .
Thinking otherwise is just short-sighted .
We 're all glad that you are happy with Gmail , but Google does not encompass the needs of the entire world .
Yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Desktop email clients, even if they are just accessing large hosted IMAP accounts that are also available through webmail, still have distinct advantages over webmail.As has been brought up by others, if you have more than one email account it is trivial to monitor them all from the same email application using the same interface versus having different tabs open in a browser to different webmail interfaces.Another advantage is speed, if the desktop client is set up to download body and attachments any email that shows up in your inbox will quickly open up and the attachment will be available for viewing and automatically gets stored in a temporary cache folder when opened.
With webmail you usually have to do the whole Save-As bit to download the attachment separately.I side benefit of downloading body and attachments automatically is that all of your mail is available even when your computer is offline.
I know, scary concept, but a lot of people need access to their email for reference even when disconnected from the Internet.
It also serves as a backup for times when the email server might go down temporarily, or Heaven forbid lose your mail in a server crash.
A business could be down for days in some cases if they had to wait for a webmail provider to restore from backups.Students, who are often going from one machine to another, will naturally gravitate to the portability of webmail interfaces.
I use them myself quite often but still have Thunderbird set up on my personal/work computer simply because it's easier to have a single place to go to monitor several accounts.
As you said, staff and faculty are still sticking with desktop email, probably because they tend to use a single computer and don't see enough benefit to webmail to move away from what they have been using forever.Searching often works better/faster or has more options in a desktop client versus webmail interfaces.
I've seen a lot of webmail with not just clunky search interfaces but clunky interfaces overall.
I've seen a lot of webmail that is abysmally slow even on a fast connection, also.
Not to mention the fact that pretty much every email service that provides webmail uses a different interface.In other words, just because in your specific situation there are a lot of people who don't prefer a desktop email client anymore doesn't mean there is no longer a reason for them to exist.
People have been predicting the death of things like local computer storage and desktop-based applications for a decade or longer but there will always be a subset of people for whom web-based stuff just doesn't do the job.
Thinking otherwise is just short-sighted.
We're all glad that you are happy with Gmail, but Google does not encompass the needs of the entire world.
Yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371700</id>
	<title>I hope they fixed searc in Win7...</title>
	<author>MrCrassic</author>
	<datestamp>1260273540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know it had a feature to integrate itself with search in Windows 7, but it was pretty broken in the beta. I hope it's fixed now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know it had a feature to integrate itself with search in Windows 7 , but it was pretty broken in the beta .
I hope it 's fixed now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know it had a feature to integrate itself with search in Windows 7, but it was pretty broken in the beta.
I hope it's fixed now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376756</id>
	<title>Re:Great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259595060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lightning 1.0b1 will be released shortly. In the meantime, use the <a href="http://ilpolipo.free.fr/addons/?sn=lnu" title="ilpolipo.free.fr" rel="nofollow">Lightning Nightly Updater</a> [ilpolipo.free.fr]. It sounds scarier than it is. Lightning is actually quite stable now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lightning 1.0b1 will be released shortly .
In the meantime , use the Lightning Nightly Updater [ ilpolipo.free.fr ] .
It sounds scarier than it is .
Lightning is actually quite stable now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lightning 1.0b1 will be released shortly.
In the meantime, use the Lightning Nightly Updater [ilpolipo.free.fr].
It sounds scarier than it is.
Lightning is actually quite stable now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375452</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>ickleberry</author>
	<datestamp>1259579340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>With the likes of Eric Schmidt saying "Privacy concerns are for wrongdoers" it is more relevant than ever.<br> <br>

and besides, I don't like web interfaces at all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>With the likes of Eric Schmidt saying " Privacy concerns are for wrongdoers " it is more relevant than ever .
and besides , I do n't like web interfaces at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the likes of Eric Schmidt saying "Privacy concerns are for wrongdoers" it is more relevant than ever.
and besides, I don't like web interfaces at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30386558</id>
	<title>Re:A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260447480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Mac Mail had problems with colossally-large (as in foolishly-large, yes I am to blame) IMAP folders.</p></div> </blockquote><p>One of my clients was being joe-jobbed a while back, Mail.app was all kinds of useless is that scenario.  With any kind of serious usage, the message index database corrupts more often than Outlook PST's.  The filter rules would regularly stop working and the app regularly refused to move email from the INBOX.  Furthermore, Mail.app does not appear to expunge deleted IMAP messages from the INBOX; 'FAIL' is built right into the app.</p><p>After switching the client to TB3 Beta, there's been no problems (aside from lack of address book integration and mobileme support).  Perhaps Apple fixed some of the Mail issues with Snow Leopard but if you rely on email to run your business then my advice would be to avoid it.  The TB3 betas have been stable, my client reports only a couple of crashes in 6 months.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac Mail had problems with colossally-large ( as in foolishly-large , yes I am to blame ) IMAP folders .
One of my clients was being joe-jobbed a while back , Mail.app was all kinds of useless is that scenario .
With any kind of serious usage , the message index database corrupts more often than Outlook PST 's .
The filter rules would regularly stop working and the app regularly refused to move email from the INBOX .
Furthermore , Mail.app does not appear to expunge deleted IMAP messages from the INBOX ; 'FAIL ' is built right into the app.After switching the client to TB3 Beta , there 's been no problems ( aside from lack of address book integration and mobileme support ) .
Perhaps Apple fixed some of the Mail issues with Snow Leopard but if you rely on email to run your business then my advice would be to avoid it .
The TB3 betas have been stable , my client reports only a couple of crashes in 6 months .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac Mail had problems with colossally-large (as in foolishly-large, yes I am to blame) IMAP folders.
One of my clients was being joe-jobbed a while back, Mail.app was all kinds of useless is that scenario.
With any kind of serious usage, the message index database corrupts more often than Outlook PST's.
The filter rules would regularly stop working and the app regularly refused to move email from the INBOX.
Furthermore, Mail.app does not appear to expunge deleted IMAP messages from the INBOX; 'FAIL' is built right into the app.After switching the client to TB3 Beta, there's been no problems (aside from lack of address book integration and mobileme support).
Perhaps Apple fixed some of the Mail issues with Snow Leopard but if you rely on email to run your business then my advice would be to avoid it.
The TB3 betas have been stable, my client reports only a couple of crashes in 6 months.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30377734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371636</id>
	<title>Sometimes there are ...</title>
	<author>neonprimetime</author>
	<datestamp>1260273120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>... slashdot story summaries i <b>don't want to delete but still want to keep</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>... slashdot story summaries i do n't want to delete but still want to keep</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... slashdot story summaries i don't want to delete but still want to keep</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371704</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260273540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One thing I would surely like to see in email clients however - the gmail like threaded conversation view. It's just so much better and nicer to use, but still many email applications tend to have the plain-list-of-messages view.</p><p>I've been using Thunderbird 3 beta for a while, so I'm not sure if this feature is new to Thunderbird 3 or not (I suspect that it was in 2, not sure though), but you can read your email in a threaded view. In Thunderbird 3, on the column headers, there is a Thread View column to the very left. It is next to the Starred column. Click on that to view your emails in threaded view.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One thing I would surely like to see in email clients however - the gmail like threaded conversation view .
It 's just so much better and nicer to use , but still many email applications tend to have the plain-list-of-messages view.I 've been using Thunderbird 3 beta for a while , so I 'm not sure if this feature is new to Thunderbird 3 or not ( I suspect that it was in 2 , not sure though ) , but you can read your email in a threaded view .
In Thunderbird 3 , on the column headers , there is a Thread View column to the very left .
It is next to the Starred column .
Click on that to view your emails in threaded view .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One thing I would surely like to see in email clients however - the gmail like threaded conversation view.
It's just so much better and nicer to use, but still many email applications tend to have the plain-list-of-messages view.I've been using Thunderbird 3 beta for a while, so I'm not sure if this feature is new to Thunderbird 3 or not (I suspect that it was in 2, not sure though), but you can read your email in a threaded view.
In Thunderbird 3, on the column headers, there is a Thread View column to the very left.
It is next to the Starred column.
Click on that to view your emails in threaded view.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373408</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260285480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Try to see old mails using gmail on a plain, or in a fast train, or away in an area with bad GSM/UMTS/whatever signal. Only the cloud computing people think the cloud is always there. Simpler... Try to get your old email if google doesn't want to give it to you. I know, it's SCI-FI, for now...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try to see old mails using gmail on a plain , or in a fast train , or away in an area with bad GSM/UMTS/whatever signal .
Only the cloud computing people think the cloud is always there .
Simpler... Try to get your old email if google does n't want to give it to you .
I know , it 's SCI-FI , for now.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try to see old mails using gmail on a plain, or in a fast train, or away in an area with bad GSM/UMTS/whatever signal.
Only the cloud computing people think the cloud is always there.
Simpler... Try to get your old email if google doesn't want to give it to you.
I know, it's SCI-FI, for now...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371882</id>
	<title>TB3 Upgrade Warning - You'll need your passwords</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just ran the upgrade, and the bad news is that TB 3 asked for my long-forgotten passwords when checking for mail. You know, the ones that TB 2 so helpfully remembered years ago when I first installed it.</p><p>It would have been nice to get some warning before running the upgrade. Fortunately, I use webmail for one account, so I knew its password, and guessed lucky on another.</p><p>The new version looks shiny, but who'll care if they can't get their fricking mail?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just ran the upgrade , and the bad news is that TB 3 asked for my long-forgotten passwords when checking for mail .
You know , the ones that TB 2 so helpfully remembered years ago when I first installed it.It would have been nice to get some warning before running the upgrade .
Fortunately , I use webmail for one account , so I knew its password , and guessed lucky on another.The new version looks shiny , but who 'll care if they ca n't get their fricking mail ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just ran the upgrade, and the bad news is that TB 3 asked for my long-forgotten passwords when checking for mail.
You know, the ones that TB 2 so helpfully remembered years ago when I first installed it.It would have been nice to get some warning before running the upgrade.
Fortunately, I use webmail for one account, so I knew its password, and guessed lucky on another.The new version looks shiny, but who'll care if they can't get their fricking mail?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373080</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>kizza42</author>
	<datestamp>1260282780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Funny, the only thing thats keeping me from dropping Thunderbird and moving entirely to Gmail is the "plain-list-of-messages view" that Google is too stubborn to add for people like me that feel threading is a slower way of organizing things</htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny , the only thing thats keeping me from dropping Thunderbird and moving entirely to Gmail is the " plain-list-of-messages view " that Google is too stubborn to add for people like me that feel threading is a slower way of organizing things</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny, the only thing thats keeping me from dropping Thunderbird and moving entirely to Gmail is the "plain-list-of-messages view" that Google is too stubborn to add for people like me that feel threading is a slower way of organizing things</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30380206</id>
	<title>Re:Eh, is this beta?</title>
	<author>mugurel</author>
	<datestamp>1259571960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just tried TB3 and liked it a lot. especially the search facility. It requires the messages to be indexed, it takes some time before that's done.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just tried TB3 and liked it a lot .
especially the search facility .
It requires the messages to be indexed , it takes some time before that 's done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just tried TB3 and liked it a lot.
especially the search facility.
It requires the messages to be indexed, it takes some time before that's done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376332</id>
	<title>STILL no redirect command?!</title>
	<author>raju1kabir</author>
	<datestamp>1259591880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It has been how many years now and Thunderbird STILL doesn't have a redirect command? WTF? I had an add-on that I used with Thunderbird 2 for this purpose but it's not compatible with version 3. Guess I'm going back to version 2.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It has been how many years now and Thunderbird STILL does n't have a redirect command ?
WTF ? I had an add-on that I used with Thunderbird 2 for this purpose but it 's not compatible with version 3 .
Guess I 'm going back to version 2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has been how many years now and Thunderbird STILL doesn't have a redirect command?
WTF? I had an add-on that I used with Thunderbird 2 for this purpose but it's not compatible with version 3.
Guess I'm going back to version 2.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374788</id>
	<title>Re:No mbox?</title>
	<author>WuphonsReach</author>
	<datestamp>1259611320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>The last time I looked into thunderbird 3 all the mail was no going to be stored in an mbox format and wouldn't be stored in anything close to plain text.</i> <br>
<br>
The problem with plain text (as in, individual files) is that it would bury the file system once you get mailboxes with a few thousand messages.  Especially on NTFS which starts to choke at around 10k to 20k files in a single folder.<br>
<br>
(And on my system, the MBOX files are basically plain text, including headers.  The only thing that is going to look binary-ish would be mime-encoded base64 stuff.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>The last time I looked into thunderbird 3 all the mail was no going to be stored in an mbox format and would n't be stored in anything close to plain text .
The problem with plain text ( as in , individual files ) is that it would bury the file system once you get mailboxes with a few thousand messages .
Especially on NTFS which starts to choke at around 10k to 20k files in a single folder .
( And on my system , the MBOX files are basically plain text , including headers .
The only thing that is going to look binary-ish would be mime-encoded base64 stuff .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last time I looked into thunderbird 3 all the mail was no going to be stored in an mbox format and wouldn't be stored in anything close to plain text.
The problem with plain text (as in, individual files) is that it would bury the file system once you get mailboxes with a few thousand messages.
Especially on NTFS which starts to choke at around 10k to 20k files in a single folder.
(And on my system, the MBOX files are basically plain text, including headers.
The only thing that is going to look binary-ish would be mime-encoded base64 stuff.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374498</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260298920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have been a Thunderbird user for as long as it's been around (and before it was "Thunderbird"), and I thought I would be one forever. Even once I started using Gmail....</p></div><p>Please go advertise Google elsewhere.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been a Thunderbird user for as long as it 's been around ( and before it was " Thunderbird " ) , and I thought I would be one forever .
Even once I started using Gmail....Please go advertise Google elsewhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been a Thunderbird user for as long as it's been around (and before it was "Thunderbird"), and I thought I would be one forever.
Even once I started using Gmail....Please go advertise Google elsewhere.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373542</id>
	<title>Conversation view is a mixed blessing</title>
	<author>kelanden</author>
	<datestamp>1260286800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are times I wish Gmail had never implemented conversation view. The presentation of email threads in a flat chronological progression encourages users to reply the last message in the thread regardless of which message(s) they are actually responding to.</p><p>Because of this, it's not uncommon to see threads with replies four or more levels deep when most of the participants are using Gmail. The traditional use of a tree view to track the flow of conversations becomes useless in such cases. Add in Gmail's (unalterable) behavior of placing quotes at the end of replies and you have the recipe for a very frustrating experience when participating in long discussions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are times I wish Gmail had never implemented conversation view .
The presentation of email threads in a flat chronological progression encourages users to reply the last message in the thread regardless of which message ( s ) they are actually responding to.Because of this , it 's not uncommon to see threads with replies four or more levels deep when most of the participants are using Gmail .
The traditional use of a tree view to track the flow of conversations becomes useless in such cases .
Add in Gmail 's ( unalterable ) behavior of placing quotes at the end of replies and you have the recipe for a very frustrating experience when participating in long discussions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are times I wish Gmail had never implemented conversation view.
The presentation of email threads in a flat chronological progression encourages users to reply the last message in the thread regardless of which message(s) they are actually responding to.Because of this, it's not uncommon to see threads with replies four or more levels deep when most of the participants are using Gmail.
The traditional use of a tree view to track the flow of conversations becomes useless in such cases.
Add in Gmail's (unalterable) behavior of placing quotes at the end of replies and you have the recipe for a very frustrating experience when participating in long discussions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30506666</id>
	<title>Re:New quick search sucks big time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261304340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, I just found out how to use the regular TB2 search. Just select a specific filter instead of "Search all message" and that's it, when you type stuff it will show you a list of result in the message list.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I just found out how to use the regular TB2 search .
Just select a specific filter instead of " Search all message " and that 's it , when you type stuff it will show you a list of result in the message list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I just found out how to use the regular TB2 search.
Just select a specific filter instead of "Search all message" and that's it, when you type stuff it will show you a list of result in the message list.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374096</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1260293160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, I hate this particular "feature" of Outlook 2010 with a passion. The old-style representation of conversation thread as a tree rather than flat list is much easier to follow once you have more than two people in it (which is typical in a mailing list).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I hate this particular " feature " of Outlook 2010 with a passion .
The old-style representation of conversation thread as a tree rather than flat list is much easier to follow once you have more than two people in it ( which is typical in a mailing list ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I hate this particular "feature" of Outlook 2010 with a passion.
The old-style representation of conversation thread as a tree rather than flat list is much easier to follow once you have more than two people in it (which is typical in a mailing list).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372158</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372056</id>
	<title>Tabs</title>
	<author>RalphSleigh</author>
	<datestamp>1260275640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, does anyone know how to turn off the tabs bar, or at least hide it when there is only one tab, like firefox does?</p><p>99\% of the time I read my mail in the reading pane instead of popping open a new window, so the tabs bar is just sitting there with only one tab showing.</p><p>Plus pressing the write button opens a new window instead of a tab anyway...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , does anyone know how to turn off the tabs bar , or at least hide it when there is only one tab , like firefox does ? 99 \ % of the time I read my mail in the reading pane instead of popping open a new window , so the tabs bar is just sitting there with only one tab showing.Plus pressing the write button opens a new window instead of a tab anyway.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, does anyone know how to turn off the tabs bar, or at least hide it when there is only one tab, like firefox does?99\% of the time I read my mail in the reading pane instead of popping open a new window, so the tabs bar is just sitting there with only one tab showing.Plus pressing the write button opens a new window instead of a tab anyway...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372614</id>
	<title>Re:Hopefully improved.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260278940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It ate 40 gigs? You have over 40 gigs of email in an IMAP account? Or was it buggy and downloading multiple copies of each message?</p><p>Also considering the mailbox size limits of TB, that sounds impossible. Something is fishy with your post.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It ate 40 gigs ?
You have over 40 gigs of email in an IMAP account ?
Or was it buggy and downloading multiple copies of each message ? Also considering the mailbox size limits of TB , that sounds impossible .
Something is fishy with your post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It ate 40 gigs?
You have over 40 gigs of email in an IMAP account?
Or was it buggy and downloading multiple copies of each message?Also considering the mailbox size limits of TB, that sounds impossible.
Something is fishy with your post.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373322</id>
	<title>Re:How to downgrade from FF 3.5 to FF3.0 ?</title>
	<author>MikeFM</author>
	<datestamp>1260284640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>3.6 is due out soon. Switch to that. It has some nice technology updates that will make it render pages nicer. Hopefully it'd also fix whatever is unhappy about 3.5.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>3.6 is due out soon .
Switch to that .
It has some nice technology updates that will make it render pages nicer .
Hopefully it 'd also fix whatever is unhappy about 3.5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3.6 is due out soon.
Switch to that.
It has some nice technology updates that will make it render pages nicer.
Hopefully it'd also fix whatever is unhappy about 3.5.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372096</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375518</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259580180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Likewise for FOLDERS!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Likewise for FOLDERS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Likewise for FOLDERS!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30377734</id>
	<title>Re:A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>Sloppy</author>
	<datestamp>1259601240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At work I had to upgrade from Mac Mail to Tbird2 because Mac Mail had problems with colossally-large (as in <em>foolishly</em>-large, yes I am to blame) IMAP folders.  It got to be unusable.  As long as Tbird3 is as stable as Tbird2, I think I'll be pretty happy with it.  The big question right now is whether or not I risk using a x.0 version release.  Maybe I'll let others be the guinea pigs for right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At work I had to upgrade from Mac Mail to Tbird2 because Mac Mail had problems with colossally-large ( as in foolishly-large , yes I am to blame ) IMAP folders .
It got to be unusable .
As long as Tbird3 is as stable as Tbird2 , I think I 'll be pretty happy with it .
The big question right now is whether or not I risk using a x.0 version release .
Maybe I 'll let others be the guinea pigs for right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At work I had to upgrade from Mac Mail to Tbird2 because Mac Mail had problems with colossally-large (as in foolishly-large, yes I am to blame) IMAP folders.
It got to be unusable.
As long as Tbird3 is as stable as Tbird2, I think I'll be pretty happy with it.
The big question right now is whether or not I risk using a x.0 version release.
Maybe I'll let others be the guinea pigs for right now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371878</id>
	<title>Re:A big step up from TB 2 for linux</title>
	<author>jeffstar</author>
	<datestamp>1260274560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TB2 never crashed on me. not once. I've got 10 account, gigs of mail, calender extension being populated from web services and lots of rules.</p><p>What were you doing to make it crash all the time!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TB2 never crashed on me .
not once .
I 've got 10 account , gigs of mail , calender extension being populated from web services and lots of rules.What were you doing to make it crash all the time !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TB2 never crashed on me.
not once.
I've got 10 account, gigs of mail, calender extension being populated from web services and lots of rules.What were you doing to make it crash all the time!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372794</id>
	<title>Re:4GB limit and attachment handling?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260280440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>4GB of email is crazy huge. What email program can handle more than 4GB mailbox size?</p><p>Most crap out at 2GB.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>4GB of email is crazy huge .
What email program can handle more than 4GB mailbox size ? Most crap out at 2GB .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4GB of email is crazy huge.
What email program can handle more than 4GB mailbox size?Most crap out at 2GB.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371606</id>
	<title>This is great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260272940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Too bad I switched to Postbox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad I switched to Postbox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad I switched to Postbox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30382392</id>
	<title>50,000 emails</title>
	<author>Colin Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1259582400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Outlook, <b>sucks</b>. Thunderbird isn't a lot better.</p><p>I have to use outlook in a corporate environment and for large volumes of emails (tens plus per day), it's basically useless. Hours per day can be spent on the busy work of manipulating, searching and filtering.</p><p>Computers are there to do repetitive tasks and mail classification is exactly that. We are even able to automatically classify mail as spam or not, these days so automatically classifying, sorting, tagging and prioritising emails isn't new. Yet where are the mail clients which do so?</p><p>All that seems to happen is that the mail clients change GUI widgets, storage engines, gui widgets, storage engines etc etc... They are no cleverer today than PINE was <b>20 years ago</b>.</p><p>So, we're back to procmail, bogofilter and a couple of custom scripts to autotag and prioritise emails.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Outlook , sucks .
Thunderbird is n't a lot better.I have to use outlook in a corporate environment and for large volumes of emails ( tens plus per day ) , it 's basically useless .
Hours per day can be spent on the busy work of manipulating , searching and filtering.Computers are there to do repetitive tasks and mail classification is exactly that .
We are even able to automatically classify mail as spam or not , these days so automatically classifying , sorting , tagging and prioritising emails is n't new .
Yet where are the mail clients which do so ? All that seems to happen is that the mail clients change GUI widgets , storage engines , gui widgets , storage engines etc etc... They are no cleverer today than PINE was 20 years ago.So , we 're back to procmail , bogofilter and a couple of custom scripts to autotag and prioritise emails .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Outlook, sucks.
Thunderbird isn't a lot better.I have to use outlook in a corporate environment and for large volumes of emails (tens plus per day), it's basically useless.
Hours per day can be spent on the busy work of manipulating, searching and filtering.Computers are there to do repetitive tasks and mail classification is exactly that.
We are even able to automatically classify mail as spam or not, these days so automatically classifying, sorting, tagging and prioritising emails isn't new.
Yet where are the mail clients which do so?All that seems to happen is that the mail clients change GUI widgets, storage engines, gui widgets, storage engines etc etc... They are no cleverer today than PINE was 20 years ago.So, we're back to procmail, bogofilter and a couple of custom scripts to autotag and prioritise emails.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372158</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375658</id>
	<title>Re:Tabs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259582520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Threaded view works really well, so long as the people you correspond with are using mail clients which set the in-reply-to header properly... Microsoft outlook still doesn't set this header, so every time an outlook user replies it breaks the thread and goes back to the top level... It also doesn't format replies properly, so you can't easily differentiate between new text and quoted text from previous mails.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Threaded view works really well , so long as the people you correspond with are using mail clients which set the in-reply-to header properly... Microsoft outlook still does n't set this header , so every time an outlook user replies it breaks the thread and goes back to the top level... It also does n't format replies properly , so you ca n't easily differentiate between new text and quoted text from previous mails .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Threaded view works really well, so long as the people you correspond with are using mail clients which set the in-reply-to header properly... Microsoft outlook still doesn't set this header, so every time an outlook user replies it breaks the thread and goes back to the top level... It also doesn't format replies properly, so you can't easily differentiate between new text and quoted text from previous mails.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374104</id>
	<title>Re:Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1260293280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny, I switched *away* from in the web-based GMail client, opting for Evolution (mainly because of it's calendar integration).  Why?  Well, I wanted to access my personal and work email through the same client.  But, of course, I'm not gonna forward my work email to GMail.  So the only solution available was to use an IMAP client, through which I now access both my work and gmail accounts.</p><p>So, no, desktop clients are alive and well, and probably always will be, thanks to corporations and individuals who choose to run their own email services (Microsoft Exchange in particular).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny , I switched * away * from in the web-based GMail client , opting for Evolution ( mainly because of it 's calendar integration ) .
Why ? Well , I wanted to access my personal and work email through the same client .
But , of course , I 'm not gon na forward my work email to GMail .
So the only solution available was to use an IMAP client , through which I now access both my work and gmail accounts.So , no , desktop clients are alive and well , and probably always will be , thanks to corporations and individuals who choose to run their own email services ( Microsoft Exchange in particular ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny, I switched *away* from in the web-based GMail client, opting for Evolution (mainly because of it's calendar integration).
Why?  Well, I wanted to access my personal and work email through the same client.
But, of course, I'm not gonna forward my work email to GMail.
So the only solution available was to use an IMAP client, through which I now access both my work and gmail accounts.So, no, desktop clients are alive and well, and probably always will be, thanks to corporations and individuals who choose to run their own email services (Microsoft Exchange in particular).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373358</id>
	<title>Lightning (and Sunbird) status...</title>
	<author>CritterNYC</author>
	<datestamp>1260285000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lightning isn't ready yet, it's 1.0 release is lagging behind TB 3.0.  You can use the current nightly builds and they should work with Thunderbird 3.  They're marked as Lightning 1.0B1pre.  You can grab a nightly here:<br><a href="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/lightning/download.html#nightly" title="mozilla.org">http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/lightning/download.html#nightly</a> [mozilla.org]</p><p>They said they're basically at 1.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate status and hope to have the official 1.0 Beta 1 release out within a couple weeks, at least according to the Mozilla Calendar blog.  Details are in the Mozilla Calendar Blog (currently offline):<br><a href="http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/calendar/" title="mozillazine.org">http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/calendar/</a> [mozillazine.org]</p><p>We're going to stick with recommending Thunderbird 2.0 for a little bit on PortableApps.com because Lightning isn't ready, and it is (arguably) the most important Thunderbird extension.  And recommending nightlies to regular users is a bad idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lightning is n't ready yet , it 's 1.0 release is lagging behind TB 3.0 .
You can use the current nightly builds and they should work with Thunderbird 3 .
They 're marked as Lightning 1.0B1pre .
You can grab a nightly here : http : //www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/lightning/download.html # nightly [ mozilla.org ] They said they 're basically at 1.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate status and hope to have the official 1.0 Beta 1 release out within a couple weeks , at least according to the Mozilla Calendar blog .
Details are in the Mozilla Calendar Blog ( currently offline ) : http : //weblogs.mozillazine.org/calendar/ [ mozillazine.org ] We 're going to stick with recommending Thunderbird 2.0 for a little bit on PortableApps.com because Lightning is n't ready , and it is ( arguably ) the most important Thunderbird extension .
And recommending nightlies to regular users is a bad idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lightning isn't ready yet, it's 1.0 release is lagging behind TB 3.0.
You can use the current nightly builds and they should work with Thunderbird 3.
They're marked as Lightning 1.0B1pre.
You can grab a nightly here:http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/lightning/download.html#nightly [mozilla.org]They said they're basically at 1.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate status and hope to have the official 1.0 Beta 1 release out within a couple weeks, at least according to the Mozilla Calendar blog.
Details are in the Mozilla Calendar Blog (currently offline):http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/calendar/ [mozillazine.org]We're going to stick with recommending Thunderbird 2.0 for a little bit on PortableApps.com because Lightning isn't ready, and it is (arguably) the most important Thunderbird extension.
And recommending nightlies to regular users is a bad idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122</id>
	<title>Does it matter all that much?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260276000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have been a Thunderbird user for as long as it's been around (and before it was "Thunderbird"), and I thought I would be one forever. Even once I started using Gmail for my personal email, I thought I'd need Thunderbird for my work stuff. But, you know, the university started offering hosted Gmail, and I decided to try it... and, months later, I don't miss T-bird at all.</p><p>Thing is, I was one of the hold-outs. While quite a few staff and faculty here are still on desktop email, almost all of our students have preferred web mail for quite a few years now - even when the only web-based option was that gosh-awful "Webpine" (Hey! Here's a great idea! Let's use our awful, counter-intuitive, ugly Pine command line program as a design template for a new web-based email client!). So I wonder for how much longer any desktop email programs will even be considered relevant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been a Thunderbird user for as long as it 's been around ( and before it was " Thunderbird " ) , and I thought I would be one forever .
Even once I started using Gmail for my personal email , I thought I 'd need Thunderbird for my work stuff .
But , you know , the university started offering hosted Gmail , and I decided to try it... and , months later , I do n't miss T-bird at all.Thing is , I was one of the hold-outs .
While quite a few staff and faculty here are still on desktop email , almost all of our students have preferred web mail for quite a few years now - even when the only web-based option was that gosh-awful " Webpine " ( Hey !
Here 's a great idea !
Let 's use our awful , counter-intuitive , ugly Pine command line program as a design template for a new web-based email client ! ) .
So I wonder for how much longer any desktop email programs will even be considered relevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been a Thunderbird user for as long as it's been around (and before it was "Thunderbird"), and I thought I would be one forever.
Even once I started using Gmail for my personal email, I thought I'd need Thunderbird for my work stuff.
But, you know, the university started offering hosted Gmail, and I decided to try it... and, months later, I don't miss T-bird at all.Thing is, I was one of the hold-outs.
While quite a few staff and faculty here are still on desktop email, almost all of our students have preferred web mail for quite a few years now - even when the only web-based option was that gosh-awful "Webpine" (Hey!
Here's a great idea!
Let's use our awful, counter-intuitive, ugly Pine command line program as a design template for a new web-based email client!).
So I wonder for how much longer any desktop email programs will even be considered relevant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376250</id>
	<title>Re:New quick search sucks big time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259590800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Thunderbird 3 still has the search bar but results appear in a new tab. This tab does not show results as a list but in a fancy HTML based summary view. That's great if you were searching for a particular message but utterly useless for bulk operations. What if I want to drag and drop a few files around, or delete them or flag them as junk? Even as a summary view it is stupid since it only shows 10 results at a time with a More button at the bottom.</p></div><p>You missed an important point.<br>Just click on "Open as list" (in the Search tab) and it will display *all* the results in a new tab! Here you can perform whatever operation you want on them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thunderbird 3 still has the search bar but results appear in a new tab .
This tab does not show results as a list but in a fancy HTML based summary view .
That 's great if you were searching for a particular message but utterly useless for bulk operations .
What if I want to drag and drop a few files around , or delete them or flag them as junk ?
Even as a summary view it is stupid since it only shows 10 results at a time with a More button at the bottom.You missed an important point.Just click on " Open as list " ( in the Search tab ) and it will display * all * the results in a new tab !
Here you can perform whatever operation you want on them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thunderbird 3 still has the search bar but results appear in a new tab.
This tab does not show results as a list but in a fancy HTML based summary view.
That's great if you were searching for a particular message but utterly useless for bulk operations.
What if I want to drag and drop a few files around, or delete them or flag them as junk?
Even as a summary view it is stupid since it only shows 10 results at a time with a More button at the bottom.You missed an important point.Just click on "Open as list" (in the Search tab) and it will display *all* the results in a new tab!
Here you can perform whatever operation you want on them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371702</id>
	<title>I blame the cold weather</title>
	<author>MrEricSir</author>
	<datestamp>1260273540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>because hell just froze over.  First we get Chrome for Linux, then Thunderbird 3.  What next, Duke Nukem Forever?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>because hell just froze over .
First we get Chrome for Linux , then Thunderbird 3 .
What next , Duke Nukem Forever ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because hell just froze over.
First we get Chrome for Linux, then Thunderbird 3.
What next, Duke Nukem Forever?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371852</id>
	<title>Conversation view != threads</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260274440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every single time I see this discussion, someone pipes up to say "but thunderbird DOES do threads!".<br>That it does. And that has absolutely no bearing on the discussion at hand.<br>Conversation view as provided by gmail gives you a single page for each entire conversation AND it inserts your replies online as appropriate.<br>There's several other features that make conversation view work so well, but you'll have to actually try gmail to understand what we are talking about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every single time I see this discussion , someone pipes up to say " but thunderbird DOES do threads !
" .That it does .
And that has absolutely no bearing on the discussion at hand.Conversation view as provided by gmail gives you a single page for each entire conversation AND it inserts your replies online as appropriate.There 's several other features that make conversation view work so well , but you 'll have to actually try gmail to understand what we are talking about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every single time I see this discussion, someone pipes up to say "but thunderbird DOES do threads!
".That it does.
And that has absolutely no bearing on the discussion at hand.Conversation view as provided by gmail gives you a single page for each entire conversation AND it inserts your replies online as appropriate.There's several other features that make conversation view work so well, but you'll have to actually try gmail to understand what we are talking about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375178</id>
	<title>Re:Sometimes there are ...</title>
	<author>Conanymous Award</author>
	<datestamp>1259574960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The funny thing is, I read that part and actually interpreted it correctly without first noticing what nonsense it is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The funny thing is , I read that part and actually interpreted it correctly without first noticing what nonsense it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The funny thing is, I read that part and actually interpreted it correctly without first noticing what nonsense it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30379730</id>
	<title>Re:New quick search sucks big time. Solution!</title>
	<author>rleibman</author>
	<datestamp>1259612100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It was the first thing I noticed too, and it irked me<br>
Change the search type (click on the little magnifying glass) to "message body filter". You get the old functionality back.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It was the first thing I noticed too , and it irked me Change the search type ( click on the little magnifying glass ) to " message body filter " .
You get the old functionality back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was the first thing I noticed too, and it irked me
Change the search type (click on the little magnifying glass) to "message body filter".
You get the old functionality back.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30381686
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30377190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30394998
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373932
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372910
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30381922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376180
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376694
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30399502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374932
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30377734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30386558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30379132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30380908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30506666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374096
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30380190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30382392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373404
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30380206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30395916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_08_211240_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30379730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30380274
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371972
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374808
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30506666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30394998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30399502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30381686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30379730
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372878
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371930
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373710
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372466
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372256
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376756
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30379132
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371926
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373080
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372096
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373210
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371682
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376694
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371852
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376810
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372590
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373692
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373542
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30381922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371704
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372158
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30382392
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371686
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371606
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372738
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371866
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30377734
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30386558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371878
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374486
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375840
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376072
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30395916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372234
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371810
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374334
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30380206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375178
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374788
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373520
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374498
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30376056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30380908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30375088
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30377190
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372180
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_08_211240.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30371956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30380190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30372614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30374030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_08_211240.30373592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
