<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_10_1922250</id>
	<title>FTC Says Virtual Worlds Bad For Minors</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1260474480000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>eldavojohn writes <i>"A <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/12/virtualworlds.shtm">new report from the FTC</a> is <a href="http://www.gamepolitics.com/2009/12/10/ftc-virtual-worlds-offer-real-explicit-content-minors">claiming minors have access to explicit content via online virtual worlds</a> such as those found in online games.  The report makes five recommendations to keep little Johnny away from the harms of Barrens chat: Use more effective age-screening mechanisms to prevent children from registering in adult virtual worlds; Use or enhance age-segregation techniques to make sure that people interact only with others in their age group; Re-examine language filters to ensure that they detect and eliminate messages that violate rules of behavior in virtual worlds; Provide more guidance to community enforcers in virtual worlds so they are better able to review and rate virtual world content, report potential underage users, and report any users who appear to be violating rules of behavior; and Employ a staff of specially trained moderators who are equipped to take swift action against rule violations."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>eldavojohn writes " A new report from the FTC is claiming minors have access to explicit content via online virtual worlds such as those found in online games .
The report makes five recommendations to keep little Johnny away from the harms of Barrens chat : Use more effective age-screening mechanisms to prevent children from registering in adult virtual worlds ; Use or enhance age-segregation techniques to make sure that people interact only with others in their age group ; Re-examine language filters to ensure that they detect and eliminate messages that violate rules of behavior in virtual worlds ; Provide more guidance to community enforcers in virtual worlds so they are better able to review and rate virtual world content , report potential underage users , and report any users who appear to be violating rules of behavior ; and Employ a staff of specially trained moderators who are equipped to take swift action against rule violations .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eldavojohn writes "A new report from the FTC is claiming minors have access to explicit content via online virtual worlds such as those found in online games.
The report makes five recommendations to keep little Johnny away from the harms of Barrens chat: Use more effective age-screening mechanisms to prevent children from registering in adult virtual worlds; Use or enhance age-segregation techniques to make sure that people interact only with others in their age group; Re-examine language filters to ensure that they detect and eliminate messages that violate rules of behavior in virtual worlds; Provide more guidance to community enforcers in virtual worlds so they are better able to review and rate virtual world content, report potential underage users, and report any users who appear to be violating rules of behavior; and Employ a staff of specially trained moderators who are equipped to take swift action against rule violations.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30399786</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1260531780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Parents should be the one who ultimately decide whether their kids are ready to join online worlds and, if they're not, prevent them from doing so.
</p><p>
We as a people should not need a government organization dictating what our children should or should not be exposed too. I realize it's politically incorrect to blame voting parents for anything these days but there is no government rules that will replace a good parenting. Furthermore, I'm starting to realize a good chunk of those pushing for things like this are parents who really don't want to put in the work to raise their children and instead would prefer the government or schools do it for them.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
The problem is that there are a lot of useless parents out there.  If a parent is unable to feed, shelter or clothe their children, at some point (I hope) the state needs to intervene to save the child from serious harm.
</p><p>
Children are not independent like adults, you can't just leave them to it if their supposed carers are not up to the job.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Parents should be the one who ultimately decide whether their kids are ready to join online worlds and , if they 're not , prevent them from doing so .
We as a people should not need a government organization dictating what our children should or should not be exposed too .
I realize it 's politically incorrect to blame voting parents for anything these days but there is no government rules that will replace a good parenting .
Furthermore , I 'm starting to realize a good chunk of those pushing for things like this are parents who really do n't want to put in the work to raise their children and instead would prefer the government or schools do it for them .
The problem is that there are a lot of useless parents out there .
If a parent is unable to feed , shelter or clothe their children , at some point ( I hope ) the state needs to intervene to save the child from serious harm .
Children are not independent like adults , you ca n't just leave them to it if their supposed carers are not up to the job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parents should be the one who ultimately decide whether their kids are ready to join online worlds and, if they're not, prevent them from doing so.
We as a people should not need a government organization dictating what our children should or should not be exposed too.
I realize it's politically incorrect to blame voting parents for anything these days but there is no government rules that will replace a good parenting.
Furthermore, I'm starting to realize a good chunk of those pushing for things like this are parents who really don't want to put in the work to raise their children and instead would prefer the government or schools do it for them.
The problem is that there are a lot of useless parents out there.
If a parent is unable to feed, shelter or clothe their children, at some point (I hope) the state needs to intervene to save the child from serious harm.
Children are not independent like adults, you can't just leave them to it if their supposed carers are not up to the job.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395724</id>
	<title>Re:No such thing as bad words.</title>
	<author>GrubLord</author>
	<datestamp>1260445320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ironically, the words in your post might've just blocked most minors from reading this page, if their NetNanny software is working.</p><p>You're going to have to learn to deal with the fact that even though you appear to have common sense, most of your contemporaries do not - and they're the ones who make the rules.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ironically , the words in your post might 've just blocked most minors from reading this page , if their NetNanny software is working.You 're going to have to learn to deal with the fact that even though you appear to have common sense , most of your contemporaries do not - and they 're the ones who make the rules .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ironically, the words in your post might've just blocked most minors from reading this page, if their NetNanny software is working.You're going to have to learn to deal with the fact that even though you appear to have common sense, most of your contemporaries do not - and they're the ones who make the rules.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397700</id>
	<title>Freakin' Hilarious!</title>
	<author>Bones3D\_mac</author>
	<datestamp>1260457500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After years of running a large scale message board myself, one thing I have learned is that you simply can't quantify every situation enough to objectively make the correct decision every single time. An automated system can either be inadequate and unintrusive, or, draconian and inefficient. Using a team of humans is even more chaotic, because each one ultimately ends up falling back onto their own experiences to determine right from wrong. This can vary greatly from person to person, leading to either being too lax or too iron fisted. Both extremes have their own consequences and effect upon the community being watched over.</p><p>Even a system like Slashdot's setup, where the community polices itself, isn't free of flaws. A community that polices itself will ultimately normalize with whatever the averages deem "appropriate", for better or worse. In addition, any attempt to override this average will often be met with opposition from the community when the operators' trust in the community gets put into question.</p><p>No online system will ever be perfectly safe for children. But neither is the real world.</p><p>The only real way to protect children both online and off is for the parents to be more involved in their kids' lives. Talk to them. Keep the video games and computers out in neutral parts of the home where you can actually see what's going on, rather than putting them in the bedroom. Furthermore, don't violate your kids' trust in you by monitoring their actions from behind the scenes using keyloggers or VNC servers. You can be just as effective by watching their actions out in the open when you walk by. If they make a sudden knee-jerk reaction like turning off the monitor or closing windows, you know their up to something and your actions immediately after should be enough to put the fear of god into them when they know they're doing something they shouldn't be doing.</p><p>Want your kids to grow up "right"? Then don't let others do your job for you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After years of running a large scale message board myself , one thing I have learned is that you simply ca n't quantify every situation enough to objectively make the correct decision every single time .
An automated system can either be inadequate and unintrusive , or , draconian and inefficient .
Using a team of humans is even more chaotic , because each one ultimately ends up falling back onto their own experiences to determine right from wrong .
This can vary greatly from person to person , leading to either being too lax or too iron fisted .
Both extremes have their own consequences and effect upon the community being watched over.Even a system like Slashdot 's setup , where the community polices itself , is n't free of flaws .
A community that polices itself will ultimately normalize with whatever the averages deem " appropriate " , for better or worse .
In addition , any attempt to override this average will often be met with opposition from the community when the operators ' trust in the community gets put into question.No online system will ever be perfectly safe for children .
But neither is the real world.The only real way to protect children both online and off is for the parents to be more involved in their kids ' lives .
Talk to them .
Keep the video games and computers out in neutral parts of the home where you can actually see what 's going on , rather than putting them in the bedroom .
Furthermore , do n't violate your kids ' trust in you by monitoring their actions from behind the scenes using keyloggers or VNC servers .
You can be just as effective by watching their actions out in the open when you walk by .
If they make a sudden knee-jerk reaction like turning off the monitor or closing windows , you know their up to something and your actions immediately after should be enough to put the fear of god into them when they know they 're doing something they should n't be doing.Want your kids to grow up " right " ?
Then do n't let others do your job for you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After years of running a large scale message board myself, one thing I have learned is that you simply can't quantify every situation enough to objectively make the correct decision every single time.
An automated system can either be inadequate and unintrusive, or, draconian and inefficient.
Using a team of humans is even more chaotic, because each one ultimately ends up falling back onto their own experiences to determine right from wrong.
This can vary greatly from person to person, leading to either being too lax or too iron fisted.
Both extremes have their own consequences and effect upon the community being watched over.Even a system like Slashdot's setup, where the community polices itself, isn't free of flaws.
A community that polices itself will ultimately normalize with whatever the averages deem "appropriate", for better or worse.
In addition, any attempt to override this average will often be met with opposition from the community when the operators' trust in the community gets put into question.No online system will ever be perfectly safe for children.
But neither is the real world.The only real way to protect children both online and off is for the parents to be more involved in their kids' lives.
Talk to them.
Keep the video games and computers out in neutral parts of the home where you can actually see what's going on, rather than putting them in the bedroom.
Furthermore, don't violate your kids' trust in you by monitoring their actions from behind the scenes using keyloggers or VNC servers.
You can be just as effective by watching their actions out in the open when you walk by.
If they make a sudden knee-jerk reaction like turning off the monitor or closing windows, you know their up to something and your actions immediately after should be enough to put the fear of god into them when they know they're doing something they shouldn't be doing.Want your kids to grow up "right"?
Then don't let others do your job for you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393452</id>
	<title>Parents need to be Parents</title>
	<author>Stregano</author>
	<datestamp>1260436800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you are a parent and you are truly that worried, then stop paying for your kid to play WoW.

Don't filter a MMO and downgrade it for us.  It starts with filters and then just expands and makes the good online games dull.

If you don't want your child to do something, don't let them.

It is not Blizzard's or SOE's fault little Timmy showed his wang to his class, it is your fault.  Maybe you should have taught him that is not acceptable to do.

Not all parents are like this.  Some parents out there still do a great job parenting, but the parents that want to censor games instead of just not letting their kids play them, GRR! (that is my way of not getting flagged for flamebait and stopping).</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are a parent and you are truly that worried , then stop paying for your kid to play WoW .
Do n't filter a MMO and downgrade it for us .
It starts with filters and then just expands and makes the good online games dull .
If you do n't want your child to do something , do n't let them .
It is not Blizzard 's or SOE 's fault little Timmy showed his wang to his class , it is your fault .
Maybe you should have taught him that is not acceptable to do .
Not all parents are like this .
Some parents out there still do a great job parenting , but the parents that want to censor games instead of just not letting their kids play them , GRR !
( that is my way of not getting flagged for flamebait and stopping ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are a parent and you are truly that worried, then stop paying for your kid to play WoW.
Don't filter a MMO and downgrade it for us.
It starts with filters and then just expands and makes the good online games dull.
If you don't want your child to do something, don't let them.
It is not Blizzard's or SOE's fault little Timmy showed his wang to his class, it is your fault.
Maybe you should have taught him that is not acceptable to do.
Not all parents are like this.
Some parents out there still do a great job parenting, but the parents that want to censor games instead of just not letting their kids play them, GRR!
(that is my way of not getting flagged for flamebait and stopping).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397714</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>shaitand</author>
	<datestamp>1260457620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It all started with idiots recognizing psycology as a legitimate field of study. All the sudden there is a regimented and very official sounding pool of opinions regarding behavior that can be used to justify coding those opinions in law.</p><p>If I starve my children or if I intentionally inflict permanent physical damage to them that's one thing. But what is or is not good for the mental and psychological development of my child should be up to me, not the government and certainly not some shrink. This includes corporal punishment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It all started with idiots recognizing psycology as a legitimate field of study .
All the sudden there is a regimented and very official sounding pool of opinions regarding behavior that can be used to justify coding those opinions in law.If I starve my children or if I intentionally inflict permanent physical damage to them that 's one thing .
But what is or is not good for the mental and psychological development of my child should be up to me , not the government and certainly not some shrink .
This includes corporal punishment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It all started with idiots recognizing psycology as a legitimate field of study.
All the sudden there is a regimented and very official sounding pool of opinions regarding behavior that can be used to justify coding those opinions in law.If I starve my children or if I intentionally inflict permanent physical damage to them that's one thing.
But what is or is not good for the mental and psychological development of my child should be up to me, not the government and certainly not some shrink.
This includes corporal punishment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393666</id>
	<title>"Age segregation" = "knowledge segregation"</title>
	<author>ZorbaTHut</author>
	<datestamp>1260437520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Y'know, I remember when I was going online in my early teen years. I remember chatting with people online about all manner of things. Yeah, I went into a few cybersex chatrooms for the thrill of it, I hung out in adult discussion channels.</p><p>I learned from it.</p><p>I talked to 25-year-olds and 35-year-olds about philosophy. I spectated on public cybersex, and learned things about human behavior and desire. I watched people wiser and smarter than I was make good decisions after good decision, then fuck up, do something stupid, and recover from it.</p><p>Humanity learns from its elders. That is the way it has always been. The older ones teach the younger ones, the younger ones mull over what they've been taught and improve it, the younger ones become the older ones, the cycle continues. Why are we trying to break this? Children today are kept in the dark more than in any point in history - should we lock them in a small steel box, isolated from human interaction, until they're 18 and magically an adult?</p><p>I was emotionally mature early. Everyone I talked to said so. They said that at 16, I was wiser and smarter than a lot of their peers. And now I look back on who I was then and realize I knew <i>nothing</i>, but, indeed, I was still far ahead of the curve. Today, I give out advice to people, just like I was given advice to back then, and I know for a fact I've helped the lives of many people, I've given them a philosophical kickstart and pushed their lives onto good tracks.</p><p>And in twenty years, they'll be doing the same thing as I did, only even better because they'll have started from a better position, thanks to my efforts.</p><p>These recommendations are actively dangerous to the progression of humanity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Y'know , I remember when I was going online in my early teen years .
I remember chatting with people online about all manner of things .
Yeah , I went into a few cybersex chatrooms for the thrill of it , I hung out in adult discussion channels.I learned from it.I talked to 25-year-olds and 35-year-olds about philosophy .
I spectated on public cybersex , and learned things about human behavior and desire .
I watched people wiser and smarter than I was make good decisions after good decision , then fuck up , do something stupid , and recover from it.Humanity learns from its elders .
That is the way it has always been .
The older ones teach the younger ones , the younger ones mull over what they 've been taught and improve it , the younger ones become the older ones , the cycle continues .
Why are we trying to break this ?
Children today are kept in the dark more than in any point in history - should we lock them in a small steel box , isolated from human interaction , until they 're 18 and magically an adult ? I was emotionally mature early .
Everyone I talked to said so .
They said that at 16 , I was wiser and smarter than a lot of their peers .
And now I look back on who I was then and realize I knew nothing , but , indeed , I was still far ahead of the curve .
Today , I give out advice to people , just like I was given advice to back then , and I know for a fact I 've helped the lives of many people , I 've given them a philosophical kickstart and pushed their lives onto good tracks.And in twenty years , they 'll be doing the same thing as I did , only even better because they 'll have started from a better position , thanks to my efforts.These recommendations are actively dangerous to the progression of humanity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Y'know, I remember when I was going online in my early teen years.
I remember chatting with people online about all manner of things.
Yeah, I went into a few cybersex chatrooms for the thrill of it, I hung out in adult discussion channels.I learned from it.I talked to 25-year-olds and 35-year-olds about philosophy.
I spectated on public cybersex, and learned things about human behavior and desire.
I watched people wiser and smarter than I was make good decisions after good decision, then fuck up, do something stupid, and recover from it.Humanity learns from its elders.
That is the way it has always been.
The older ones teach the younger ones, the younger ones mull over what they've been taught and improve it, the younger ones become the older ones, the cycle continues.
Why are we trying to break this?
Children today are kept in the dark more than in any point in history - should we lock them in a small steel box, isolated from human interaction, until they're 18 and magically an adult?I was emotionally mature early.
Everyone I talked to said so.
They said that at 16, I was wiser and smarter than a lot of their peers.
And now I look back on who I was then and realize I knew nothing, but, indeed, I was still far ahead of the curve.
Today, I give out advice to people, just like I was given advice to back then, and I know for a fact I've helped the lives of many people, I've given them a philosophical kickstart and pushed their lives onto good tracks.And in twenty years, they'll be doing the same thing as I did, only even better because they'll have started from a better position, thanks to my efforts.These recommendations are actively dangerous to the progression of humanity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393642</id>
	<title>They're the problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260437400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just want to point out that a lot of the acts the FTC is aiming to protect children from are actually perpetrated by the children themselves.</p><p>Whenever I see or hear racial slurs, or comments I would consider inappropriate for public forums, they always seem to be spouted by those with the language comprehension of a 3rd to 9th grader. Most adults who pay their own subscription to these worlds aim to do better things with their time then spamming trade chat with inappropriate or blatantly offensive messages.</p><p>That said, I'm all for it. Get the little buggers off my virtual lawn and let them have their own sandbox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just want to point out that a lot of the acts the FTC is aiming to protect children from are actually perpetrated by the children themselves.Whenever I see or hear racial slurs , or comments I would consider inappropriate for public forums , they always seem to be spouted by those with the language comprehension of a 3rd to 9th grader .
Most adults who pay their own subscription to these worlds aim to do better things with their time then spamming trade chat with inappropriate or blatantly offensive messages.That said , I 'm all for it .
Get the little buggers off my virtual lawn and let them have their own sandbox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just want to point out that a lot of the acts the FTC is aiming to protect children from are actually perpetrated by the children themselves.Whenever I see or hear racial slurs, or comments I would consider inappropriate for public forums, they always seem to be spouted by those with the language comprehension of a 3rd to 9th grader.
Most adults who pay their own subscription to these worlds aim to do better things with their time then spamming trade chat with inappropriate or blatantly offensive messages.That said, I'm all for it.
Get the little buggers off my virtual lawn and let them have their own sandbox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393124</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>wiredog</author>
	<datestamp>1260435600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes.  Parents need to be <a href="http://adequacy.org/public/stories/2001.12.2.42056.2147.html" title="adequacy.org">pro-active</a> [adequacy.org] in defending their children from online threats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
Parents need to be pro-active [ adequacy.org ] in defending their children from online threats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
Parents need to be pro-active [adequacy.org] in defending their children from online threats.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393942</id>
	<title>Fuck the FTC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260438600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They have no say in the matter. Constitution says so. End of discussion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They have no say in the matter .
Constitution says so .
End of discussion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have no say in the matter.
Constitution says so.
End of discussion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393988</id>
	<title>Re:Prevent Beneficial Interaction</title>
	<author>Normal Dan</author>
	<datestamp>1260438840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree.  I used to live in a virtual world when I was younger (not healthy btw) but an adult was able to guess my age exactly by the way I was acting.  It really made me think about how I was acting and I became (or at least acted) far more mature than most of my friends (at least online).  I really wish I was exposed to more adults as a child.  Once I graduated high school it felt strange to interact with anyone outside my age group (IRL).  I feel I've missed out on quite a bit because I had trouble talking to anyone older (or younger) than myself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
I used to live in a virtual world when I was younger ( not healthy btw ) but an adult was able to guess my age exactly by the way I was acting .
It really made me think about how I was acting and I became ( or at least acted ) far more mature than most of my friends ( at least online ) .
I really wish I was exposed to more adults as a child .
Once I graduated high school it felt strange to interact with anyone outside my age group ( IRL ) .
I feel I 've missed out on quite a bit because I had trouble talking to anyone older ( or younger ) than myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
I used to live in a virtual world when I was younger (not healthy btw) but an adult was able to guess my age exactly by the way I was acting.
It really made me think about how I was acting and I became (or at least acted) far more mature than most of my friends (at least online).
I really wish I was exposed to more adults as a child.
Once I graduated high school it felt strange to interact with anyone outside my age group (IRL).
I feel I've missed out on quite a bit because I had trouble talking to anyone older (or younger) than myself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393866</id>
	<title>Parental responsibility</title>
	<author>CaseM</author>
	<datestamp>1260438300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a parent, I take great pride in knowing exactly what my son's doing in World of Warcraft. He knows that if I get home home from work and my dailies haven't been run then there's going to be hell to pay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a parent , I take great pride in knowing exactly what my son 's doing in World of Warcraft .
He knows that if I get home home from work and my dailies have n't been run then there 's going to be hell to pay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a parent, I take great pride in knowing exactly what my son's doing in World of Warcraft.
He knows that if I get home home from work and my dailies haven't been run then there's going to be hell to pay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393138</id>
	<title>Oh the irony...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260435600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Parents telling the government to 'think of the children'. Parents not knowing what their children are doing online.</p><p>Dear Parents,</p><p>You gave your kid a computer and access to the Internet with little or no supervision or restriction. What the FUCK were you thinking?</p><p>Sincerely,<br>Someone who's thinking of your children for you!</p><p>p.s. If you thought the zombie box was bad 20 years ago, you're in for a world of hurt with the Internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Parents telling the government to 'think of the children' .
Parents not knowing what their children are doing online.Dear Parents,You gave your kid a computer and access to the Internet with little or no supervision or restriction .
What the FUCK were you thinking ? Sincerely,Someone who 's thinking of your children for you ! p.s .
If you thought the zombie box was bad 20 years ago , you 're in for a world of hurt with the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parents telling the government to 'think of the children'.
Parents not knowing what their children are doing online.Dear Parents,You gave your kid a computer and access to the Internet with little or no supervision or restriction.
What the FUCK were you thinking?Sincerely,Someone who's thinking of your children for you!p.s.
If you thought the zombie box was bad 20 years ago, you're in for a world of hurt with the Internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395594</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Akaihiryuu</author>
	<datestamp>1260444900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Blizzard agrees with you.  WOW is pretty much untouchable in this regard, because *they don't allow anyone under 18 to own an account*.  For a minor to play, their parent/guardian must register an account in their name and (this is the one case in which Blizzard allows account sharing) the parent/guardian is allowed to share each account with 1 minor child.  When they turn 18 there is a procedure to switch the account over to their name.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Blizzard agrees with you .
WOW is pretty much untouchable in this regard , because * they do n't allow anyone under 18 to own an account * .
For a minor to play , their parent/guardian must register an account in their name and ( this is the one case in which Blizzard allows account sharing ) the parent/guardian is allowed to share each account with 1 minor child .
When they turn 18 there is a procedure to switch the account over to their name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blizzard agrees with you.
WOW is pretty much untouchable in this regard, because *they don't allow anyone under 18 to own an account*.
For a minor to play, their parent/guardian must register an account in their name and (this is the one case in which Blizzard allows account sharing) the parent/guardian is allowed to share each account with 1 minor child.
When they turn 18 there is a procedure to switch the account over to their name.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30400160</id>
	<title>Re:No surprise</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1260536580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You know what they're really missing here? Teenaged boys are looking for explicit content and you'll never be able to stop them from finding it.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
I'm actually glad I didn't have access to free online porn when I was growing up, as I don't think I'd have ever left my bedroom...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know what they 're really missing here ?
Teenaged boys are looking for explicit content and you 'll never be able to stop them from finding it .
I 'm actually glad I did n't have access to free online porn when I was growing up , as I do n't think I 'd have ever left my bedroom.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know what they're really missing here?
Teenaged boys are looking for explicit content and you'll never be able to stop them from finding it.
I'm actually glad I didn't have access to free online porn when I was growing up, as I don't think I'd have ever left my bedroom...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393768</id>
	<title>Not the adult content that's the problem.</title>
	<author>bmearns</author>
	<datestamp>1260437940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Personally, I don't think the "adult content" is the biggest problem. Immersion in a virtual world can be damaging to your sense of reality, parents (and children to whatever extent that's possible) need to be aware of it. Frankly, I'd be more worried that my kid wants to spend all his free time and all his money in a virtual world, then I would if he wanted to get off watching virtual sex.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , I do n't think the " adult content " is the biggest problem .
Immersion in a virtual world can be damaging to your sense of reality , parents ( and children to whatever extent that 's possible ) need to be aware of it .
Frankly , I 'd be more worried that my kid wants to spend all his free time and all his money in a virtual world , then I would if he wanted to get off watching virtual sex .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, I don't think the "adult content" is the biggest problem.
Immersion in a virtual world can be damaging to your sense of reality, parents (and children to whatever extent that's possible) need to be aware of it.
Frankly, I'd be more worried that my kid wants to spend all his free time and all his money in a virtual world, then I would if he wanted to get off watching virtual sex.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396972</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260451560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whatever. Seatbelts save lives. But, more lives could be saved if we, I don't know, quit driving automobiles.<br>
&nbsp; <br>If you want your kid to be free from online predators, there is one sure-fire way to do it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... keep them offline. Problem solved. Have a nice day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whatever .
Seatbelts save lives .
But , more lives could be saved if we , I do n't know , quit driving automobiles .
  If you want your kid to be free from online predators , there is one sure-fire way to do it ... keep them offline .
Problem solved .
Have a nice day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whatever.
Seatbelts save lives.
But, more lives could be saved if we, I don't know, quit driving automobiles.
  If you want your kid to be free from online predators, there is one sure-fire way to do it ... keep them offline.
Problem solved.
Have a nice day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394102</id>
	<title>Re:Keep the kids away from the rest of us</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260439380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fuck you I do. I have a goddamn potty mouth even though I'm not 14, you insensitive shitcock!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck you I do .
I have a goddamn potty mouth even though I 'm not 14 , you insensitive shitcock !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck you I do.
I have a goddamn potty mouth even though I'm not 14, you insensitive shitcock!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393498</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Aeros</author>
	<datestamp>1260436920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately so many parents have it in their mind that they don't actually need to take on this responsibility.  They expect the teachers to also teach their kids morality instead of teaching it themselves.

In my opinion these are the types of 'parents' that really do not deserve to have that title.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately so many parents have it in their mind that they do n't actually need to take on this responsibility .
They expect the teachers to also teach their kids morality instead of teaching it themselves .
In my opinion these are the types of 'parents ' that really do not deserve to have that title .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately so many parents have it in their mind that they don't actually need to take on this responsibility.
They expect the teachers to also teach their kids morality instead of teaching it themselves.
In my opinion these are the types of 'parents' that really do not deserve to have that title.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393720</id>
	<title>A modest proposal...</title>
	<author>Tsar</author>
	<datestamp>1260437760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Develop a gatekeeper that, rather than asking for an age or birthdate, actually <i>tests</i> emotional maturity based on some signal criteria.  If you test out as mature enough for the subject matter, you're in.  If not, you get redirected to something appropriate for your maturity level.<br> <br> <b>PROS: </b>Emotionally mature users would be admitted, and others blocked, regardless of age.  Advanced tweens and stunted twenty-somethings could both be dealt with appropriately.<br> <br> <b>CONS: </b>Where exactly do you draw the line?  Chronological age may still need to be used as a deciding factor in borderline cases.  Also, some sites might find it beneficial to develop a gatekeeper that identifies other factors not directly relevant to emotional maturity--high susceptibility to certain forms of advertising, for example.<br> <br>Hey, it's just a thought.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Develop a gatekeeper that , rather than asking for an age or birthdate , actually tests emotional maturity based on some signal criteria .
If you test out as mature enough for the subject matter , you 're in .
If not , you get redirected to something appropriate for your maturity level .
PROS : Emotionally mature users would be admitted , and others blocked , regardless of age .
Advanced tweens and stunted twenty-somethings could both be dealt with appropriately .
CONS : Where exactly do you draw the line ?
Chronological age may still need to be used as a deciding factor in borderline cases .
Also , some sites might find it beneficial to develop a gatekeeper that identifies other factors not directly relevant to emotional maturity--high susceptibility to certain forms of advertising , for example .
Hey , it 's just a thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Develop a gatekeeper that, rather than asking for an age or birthdate, actually tests emotional maturity based on some signal criteria.
If you test out as mature enough for the subject matter, you're in.
If not, you get redirected to something appropriate for your maturity level.
PROS: Emotionally mature users would be admitted, and others blocked, regardless of age.
Advanced tweens and stunted twenty-somethings could both be dealt with appropriately.
CONS: Where exactly do you draw the line?
Chronological age may still need to be used as a deciding factor in borderline cases.
Also, some sites might find it beneficial to develop a gatekeeper that identifies other factors not directly relevant to emotional maturity--high susceptibility to certain forms of advertising, for example.
Hey, it's just a thought.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393198</id>
	<title>Out of touch bureaucrats?</title>
	<author>bughunter</author>
	<datestamp>1260435840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm convinced that most adults, especially those who claim the mantle of "protecting the children" forget what it's like to be a child.</p><p>I mean, come on.  Don't you guys remember the ribald jokes told as early as the first grade, and the whole fascination with that mysterious, taboo subject that nobody who talked about it really understood, and nobody who understood it talked about it?</p><p>I am a parent of a five year old, and I'm far more concerned about advertisements and commercials than I am worried that he'll overhear a reference to boobies or weiners.  Exposure to "adult subjects?"  Please.  Like you never told a joke about headlights or train tunnels when you were six, or sung the "Miss Lucy" song.</p><p>And as for chat rooms and other "predator" hangouts, well, that's another level of threat... one that the media has a whole other set of objectivity problems with.  (And common sense and involvement with your child is all it takes to manage that threat.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm convinced that most adults , especially those who claim the mantle of " protecting the children " forget what it 's like to be a child.I mean , come on .
Do n't you guys remember the ribald jokes told as early as the first grade , and the whole fascination with that mysterious , taboo subject that nobody who talked about it really understood , and nobody who understood it talked about it ? I am a parent of a five year old , and I 'm far more concerned about advertisements and commercials than I am worried that he 'll overhear a reference to boobies or weiners .
Exposure to " adult subjects ?
" Please .
Like you never told a joke about headlights or train tunnels when you were six , or sung the " Miss Lucy " song.And as for chat rooms and other " predator " hangouts , well , that 's another level of threat... one that the media has a whole other set of objectivity problems with .
( And common sense and involvement with your child is all it takes to manage that threat .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm convinced that most adults, especially those who claim the mantle of "protecting the children" forget what it's like to be a child.I mean, come on.
Don't you guys remember the ribald jokes told as early as the first grade, and the whole fascination with that mysterious, taboo subject that nobody who talked about it really understood, and nobody who understood it talked about it?I am a parent of a five year old, and I'm far more concerned about advertisements and commercials than I am worried that he'll overhear a reference to boobies or weiners.
Exposure to "adult subjects?
"  Please.
Like you never told a joke about headlights or train tunnels when you were six, or sung the "Miss Lucy" song.And as for chat rooms and other "predator" hangouts, well, that's another level of threat... one that the media has a whole other set of objectivity problems with.
(And common sense and involvement with your child is all it takes to manage that threat.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394136</id>
	<title>Re:Prevent Beneficial Interaction</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260439560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Segregation leads to 'Lord of the Flies' inbreeding of immature thought.</p></div><p>See also "Congress" for what happens in this case.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Segregation leads to 'Lord of the Flies ' inbreeding of immature thought.See also " Congress " for what happens in this case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Segregation leads to 'Lord of the Flies' inbreeding of immature thought.See also "Congress" for what happens in this case.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393586</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>MrTester</author>
	<datestamp>1260437220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mod Parent (both of them) down.</p><p>We as a people should not have to tell people to read the article before they run around spouting off.<br>Oh.  Wait.  This is slashdot.  What am I thinking?</p><p>"I'm starting to realize a good chunk of those pushing for things like this..."  Yeah.  "Things like this" are reccomendations that people who are going to host a childrens site really ought to have moderators who can tell when a 20 year old pedophile is sending foul language to my 8 year old daughter on the Build-a-bear site and then do something about it.<br>HOW DARE THEY SUGGEST SUCH A THING.</p><p>I am a parent.  And $#!@$ you for suggesting that it is lazy of me to expect Build-A-Bear to effectively prevent pedophiles from harassing my daughter on line.  There is nothing in this article that states that these things must be implimented everywhere.  Its meerly suggesting that sites that are targeted to kids need to make a better effort to protect children.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod Parent ( both of them ) down.We as a people should not have to tell people to read the article before they run around spouting off.Oh .
Wait. This is slashdot .
What am I thinking ?
" I 'm starting to realize a good chunk of those pushing for things like this... " Yeah .
" Things like this " are reccomendations that people who are going to host a childrens site really ought to have moderators who can tell when a 20 year old pedophile is sending foul language to my 8 year old daughter on the Build-a-bear site and then do something about it.HOW DARE THEY SUGGEST SUCH A THING.I am a parent .
And $ # !
@ $ you for suggesting that it is lazy of me to expect Build-A-Bear to effectively prevent pedophiles from harassing my daughter on line .
There is nothing in this article that states that these things must be implimented everywhere .
Its meerly suggesting that sites that are targeted to kids need to make a better effort to protect children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod Parent (both of them) down.We as a people should not have to tell people to read the article before they run around spouting off.Oh.
Wait.  This is slashdot.
What am I thinking?
"I'm starting to realize a good chunk of those pushing for things like this..."  Yeah.
"Things like this" are reccomendations that people who are going to host a childrens site really ought to have moderators who can tell when a 20 year old pedophile is sending foul language to my 8 year old daughter on the Build-a-bear site and then do something about it.HOW DARE THEY SUGGEST SUCH A THING.I am a parent.
And $#!
@$ you for suggesting that it is lazy of me to expect Build-A-Bear to effectively prevent pedophiles from harassing my daughter on line.
There is nothing in this article that states that these things must be implimented everywhere.
Its meerly suggesting that sites that are targeted to kids need to make a better effort to protect children.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396444</id>
	<title>So no more church?</title>
	<author>blair1q</author>
	<datestamp>1260448380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cool.</p><p>We can finally shut down the MMRPG called "religion".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cool.We can finally shut down the MMRPG called " religion " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cool.We can finally shut down the MMRPG called "religion".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393146</id>
	<title>Teen Second Life</title>
	<author>Neuroelectronic</author>
	<datestamp>1260435660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if this was in any way brought about by my 200-story-tall penis avatar that I built in Teen Second Life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if this was in any way brought about by my 200-story-tall penis avatar that I built in Teen Second Life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if this was in any way brought about by my 200-story-tall penis avatar that I built in Teen Second Life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393562</id>
	<title>needs a "nosh*tsherlock" tag</title>
	<author>MoFoQ</author>
	<datestamp>1260437100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think this one needs a no shit sherlock tag (and perhaps a pedobear icon)....</p><p>but yea...there's plenty of cursing in the game world...not just virtual worlds in MMOs.</p><p>But then again...if you consider the fact that in MMO's...you're hacking or slicing or using magic or something to kill and destroy....yea....at the very least, it should be rated "PG-13"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this one needs a no shit sherlock tag ( and perhaps a pedobear icon ) ....but yea...there 's plenty of cursing in the game world...not just virtual worlds in MMOs.But then again...if you consider the fact that in MMO 's...you 're hacking or slicing or using magic or something to kill and destroy....yea....at the very least , it should be rated " PG-13 "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this one needs a no shit sherlock tag (and perhaps a pedobear icon)....but yea...there's plenty of cursing in the game world...not just virtual worlds in MMOs.But then again...if you consider the fact that in MMO's...you're hacking or slicing or using magic or something to kill and destroy....yea....at the very least, it should be rated "PG-13"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393888</id>
	<title>Why not just ban them from the internet?</title>
	<author>lattyware</author>
	<datestamp>1260438420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why not just ban them from the internet? Seriously, that appears to be what everyone wants. Take away a wounderful resoure from the children. It is for their own good!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not just ban them from the internet ?
Seriously , that appears to be what everyone wants .
Take away a wounderful resoure from the children .
It is for their own good !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not just ban them from the internet?
Seriously, that appears to be what everyone wants.
Take away a wounderful resoure from the children.
It is for their own good!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393122</id>
	<title>Bad for minors?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260478740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always thought that gold minors were an important part of many virtual wolrds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always thought that gold minors were an important part of many virtual wolrds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always thought that gold minors were an important part of many virtual wolrds.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30399430</id>
	<title>Age in years isn't a good guide...</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1260526140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I was a 'minor', the last thing I'd have wanted to do in most games was get segregated in an area with kids of my own age. It would have led to a dull, boring, and ruined gaming experience as they all messed around. Hell, I'm 25 now and I wouldn't want to be segregated in a game with half of the 25 year olds I know for exactly the same reason!</p><p>As people have said, you can't control every little thing that kids see, hear or do. I've got an 18 month old and we're going to be relaxed, logical and sensible with his up-bringing. Certain things have their place, but both me and my wife know what kids are like and won't go crazy if he starts viewing porn at age 14, and language will be explained.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was a 'minor ' , the last thing I 'd have wanted to do in most games was get segregated in an area with kids of my own age .
It would have led to a dull , boring , and ruined gaming experience as they all messed around .
Hell , I 'm 25 now and I would n't want to be segregated in a game with half of the 25 year olds I know for exactly the same reason ! As people have said , you ca n't control every little thing that kids see , hear or do .
I 've got an 18 month old and we 're going to be relaxed , logical and sensible with his up-bringing .
Certain things have their place , but both me and my wife know what kids are like and wo n't go crazy if he starts viewing porn at age 14 , and language will be explained .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was a 'minor', the last thing I'd have wanted to do in most games was get segregated in an area with kids of my own age.
It would have led to a dull, boring, and ruined gaming experience as they all messed around.
Hell, I'm 25 now and I wouldn't want to be segregated in a game with half of the 25 year olds I know for exactly the same reason!As people have said, you can't control every little thing that kids see, hear or do.
I've got an 18 month old and we're going to be relaxed, logical and sensible with his up-bringing.
Certain things have their place, but both me and my wife know what kids are like and won't go crazy if he starts viewing porn at age 14, and language will be explained.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393136</id>
	<title>Virtual</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260435600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Real World (TM) ain't too good for them, either.  Of course, I have to no clue what FTA is about, nor does it faintly relate to the title.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Real World ( TM ) ai n't too good for them , either .
Of course , I have to no clue what FTA is about , nor does it faintly relate to the title .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Real World (TM) ain't too good for them, either.
Of course, I have to no clue what FTA is about, nor does it faintly relate to the title.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393542</id>
	<title>Re:For what it's worth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260437040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The real world is worse and, as a public school employee (no, not an english teacher you swarmy grammar nazis) in the midwest, i can tell you that most parents don't want to be, they would rather let the gov't raise them (no responsibility/no fault).</p><p>Having said that though, the real enemy of the kids is rarely mentioned: Poverty.  A lot of the kids at my school dont' have parents because they work insane hours just to barely make ends meet and are often single parent homes, and the kids as a result end up with nothing including manners/guidance/sense.</p><p>What happens is the gov't steps in and they get free lunch free books etc and so when it comes time for them to take responsibility for anything they just shrug, someone else got them this far, why should they worry/care?</p><p>disclaimer: there are no easy answers, i'm just stating facts as i see them every day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The real world is worse and , as a public school employee ( no , not an english teacher you swarmy grammar nazis ) in the midwest , i can tell you that most parents do n't want to be , they would rather let the gov't raise them ( no responsibility/no fault ) .Having said that though , the real enemy of the kids is rarely mentioned : Poverty .
A lot of the kids at my school dont ' have parents because they work insane hours just to barely make ends meet and are often single parent homes , and the kids as a result end up with nothing including manners/guidance/sense.What happens is the gov't steps in and they get free lunch free books etc and so when it comes time for them to take responsibility for anything they just shrug , someone else got them this far , why should they worry/care ? disclaimer : there are no easy answers , i 'm just stating facts as i see them every day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real world is worse and, as a public school employee (no, not an english teacher you swarmy grammar nazis) in the midwest, i can tell you that most parents don't want to be, they would rather let the gov't raise them (no responsibility/no fault).Having said that though, the real enemy of the kids is rarely mentioned: Poverty.
A lot of the kids at my school dont' have parents because they work insane hours just to barely make ends meet and are often single parent homes, and the kids as a result end up with nothing including manners/guidance/sense.What happens is the gov't steps in and they get free lunch free books etc and so when it comes time for them to take responsibility for anything they just shrug, someone else got them this far, why should they worry/care?disclaimer: there are no easy answers, i'm just stating facts as i see them every day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393388</id>
	<title>USA Puritans</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260436500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>just remember, the US was founded in part by the Puritans, people so stuffy that the ENGLISH couldn't stand them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>just remember , the US was founded in part by the Puritans , people so stuffy that the ENGLISH could n't stand them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just remember, the US was founded in part by the Puritans, people so stuffy that the ENGLISH couldn't stand them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394124</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Hylandr</author>
	<datestamp>1260439500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is a good start but only covers the alcohol. If there's children, chances are there has been some Sex in the house also. Since the monitoring of this facility would classify as pornographic and possibly child pornography the children should immediately be made wards of the state and abducted *ahem*  removed from the home to live in an overcrowded, under-monitored house populated by disturbed and damaged children "for their protection".
<br> <br>

The state saves on cost and we might as well just prosecute the parents to justify the expense.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a good start but only covers the alcohol .
If there 's children , chances are there has been some Sex in the house also .
Since the monitoring of this facility would classify as pornographic and possibly child pornography the children should immediately be made wards of the state and abducted * ahem * removed from the home to live in an overcrowded , under-monitored house populated by disturbed and damaged children " for their protection " .
The state saves on cost and we might as well just prosecute the parents to justify the expense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a good start but only covers the alcohol.
If there's children, chances are there has been some Sex in the house also.
Since the monitoring of this facility would classify as pornographic and possibly child pornography the children should immediately be made wards of the state and abducted *ahem*  removed from the home to live in an overcrowded, under-monitored house populated by disturbed and damaged children "for their protection".
The state saves on cost and we might as well just prosecute the parents to justify the expense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393266</id>
	<title>Who needs terrorists...</title>
	<author>Duradin</author>
	<datestamp>1260436080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who needs terrorists when children are doing such a great job of destroying our society?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who needs terrorists when children are doing such a great job of destroying our society ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who needs terrorists when children are doing such a great job of destroying our society?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393356</id>
	<title>Oblig. South Park...</title>
	<author>Kemanorel</author>
	<datestamp>1260436440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the movie...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Cartman: Damn! Shit! Respect my fuckin' authoritayyy!<br>[shocks Saddam]<br>Saddam Hussein: You need to watch your mouth, brat.<br>Cartman: Dog-shit taco!<br>Saddam Hussein: Quick Satan! Do something!<br>Cartman: Try this on for size... Blood drenched frozen tampon popsicle!<br>Saddam Hussein: Hey, buddy! I know I was mean before. But don't worry - I can change!<br>Cartman: OK... not! Fuck, shit, cock, ass, titties, boner, bitch, muff, pussy, cunt, butthole, Barbra Streisand!</p></div><p>I, for one, welcome our new children overlords with electro shock abilities.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the movie...Cartman : Damn !
Shit ! Respect my fuckin ' authoritayyy !
[ shocks Saddam ] Saddam Hussein : You need to watch your mouth , brat.Cartman : Dog-shit taco ! Saddam Hussein : Quick Satan !
Do something ! Cartman : Try this on for size... Blood drenched frozen tampon popsicle ! Saddam Hussein : Hey , buddy !
I know I was mean before .
But do n't worry - I can change ! Cartman : OK... not ! Fuck , shit , cock , ass , titties , boner , bitch , muff , pussy , cunt , butthole , Barbra Streisand ! I , for one , welcome our new children overlords with electro shock abilities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the movie...Cartman: Damn!
Shit! Respect my fuckin' authoritayyy!
[shocks Saddam]Saddam Hussein: You need to watch your mouth, brat.Cartman: Dog-shit taco!Saddam Hussein: Quick Satan!
Do something!Cartman: Try this on for size... Blood drenched frozen tampon popsicle!Saddam Hussein: Hey, buddy!
I know I was mean before.
But don't worry - I can change!Cartman: OK... not! Fuck, shit, cock, ass, titties, boner, bitch, muff, pussy, cunt, butthole, Barbra Streisand!I, for one, welcome our new children overlords with electro shock abilities.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397046</id>
	<title>Wait for it...</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1260452100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any moment now, someone will try to label this as "ZOMG TEH FASCISTISMS" or "big brother".  Nevermind that the FTC is just releasing recommendations for parents in this one, and not actually regulating, restricting, or enforcing anything.  How dare a government agency observe something and then make a tremendously obvious recommendation based on those observations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any moment now , someone will try to label this as " ZOMG TEH FASCISTISMS " or " big brother " .
Nevermind that the FTC is just releasing recommendations for parents in this one , and not actually regulating , restricting , or enforcing anything .
How dare a government agency observe something and then make a tremendously obvious recommendation based on those observations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any moment now, someone will try to label this as "ZOMG TEH FASCISTISMS" or "big brother".
Nevermind that the FTC is just releasing recommendations for parents in this one, and not actually regulating, restricting, or enforcing anything.
How dare a government agency observe something and then make a tremendously obvious recommendation based on those observations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395028</id>
	<title>Parents need to wake up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260442800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>how about, grow some ba!!s and be a parent.<br>I have x3 kids and I will and do monitor what they watch on TV and on the internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how about , grow some ba !
! s and be a parent.I have x3 kids and I will and do monitor what they watch on TV and on the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how about, grow some ba!
!s and be a parent.I have x3 kids and I will and do monitor what they watch on TV and on the internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393496</id>
	<title>3.3</title>
	<author>Wiarumas</author>
	<datestamp>1260436920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds like someone at the FTC got ninja looted by a minor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like someone at the FTC got ninja looted by a minor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like someone at the FTC got ninja looted by a minor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394350</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs terrorists...</title>
	<author>pyster</author>
	<datestamp>1260440520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that is the best quote ever.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>that is the best quote ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that is the best quote ever.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393266</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436</id>
	<title>No such thing as bad words.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260436740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've got four kids and I've taught them that there is not such things as bad words.   Words are a tool of language; its how you use them that matters.  There is nothing wrong with the word bitch, especially when used in the proper context.  Our genitalia have proper anatomically correct terms, penis and vagina.  There is a proper place to use words, you don't talk about penises and vagina in proper company or in public places, the words are not bad, but it is rude because it might offend or embarrass others.  The idea that a word is naughty or bad is just as wrong as saying that sex is naughty or bad.  None of us would be here without sex, including test-tube babies since at some point in history their grandparents or great-grandparents weren't test tube babies.<br>
<br>
Censorship of thoughts and language of any kind is a bad thing.  If you censor a word or call it bad, it will just be replaced by an innuendo or another innocent word will acquire its meaning.  Language is like the internet, it too views censorship as damage and routes around it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got four kids and I 've taught them that there is not such things as bad words .
Words are a tool of language ; its how you use them that matters .
There is nothing wrong with the word bitch , especially when used in the proper context .
Our genitalia have proper anatomically correct terms , penis and vagina .
There is a proper place to use words , you do n't talk about penises and vagina in proper company or in public places , the words are not bad , but it is rude because it might offend or embarrass others .
The idea that a word is naughty or bad is just as wrong as saying that sex is naughty or bad .
None of us would be here without sex , including test-tube babies since at some point in history their grandparents or great-grandparents were n't test tube babies .
Censorship of thoughts and language of any kind is a bad thing .
If you censor a word or call it bad , it will just be replaced by an innuendo or another innocent word will acquire its meaning .
Language is like the internet , it too views censorship as damage and routes around it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got four kids and I've taught them that there is not such things as bad words.
Words are a tool of language; its how you use them that matters.
There is nothing wrong with the word bitch, especially when used in the proper context.
Our genitalia have proper anatomically correct terms, penis and vagina.
There is a proper place to use words, you don't talk about penises and vagina in proper company or in public places, the words are not bad, but it is rude because it might offend or embarrass others.
The idea that a word is naughty or bad is just as wrong as saying that sex is naughty or bad.
None of us would be here without sex, including test-tube babies since at some point in history their grandparents or great-grandparents weren't test tube babies.
Censorship of thoughts and language of any kind is a bad thing.
If you censor a word or call it bad, it will just be replaced by an innuendo or another innocent word will acquire its meaning.
Language is like the internet, it too views censorship as damage and routes around it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393710</id>
	<title>Re:For what it's worth</title>
	<author>city</author>
	<datestamp>1260437700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Really... are sex and swear words that bad?</p></div><p>
If they aren't then you are doing them right...
<br>/misquoted Vonnegut</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really... are sex and swear words that bad ?
If they are n't then you are doing them right.. . /misquoted Vonnegut</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really... are sex and swear words that bad?
If they aren't then you are doing them right...
/misquoted Vonnegut
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393522</id>
	<title>Re:For what it's worth</title>
	<author>dlanod</author>
	<datestamp>1260436980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are when politicians think they can convince people to vote for them based on it...</p><p>Plus sex and swear words don't have a real lobby group, unlike police brutality, marketing, and religion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are when politicians think they can convince people to vote for them based on it...Plus sex and swear words do n't have a real lobby group , unlike police brutality , marketing , and religion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are when politicians think they can convince people to vote for them based on it...Plus sex and swear words don't have a real lobby group, unlike police brutality, marketing, and religion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393096</id>
	<title>Sounds good to me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260478680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would much rather not have to deal with other people's children or silly rules to protect them. Build kiddie pools and throw the little snots and the content filters in them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would much rather not have to deal with other people 's children or silly rules to protect them .
Build kiddie pools and throw the little snots and the content filters in them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would much rather not have to deal with other people's children or silly rules to protect them.
Build kiddie pools and throw the little snots and the content filters in them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398864</id>
	<title>Re:Out of touch bureaucrats?</title>
	<author>rrohbeck</author>
	<datestamp>1260474840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's your problem with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boobies" title="wikipedia.org">boobies</a> [wikipedia.org]? There was just some <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/02/abstaining-blue-footed-bo\_n\_377630.html?show\_comment\_id=35726790#comment\_35726790" title="huffingtonpost.com">new research</a> [huffingtonpost.com] on them in the news.</p><p>Interestingly, they have blue feet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's your problem with boobies [ wikipedia.org ] ?
There was just some new research [ huffingtonpost.com ] on them in the news.Interestingly , they have blue feet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's your problem with boobies [wikipedia.org]?
There was just some new research [huffingtonpost.com] on them in the news.Interestingly, they have blue feet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393882</id>
	<title>Nope</title>
	<author>gardel999</author>
	<datestamp>1260438360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think it's much better for our children to be smoking virtual crack rather than the real thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's much better for our children to be smoking virtual crack rather than the real thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's much better for our children to be smoking virtual crack rather than the real thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30399996</id>
	<title>Re:For what it's worth</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1260534600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hitting a child is not as bad as murdering a child.  That does not mean it is OK to hit a child.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hitting a child is not as bad as murdering a child .
That does not mean it is OK to hit a child .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hitting a child is not as bad as murdering a child.
That does not mean it is OK to hit a child.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393962</id>
	<title>Re:No such thing as bad words.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260438660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>f*** you dad</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>f * * * you dad</tokentext>
<sentencetext>f*** you dad</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260478740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most people nowadays have liquor cabinets at home and beer in the fridge. In order to protect minors from consuming alcohol, we propose the following measures. Use more effective age-screening techniques to prevent kids from opening the bottles. Child-proof caps and lids would suit this purpose. Use or enhance age-segragation techniques to ensure kids aren't allowed access to parts of the house where the liquor resides. Re-examine consumption filters to ensure that bottles that are drunk by kids are detected and quickly discarded. Provide more guidance to household enforcers (other adults and siblings) to ensure they can accurately detect when a kid is getting drunk and report the kid or discard the bottle. Employ a household staff of specially trained moderators who can watch your kid like a hawk to ensure they don't consume alcohol.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people nowadays have liquor cabinets at home and beer in the fridge .
In order to protect minors from consuming alcohol , we propose the following measures .
Use more effective age-screening techniques to prevent kids from opening the bottles .
Child-proof caps and lids would suit this purpose .
Use or enhance age-segragation techniques to ensure kids are n't allowed access to parts of the house where the liquor resides .
Re-examine consumption filters to ensure that bottles that are drunk by kids are detected and quickly discarded .
Provide more guidance to household enforcers ( other adults and siblings ) to ensure they can accurately detect when a kid is getting drunk and report the kid or discard the bottle .
Employ a household staff of specially trained moderators who can watch your kid like a hawk to ensure they do n't consume alcohol .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people nowadays have liquor cabinets at home and beer in the fridge.
In order to protect minors from consuming alcohol, we propose the following measures.
Use more effective age-screening techniques to prevent kids from opening the bottles.
Child-proof caps and lids would suit this purpose.
Use or enhance age-segragation techniques to ensure kids aren't allowed access to parts of the house where the liquor resides.
Re-examine consumption filters to ensure that bottles that are drunk by kids are detected and quickly discarded.
Provide more guidance to household enforcers (other adults and siblings) to ensure they can accurately detect when a kid is getting drunk and report the kid or discard the bottle.
Employ a household staff of specially trained moderators who can watch your kid like a hawk to ensure they don't consume alcohol.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393274</id>
	<title>3. Profit!</title>
	<author>Quiet\_Desperation</author>
	<datestamp>1260436140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...; Seal little Johnny away in a hermetic reality bubble lest he experience anything that might alarm him or his parents;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... ; Seal little Johnny away in a hermetic reality bubble lest he experience anything that might alarm him or his parents ; .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...; Seal little Johnny away in a hermetic reality bubble lest he experience anything that might alarm him or his parents; ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397804</id>
	<title>I'm sorry Ma'am but there is no hope for your son</title>
	<author>Eightbitgnosis</author>
	<datestamp>1260458400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You see he's had a near terminal dose of Barrens chat. He'll be making annoying Chuck Norris jokes for weeks now.
<br> <br>
I am so very sorry for your loss</htmltext>
<tokenext>You see he 's had a near terminal dose of Barrens chat .
He 'll be making annoying Chuck Norris jokes for weeks now .
I am so very sorry for your loss</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You see he's had a near terminal dose of Barrens chat.
He'll be making annoying Chuck Norris jokes for weeks now.
I am so very sorry for your loss</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393916</id>
	<title>Rampant Ageism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260438480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Enhance "age-segregation"? Have "community enforcers" decide what anyone is allowed to see and report people suspected of being disenfranchised? Use "specially trained moderators" to harass the non-conforming? "Language filters" which censor the oldspeak which is not allowed in the brave new world?</p><p>Seriously, you Americans are batshit insane. Just because the kids' communication is less private these days doesn't mean that they should be forced to always toe the Politically Correct line at that age so that any (indirectly) snooping ageist adults won't have their sensibilities offended. The kids' "not acting adult" may be offensive to ageist adults, but it's just normal for the kids, you know. Remember all the things you were not supposed to say when your parents could hear, etc.? It's polite fiction for parents that their kids don't do that, and it was OK when the kids only had to deal with it when the adults were around. The problem is, on the Internet they are always "around", even (and especially) in places that are supposed to be for the kids! Funny how you have to "be adults" very strictly in those places, compared to the adults-only ones.</p><p>These "measures" are just more and more elaborate ways of yelling "get off my lawn!" (with an ever-expanding lawn), or to pay someone to yell that for you with a bullhorn. It's discrimination, pure and simple, the placing of the rights of adults above those of the kids' (particularly teens - the younger ones don't care). There isn't even real "age segregation" when the moderators are adults. They will always be pushing the agenda of the enfranchised group.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Enhance " age-segregation " ?
Have " community enforcers " decide what anyone is allowed to see and report people suspected of being disenfranchised ?
Use " specially trained moderators " to harass the non-conforming ?
" Language filters " which censor the oldspeak which is not allowed in the brave new world ? Seriously , you Americans are batshit insane .
Just because the kids ' communication is less private these days does n't mean that they should be forced to always toe the Politically Correct line at that age so that any ( indirectly ) snooping ageist adults wo n't have their sensibilities offended .
The kids ' " not acting adult " may be offensive to ageist adults , but it 's just normal for the kids , you know .
Remember all the things you were not supposed to say when your parents could hear , etc. ?
It 's polite fiction for parents that their kids do n't do that , and it was OK when the kids only had to deal with it when the adults were around .
The problem is , on the Internet they are always " around " , even ( and especially ) in places that are supposed to be for the kids !
Funny how you have to " be adults " very strictly in those places , compared to the adults-only ones.These " measures " are just more and more elaborate ways of yelling " get off my lawn !
" ( with an ever-expanding lawn ) , or to pay someone to yell that for you with a bullhorn .
It 's discrimination , pure and simple , the placing of the rights of adults above those of the kids ' ( particularly teens - the younger ones do n't care ) .
There is n't even real " age segregation " when the moderators are adults .
They will always be pushing the agenda of the enfranchised group .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Enhance "age-segregation"?
Have "community enforcers" decide what anyone is allowed to see and report people suspected of being disenfranchised?
Use "specially trained moderators" to harass the non-conforming?
"Language filters" which censor the oldspeak which is not allowed in the brave new world?Seriously, you Americans are batshit insane.
Just because the kids' communication is less private these days doesn't mean that they should be forced to always toe the Politically Correct line at that age so that any (indirectly) snooping ageist adults won't have their sensibilities offended.
The kids' "not acting adult" may be offensive to ageist adults, but it's just normal for the kids, you know.
Remember all the things you were not supposed to say when your parents could hear, etc.?
It's polite fiction for parents that their kids don't do that, and it was OK when the kids only had to deal with it when the adults were around.
The problem is, on the Internet they are always "around", even (and especially) in places that are supposed to be for the kids!
Funny how you have to "be adults" very strictly in those places, compared to the adults-only ones.These "measures" are just more and more elaborate ways of yelling "get off my lawn!
" (with an ever-expanding lawn), or to pay someone to yell that for you with a bullhorn.
It's discrimination, pure and simple, the placing of the rights of adults above those of the kids' (particularly teens - the younger ones don't care).
There isn't even real "age segregation" when the moderators are adults.
They will always be pushing the agenda of the enfranchised group.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260435600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mod parent up.. beat me to the punch.</p><p>Parents should be the one who ultimately decide whether their kids are ready to join online worlds and, if they're not, prevent them from doing so.</p><p>We as a people should not need a government organization dictating what our children should or should not be exposed too.  I realize it's politically incorrect to blame voting parents for anything these days but there is no government rules that will replace a good parenting.  Furthermore, I'm starting to realize a good chunk of those pushing for things like this are parents who really don't want to put in the work to raise their children and instead would prefer the government or schools do it for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent up.. beat me to the punch.Parents should be the one who ultimately decide whether their kids are ready to join online worlds and , if they 're not , prevent them from doing so.We as a people should not need a government organization dictating what our children should or should not be exposed too .
I realize it 's politically incorrect to blame voting parents for anything these days but there is no government rules that will replace a good parenting .
Furthermore , I 'm starting to realize a good chunk of those pushing for things like this are parents who really do n't want to put in the work to raise their children and instead would prefer the government or schools do it for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent up.. beat me to the punch.Parents should be the one who ultimately decide whether their kids are ready to join online worlds and, if they're not, prevent them from doing so.We as a people should not need a government organization dictating what our children should or should not be exposed too.
I realize it's politically incorrect to blame voting parents for anything these days but there is no government rules that will replace a good parenting.
Furthermore, I'm starting to realize a good chunk of those pushing for things like this are parents who really don't want to put in the work to raise their children and instead would prefer the government or schools do it for them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393760</id>
	<title>Ah, yes. Good thinking, FTC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260437880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because segregating kids from the "adult world" and then suddenly plunging them into that world on their magical 18th birthday is a great way to raise capable, well-adjusted adults.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because segregating kids from the " adult world " and then suddenly plunging them into that world on their magical 18th birthday is a great way to raise capable , well-adjusted adults .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because segregating kids from the "adult world" and then suddenly plunging them into that world on their magical 18th birthday is a great way to raise capable, well-adjusted adults.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393606</id>
	<title>It's actually a big problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260437280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's actually pretty bad. I used to play an online Flash game that was heavily used by kids. This game had an auto-loading chat room on the side. I remember there were times when some of the users would repeatedly say some very disgusting sexual things in the chat room. Over and over again, going into extreme detail. The chatroom, at the time was very clunky, and not at all easy to set the ignore function. I remember feeling pretty nauseated that these kids (I'm guessing some were 9,10,11,12 based on what they were talking about) were subjected to this kind of trash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's actually pretty bad .
I used to play an online Flash game that was heavily used by kids .
This game had an auto-loading chat room on the side .
I remember there were times when some of the users would repeatedly say some very disgusting sexual things in the chat room .
Over and over again , going into extreme detail .
The chatroom , at the time was very clunky , and not at all easy to set the ignore function .
I remember feeling pretty nauseated that these kids ( I 'm guessing some were 9,10,11,12 based on what they were talking about ) were subjected to this kind of trash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's actually pretty bad.
I used to play an online Flash game that was heavily used by kids.
This game had an auto-loading chat room on the side.
I remember there were times when some of the users would repeatedly say some very disgusting sexual things in the chat room.
Over and over again, going into extreme detail.
The chatroom, at the time was very clunky, and not at all easy to set the ignore function.
I remember feeling pretty nauseated that these kids (I'm guessing some were 9,10,11,12 based on what they were talking about) were subjected to this kind of trash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394342</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>BobMcD</author>
	<datestamp>1260440460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be completely fair, the times have changed a bit.  For example, when I was a kid:</p><p>1) We did not fear being raped to death by a psychopath.  It just hadn't ever even entered into anyone's mind that I shouldn't be walking to and from the city park without an escort.</p><p>2) There was no such thing as the internet.</p><p>3) Parents were allowed and encouraged to discipline their children</p><p>4) Children were generally forgiven their crimes</p><p>5) No one anywhere had ever even heard the term 'helicopter parent'</p><p>I'm sure there are many other differences as well, but these all make a decent framework for excessive consumption of electronic content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be completely fair , the times have changed a bit .
For example , when I was a kid : 1 ) We did not fear being raped to death by a psychopath .
It just had n't ever even entered into anyone 's mind that I should n't be walking to and from the city park without an escort.2 ) There was no such thing as the internet.3 ) Parents were allowed and encouraged to discipline their children4 ) Children were generally forgiven their crimes5 ) No one anywhere had ever even heard the term 'helicopter parent'I 'm sure there are many other differences as well , but these all make a decent framework for excessive consumption of electronic content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be completely fair, the times have changed a bit.
For example, when I was a kid:1) We did not fear being raped to death by a psychopath.
It just hadn't ever even entered into anyone's mind that I shouldn't be walking to and from the city park without an escort.2) There was no such thing as the internet.3) Parents were allowed and encouraged to discipline their children4) Children were generally forgiven their crimes5) No one anywhere had ever even heard the term 'helicopter parent'I'm sure there are many other differences as well, but these all make a decent framework for excessive consumption of electronic content.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394614</id>
	<title>Age segregation</title>
	<author>ucblockhead</author>
	<datestamp>1260441480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd kill for servers that didn't allow anyone under 30.  It'd probably cut way down in the idiot racist/homophobic bullshit and cheating.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd kill for servers that did n't allow anyone under 30 .
It 'd probably cut way down in the idiot racist/homophobic bullshit and cheating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd kill for servers that didn't allow anyone under 30.
It'd probably cut way down in the idiot racist/homophobic bullshit and cheating.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396770</id>
	<title>Re:No surprise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260450300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I remember when I was a minor on the internet I had access to explicit content.</p><p>You know what they're really missing here? Teenaged boys are <i>looking</i> for explicit content and you'll never be able to stop them from finding it.</p></div><p>I have to agree that as a child when I looked up any form of pornography, it was mainly because I was just curious.  No one ever talked to me about it and I wanted to know what it was like.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...It turned out to be kind of lame.</p><p>And look at me now?  I'm not a sex addict, I'm not *confused* sexuality in general.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:p</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember when I was a minor on the internet I had access to explicit content.You know what they 're really missing here ?
Teenaged boys are looking for explicit content and you 'll never be able to stop them from finding it.I have to agree that as a child when I looked up any form of pornography , it was mainly because I was just curious .
No one ever talked to me about it and I wanted to know what it was like .
...It turned out to be kind of lame.And look at me now ?
I 'm not a sex addict , I 'm not * confused * sexuality in general .
: p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember when I was a minor on the internet I had access to explicit content.You know what they're really missing here?
Teenaged boys are looking for explicit content and you'll never be able to stop them from finding it.I have to agree that as a child when I looked up any form of pornography, it was mainly because I was just curious.
No one ever talked to me about it and I wanted to know what it was like.
...It turned out to be kind of lame.And look at me now?
I'm not a sex addict, I'm not *confused* sexuality in general.
:p
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395196</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Crayon Kid</author>
	<datestamp>1260443460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OD?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) I'd like to hope my kid was bright enough to stop gurgling the drain cleaner after the first taste, not go on and OD on the stuff before he learns that something's wrong<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Unless, of course, you meant the blueberry drain cleaner. That thing tastes SO GOOD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OD ?
: ) I 'd like to hope my kid was bright enough to stop gurgling the drain cleaner after the first taste , not go on and OD on the stuff before he learns that something 's wrong : ) Unless , of course , you meant the blueberry drain cleaner .
That thing tastes SO GOOD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OD?
:) I'd like to hope my kid was bright enough to stop gurgling the drain cleaner after the first taste, not go on and OD on the stuff before he learns that something's wrong :)Unless, of course, you meant the blueberry drain cleaner.
That thing tastes SO GOOD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394904</id>
	<title>Re:Prevent Beneficial Interaction</title>
	<author>jdgeorge</author>
	<datestamp>1260442260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>95\% of interactions between a child and an adult are positive. </p></div><p>Give me a break. This is a completely made-up statistic, supported by no measured data about type or frequency of interaction from any study by anyone. You even say as much later in your post.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Look at our history... children didn't grow up in segregated 'child only' areas... they grew up working with their parents and community members. They were exposed to life.</p></div><p>Whose history? Crap or not, segregation of children from adults outside our families (at least in the US) is not even remotely new. The segregated "child only" areas most of my peers grew up in were called "schools". Most of those of earlier generations who didn't have schools available grew up in living and working with their families, where the need to segregate children from adults wasn't (and isn't) seen to be as essential.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>95 \ % of interactions between a child and an adult are positive .
Give me a break .
This is a completely made-up statistic , supported by no measured data about type or frequency of interaction from any study by anyone .
You even say as much later in your post.Look at our history... children did n't grow up in segregated 'child only ' areas... they grew up working with their parents and community members .
They were exposed to life.Whose history ?
Crap or not , segregation of children from adults outside our families ( at least in the US ) is not even remotely new .
The segregated " child only " areas most of my peers grew up in were called " schools " .
Most of those of earlier generations who did n't have schools available grew up in living and working with their families , where the need to segregate children from adults was n't ( and is n't ) seen to be as essential .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>95\% of interactions between a child and an adult are positive.
Give me a break.
This is a completely made-up statistic, supported by no measured data about type or frequency of interaction from any study by anyone.
You even say as much later in your post.Look at our history... children didn't grow up in segregated 'child only' areas... they grew up working with their parents and community members.
They were exposed to life.Whose history?
Crap or not, segregation of children from adults outside our families (at least in the US) is not even remotely new.
The segregated "child only" areas most of my peers grew up in were called "schools".
Most of those of earlier generations who didn't have schools available grew up in living and working with their families, where the need to segregate children from adults wasn't (and isn't) seen to be as essential.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395126</id>
	<title>Re:Prevent Beneficial Interaction</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260443160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wanted to say I ended up doing more or less the same thing through high school and my first couple years of college, and have actually returned to it in the past year or so (for the better actually, most of the RL friends I pick up tend to have questionable moral or legal stances, and the other half of the pool around here is pretty staunchly political or religious.)</p><p>Anyways my problem was exactly the opposite: I could interact fine with those younger than, or older than me, and still do today, however those who should be my peers didn't like my social mannerisms, half because I was 'too uptight' (drugs, theft, etc.) and the other half because I was 'not uptight, religious, or politically likeminded' to themselves. And then of course girls my age ALWAYS assume if I was talking to them I was hitting on them, and hence didn't have an interest in being friends. (Not being much of a looker I haven't had more than two girls in the past ten years actually ask for my number, and out of the ones I have associated with, we haven't stayed friends for longer than a year or so, most only taking time to socialize when THEY have problems, but not offering the same in return.)</p><p>So yeah, disfunctional much?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wanted to say I ended up doing more or less the same thing through high school and my first couple years of college , and have actually returned to it in the past year or so ( for the better actually , most of the RL friends I pick up tend to have questionable moral or legal stances , and the other half of the pool around here is pretty staunchly political or religious .
) Anyways my problem was exactly the opposite : I could interact fine with those younger than , or older than me , and still do today , however those who should be my peers did n't like my social mannerisms , half because I was 'too uptight ' ( drugs , theft , etc .
) and the other half because I was 'not uptight , religious , or politically likeminded ' to themselves .
And then of course girls my age ALWAYS assume if I was talking to them I was hitting on them , and hence did n't have an interest in being friends .
( Not being much of a looker I have n't had more than two girls in the past ten years actually ask for my number , and out of the ones I have associated with , we have n't stayed friends for longer than a year or so , most only taking time to socialize when THEY have problems , but not offering the same in return .
) So yeah , disfunctional much ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wanted to say I ended up doing more or less the same thing through high school and my first couple years of college, and have actually returned to it in the past year or so (for the better actually, most of the RL friends I pick up tend to have questionable moral or legal stances, and the other half of the pool around here is pretty staunchly political or religious.
)Anyways my problem was exactly the opposite: I could interact fine with those younger than, or older than me, and still do today, however those who should be my peers didn't like my social mannerisms, half because I was 'too uptight' (drugs, theft, etc.
) and the other half because I was 'not uptight, religious, or politically likeminded' to themselves.
And then of course girls my age ALWAYS assume if I was talking to them I was hitting on them, and hence didn't have an interest in being friends.
(Not being much of a looker I haven't had more than two girls in the past ten years actually ask for my number, and out of the ones I have associated with, we haven't stayed friends for longer than a year or so, most only taking time to socialize when THEY have problems, but not offering the same in return.
)So yeah, disfunctional much?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30404928</id>
	<title>Re:Prevent Beneficial Interaction</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260559860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I really wish I was exposed to more adults as a child. Once I graduated high school it felt strange to interact with anyone outside my age group (IRL). I feel I've missed out on quite a bit because I had trouble talking to anyone older (or younger) than myself.</p></div><p>I totally agree. There is nothing inherently wrong with children and adults interacting online. Even children should be intelligent enough to know which adults are okay and which are acting like idiots, and they should also know better than to reveal personal information online to ensure that nobody could gain their trust and then be able to exploit it.</p><p>I had a fairly good friend a while ago on an MMORG; when we first met in-game, she was 5. Needless to say she wasn&rsquo;t the greatest conversationalist and was pretty obnoxious at times (okay, a lot of the time... but we didn&rsquo;t talk much, then; usually just when she had some typical noob question and I usually answered it and wasn&rsquo;t bothered anymore). She grew out of it, and became a pretty fun person to skill/battle/quest with and/or to chat with in the game; I think she is something like 9 or 10 now (although I haven&rsquo;t played that game in ages).</p><p>However, a lot of people would probably have said &ldquo;omg a 20-year-old guy is talking to a 5-year-old girl online?&rdquo;... well, I did nothing wrong, helped her out occasionally, and gave her somebody to talk to who didn&rsquo;t act and type like a grade-schooler. Calm down: not every 20-year-old guy is a kiddie rapist, and if you teach your children to take reasonable precautions (don&rsquo;t reveal names, phone numbers, cities, or addresses... whereas gender, age, first name, and state/country are basically safe to reveal, once you halfway get to know a person) then the rare actual would-be rapist won&rsquo;t have any opportunity to cause harm.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really wish I was exposed to more adults as a child .
Once I graduated high school it felt strange to interact with anyone outside my age group ( IRL ) .
I feel I 've missed out on quite a bit because I had trouble talking to anyone older ( or younger ) than myself.I totally agree .
There is nothing inherently wrong with children and adults interacting online .
Even children should be intelligent enough to know which adults are okay and which are acting like idiots , and they should also know better than to reveal personal information online to ensure that nobody could gain their trust and then be able to exploit it.I had a fairly good friend a while ago on an MMORG ; when we first met in-game , she was 5 .
Needless to say she wasn    t the greatest conversationalist and was pretty obnoxious at times ( okay , a lot of the time... but we didn    t talk much , then ; usually just when she had some typical noob question and I usually answered it and wasn    t bothered anymore ) .
She grew out of it , and became a pretty fun person to skill/battle/quest with and/or to chat with in the game ; I think she is something like 9 or 10 now ( although I haven    t played that game in ages ) .However , a lot of people would probably have said    omg a 20-year-old guy is talking to a 5-year-old girl online ?    ... well , I did nothing wrong , helped her out occasionally , and gave her somebody to talk to who didn    t act and type like a grade-schooler .
Calm down : not every 20-year-old guy is a kiddie rapist , and if you teach your children to take reasonable precautions ( don    t reveal names , phone numbers , cities , or addresses... whereas gender , age , first name , and state/country are basically safe to reveal , once you halfway get to know a person ) then the rare actual would-be rapist won    t have any opportunity to cause harm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really wish I was exposed to more adults as a child.
Once I graduated high school it felt strange to interact with anyone outside my age group (IRL).
I feel I've missed out on quite a bit because I had trouble talking to anyone older (or younger) than myself.I totally agree.
There is nothing inherently wrong with children and adults interacting online.
Even children should be intelligent enough to know which adults are okay and which are acting like idiots, and they should also know better than to reveal personal information online to ensure that nobody could gain their trust and then be able to exploit it.I had a fairly good friend a while ago on an MMORG; when we first met in-game, she was 5.
Needless to say she wasn’t the greatest conversationalist and was pretty obnoxious at times (okay, a lot of the time... but we didn’t talk much, then; usually just when she had some typical noob question and I usually answered it and wasn’t bothered anymore).
She grew out of it, and became a pretty fun person to skill/battle/quest with and/or to chat with in the game; I think she is something like 9 or 10 now (although I haven’t played that game in ages).However, a lot of people would probably have said “omg a 20-year-old guy is talking to a 5-year-old girl online?”... well, I did nothing wrong, helped her out occasionally, and gave her somebody to talk to who didn’t act and type like a grade-schooler.
Calm down: not every 20-year-old guy is a kiddie rapist, and if you teach your children to take reasonable precautions (don’t reveal names, phone numbers, cities, or addresses... whereas gender, age, first name, and state/country are basically safe to reveal, once you halfway get to know a person) then the rare actual would-be rapist won’t have any opportunity to cause harm.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393750</id>
	<title>Re:No such thing as bad words.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260437880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Censorship of thoughts and language of any kind is a bad thing.</p></div><p>I wonder if that include censoring FTC.  Is FTC not allowed to say "virtual worlds bad for minors" now?  Don't we have free speech?  FTC can <b>say</b> whatever they want, right?  Right?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Censorship of thoughts and language of any kind is a bad thing.I wonder if that include censoring FTC .
Is FTC not allowed to say " virtual worlds bad for minors " now ?
Do n't we have free speech ?
FTC can say whatever they want , right ?
Right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Censorship of thoughts and language of any kind is a bad thing.I wonder if that include censoring FTC.
Is FTC not allowed to say "virtual worlds bad for minors" now?
Don't we have free speech?
FTC can say whatever they want, right?
Right?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394512</id>
	<title>Re:Sounds good to me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260441060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As somebody who was on the internet at 14 (half a lifetime ago now, scary), I despise suggestions of age discrimination against kids. Discrimination against teenagers is especially bad. Now, parents should be given tools to let them parent how they'd like, such as language filters and play timers, but the suggestion that anybody under 18 needs to be cordoned off away from the "adults" is offensive.</p><p>First of all, if you're dealing with a snotty kid chances are they have snotty parents. The kind of parents that would gladly create an account in the "adult" area and let their kid play in it anyways. Blocking them is a non-starter.</p><p>But any suggestion of cordoning teenagers is discriminatory and short-sighted. Teenagers are functionality adults, if very immature ones. Shoving teenagers into their own area is discriminatory because they are cognitively capable of understanding the things that adults are. They merely lack the knowledge and experience to put everything in the proper context. It's short-sighted because teenagers are at a point in life where they have just started gaining the experiences that will shape the rest of their lives. If their social circle only includes other teenagers, they're going to learn squat. When a teenager's social circle includes older adults who treat them with respect, it's amazing how quickly the teenager learns proper behavior.</p><p>If you've had problems with teenagers before that's unfortunate, but have you really never run into a teenager that was more mature than some of the adults you've encountered? If you think you haven't, there's a good chance you have and never realized it. When I was on the internet at 14, and nobody knew how old I actually was, I was treated with respect. I treated them the same way in turn, and any age distinction became meaningless. While they never knew how old I was and probably didn't learn much from our interactions, I learned a great deal about how to act as an adult.</p><p>I've seen the same thing from the other side, with a person who was 14 when he joined our WoW guild. He was well behaved to begin with, but when I treated him the same as everybody else and showed that I respected him by trusting him with responsibilities, he responded by being one of our most reliable players. He's 18 now, and has taken it upon himself to help members that have fallen behind in raid progression. He's organizing raids, giving advice, and dealing with conflicts. A person who was treated like a kid until the day they were 18 could not do that.</p><p>IRL I also deal with a few teenagers. If I need them for something, I go directly to them, not their parents, and talk to them like I would any adult. It's no surprise to me by now; They respond in like, and I can count on them as much as any older adult.</p><p>I'm not saying that a 15-year-old is as ready to face the world as a 21-year-old, but a 21-year-old isn't as ready to face the world as a 40-year-old either. All I would like to see is for people to stop treating teenagers as if they are less of a person than older adults. Just a little respect would make a big difference to this segment of our society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As somebody who was on the internet at 14 ( half a lifetime ago now , scary ) , I despise suggestions of age discrimination against kids .
Discrimination against teenagers is especially bad .
Now , parents should be given tools to let them parent how they 'd like , such as language filters and play timers , but the suggestion that anybody under 18 needs to be cordoned off away from the " adults " is offensive.First of all , if you 're dealing with a snotty kid chances are they have snotty parents .
The kind of parents that would gladly create an account in the " adult " area and let their kid play in it anyways .
Blocking them is a non-starter.But any suggestion of cordoning teenagers is discriminatory and short-sighted .
Teenagers are functionality adults , if very immature ones .
Shoving teenagers into their own area is discriminatory because they are cognitively capable of understanding the things that adults are .
They merely lack the knowledge and experience to put everything in the proper context .
It 's short-sighted because teenagers are at a point in life where they have just started gaining the experiences that will shape the rest of their lives .
If their social circle only includes other teenagers , they 're going to learn squat .
When a teenager 's social circle includes older adults who treat them with respect , it 's amazing how quickly the teenager learns proper behavior.If you 've had problems with teenagers before that 's unfortunate , but have you really never run into a teenager that was more mature than some of the adults you 've encountered ?
If you think you have n't , there 's a good chance you have and never realized it .
When I was on the internet at 14 , and nobody knew how old I actually was , I was treated with respect .
I treated them the same way in turn , and any age distinction became meaningless .
While they never knew how old I was and probably did n't learn much from our interactions , I learned a great deal about how to act as an adult.I 've seen the same thing from the other side , with a person who was 14 when he joined our WoW guild .
He was well behaved to begin with , but when I treated him the same as everybody else and showed that I respected him by trusting him with responsibilities , he responded by being one of our most reliable players .
He 's 18 now , and has taken it upon himself to help members that have fallen behind in raid progression .
He 's organizing raids , giving advice , and dealing with conflicts .
A person who was treated like a kid until the day they were 18 could not do that.IRL I also deal with a few teenagers .
If I need them for something , I go directly to them , not their parents , and talk to them like I would any adult .
It 's no surprise to me by now ; They respond in like , and I can count on them as much as any older adult.I 'm not saying that a 15-year-old is as ready to face the world as a 21-year-old , but a 21-year-old is n't as ready to face the world as a 40-year-old either .
All I would like to see is for people to stop treating teenagers as if they are less of a person than older adults .
Just a little respect would make a big difference to this segment of our society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As somebody who was on the internet at 14 (half a lifetime ago now, scary), I despise suggestions of age discrimination against kids.
Discrimination against teenagers is especially bad.
Now, parents should be given tools to let them parent how they'd like, such as language filters and play timers, but the suggestion that anybody under 18 needs to be cordoned off away from the "adults" is offensive.First of all, if you're dealing with a snotty kid chances are they have snotty parents.
The kind of parents that would gladly create an account in the "adult" area and let their kid play in it anyways.
Blocking them is a non-starter.But any suggestion of cordoning teenagers is discriminatory and short-sighted.
Teenagers are functionality adults, if very immature ones.
Shoving teenagers into their own area is discriminatory because they are cognitively capable of understanding the things that adults are.
They merely lack the knowledge and experience to put everything in the proper context.
It's short-sighted because teenagers are at a point in life where they have just started gaining the experiences that will shape the rest of their lives.
If their social circle only includes other teenagers, they're going to learn squat.
When a teenager's social circle includes older adults who treat them with respect, it's amazing how quickly the teenager learns proper behavior.If you've had problems with teenagers before that's unfortunate, but have you really never run into a teenager that was more mature than some of the adults you've encountered?
If you think you haven't, there's a good chance you have and never realized it.
When I was on the internet at 14, and nobody knew how old I actually was, I was treated with respect.
I treated them the same way in turn, and any age distinction became meaningless.
While they never knew how old I was and probably didn't learn much from our interactions, I learned a great deal about how to act as an adult.I've seen the same thing from the other side, with a person who was 14 when he joined our WoW guild.
He was well behaved to begin with, but when I treated him the same as everybody else and showed that I respected him by trusting him with responsibilities, he responded by being one of our most reliable players.
He's 18 now, and has taken it upon himself to help members that have fallen behind in raid progression.
He's organizing raids, giving advice, and dealing with conflicts.
A person who was treated like a kid until the day they were 18 could not do that.IRL I also deal with a few teenagers.
If I need them for something, I go directly to them, not their parents, and talk to them like I would any adult.
It's no surprise to me by now; They respond in like, and I can count on them as much as any older adult.I'm not saying that a 15-year-old is as ready to face the world as a 21-year-old, but a 21-year-old isn't as ready to face the world as a 40-year-old either.
All I would like to see is for people to stop treating teenagers as if they are less of a person than older adults.
Just a little respect would make a big difference to this segment of our society.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393096</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394716</id>
	<title>As a parent of a 7 year old ....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260441720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can see a lot of truth in many of the comments posted here.</p><p>I know one of the problem I continually face is in trying to let my kid "go out in the real world and BE a kid".  Personally, I'm a big proponent of what Penn &amp; Teller were trying to say in one of their episodes of "Bullshit"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... that the world is NOT more dangerous for kids today than it was in previous generations.  In fact, statistically, it's more probable that your kid will randomly be struck by lightning than become a victim of a predator, while playing outside.  But my own beliefs and opinions don't dictate what the rest of the community believes either.</p><p>As one example, my girlfriend's 3 year old wanted to play outside, a few weeks ago.  We live on a dead-end street, where there are at least 4 other families around with young kids.  In fact, the people next-door to us have a 3 year old who loves playing with her 3 year old.  So she let her go play, since my daughter and her 6 year old son were already playing outside anyway.  Seems reasonable enough, right?</p><p>Well, not more than 10 minutes later, I get a frantic knocking on my front door.  One of the neighbors a few houses down was basically demanding I run out and get her kid, because she was standing outside, on the sidewalk, in front of his house, with no other kids around!  When I went to get her, she looked a bit puzzled, and didn't even want to come back in.  She was simply standing around because she WANTED to, and was in no danger I could see.  (Apparently, the 6 and 7 year olds decided to play in a neighbor's back yard, and didn't want her to go with them since she was "too young" to play whatever they were playing.)</p><p>This isn't the first time I've dealt with this sort of thing, either.  On several previous occasions, my kid was outside playing, only to be taken by the hand, by an angry parent, and led up to my doorstep.  Basically, they tried to tell me I was being irresponsible, because I let my kid play outside and their kid(s) had to go in for dinner, or because they were leaving to go someplace, or what-not.  It never occurred to them it might actually be OK for my daughter to walk up and down our street and find her own way back home, when she wanted to come home!</p><p>This is in a low-crime, middle-class suburb, mind you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....    I do find it interesting that when I used to live in a rougher, lower-income part of town, I *never* saw these issues.  Whether it was because parents were too busy to be bothered with hovering over their kids constantly, or because they just had more common sense and less fear of the "real world", I don't know?  But kids of all ages played outside, both during the day and even after dark, on a street that WASN'T dead-end and had no sidewalks -- and everyone got along just fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see a lot of truth in many of the comments posted here.I know one of the problem I continually face is in trying to let my kid " go out in the real world and BE a kid " .
Personally , I 'm a big proponent of what Penn &amp; Teller were trying to say in one of their episodes of " Bullshit " .... that the world is NOT more dangerous for kids today than it was in previous generations .
In fact , statistically , it 's more probable that your kid will randomly be struck by lightning than become a victim of a predator , while playing outside .
But my own beliefs and opinions do n't dictate what the rest of the community believes either.As one example , my girlfriend 's 3 year old wanted to play outside , a few weeks ago .
We live on a dead-end street , where there are at least 4 other families around with young kids .
In fact , the people next-door to us have a 3 year old who loves playing with her 3 year old .
So she let her go play , since my daughter and her 6 year old son were already playing outside anyway .
Seems reasonable enough , right ? Well , not more than 10 minutes later , I get a frantic knocking on my front door .
One of the neighbors a few houses down was basically demanding I run out and get her kid , because she was standing outside , on the sidewalk , in front of his house , with no other kids around !
When I went to get her , she looked a bit puzzled , and did n't even want to come back in .
She was simply standing around because she WANTED to , and was in no danger I could see .
( Apparently , the 6 and 7 year olds decided to play in a neighbor 's back yard , and did n't want her to go with them since she was " too young " to play whatever they were playing .
) This is n't the first time I 've dealt with this sort of thing , either .
On several previous occasions , my kid was outside playing , only to be taken by the hand , by an angry parent , and led up to my doorstep .
Basically , they tried to tell me I was being irresponsible , because I let my kid play outside and their kid ( s ) had to go in for dinner , or because they were leaving to go someplace , or what-not .
It never occurred to them it might actually be OK for my daughter to walk up and down our street and find her own way back home , when she wanted to come home ! This is in a low-crime , middle-class suburb , mind you .... I do find it interesting that when I used to live in a rougher , lower-income part of town , I * never * saw these issues .
Whether it was because parents were too busy to be bothered with hovering over their kids constantly , or because they just had more common sense and less fear of the " real world " , I do n't know ?
But kids of all ages played outside , both during the day and even after dark , on a street that WAS N'T dead-end and had no sidewalks -- and everyone got along just fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see a lot of truth in many of the comments posted here.I know one of the problem I continually face is in trying to let my kid "go out in the real world and BE a kid".
Personally, I'm a big proponent of what Penn &amp; Teller were trying to say in one of their episodes of "Bullshit" .... that the world is NOT more dangerous for kids today than it was in previous generations.
In fact, statistically, it's more probable that your kid will randomly be struck by lightning than become a victim of a predator, while playing outside.
But my own beliefs and opinions don't dictate what the rest of the community believes either.As one example, my girlfriend's 3 year old wanted to play outside, a few weeks ago.
We live on a dead-end street, where there are at least 4 other families around with young kids.
In fact, the people next-door to us have a 3 year old who loves playing with her 3 year old.
So she let her go play, since my daughter and her 6 year old son were already playing outside anyway.
Seems reasonable enough, right?Well, not more than 10 minutes later, I get a frantic knocking on my front door.
One of the neighbors a few houses down was basically demanding I run out and get her kid, because she was standing outside, on the sidewalk, in front of his house, with no other kids around!
When I went to get her, she looked a bit puzzled, and didn't even want to come back in.
She was simply standing around because she WANTED to, and was in no danger I could see.
(Apparently, the 6 and 7 year olds decided to play in a neighbor's back yard, and didn't want her to go with them since she was "too young" to play whatever they were playing.
)This isn't the first time I've dealt with this sort of thing, either.
On several previous occasions, my kid was outside playing, only to be taken by the hand, by an angry parent, and led up to my doorstep.
Basically, they tried to tell me I was being irresponsible, because I let my kid play outside and their kid(s) had to go in for dinner, or because they were leaving to go someplace, or what-not.
It never occurred to them it might actually be OK for my daughter to walk up and down our street and find her own way back home, when she wanted to come home!This is in a low-crime, middle-class suburb, mind you ....    I do find it interesting that when I used to live in a rougher, lower-income part of town, I *never* saw these issues.
Whether it was because parents were too busy to be bothered with hovering over their kids constantly, or because they just had more common sense and less fear of the "real world", I don't know?
But kids of all ages played outside, both during the day and even after dark, on a street that WASN'T dead-end and had no sidewalks -- and everyone got along just fine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393530</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>fermion</author>
	<datestamp>1260436980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Both of these are correct.  I was exposed to a good amount of what would be called inappropriate content, but most of it was either through my parent of my peer group.  My parents took me to museums and classical performances.  At both, sometime the content was kind of explicit.  My peer group had various materials as well which we all looked at.  What we did not have was all this content which I allowed to viewed as a replacement for parenting.  TV was much less graphic, and we did not have cable.  I did not watch a lot of late night tv until I was well into high school.  I did not watch the evening soaps alone.  I was sent outside to play and learn about the graphic nature of the world for real, not in virtual reality.  It was way more fun.
<p>
The liquor and other poisonous ingestibles are the same. All sane parents keep the kids away from these things.All sane parents make sure small children cannot get to the alcohol, drugs, or drain cleaner. Most of these have child proof caps for as a backup.
</p><p>
At some age, most kids will learn not to OD on drugs or drain cleaner.  I think we all agree that some don't.  Also, many parents will teach children about the proper dosage of drugs, alcohol, and the such.  This is the serving you get of wine.  This is the serving you get of beer.  This is when you drink cognac.  If you need an asprin, this is what you should take.  Clearly not all parent teach such civility, just like not all parent teach how to set a table, which fork to use, or to open doors for others, but the many do.
</p><p>
But learning and teaching takes time, which is why children can just be set out on their own and be expected to make long term best decisions, which may not be spending 10 hours a day playing the video games, or for a 14 year old trolling for facebook to find an older man to go out with in hope of impregnation, then a house and child support.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Both of these are correct .
I was exposed to a good amount of what would be called inappropriate content , but most of it was either through my parent of my peer group .
My parents took me to museums and classical performances .
At both , sometime the content was kind of explicit .
My peer group had various materials as well which we all looked at .
What we did not have was all this content which I allowed to viewed as a replacement for parenting .
TV was much less graphic , and we did not have cable .
I did not watch a lot of late night tv until I was well into high school .
I did not watch the evening soaps alone .
I was sent outside to play and learn about the graphic nature of the world for real , not in virtual reality .
It was way more fun .
The liquor and other poisonous ingestibles are the same .
All sane parents keep the kids away from these things.All sane parents make sure small children can not get to the alcohol , drugs , or drain cleaner .
Most of these have child proof caps for as a backup .
At some age , most kids will learn not to OD on drugs or drain cleaner .
I think we all agree that some do n't .
Also , many parents will teach children about the proper dosage of drugs , alcohol , and the such .
This is the serving you get of wine .
This is the serving you get of beer .
This is when you drink cognac .
If you need an asprin , this is what you should take .
Clearly not all parent teach such civility , just like not all parent teach how to set a table , which fork to use , or to open doors for others , but the many do .
But learning and teaching takes time , which is why children can just be set out on their own and be expected to make long term best decisions , which may not be spending 10 hours a day playing the video games , or for a 14 year old trolling for facebook to find an older man to go out with in hope of impregnation , then a house and child support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Both of these are correct.
I was exposed to a good amount of what would be called inappropriate content, but most of it was either through my parent of my peer group.
My parents took me to museums and classical performances.
At both, sometime the content was kind of explicit.
My peer group had various materials as well which we all looked at.
What we did not have was all this content which I allowed to viewed as a replacement for parenting.
TV was much less graphic, and we did not have cable.
I did not watch a lot of late night tv until I was well into high school.
I did not watch the evening soaps alone.
I was sent outside to play and learn about the graphic nature of the world for real, not in virtual reality.
It was way more fun.
The liquor and other poisonous ingestibles are the same.
All sane parents keep the kids away from these things.All sane parents make sure small children cannot get to the alcohol, drugs, or drain cleaner.
Most of these have child proof caps for as a backup.
At some age, most kids will learn not to OD on drugs or drain cleaner.
I think we all agree that some don't.
Also, many parents will teach children about the proper dosage of drugs, alcohol, and the such.
This is the serving you get of wine.
This is the serving you get of beer.
This is when you drink cognac.
If you need an asprin, this is what you should take.
Clearly not all parent teach such civility, just like not all parent teach how to set a table, which fork to use, or to open doors for others, but the many do.
But learning and teaching takes time, which is why children can just be set out on their own and be expected to make long term best decisions, which may not be spending 10 hours a day playing the video games, or for a 14 year old trolling for facebook to find an older man to go out with in hope of impregnation, then a house and child support.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393494</id>
	<title>Get a clue people!!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260436920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All I have to say is that this is one of the inherent problems with Linux. Rather than the nice, logical, pristine system registry that Windows has you have a big mess of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.conf files scattered all over the various disk partitions. Even the clean, responsive WIndows-type GUI cannot be found in Linux. You're stuck with some cobbled-together GUI if you're lucky. Most of the time you are left using a terminal shell like the the DOS dinosaur days.<p>

I don't want to edit a hacked-up<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.conf file to get my modem to work, to get my video card's refresh rate correct, or to hear my speaker beep, thank you. I will stick with Windows, which has been around for years and is the most user-friendly operating system on the planet. </p><p>

Heck, I remember back a few years ago our company's IT guy had the brainstorm of replacing our accounting system computers with Linux. After he found he couldn't get the accounting software to work on them the big boss yelled at him so bad that the poor guy broke down crying and swore he'd never try to push that Linux crap again. Can't say I blame him...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All I have to say is that this is one of the inherent problems with Linux .
Rather than the nice , logical , pristine system registry that Windows has you have a big mess of .conf files scattered all over the various disk partitions .
Even the clean , responsive WIndows-type GUI can not be found in Linux .
You 're stuck with some cobbled-together GUI if you 're lucky .
Most of the time you are left using a terminal shell like the the DOS dinosaur days .
I do n't want to edit a hacked-up .conf file to get my modem to work , to get my video card 's refresh rate correct , or to hear my speaker beep , thank you .
I will stick with Windows , which has been around for years and is the most user-friendly operating system on the planet .
Heck , I remember back a few years ago our company 's IT guy had the brainstorm of replacing our accounting system computers with Linux .
After he found he could n't get the accounting software to work on them the big boss yelled at him so bad that the poor guy broke down crying and swore he 'd never try to push that Linux crap again .
Ca n't say I blame him.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All I have to say is that this is one of the inherent problems with Linux.
Rather than the nice, logical, pristine system registry that Windows has you have a big mess of .conf files scattered all over the various disk partitions.
Even the clean, responsive WIndows-type GUI cannot be found in Linux.
You're stuck with some cobbled-together GUI if you're lucky.
Most of the time you are left using a terminal shell like the the DOS dinosaur days.
I don't want to edit a hacked-up .conf file to get my modem to work, to get my video card's refresh rate correct, or to hear my speaker beep, thank you.
I will stick with Windows, which has been around for years and is the most user-friendly operating system on the planet.
Heck, I remember back a few years ago our company's IT guy had the brainstorm of replacing our accounting system computers with Linux.
After he found he couldn't get the accounting software to work on them the big boss yelled at him so bad that the poor guy broke down crying and swore he'd never try to push that Linux crap again.
Can't say I blame him...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393140</id>
	<title>Age gating</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260435600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm pretty sure that is impossible to build effective age restrictions into the internet. The one article mentions that some of the worlds set it up so that if you enter a birthday that says you are too young they block you from creating an account with a different birthday from the same computer. This only hurts households with multiple users and only needs to happen on one world for the kids to learn that they need to enter that they are over the legal age the first time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure that is impossible to build effective age restrictions into the internet .
The one article mentions that some of the worlds set it up so that if you enter a birthday that says you are too young they block you from creating an account with a different birthday from the same computer .
This only hurts households with multiple users and only needs to happen on one world for the kids to learn that they need to enter that they are over the legal age the first time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure that is impossible to build effective age restrictions into the internet.
The one article mentions that some of the worlds set it up so that if you enter a birthday that says you are too young they block you from creating an account with a different birthday from the same computer.
This only hurts households with multiple users and only needs to happen on one world for the kids to learn that they need to enter that they are over the legal age the first time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397214</id>
	<title>Restrict minors to preset phrases</title>
	<author>Psaakyrn</author>
	<datestamp>1260453360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of cause, there are some successes in filtering words in MMOs. Case in point, Toontown Online.</p><p>(Granted it's done by only allowing a small subset of preset phrases, but at least it works. The closest to vulgarity is the spamming of "You stink!" phrases.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of cause , there are some successes in filtering words in MMOs .
Case in point , Toontown Online .
( Granted it 's done by only allowing a small subset of preset phrases , but at least it works .
The closest to vulgarity is the spamming of " You stink !
" phrases .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of cause, there are some successes in filtering words in MMOs.
Case in point, Toontown Online.
(Granted it's done by only allowing a small subset of preset phrases, but at least it works.
The closest to vulgarity is the spamming of "You stink!
" phrases.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393434</id>
	<title>Virtual World Bad For MInors, But</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260436680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>REAL WORLD via your six o'clock news is OK.</p><p>The U.S. is a joke.</p><p>Yours In Yasnogorsk,<br>Kilgore T.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>REAL WORLD via your six o'clock news is OK.The U.S. is a joke.Yours In Yasnogorsk,Kilgore T .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>REAL WORLD via your six o'clock news is OK.The U.S. is a joke.Yours In Yasnogorsk,Kilgore T.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393670</id>
	<title>Don't forget the Vent server</title>
	<author>AutumnLeaf</author>
	<datestamp>1260437520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My 14-year old cousin transferred to my realm and sometimes is on vent with us.  The conversation drifted off into the sophomoric-put-down gutter and some of the digs had me raising an eyebrow about my cousin being in channel until I saw he was commenting in raid chat "haha - that was awesome.  LOL!  Oooooh - snap - I'm going to use that on my brother!"</p><p>In any case, unless all forms of communication are removed except strict emotes... the problem's not solvable.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My 14-year old cousin transferred to my realm and sometimes is on vent with us .
The conversation drifted off into the sophomoric-put-down gutter and some of the digs had me raising an eyebrow about my cousin being in channel until I saw he was commenting in raid chat " haha - that was awesome .
LOL ! Oooooh - snap - I 'm going to use that on my brother !
" In any case , unless all forms of communication are removed except strict emotes... the problem 's not solvable .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>My 14-year old cousin transferred to my realm and sometimes is on vent with us.
The conversation drifted off into the sophomoric-put-down gutter and some of the digs had me raising an eyebrow about my cousin being in channel until I saw he was commenting in raid chat "haha - that was awesome.
LOL!  Oooooh - snap - I'm going to use that on my brother!
"In any case, unless all forms of communication are removed except strict emotes... the problem's not solvable.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394202</id>
	<title>Internet Says FTC Bad For Minors</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1260439860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reality News writes:</p><p>"A new report from the Internet is claiming minors have access to explicit bullshit via FTC such as those found in Slashvertisements. The report makes five recommendations to keep little Anonymous Cowards away from the harms of Barrens' lies:<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reality News writes : " A new report from the Internet is claiming minors have access to explicit bullshit via FTC such as those found in Slashvertisements .
The report makes five recommendations to keep little Anonymous Cowards away from the harms of Barrens ' lies : .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reality News writes:"A new report from the Internet is claiming minors have access to explicit bullshit via FTC such as those found in Slashvertisements.
The report makes five recommendations to keep little Anonymous Cowards away from the harms of Barrens' lies: ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395482</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260444480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I am a parent. And $#!@$ you for suggesting that it is lazy of me to expect Build-A-Bear to effectively prevent pedophiles from harassing my daughter on line.</p></div></blockquote><p>Straw man arguments are lies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a parent .
And $ # !
@ $ you for suggesting that it is lazy of me to expect Build-A-Bear to effectively prevent pedophiles from harassing my daughter on line.Straw man arguments are lies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a parent.
And $#!
@$ you for suggesting that it is lazy of me to expect Build-A-Bear to effectively prevent pedophiles from harassing my daughter on line.Straw man arguments are lies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394132</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1260439500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Child-proof caps and lids would suit this purpose.</i></p><p>Yeah, that ten year old won't get the lid off, right? I absolutely HATE child-proof caps. Ever try to open a bottle of aspirin when your wrist hurts from being at the computer too long?</p><p><i>Employ a household staff of specially trained moderators who can watch your kid like a hawk to ensure they don't consume alcohol.</i></p><p>Do I get a "woosh" for responding to a joke that's modded +5 interesting?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Child-proof caps and lids would suit this purpose.Yeah , that ten year old wo n't get the lid off , right ?
I absolutely HATE child-proof caps .
Ever try to open a bottle of aspirin when your wrist hurts from being at the computer too long ? Employ a household staff of specially trained moderators who can watch your kid like a hawk to ensure they do n't consume alcohol.Do I get a " woosh " for responding to a joke that 's modded + 5 interesting ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Child-proof caps and lids would suit this purpose.Yeah, that ten year old won't get the lid off, right?
I absolutely HATE child-proof caps.
Ever try to open a bottle of aspirin when your wrist hurts from being at the computer too long?Employ a household staff of specially trained moderators who can watch your kid like a hawk to ensure they don't consume alcohol.Do I get a "woosh" for responding to a joke that's modded +5 interesting?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393438</id>
	<title>Facepalm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260436740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*facepalm*</p><p>Got to love government mentality, find a problem with an insanely simple answer, and complicate it beyond all logic.  Their called "Parents", if they aren't doing their jobs you've got a lot bigger problem their kids seeing some dirty words or even a little porno online.  In a sane world I could understand every site/game/virtual world having a self applied voluntary rating tag, but if it was ever required by law I could just see it being used for ISP level filtering, harassment of host companies, ect.  The internet has grown so successfully for one reason above all others, Freedom (of information).  Its a pity that whenever governments see "freedom" and "successful" used to describe any one thing they get the uncontrollable urge to regulate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* facepalm * Got to love government mentality , find a problem with an insanely simple answer , and complicate it beyond all logic .
Their called " Parents " , if they are n't doing their jobs you 've got a lot bigger problem their kids seeing some dirty words or even a little porno online .
In a sane world I could understand every site/game/virtual world having a self applied voluntary rating tag , but if it was ever required by law I could just see it being used for ISP level filtering , harassment of host companies , ect .
The internet has grown so successfully for one reason above all others , Freedom ( of information ) .
Its a pity that whenever governments see " freedom " and " successful " used to describe any one thing they get the uncontrollable urge to regulate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*facepalm*Got to love government mentality, find a problem with an insanely simple answer, and complicate it beyond all logic.
Their called "Parents", if they aren't doing their jobs you've got a lot bigger problem their kids seeing some dirty words or even a little porno online.
In a sane world I could understand every site/game/virtual world having a self applied voluntary rating tag, but if it was ever required by law I could just see it being used for ISP level filtering, harassment of host companies, ect.
The internet has grown so successfully for one reason above all others, Freedom (of information).
Its a pity that whenever governments see "freedom" and "successful" used to describe any one thing they get the uncontrollable urge to regulate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393424</id>
	<title>FTC</title>
	<author>Jaysyn</author>
	<datestamp>1260436680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does the Federal *TRADE* Commission give a fuck what is going on with kids in online settings?  Isn't this the domain of the FCC?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does the Federal * TRADE * Commission give a fuck what is going on with kids in online settings ?
Is n't this the domain of the FCC ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does the Federal *TRADE* Commission give a fuck what is going on with kids in online settings?
Isn't this the domain of the FCC?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394306</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>ObsessiveMathsFreak</author>
	<datestamp>1260440340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>We as a people should not need a government organization dictating what our children should or should not be exposed too.</p></div></blockquote><p>But without such an organisation some parents will allow their children access to content that other people think they shouldn't be allowed to access. Since enough of these other people exist, they can vote for such organisations to be created so that their views can be imposed on people who would otherwise ignore them. All the rules have been followed, all the boxes ticked, no one has done anything "wrong", we've just ended up with organisations which actively oppose the decisions of parents regarding their children so that the majority are satisfied.</p><p>And this is called; a Democracy. Where the will of the people, not the individual, is absolute.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We as a people should not need a government organization dictating what our children should or should not be exposed too.But without such an organisation some parents will allow their children access to content that other people think they should n't be allowed to access .
Since enough of these other people exist , they can vote for such organisations to be created so that their views can be imposed on people who would otherwise ignore them .
All the rules have been followed , all the boxes ticked , no one has done anything " wrong " , we 've just ended up with organisations which actively oppose the decisions of parents regarding their children so that the majority are satisfied.And this is called ; a Democracy .
Where the will of the people , not the individual , is absolute .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We as a people should not need a government organization dictating what our children should or should not be exposed too.But without such an organisation some parents will allow their children access to content that other people think they shouldn't be allowed to access.
Since enough of these other people exist, they can vote for such organisations to be created so that their views can be imposed on people who would otherwise ignore them.
All the rules have been followed, all the boxes ticked, no one has done anything "wrong", we've just ended up with organisations which actively oppose the decisions of parents regarding their children so that the majority are satisfied.And this is called; a Democracy.
Where the will of the people, not the individual, is absolute.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393142</id>
	<title>Keep the kids away from the rest of us</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260435660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>the most irritating people in these virtual worlds are the damn teenagers - I'm all for separating out the populations or at least allowing me to filter out messages from kids. Most adults have at least some level of decorum.</htmltext>
<tokenext>the most irritating people in these virtual worlds are the damn teenagers - I 'm all for separating out the populations or at least allowing me to filter out messages from kids .
Most adults have at least some level of decorum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the most irritating people in these virtual worlds are the damn teenagers - I'm all for separating out the populations or at least allowing me to filter out messages from kids.
Most adults have at least some level of decorum.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393414</id>
	<title>Conservatism:</title>
	<author>edraven</author>
	<datestamp>1260436620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The belief that there are certain things which it is of vital importance not to appear to condone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The belief that there are certain things which it is of vital importance not to appear to condone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The belief that there are certain things which it is of vital importance not to appear to condone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393296</id>
	<title>Stop it. Just stop.</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1260436200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Either make the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.kid domain with strict regulations/requirements and legal fines if you don't follow them.</p><p>Another radical idea would be for parents to do their job of parenting and just stop annoying us with all of this. The internet is just like the real world, not all places are kid-friendly. Parents should know that.</p><p>Even age itself, for adults, doesn't quite cut it. Some people just can't handle some types of content while others can.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Either make the .kid domain with strict regulations/requirements and legal fines if you do n't follow them.Another radical idea would be for parents to do their job of parenting and just stop annoying us with all of this .
The internet is just like the real world , not all places are kid-friendly .
Parents should know that.Even age itself , for adults , does n't quite cut it .
Some people just ca n't handle some types of content while others can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Either make the .kid domain with strict regulations/requirements and legal fines if you don't follow them.Another radical idea would be for parents to do their job of parenting and just stop annoying us with all of this.
The internet is just like the real world, not all places are kid-friendly.
Parents should know that.Even age itself, for adults, doesn't quite cut it.
Some people just can't handle some types of content while others can.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228</id>
	<title>No surprise</title>
	<author>royallthefourth</author>
	<datestamp>1260435900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember when I was a minor on the internet I had access to explicit content.<br> <br>You know what they're really missing here? Teenaged boys are <i>looking</i> for explicit content and you'll never be able to stop them from finding it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember when I was a minor on the internet I had access to explicit content .
You know what they 're really missing here ?
Teenaged boys are looking for explicit content and you 'll never be able to stop them from finding it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember when I was a minor on the internet I had access to explicit content.
You know what they're really missing here?
Teenaged boys are looking for explicit content and you'll never be able to stop them from finding it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398334</id>
	<title>Virtual worlds? How about the real one?</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1260465540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder how the FTC will react once it learns the explosive truth: <i>the real world is bad for minors.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how the FTC will react once it learns the explosive truth : the real world is bad for minors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how the FTC will react once it learns the explosive truth: the real world is bad for minors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393974</id>
	<title>FUCK THIS SHIT</title>
	<author>alexborges</author>
	<datestamp>1260438780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here is my proposal.</p><p>Have NIC go and make a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.kid toplevel domain, and let the OS makers have an option to turn a box into a kiddie box that doesnt let anything but<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.kid resolvable back and foth domains to happen. THEN go and police the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.kid domain all the fuck you want.</p><p>Google can go and provide the google.kid with all the decency that the most conservative taliban/ultrachristian demand, then all the search engines the same, and for christ sakes, leave the rest of the world a-fucking-lone. Same for the online games and online worlds and any kind of service that is INTERESTED in tending to children.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is my proposal.Have NIC go and make a .kid toplevel domain , and let the OS makers have an option to turn a box into a kiddie box that doesnt let anything but .kid resolvable back and foth domains to happen .
THEN go and police the .kid domain all the fuck you want.Google can go and provide the google.kid with all the decency that the most conservative taliban/ultrachristian demand , then all the search engines the same , and for christ sakes , leave the rest of the world a-fucking-lone .
Same for the online games and online worlds and any kind of service that is INTERESTED in tending to children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is my proposal.Have NIC go and make a .kid toplevel domain, and let the OS makers have an option to turn a box into a kiddie box that doesnt let anything but .kid resolvable back and foth domains to happen.
THEN go and police the .kid domain all the fuck you want.Google can go and provide the google.kid with all the decency that the most conservative taliban/ultrachristian demand, then all the search engines the same, and for christ sakes, leave the rest of the world a-fucking-lone.
Same for the online games and online worlds and any kind of service that is INTERESTED in tending to children.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393326</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>SOdhner</author>
	<datestamp>1260436320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not for a second saying that parents shouldn't take responsibility, but I have to say I've been humbled somewhat in this area and do think that whenever possible people should help parents do this by giving them the tools they need.
<br> <br>
Not too long ago my house gained an eleven year old.  Before that I just rolled my eyes and said "Parents need to just keep track of what the kids are watching"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... once she was there I suddenly became aware of just how hard that is.  The commercials that play during otherwise acceptable shows, for example - not to mention all the problems with knowing what is and is not possible in an online game.
<br> <br>
I don't want to see things censored, but I welcome voluntary attempts to make the colossal task of monitoring easier for parents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not for a second saying that parents should n't take responsibility , but I have to say I 've been humbled somewhat in this area and do think that whenever possible people should help parents do this by giving them the tools they need .
Not too long ago my house gained an eleven year old .
Before that I just rolled my eyes and said " Parents need to just keep track of what the kids are watching " ... once she was there I suddenly became aware of just how hard that is .
The commercials that play during otherwise acceptable shows , for example - not to mention all the problems with knowing what is and is not possible in an online game .
I do n't want to see things censored , but I welcome voluntary attempts to make the colossal task of monitoring easier for parents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not for a second saying that parents shouldn't take responsibility, but I have to say I've been humbled somewhat in this area and do think that whenever possible people should help parents do this by giving them the tools they need.
Not too long ago my house gained an eleven year old.
Before that I just rolled my eyes and said "Parents need to just keep track of what the kids are watching" ... once she was there I suddenly became aware of just how hard that is.
The commercials that play during otherwise acceptable shows, for example - not to mention all the problems with knowing what is and is not possible in an online game.
I don't want to see things censored, but I welcome voluntary attempts to make the colossal task of monitoring easier for parents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393204</id>
	<title>Parenting only goes so far</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260435840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been in Second Life and wandered innocently (naively? probably.) into some places that <em>I</em> didn't want to be, much less want a minor to be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been in Second Life and wandered innocently ( naively ?
probably. ) into some places that I did n't want to be , much less want a minor to be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been in Second Life and wandered innocently (naively?
probably.) into some places that I didn't want to be, much less want a minor to be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394230</id>
	<title>Re:Keep the kids away from the rest of us</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260440040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh cool where did you get that sword?  How did you do that magic spell that's so neato!  Hey can I come xp with you I promise I'll roll for loot.  Can I have that dwarven helmet if you don't want it?  Hey can you help me with these quests I need 50 turtle shells to turn in plz respond.  Power level me please I'll pay you 5 silver okay?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh cool where did you get that sword ?
How did you do that magic spell that 's so neato !
Hey can I come xp with you I promise I 'll roll for loot .
Can I have that dwarven helmet if you do n't want it ?
Hey can you help me with these quests I need 50 turtle shells to turn in plz respond .
Power level me please I 'll pay you 5 silver okay ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh cool where did you get that sword?
How did you do that magic spell that's so neato!
Hey can I come xp with you I promise I'll roll for loot.
Can I have that dwarven helmet if you don't want it?
Hey can you help me with these quests I need 50 turtle shells to turn in plz respond.
Power level me please I'll pay you 5 silver okay?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395100</id>
	<title>Porn</title>
	<author>mwvdlee</author>
	<datestamp>1260443040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The parent of today have all been raised with excessive amounts of dirty pictures in dirty magazines and we all know how badly they all ended up. They're just trying to prevent their children from growing up as the messed up, immoral, foul-mouthed, rapist maniacs that they grew up as.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The parent of today have all been raised with excessive amounts of dirty pictures in dirty magazines and we all know how badly they all ended up .
They 're just trying to prevent their children from growing up as the messed up , immoral , foul-mouthed , rapist maniacs that they grew up as .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The parent of today have all been raised with excessive amounts of dirty pictures in dirty magazines and we all know how badly they all ended up.
They're just trying to prevent their children from growing up as the messed up, immoral, foul-mouthed, rapist maniacs that they grew up as.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394538</id>
	<title>Re:Who needs terrorists...</title>
	<author>nightfire-unique</author>
	<datestamp>1260441180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man I know that one's tongue-in-cheek but...</p><p>It's pretty harsh to even joke that kids are responsible for the horrible things we do to them and the world they will inherit.  It's even worse that the think-of-the-children asshats do these horrible things <i>in their name.</i><nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man I know that one 's tongue-in-cheek but...It 's pretty harsh to even joke that kids are responsible for the horrible things we do to them and the world they will inherit .
It 's even worse that the think-of-the-children asshats do these horrible things in their name .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man I know that one's tongue-in-cheek but...It's pretty harsh to even joke that kids are responsible for the horrible things we do to them and the world they will inherit.
It's even worse that the think-of-the-children asshats do these horrible things in their name.
:(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393266</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393106</id>
	<title>Nanny Business</title>
	<author>SirAstral</author>
	<datestamp>1260478680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We already know the details of nanny government and all that jazz... but when are the businesses going to stand up, pool their money and fight being pushed into becoming nannys themselves?  They may think its cool now to have a little power, but soon they will start getting sued by parents for not keeping their little dissident children in line.  It won't be facebook, craigslist, and myspace being sued.  It will be the companies that run games like WOW, Everquest, EVE, and the rest getting sued for the GM's and Dev's not keeping predators out of the game world.</p><p>People are a sleep at the wheel here!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We already know the details of nanny government and all that jazz... but when are the businesses going to stand up , pool their money and fight being pushed into becoming nannys themselves ?
They may think its cool now to have a little power , but soon they will start getting sued by parents for not keeping their little dissident children in line .
It wo n't be facebook , craigslist , and myspace being sued .
It will be the companies that run games like WOW , Everquest , EVE , and the rest getting sued for the GM 's and Dev 's not keeping predators out of the game world.People are a sleep at the wheel here !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We already know the details of nanny government and all that jazz... but when are the businesses going to stand up, pool their money and fight being pushed into becoming nannys themselves?
They may think its cool now to have a little power, but soon they will start getting sued by parents for not keeping their little dissident children in line.
It won't be facebook, craigslist, and myspace being sued.
It will be the companies that run games like WOW, Everquest, EVE, and the rest getting sued for the GM's and Dev's not keeping predators out of the game world.People are a sleep at the wheel here!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393250</id>
	<title>Prevent Beneficial Interaction</title>
	<author>The Raven</author>
	<datestamp>1260436020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This whole segregation thing is crap. 95\% of interactions between a child and an adult are positive. Segregation leads to 'Lord of the Flies' inbreeding of immature thought. Mixed company is the proper company for a child to have to learn how to grow up to be a sane, responsible, rounded individual.</p><p>Look at our history... children didn't grow up in segregated 'child only' areas... they grew up working with their parents and community members. They were exposed to life.</p><p>I'm of the opinion that over 95\% of interactions between a child and adult are positive. How many of you have grouped with an obviously young kid, and helped them through an instance? Asked them to please be more polite, or type neatly, or don't ninja all the loot? Grouping, chatting, and talking with more mature players is what helps children learn maturity (at least in the context of an MMO).</p><p>Perhaps some of the other points of the article have merit, but I'm quite against age segregation. We are a community... act like it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This whole segregation thing is crap .
95 \ % of interactions between a child and an adult are positive .
Segregation leads to 'Lord of the Flies ' inbreeding of immature thought .
Mixed company is the proper company for a child to have to learn how to grow up to be a sane , responsible , rounded individual.Look at our history... children did n't grow up in segregated 'child only ' areas... they grew up working with their parents and community members .
They were exposed to life.I 'm of the opinion that over 95 \ % of interactions between a child and adult are positive .
How many of you have grouped with an obviously young kid , and helped them through an instance ?
Asked them to please be more polite , or type neatly , or do n't ninja all the loot ?
Grouping , chatting , and talking with more mature players is what helps children learn maturity ( at least in the context of an MMO ) .Perhaps some of the other points of the article have merit , but I 'm quite against age segregation .
We are a community... act like it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This whole segregation thing is crap.
95\% of interactions between a child and an adult are positive.
Segregation leads to 'Lord of the Flies' inbreeding of immature thought.
Mixed company is the proper company for a child to have to learn how to grow up to be a sane, responsible, rounded individual.Look at our history... children didn't grow up in segregated 'child only' areas... they grew up working with their parents and community members.
They were exposed to life.I'm of the opinion that over 95\% of interactions between a child and adult are positive.
How many of you have grouped with an obviously young kid, and helped them through an instance?
Asked them to please be more polite, or type neatly, or don't ninja all the loot?
Grouping, chatting, and talking with more mature players is what helps children learn maturity (at least in the context of an MMO).Perhaps some of the other points of the article have merit, but I'm quite against age segregation.
We are a community... act like it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396194</id>
	<title>Who are we protecting?</title>
	<author>Lectrik</author>
	<datestamp>1260447180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree totally, we must join together in our effort to protect barrens chat from Little Johnny!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree totally , we must join together in our effort to protect barrens chat from Little Johnny !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree totally, we must join together in our effort to protect barrens chat from Little Johnny!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394704</id>
	<title>Age Segregation</title>
	<author>Toonol</author>
	<datestamp>1260441720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think we already do too much age segregation.  While mixing adults and children can lead to some problems, it can also have extremely beneficial effects on both.  I would also prefer a school system that included children of all ages, in addition; having 3rd graders in the same school as 12th graders gives the younger kids more guidance, and the older kids more of a sense of responsibility (assuming that social behavior hasn't already completely broken down).  Keeping people primarily isolated to their age 'tier' doesn't seem healthy, and can promote 'lord of the flies' type behavior to a certain degree.<br> <br>

The same applies with mixing senior citizens in with younger people; both benefit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think we already do too much age segregation .
While mixing adults and children can lead to some problems , it can also have extremely beneficial effects on both .
I would also prefer a school system that included children of all ages , in addition ; having 3rd graders in the same school as 12th graders gives the younger kids more guidance , and the older kids more of a sense of responsibility ( assuming that social behavior has n't already completely broken down ) .
Keeping people primarily isolated to their age 'tier ' does n't seem healthy , and can promote 'lord of the flies ' type behavior to a certain degree .
The same applies with mixing senior citizens in with younger people ; both benefit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think we already do too much age segregation.
While mixing adults and children can lead to some problems, it can also have extremely beneficial effects on both.
I would also prefer a school system that included children of all ages, in addition; having 3rd graders in the same school as 12th graders gives the younger kids more guidance, and the older kids more of a sense of responsibility (assuming that social behavior hasn't already completely broken down).
Keeping people primarily isolated to their age 'tier' doesn't seem healthy, and can promote 'lord of the flies' type behavior to a certain degree.
The same applies with mixing senior citizens in with younger people; both benefit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394168</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1260439680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the FTC site:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Of the 14 virtual worlds in the FTC&rsquo;s study that were, by design, open to children under age 13, seven contained no explicit content, six contained a low amount of such content, and one contained a moderate amount. Almost all of the explicit content found in the child-oriented virtual worlds appeared in the form of text posted in chat rooms, on message boards, or in discussion forums.</p></div><p>So the FTC studied 27 "online worlds" and of those 14 were listed as open to kids under 13.  Of the 14 worlds, 13 of them seem to be doing a good to excellent job of policing their discussion boards and/or chat rooms for inappropriate content.  All but one of the sites with inappropriate content were sites that were not registered as open to kids under 13.  In other words, not the "Build a Bear" site you mention.  The sites actually designed for your daughter (and trust me, I understand your concerns, my daughter is seven) seem to be doing a good job, by and large.</p><p>If you want your daughter to use a particular board, visit it and read for a while.  If the moderators seem to be doing a good job of removing anything you don't like, then you make a decision as to whether you can trust their moderation style (which probably includes many of the things mentioned in the FCC report).  Then YOU, as a parent, can decide which sites are making appropriate efforts.</p><p>"Being a parent" isn't necessarily a narrow corridor of "watch everything your kid does to protect them."  You can occasionally trust others.  But it's up to you to figure out who to trust and who not to.</p><p>The ideas mentioned are good ones, but they won't offer adequate protection except the last one ("employ a staff of specially trained moderators"), and that one is impractical for a lot of sites.  You're talking about a 24/7 staff of people who can read ALL of the messages coming in and filter them.  Plus, there's always a time lag between the time something is posted and the time that even the most trained and talented moderator can catch it and delete it.  So even if a moderator is on the job, your daughter might see something occasionally.  Plus, you might consider pictures of violent cartoon shows to be inappropriate for your child, while we have an entire TV industry built around this being appropriate entertainment.  "What constitutes inappropriate content" is VERY subjective.</p><p>I run a handful of discussion boards, and kids would be welcome at all of them as far as I'm concerned, and I moderate them and keep them clean, but I couldn't afford the lawsuit if one of our members said or did something inappropriate and I failed to "protect the children" because I can't read every post before it's put on the website, and I can't monitor it 24/7.</p><p>This is the conundrum that the attempts to protect our children have put us in.  Those of us who are parents want our children protected against pedophiles.  Fair enough.</p><p>Those of us who are moderators of discussion boards cannot provide that service with any absolute level of guarantee and still allow strangers to post messages to the discussion boards.  Any level of security I offered you would be a false sense, and I'd rather you visit my boards as an interested parent, check them out, and decide whether the community I've built is appropriate for your child.  That, in my mind, is proper parenting.  You don't have to live along with them on my site, but if you want to trust me, I should EARN that trust, which means YOU, as the parent, need to look at my site and see if you trust me.  Just like hiring a babysitter - we don't depend on the government to find us a babysitter who is safe, we depend on knowing the person we're leaving our kids with.</p><p>Personally, I "COPA Filter" everything I put up online that allows user input of any kind.  If you signed up for an account on one of my boards, you have to check a little tickybox that says "I am over the age of consent in my state or country, and/or I have legal parental consent to access this board, which may contain inappropriate content for my age group.  I (or my parents, if I am underage) understand that the moderators cannot control the actions of all of the people on the site."  Then I do my level best to watch the discussions and delete anything inappropriate, and ban members if necessary.</p><p>None of that protects the children.  Kids lie and claim they are over 18 or have parental consent when they don't all the time.  But it's protecting me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the FTC site : Of the 14 virtual worlds in the FTC    s study that were , by design , open to children under age 13 , seven contained no explicit content , six contained a low amount of such content , and one contained a moderate amount .
Almost all of the explicit content found in the child-oriented virtual worlds appeared in the form of text posted in chat rooms , on message boards , or in discussion forums.So the FTC studied 27 " online worlds " and of those 14 were listed as open to kids under 13 .
Of the 14 worlds , 13 of them seem to be doing a good to excellent job of policing their discussion boards and/or chat rooms for inappropriate content .
All but one of the sites with inappropriate content were sites that were not registered as open to kids under 13 .
In other words , not the " Build a Bear " site you mention .
The sites actually designed for your daughter ( and trust me , I understand your concerns , my daughter is seven ) seem to be doing a good job , by and large.If you want your daughter to use a particular board , visit it and read for a while .
If the moderators seem to be doing a good job of removing anything you do n't like , then you make a decision as to whether you can trust their moderation style ( which probably includes many of the things mentioned in the FCC report ) .
Then YOU , as a parent , can decide which sites are making appropriate efforts .
" Being a parent " is n't necessarily a narrow corridor of " watch everything your kid does to protect them .
" You can occasionally trust others .
But it 's up to you to figure out who to trust and who not to.The ideas mentioned are good ones , but they wo n't offer adequate protection except the last one ( " employ a staff of specially trained moderators " ) , and that one is impractical for a lot of sites .
You 're talking about a 24/7 staff of people who can read ALL of the messages coming in and filter them .
Plus , there 's always a time lag between the time something is posted and the time that even the most trained and talented moderator can catch it and delete it .
So even if a moderator is on the job , your daughter might see something occasionally .
Plus , you might consider pictures of violent cartoon shows to be inappropriate for your child , while we have an entire TV industry built around this being appropriate entertainment .
" What constitutes inappropriate content " is VERY subjective.I run a handful of discussion boards , and kids would be welcome at all of them as far as I 'm concerned , and I moderate them and keep them clean , but I could n't afford the lawsuit if one of our members said or did something inappropriate and I failed to " protect the children " because I ca n't read every post before it 's put on the website , and I ca n't monitor it 24/7.This is the conundrum that the attempts to protect our children have put us in .
Those of us who are parents want our children protected against pedophiles .
Fair enough.Those of us who are moderators of discussion boards can not provide that service with any absolute level of guarantee and still allow strangers to post messages to the discussion boards .
Any level of security I offered you would be a false sense , and I 'd rather you visit my boards as an interested parent , check them out , and decide whether the community I 've built is appropriate for your child .
That , in my mind , is proper parenting .
You do n't have to live along with them on my site , but if you want to trust me , I should EARN that trust , which means YOU , as the parent , need to look at my site and see if you trust me .
Just like hiring a babysitter - we do n't depend on the government to find us a babysitter who is safe , we depend on knowing the person we 're leaving our kids with.Personally , I " COPA Filter " everything I put up online that allows user input of any kind .
If you signed up for an account on one of my boards , you have to check a little tickybox that says " I am over the age of consent in my state or country , and/or I have legal parental consent to access this board , which may contain inappropriate content for my age group .
I ( or my parents , if I am underage ) understand that the moderators can not control the actions of all of the people on the site .
" Then I do my level best to watch the discussions and delete anything inappropriate , and ban members if necessary.None of that protects the children .
Kids lie and claim they are over 18 or have parental consent when they do n't all the time .
But it 's protecting me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the FTC site:Of the 14 virtual worlds in the FTC’s study that were, by design, open to children under age 13, seven contained no explicit content, six contained a low amount of such content, and one contained a moderate amount.
Almost all of the explicit content found in the child-oriented virtual worlds appeared in the form of text posted in chat rooms, on message boards, or in discussion forums.So the FTC studied 27 "online worlds" and of those 14 were listed as open to kids under 13.
Of the 14 worlds, 13 of them seem to be doing a good to excellent job of policing their discussion boards and/or chat rooms for inappropriate content.
All but one of the sites with inappropriate content were sites that were not registered as open to kids under 13.
In other words, not the "Build a Bear" site you mention.
The sites actually designed for your daughter (and trust me, I understand your concerns, my daughter is seven) seem to be doing a good job, by and large.If you want your daughter to use a particular board, visit it and read for a while.
If the moderators seem to be doing a good job of removing anything you don't like, then you make a decision as to whether you can trust their moderation style (which probably includes many of the things mentioned in the FCC report).
Then YOU, as a parent, can decide which sites are making appropriate efforts.
"Being a parent" isn't necessarily a narrow corridor of "watch everything your kid does to protect them.
"  You can occasionally trust others.
But it's up to you to figure out who to trust and who not to.The ideas mentioned are good ones, but they won't offer adequate protection except the last one ("employ a staff of specially trained moderators"), and that one is impractical for a lot of sites.
You're talking about a 24/7 staff of people who can read ALL of the messages coming in and filter them.
Plus, there's always a time lag between the time something is posted and the time that even the most trained and talented moderator can catch it and delete it.
So even if a moderator is on the job, your daughter might see something occasionally.
Plus, you might consider pictures of violent cartoon shows to be inappropriate for your child, while we have an entire TV industry built around this being appropriate entertainment.
"What constitutes inappropriate content" is VERY subjective.I run a handful of discussion boards, and kids would be welcome at all of them as far as I'm concerned, and I moderate them and keep them clean, but I couldn't afford the lawsuit if one of our members said or did something inappropriate and I failed to "protect the children" because I can't read every post before it's put on the website, and I can't monitor it 24/7.This is the conundrum that the attempts to protect our children have put us in.
Those of us who are parents want our children protected against pedophiles.
Fair enough.Those of us who are moderators of discussion boards cannot provide that service with any absolute level of guarantee and still allow strangers to post messages to the discussion boards.
Any level of security I offered you would be a false sense, and I'd rather you visit my boards as an interested parent, check them out, and decide whether the community I've built is appropriate for your child.
That, in my mind, is proper parenting.
You don't have to live along with them on my site, but if you want to trust me, I should EARN that trust, which means YOU, as the parent, need to look at my site and see if you trust me.
Just like hiring a babysitter - we don't depend on the government to find us a babysitter who is safe, we depend on knowing the person we're leaving our kids with.Personally, I "COPA Filter" everything I put up online that allows user input of any kind.
If you signed up for an account on one of my boards, you have to check a little tickybox that says "I am over the age of consent in my state or country, and/or I have legal parental consent to access this board, which may contain inappropriate content for my age group.
I (or my parents, if I am underage) understand that the moderators cannot control the actions of all of the people on the site.
"  Then I do my level best to watch the discussions and delete anything inappropriate, and ban members if necessary.None of that protects the children.
Kids lie and claim they are over 18 or have parental consent when they don't all the time.
But it's protecting me.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393690</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260437580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I agree, I also think that virtual communities can be good for kids so I want my daughter to participate in some that are appropriate.  Having some of the features they discussed in ones geared towards kids and explicitly marking them so parents know they are more likely to be appropriate (it won't be perfect; but neither is the real world) is a useful tool to parents.</p><p>My daughter's mom bought her a laptop, and one of the first things I did was to put a general filter banning internet access.  This way she can play music from my itunes share, print to my laser printer etc but in general can't get online.  I made  a couple of exceptions to the rules for sites that I expect to be safe for kids.  Sure they could get hacked, but anything she could see online she could see in the real world; its about trying to limit the things they aren't ready for so that they get exposed slowly, have a chance to talk about it and process it, and return to their "normal" state.  Other sites she can either request that I approve them and I'll do some research or we visit them together.  I see no difference in how I should treat virtual worlds; these guidelines would be useful in a more child friendly virtual world.  Especially since I frequently have to do things like change the 1 year old's diaper or check to see what trouble the four year old is getting into (he's too smart for his own good in terms of getting into trouble).  These three of them and only one of me, so at times they have to be slightly unsupervised; honestly, I think that's a good thing, its gives them a chance to make choices and to learn that there are consequences to choices.  My daughter's last school had a goal of children making the rules, making hte consequences, and teaching children that breaking them have consequences (and EXPLICITLY NOT of making the children obeye the rules but rather learn they must accept consequences).  I think in the big pictures, that's the right path to take; at times, we all break the rules (and some times for VERY good reasons).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I agree , I also think that virtual communities can be good for kids so I want my daughter to participate in some that are appropriate .
Having some of the features they discussed in ones geared towards kids and explicitly marking them so parents know they are more likely to be appropriate ( it wo n't be perfect ; but neither is the real world ) is a useful tool to parents.My daughter 's mom bought her a laptop , and one of the first things I did was to put a general filter banning internet access .
This way she can play music from my itunes share , print to my laser printer etc but in general ca n't get online .
I made a couple of exceptions to the rules for sites that I expect to be safe for kids .
Sure they could get hacked , but anything she could see online she could see in the real world ; its about trying to limit the things they are n't ready for so that they get exposed slowly , have a chance to talk about it and process it , and return to their " normal " state .
Other sites she can either request that I approve them and I 'll do some research or we visit them together .
I see no difference in how I should treat virtual worlds ; these guidelines would be useful in a more child friendly virtual world .
Especially since I frequently have to do things like change the 1 year old 's diaper or check to see what trouble the four year old is getting into ( he 's too smart for his own good in terms of getting into trouble ) .
These three of them and only one of me , so at times they have to be slightly unsupervised ; honestly , I think that 's a good thing , its gives them a chance to make choices and to learn that there are consequences to choices .
My daughter 's last school had a goal of children making the rules , making hte consequences , and teaching children that breaking them have consequences ( and EXPLICITLY NOT of making the children obeye the rules but rather learn they must accept consequences ) .
I think in the big pictures , that 's the right path to take ; at times , we all break the rules ( and some times for VERY good reasons ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I agree, I also think that virtual communities can be good for kids so I want my daughter to participate in some that are appropriate.
Having some of the features they discussed in ones geared towards kids and explicitly marking them so parents know they are more likely to be appropriate (it won't be perfect; but neither is the real world) is a useful tool to parents.My daughter's mom bought her a laptop, and one of the first things I did was to put a general filter banning internet access.
This way she can play music from my itunes share, print to my laser printer etc but in general can't get online.
I made  a couple of exceptions to the rules for sites that I expect to be safe for kids.
Sure they could get hacked, but anything she could see online she could see in the real world; its about trying to limit the things they aren't ready for so that they get exposed slowly, have a chance to talk about it and process it, and return to their "normal" state.
Other sites she can either request that I approve them and I'll do some research or we visit them together.
I see no difference in how I should treat virtual worlds; these guidelines would be useful in a more child friendly virtual world.
Especially since I frequently have to do things like change the 1 year old's diaper or check to see what trouble the four year old is getting into (he's too smart for his own good in terms of getting into trouble).
These three of them and only one of me, so at times they have to be slightly unsupervised; honestly, I think that's a good thing, its gives them a chance to make choices and to learn that there are consequences to choices.
My daughter's last school had a goal of children making the rules, making hte consequences, and teaching children that breaking them have consequences (and EXPLICITLY NOT of making the children obeye the rules but rather learn they must accept consequences).
I think in the big pictures, that's the right path to take; at times, we all break the rules (and some times for VERY good reasons).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398874</id>
	<title>Re:true in the real world, too</title>
	<author>rrohbeck</author>
	<datestamp>1260475020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Click *here* to confirm that you are 18 years or older."</p><p>Yeah right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Click * here * to confirm that you are 18 years or older .
" Yeah right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Click *here* to confirm that you are 18 years or older.
"Yeah right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30400888</id>
	<title>How about....</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1260542700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about putting more onus on the parents in order to control their children???<br>Does the fact that making wine , we should ban wine because of the alcohol content that children<br>seem to have access to anywhere in europe (legal for children to drink wine in france and italy)....NO</p><p>The parents teach the children how to moderate their drinking of wine from an early age,<br>so as to understand that it is not to be abused! There are alot less alcoholics in europe then here in north america!!!</p><p>Same with pot, legal in many countries in europe....and you do not see the country falling part now do you?<br>So if we teach our children about what bad things that can happen, and educate them (a job much<br>lacking in the parent department these days), you will get children that know when they should not get into<br>games that promote killing women for bonus points, or crashing your car, then stealing another.</p><p>I see no point in this practice, as in fact I understand , and from a young age too, that scraping<br>cars is not environmentally friendly decision, as well violence never went without consequences.<br>Can today's children say they understand these points?<br>Can you say today's parents drive home these points and spend time (like a dog)<br>to reinforce these points constantly?</p><p>My point exactly. Let's ban the video games, let's ban alcohol, let's ban sex, let's ban life altogether!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about putting more onus on the parents in order to control their children ? ?
? Does the fact that making wine , we should ban wine because of the alcohol content that childrenseem to have access to anywhere in europe ( legal for children to drink wine in france and italy ) ....NOThe parents teach the children how to moderate their drinking of wine from an early age,so as to understand that it is not to be abused !
There are alot less alcoholics in europe then here in north america ! !
! Same with pot , legal in many countries in europe....and you do not see the country falling part now do you ? So if we teach our children about what bad things that can happen , and educate them ( a job muchlacking in the parent department these days ) , you will get children that know when they should not get intogames that promote killing women for bonus points , or crashing your car , then stealing another.I see no point in this practice , as in fact I understand , and from a young age too , that scrapingcars is not environmentally friendly decision , as well violence never went without consequences.Can today 's children say they understand these points ? Can you say today 's parents drive home these points and spend time ( like a dog ) to reinforce these points constantly ? My point exactly .
Let 's ban the video games , let 's ban alcohol , let 's ban sex , let 's ban life altogether !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about putting more onus on the parents in order to control their children??
?Does the fact that making wine , we should ban wine because of the alcohol content that childrenseem to have access to anywhere in europe (legal for children to drink wine in france and italy)....NOThe parents teach the children how to moderate their drinking of wine from an early age,so as to understand that it is not to be abused!
There are alot less alcoholics in europe then here in north america!!
!Same with pot, legal in many countries in europe....and you do not see the country falling part now do you?So if we teach our children about what bad things that can happen, and educate them (a job muchlacking in the parent department these days), you will get children that know when they should not get intogames that promote killing women for bonus points, or crashing your car, then stealing another.I see no point in this practice, as in fact I understand , and from a young age too, that scrapingcars is not environmentally friendly decision, as well violence never went without consequences.Can today's children say they understand these points?Can you say today's parents drive home these points and spend time (like a dog)to reinforce these points constantly?My point exactly.
Let's ban the video games, let's ban alcohol, let's ban sex, let's ban life altogether!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394312</id>
	<title>Post Title?</title>
	<author>MoNsTeR</author>
	<datestamp>1260440400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll admit to having only skimmed the FTC posting, but I didn't see anything saying that could be construed as "virtual worlds are bad for minors."  They said that minors have ACCESS to virtual worlds, but any conclusion of harm is based on prior assumptions, with which many of us would disagree.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll admit to having only skimmed the FTC posting , but I did n't see anything saying that could be construed as " virtual worlds are bad for minors .
" They said that minors have ACCESS to virtual worlds , but any conclusion of harm is based on prior assumptions , with which many of us would disagree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll admit to having only skimmed the FTC posting, but I didn't see anything saying that could be construed as "virtual worlds are bad for minors.
"  They said that minors have ACCESS to virtual worlds, but any conclusion of harm is based on prior assumptions, with which many of us would disagree.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398110</id>
	<title>Parental Advisory</title>
	<author>stimpleton</author>
	<datestamp>1260461880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I saw this somewhere as a joke, cant recall where: "Parental Advisory: Parenting may be required."</htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw this somewhere as a joke , cant recall where : " Parental Advisory : Parenting may be required .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw this somewhere as a joke, cant recall where: "Parental Advisory: Parenting may be required.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397666</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>shaitand</author>
	<datestamp>1260457200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Yeah, that ten year old won't get the lid off, right?"</p><p>No kidding. Kids are generally brighter than adults, particularly when figuring something out that doesn't require the kind of prerequisite knowledge adults took years to learn. The first time an adult encounters one of these caps the adult will read the label and start following the instruction and figure it out shortly enough. The kid will figure it out by feel before the adult has found his/her reading glasses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Yeah , that ten year old wo n't get the lid off , right ?
" No kidding .
Kids are generally brighter than adults , particularly when figuring something out that does n't require the kind of prerequisite knowledge adults took years to learn .
The first time an adult encounters one of these caps the adult will read the label and start following the instruction and figure it out shortly enough .
The kid will figure it out by feel before the adult has found his/her reading glasses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Yeah, that ten year old won't get the lid off, right?
"No kidding.
Kids are generally brighter than adults, particularly when figuring something out that doesn't require the kind of prerequisite knowledge adults took years to learn.
The first time an adult encounters one of these caps the adult will read the label and start following the instruction and figure it out shortly enough.
The kid will figure it out by feel before the adult has found his/her reading glasses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393154</id>
	<title>For what it's worth</title>
	<author>nightfire-unique</author>
	<datestamp>1260435660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm of the opinion that the "real world" with all its war, police brutality, marketing, religion, fear and suffering is worse.</p><p>Really... are sex and swear words that bad?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm of the opinion that the " real world " with all its war , police brutality , marketing , religion , fear and suffering is worse.Really... are sex and swear words that bad ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm of the opinion that the "real world" with all its war, police brutality, marketing, religion, fear and suffering is worse.Really... are sex and swear words that bad?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396878</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>discord5</author>
	<datestamp>1260450840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Child-proof caps and lids would suit this purpose</p></div><p>I know you're being ironic, but a few months ago a friend of mine got some medication in a childproof bottle. It's a very funny sight to see two grown men struggle with that particular bottle, and have a six year old open it with ease.</p><p>As for this summary:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The report makes five recommendations to keep little Johnny away from the harms of Barrens chat</p></div><p>I always assumed the Barrens chat or trade channel was filled with little Johnnies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Child-proof caps and lids would suit this purposeI know you 're being ironic , but a few months ago a friend of mine got some medication in a childproof bottle .
It 's a very funny sight to see two grown men struggle with that particular bottle , and have a six year old open it with ease.As for this summary : The report makes five recommendations to keep little Johnny away from the harms of Barrens chatI always assumed the Barrens chat or trade channel was filled with little Johnnies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Child-proof caps and lids would suit this purposeI know you're being ironic, but a few months ago a friend of mine got some medication in a childproof bottle.
It's a very funny sight to see two grown men struggle with that particular bottle, and have a six year old open it with ease.As for this summary:The report makes five recommendations to keep little Johnny away from the harms of Barrens chatI always assumed the Barrens chat or trade channel was filled with little Johnnies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393426</id>
	<title>Regulatory group calls for more regulation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260436680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Imagine that, a group that regulates content calls for stricter regulation of content on a new medium.</p><p>I guess they are just as into job security as the rest of us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Imagine that , a group that regulates content calls for stricter regulation of content on a new medium.I guess they are just as into job security as the rest of us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Imagine that, a group that regulates content calls for stricter regulation of content on a new medium.I guess they are just as into job security as the rest of us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393202</id>
	<title>Ten years down the line...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260435840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FTC: "You can't do that in public" Woman: "Huh?" FTC: "You can't nurse a child, THEY MIGHT SEE A BREAST"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FTC : " You ca n't do that in public " Woman : " Huh ?
" FTC : " You ca n't nurse a child , THEY MIGHT SEE A BREAST "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTC: "You can't do that in public" Woman: "Huh?
" FTC: "You can't nurse a child, THEY MIGHT SEE A BREAST"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393794</id>
	<title>I hate to agree</title>
	<author>pyster</author>
	<datestamp>1260438000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I spent today in a discussion about video games, free speech, and how hiliary clinton is a c-muscle for supporting jack thompson like legislation. I'm on the side of putting to death all those who attack the 1st amendment... and I hate almost every thing that screams protect the children because it almost always ruins life and freedom for others.

But i do think that segregation is a good idea, and that some sort of parental approval to allow children to interact with adults in online gaming is a good idea for all involved. If you have ever played online... the racism... the sexism... man... those kids are rough... THEY ARE WORSE THAN ADULTS. Here and there you want to hunt one of them down...

The MMOs... I imagine them being like the IRC in the 90s... again... there is a need protect adults from horny under aged girls...

Heh, I think the adults actually need protected from the kids.

I dont think I want to see the legislator getting involved, I think I want to see the industry decide how to sort this out themselves.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I spent today in a discussion about video games , free speech , and how hiliary clinton is a c-muscle for supporting jack thompson like legislation .
I 'm on the side of putting to death all those who attack the 1st amendment... and I hate almost every thing that screams protect the children because it almost always ruins life and freedom for others .
But i do think that segregation is a good idea , and that some sort of parental approval to allow children to interact with adults in online gaming is a good idea for all involved .
If you have ever played online... the racism... the sexism... man... those kids are rough... THEY ARE WORSE THAN ADULTS .
Here and there you want to hunt one of them down.. . The MMOs... I imagine them being like the IRC in the 90s... again... there is a need protect adults from horny under aged girls.. . Heh , I think the adults actually need protected from the kids .
I dont think I want to see the legislator getting involved , I think I want to see the industry decide how to sort this out themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I spent today in a discussion about video games, free speech, and how hiliary clinton is a c-muscle for supporting jack thompson like legislation.
I'm on the side of putting to death all those who attack the 1st amendment... and I hate almost every thing that screams protect the children because it almost always ruins life and freedom for others.
But i do think that segregation is a good idea, and that some sort of parental approval to allow children to interact with adults in online gaming is a good idea for all involved.
If you have ever played online... the racism... the sexism... man... those kids are rough... THEY ARE WORSE THAN ADULTS.
Here and there you want to hunt one of them down...

The MMOs... I imagine them being like the IRC in the 90s... again... there is a need protect adults from horny under aged girls...

Heh, I think the adults actually need protected from the kids.
I dont think I want to see the legislator getting involved, I think I want to see the industry decide how to sort this out themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394106</id>
	<title>More regulations!</title>
	<author>Dumnezeu</author>
	<datestamp>1260439380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What you guys need is some sort of regulator that will regulate everything by assigning new regulators every once in a while.<br>[/sarcasm]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What you guys need is some sort of regulator that will regulate everything by assigning new regulators every once in a while .
[ /sarcasm ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What you guys need is some sort of regulator that will regulate everything by assigning new regulators every once in a while.
[/sarcasm]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394692</id>
	<title>Re:Age gating</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260441660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm pretty sure that is impossible to build effective age restrictions into the internet.</p></div></blockquote><p>Continual two factor biometric authentication. When either the face in front of the computer changes or the prints on the mouse change you are logged out. Both fingerprints and facial structure can indicate age. Transdermal blood analysis as a third might not be a bad idea either.</p><p>This is the only way it will ever work. Yah, sure your kid can use fake fingerprints, wear a mask and keep random blood samples on hand, but I'm pretty sure you'd know they were up to something by then.</p><p>Seriously though, there will be no online age until reliable multifactor biometric logins are implemented.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure that is impossible to build effective age restrictions into the internet.Continual two factor biometric authentication .
When either the face in front of the computer changes or the prints on the mouse change you are logged out .
Both fingerprints and facial structure can indicate age .
Transdermal blood analysis as a third might not be a bad idea either.This is the only way it will ever work .
Yah , sure your kid can use fake fingerprints , wear a mask and keep random blood samples on hand , but I 'm pretty sure you 'd know they were up to something by then.Seriously though , there will be no online age until reliable multifactor biometric logins are implemented .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure that is impossible to build effective age restrictions into the internet.Continual two factor biometric authentication.
When either the face in front of the computer changes or the prints on the mouse change you are logged out.
Both fingerprints and facial structure can indicate age.
Transdermal blood analysis as a third might not be a bad idea either.This is the only way it will ever work.
Yah, sure your kid can use fake fingerprints, wear a mask and keep random blood samples on hand, but I'm pretty sure you'd know they were up to something by then.Seriously though, there will be no online age until reliable multifactor biometric logins are implemented.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398372</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Imrik</author>
	<datestamp>1260466260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reminds me of when I was younger and my parents asked me to open the child proof caps for them...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reminds me of when I was younger and my parents asked me to open the child proof caps for them.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reminds me of when I was younger and my parents asked me to open the child proof caps for them...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30399456</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Dhalka226</author>
	<datestamp>1260526800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your experiences are exactly right, but if I might be so bold I think your conclusions are wrong.

</p><p>Somewhere along the line, parents have come to believe that it is their job to protect children.  It's not.  A parent's job is to prepare their child.  I'm not saying you don't hold a two-year-old's hand crossing the street, or that you introduce them to a pedophile so that they can learn about them, but I AM saying that you also teach that two-year-old to look both ways and you teach your children what sorts of information they should and should not give on the Internet.

</p><p>Even if your children are not actively trying to bypass you--and at eleven years old she has probably already begun--you simply can't be there to protect them all the time.  Nor, frankly, would you want to be; that's not a recipe for raising a child who is going to go off and do well on their own as an adult.  Instead, you want to give them the tools and the knowledge they need to protect themselves.  Talking to adults is not a problem.  Hell, frankly talking to a pedophile is not a problem -- the problem is in what gets said and done.  Teach them about that and you don't need to police who they speak to.  Teach them your morality with regards to things like sex and you don't have to concern yourself with whether or not a penis or boobs flash on the television.  Teach them about appropriate language for situations and you don't have to care if some guy in an MMO swears a lot.  Be open and honest and respectful and it will be reciprocated, much more so than if you're not.  They won't always listen.  They won't always do the right thing, but short of locking them in a bedroom until their brains are fully developed that's always going to be the case.  Part of life, part of growing up, is making mistakes and learning from them, not being hidden away from real life and then thrust upon the world at eighteen.

</p><p>And if I might throw in a bit of a personal touch, teach them carefully.  Maybe it says something about me, but I met my best friend online.  A friend who I literally have flown across the world to meet and spend time with.  His friendship has been great for me and I hope mine has been for him as well.  Neither of us ended up raped or beaten or murdered, and our friendship is stronger for it.  What I'm saying is this:  There are meaningful relationships to be had online, which both you and your child should not only be open to but embrace when they come around.  Yes, you have to be careful; you have to be careful in person too.  Just being able to see somebody is a shallow evaluation of whether or not they are who and what they claim to be.  But there are far more good and honest people online than bad people, regardless of how the media portrays things.  It shouldn't be so much a boogeyman that people are afraid to ever be open or honest with another person online -- like everything else, it just needs to be done smart.

</p><p>I'm not one of those people who think it's amoral to censor what kids watch or anything like that.  I just think it's incomplete; parents need to be educating their children in the ways I discussed regardless of whether they're keeping an eye on what they watch and listen to and see and who they talk to, or those children are little better off.  With that the case, I find the actual censorship to be unnecessary.  Teach them and trust them; ultimately, what else can you do?

</p><p>For the record, most of this wasn't targeted directly at you.  I don't know you, the child or any particulars about your situation.  In fact since you said "gained an eleven year old" I suspect you either adopted or something happened to somebody close to you and you ended up a guardian, and either way the situation is entirely more complex than with your own child whom you get to start with from birth.  I just used your commentary as a bit of a jumping off point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your experiences are exactly right , but if I might be so bold I think your conclusions are wrong .
Somewhere along the line , parents have come to believe that it is their job to protect children .
It 's not .
A parent 's job is to prepare their child .
I 'm not saying you do n't hold a two-year-old 's hand crossing the street , or that you introduce them to a pedophile so that they can learn about them , but I AM saying that you also teach that two-year-old to look both ways and you teach your children what sorts of information they should and should not give on the Internet .
Even if your children are not actively trying to bypass you--and at eleven years old she has probably already begun--you simply ca n't be there to protect them all the time .
Nor , frankly , would you want to be ; that 's not a recipe for raising a child who is going to go off and do well on their own as an adult .
Instead , you want to give them the tools and the knowledge they need to protect themselves .
Talking to adults is not a problem .
Hell , frankly talking to a pedophile is not a problem -- the problem is in what gets said and done .
Teach them about that and you do n't need to police who they speak to .
Teach them your morality with regards to things like sex and you do n't have to concern yourself with whether or not a penis or boobs flash on the television .
Teach them about appropriate language for situations and you do n't have to care if some guy in an MMO swears a lot .
Be open and honest and respectful and it will be reciprocated , much more so than if you 're not .
They wo n't always listen .
They wo n't always do the right thing , but short of locking them in a bedroom until their brains are fully developed that 's always going to be the case .
Part of life , part of growing up , is making mistakes and learning from them , not being hidden away from real life and then thrust upon the world at eighteen .
And if I might throw in a bit of a personal touch , teach them carefully .
Maybe it says something about me , but I met my best friend online .
A friend who I literally have flown across the world to meet and spend time with .
His friendship has been great for me and I hope mine has been for him as well .
Neither of us ended up raped or beaten or murdered , and our friendship is stronger for it .
What I 'm saying is this : There are meaningful relationships to be had online , which both you and your child should not only be open to but embrace when they come around .
Yes , you have to be careful ; you have to be careful in person too .
Just being able to see somebody is a shallow evaluation of whether or not they are who and what they claim to be .
But there are far more good and honest people online than bad people , regardless of how the media portrays things .
It should n't be so much a boogeyman that people are afraid to ever be open or honest with another person online -- like everything else , it just needs to be done smart .
I 'm not one of those people who think it 's amoral to censor what kids watch or anything like that .
I just think it 's incomplete ; parents need to be educating their children in the ways I discussed regardless of whether they 're keeping an eye on what they watch and listen to and see and who they talk to , or those children are little better off .
With that the case , I find the actual censorship to be unnecessary .
Teach them and trust them ; ultimately , what else can you do ?
For the record , most of this was n't targeted directly at you .
I do n't know you , the child or any particulars about your situation .
In fact since you said " gained an eleven year old " I suspect you either adopted or something happened to somebody close to you and you ended up a guardian , and either way the situation is entirely more complex than with your own child whom you get to start with from birth .
I just used your commentary as a bit of a jumping off point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your experiences are exactly right, but if I might be so bold I think your conclusions are wrong.
Somewhere along the line, parents have come to believe that it is their job to protect children.
It's not.
A parent's job is to prepare their child.
I'm not saying you don't hold a two-year-old's hand crossing the street, or that you introduce them to a pedophile so that they can learn about them, but I AM saying that you also teach that two-year-old to look both ways and you teach your children what sorts of information they should and should not give on the Internet.
Even if your children are not actively trying to bypass you--and at eleven years old she has probably already begun--you simply can't be there to protect them all the time.
Nor, frankly, would you want to be; that's not a recipe for raising a child who is going to go off and do well on their own as an adult.
Instead, you want to give them the tools and the knowledge they need to protect themselves.
Talking to adults is not a problem.
Hell, frankly talking to a pedophile is not a problem -- the problem is in what gets said and done.
Teach them about that and you don't need to police who they speak to.
Teach them your morality with regards to things like sex and you don't have to concern yourself with whether or not a penis or boobs flash on the television.
Teach them about appropriate language for situations and you don't have to care if some guy in an MMO swears a lot.
Be open and honest and respectful and it will be reciprocated, much more so than if you're not.
They won't always listen.
They won't always do the right thing, but short of locking them in a bedroom until their brains are fully developed that's always going to be the case.
Part of life, part of growing up, is making mistakes and learning from them, not being hidden away from real life and then thrust upon the world at eighteen.
And if I might throw in a bit of a personal touch, teach them carefully.
Maybe it says something about me, but I met my best friend online.
A friend who I literally have flown across the world to meet and spend time with.
His friendship has been great for me and I hope mine has been for him as well.
Neither of us ended up raped or beaten or murdered, and our friendship is stronger for it.
What I'm saying is this:  There are meaningful relationships to be had online, which both you and your child should not only be open to but embrace when they come around.
Yes, you have to be careful; you have to be careful in person too.
Just being able to see somebody is a shallow evaluation of whether or not they are who and what they claim to be.
But there are far more good and honest people online than bad people, regardless of how the media portrays things.
It shouldn't be so much a boogeyman that people are afraid to ever be open or honest with another person online -- like everything else, it just needs to be done smart.
I'm not one of those people who think it's amoral to censor what kids watch or anything like that.
I just think it's incomplete; parents need to be educating their children in the ways I discussed regardless of whether they're keeping an eye on what they watch and listen to and see and who they talk to, or those children are little better off.
With that the case, I find the actual censorship to be unnecessary.
Teach them and trust them; ultimately, what else can you do?
For the record, most of this wasn't targeted directly at you.
I don't know you, the child or any particulars about your situation.
In fact since you said "gained an eleven year old" I suspect you either adopted or something happened to somebody close to you and you ended up a guardian, and either way the situation is entirely more complex than with your own child whom you get to start with from birth.
I just used your commentary as a bit of a jumping off point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396364</id>
	<title>Re:FTC</title>
	<author>Wowlapalooza</author>
	<datestamp>1260447960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why does the Federal *TRADE* Commission give a fuck what is going on with kids in online settings?  Isn't this the domain of the FCC?</p></div><p>Actually, it makes perfect sense. "Bad" content falls under Consumer Protection, regardless of how that content is accessed. The FCC only has some specific mandates relating to digital content, e.g. "broadcast decency".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does the Federal * TRADE * Commission give a fuck what is going on with kids in online settings ?
Is n't this the domain of the FCC ? Actually , it makes perfect sense .
" Bad " content falls under Consumer Protection , regardless of how that content is accessed .
The FCC only has some specific mandates relating to digital content , e.g .
" broadcast decency " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does the Federal *TRADE* Commission give a fuck what is going on with kids in online settings?
Isn't this the domain of the FCC?Actually, it makes perfect sense.
"Bad" content falls under Consumer Protection, regardless of how that content is accessed.
The FCC only has some specific mandates relating to digital content, e.g.
"broadcast decency".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394532</id>
	<title>Re:No surprise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260441180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you kidding me? TEENAGED GIRLS are oft doing the same thing, given some cultural and sexual bias. The number of girls I knew online between my teens and really early 20's who were looking up stuff like that was crazy. Nevermind the number involved in cybersex (mind you at the time text based gaming was still huge, and MMOs were still 2d affairs with a much lower level of interactivity and MUCH higher pricetag.</p><p>My point being: Kids will be kids, teens will be teens, and really, people, both parents and others need to watch out for predators and educate kids, their own or not, about the dangers present, and things they can do to mitigate it. (Like starting with: Never meet anyone you know online until you're at least 18, then it's your problem, not your parents. Never give out personal info any closer than your state. Given the number of kids doing this every day in chat, be it on websites, irc, or MMOs I think this one needs to be pounded in.) And: If you're thinking some girl/guy you met online is your true love, uhmm get out more, and only when you've been rejected and ridiculed by half of your local county's suitable aged and gendered population should you consider coming back and letting someone online suck you in. Mind you I personally had as lousy if not lousier luck offline, so I certainly understand the appeal.)<br>Oh and the final and most emphatic one: No matter how desperate you are, nor how desperate the other person is. NEVER EVER allow either one of you to send the other pictures, inappropriate or otherwise, until such time as you've been fixtures in each other's lives for long enough that it's really stupid not to know what the other looks/sounds like. Combined with the 18 one above, this would solve 9/10s of child predator problems online, because honestly if they're still talking to you in 3-10 years (depending on how much of a child you were when you started talking) then they at least apparently have some investment in you as a person and besides if you're over 18 now and they're a paedo, they should find you gross, right?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p><p>Just my 2 cents, subject to devaluation and taxes. Your mileage may vary. Some conditions apply.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you kidding me ?
TEENAGED GIRLS are oft doing the same thing , given some cultural and sexual bias .
The number of girls I knew online between my teens and really early 20 's who were looking up stuff like that was crazy .
Nevermind the number involved in cybersex ( mind you at the time text based gaming was still huge , and MMOs were still 2d affairs with a much lower level of interactivity and MUCH higher pricetag.My point being : Kids will be kids , teens will be teens , and really , people , both parents and others need to watch out for predators and educate kids , their own or not , about the dangers present , and things they can do to mitigate it .
( Like starting with : Never meet anyone you know online until you 're at least 18 , then it 's your problem , not your parents .
Never give out personal info any closer than your state .
Given the number of kids doing this every day in chat , be it on websites , irc , or MMOs I think this one needs to be pounded in .
) And : If you 're thinking some girl/guy you met online is your true love , uhmm get out more , and only when you 've been rejected and ridiculed by half of your local county 's suitable aged and gendered population should you consider coming back and letting someone online suck you in .
Mind you I personally had as lousy if not lousier luck offline , so I certainly understand the appeal .
) Oh and the final and most emphatic one : No matter how desperate you are , nor how desperate the other person is .
NEVER EVER allow either one of you to send the other pictures , inappropriate or otherwise , until such time as you 've been fixtures in each other 's lives for long enough that it 's really stupid not to know what the other looks/sounds like .
Combined with the 18 one above , this would solve 9/10s of child predator problems online , because honestly if they 're still talking to you in 3-10 years ( depending on how much of a child you were when you started talking ) then they at least apparently have some investment in you as a person and besides if you 're over 18 now and they 're a paedo , they should find you gross , right ?
: DJust my 2 cents , subject to devaluation and taxes .
Your mileage may vary .
Some conditions apply .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you kidding me?
TEENAGED GIRLS are oft doing the same thing, given some cultural and sexual bias.
The number of girls I knew online between my teens and really early 20's who were looking up stuff like that was crazy.
Nevermind the number involved in cybersex (mind you at the time text based gaming was still huge, and MMOs were still 2d affairs with a much lower level of interactivity and MUCH higher pricetag.My point being: Kids will be kids, teens will be teens, and really, people, both parents and others need to watch out for predators and educate kids, their own or not, about the dangers present, and things they can do to mitigate it.
(Like starting with: Never meet anyone you know online until you're at least 18, then it's your problem, not your parents.
Never give out personal info any closer than your state.
Given the number of kids doing this every day in chat, be it on websites, irc, or MMOs I think this one needs to be pounded in.
) And: If you're thinking some girl/guy you met online is your true love, uhmm get out more, and only when you've been rejected and ridiculed by half of your local county's suitable aged and gendered population should you consider coming back and letting someone online suck you in.
Mind you I personally had as lousy if not lousier luck offline, so I certainly understand the appeal.
)Oh and the final and most emphatic one: No matter how desperate you are, nor how desperate the other person is.
NEVER EVER allow either one of you to send the other pictures, inappropriate or otherwise, until such time as you've been fixtures in each other's lives for long enough that it's really stupid not to know what the other looks/sounds like.
Combined with the 18 one above, this would solve 9/10s of child predator problems online, because honestly if they're still talking to you in 3-10 years (depending on how much of a child you were when you started talking) then they at least apparently have some investment in you as a person and besides if you're over 18 now and they're a paedo, they should find you gross, right?
:DJust my 2 cents, subject to devaluation and taxes.
Your mileage may vary.
Some conditions apply.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394410</id>
	<title>Age verification</title>
	<author>Adrian Lopez</author>
	<datestamp>1260440700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the issue of kids faking their birth date after being initially rejected, <a href="http://www.gamepolitics.com/2009/12/10/ftc-virtual-worlds-offer-real-explicit-content-minors" title="gamepolitics.com">Game Politics</a> [gamepolitics.com] said:</p><blockquote><div><p>"... half of these worlds did not accept kids who re-registered on the same computer using a modified birth date."</p></div></blockquote><p>I responded:</p><blockquote><div><p>I presume this means these systems would also reject adults who try to re-register (either after entering the wrong date by accident, or because they have kids who've unsuccessfully tried to register on the same computer)? I hope such a system doesn't ever become law; it seems like such a terrible idea, especially considering how silly the "problem" really is.</p><p>The FTC should have better things to worry about than explict content and kids not being segregated from adults.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the issue of kids faking their birth date after being initially rejected , Game Politics [ gamepolitics.com ] said : " ... half of these worlds did not accept kids who re-registered on the same computer using a modified birth date .
" I responded : I presume this means these systems would also reject adults who try to re-register ( either after entering the wrong date by accident , or because they have kids who 've unsuccessfully tried to register on the same computer ) ?
I hope such a system does n't ever become law ; it seems like such a terrible idea , especially considering how silly the " problem " really is.The FTC should have better things to worry about than explict content and kids not being segregated from adults .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the issue of kids faking their birth date after being initially rejected, Game Politics [gamepolitics.com] said:"... half of these worlds did not accept kids who re-registered on the same computer using a modified birth date.
"I responded:I presume this means these systems would also reject adults who try to re-register (either after entering the wrong date by accident, or because they have kids who've unsuccessfully tried to register on the same computer)?
I hope such a system doesn't ever become law; it seems like such a terrible idea, especially considering how silly the "problem" really is.The FTC should have better things to worry about than explict content and kids not being segregated from adults.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398024</id>
	<title>Re:Prevent Beneficial Interaction</title>
	<author>Alarindris</author>
	<datestamp>1260460620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Great point.  Interesting story I have to add.<br> <br>

I used to run a WoW guild.  Everyone in the guild was between 20 and 40.  Or so we thought.  Our kickass bear tank that we had for months, revealed that he was 13.  We hadn't heard him on vent, so we were just dumbfounded.  Very polite, mature, organised, and punctual.  Guess what?<br> <br>

He was home schooled.  One of the best youngsters I've met TBH.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Great point .
Interesting story I have to add .
I used to run a WoW guild .
Everyone in the guild was between 20 and 40 .
Or so we thought .
Our kickass bear tank that we had for months , revealed that he was 13 .
We had n't heard him on vent , so we were just dumbfounded .
Very polite , mature , organised , and punctual .
Guess what ?
He was home schooled .
One of the best youngsters I 've met TBH .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great point.
Interesting story I have to add.
I used to run a WoW guild.
Everyone in the guild was between 20 and 40.
Or so we thought.
Our kickass bear tank that we had for months, revealed that he was 13.
We hadn't heard him on vent, so we were just dumbfounded.
Very polite, mature, organised, and punctual.
Guess what?
He was home schooled.
One of the best youngsters I've met TBH.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393430</id>
	<title>Parents need to control online access</title>
	<author>Interoperable</author>
	<datestamp>1260436680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Children just can't be left unsupervised on the internet until they are old enough to make proper decisions. I don't understand why parents (and governments) feel that the internet needs to be made child-proof; it just isn't and it never will be. Computers need to be left in common rooms with access restricted whenever the parents aren't home.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Children just ca n't be left unsupervised on the internet until they are old enough to make proper decisions .
I do n't understand why parents ( and governments ) feel that the internet needs to be made child-proof ; it just is n't and it never will be .
Computers need to be left in common rooms with access restricted whenever the parents are n't home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Children just can't be left unsupervised on the internet until they are old enough to make proper decisions.
I don't understand why parents (and governments) feel that the internet needs to be made child-proof; it just isn't and it never will be.
Computers need to be left in common rooms with access restricted whenever the parents aren't home.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394358</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>psYchotic87</author>
	<datestamp>1260440580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stop overreacting.<br>
There are three kind of people when it comes to what they first think when they see an article like this:
<ol>
<li>the kind that thinks it's about protecting the young (prepubescent) kids.<br>
They tend to agree with the proposed measures, and they usually get upset when someone of the second category is upset about restricting the "kids" they think the article refers to</li><li>the kind that thinks it's about restricting the right of exploring and learning the world around them teenagers should have<br>
They tend to disagree with the proposed measures, and they usually get upset when someone of the first category is upset about them being upset about restricting the "kids" they think the article refers to (phew... that wasn't so hard now, was it?)</li><li>the kind that reads the article and gets upset when the first two categories rant.</li></ol><p>
I must admit, I'm usually in the second category. However, my point remains: chillax, bro!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop overreacting .
There are three kind of people when it comes to what they first think when they see an article like this : the kind that thinks it 's about protecting the young ( prepubescent ) kids .
They tend to agree with the proposed measures , and they usually get upset when someone of the second category is upset about restricting the " kids " they think the article refers tothe kind that thinks it 's about restricting the right of exploring and learning the world around them teenagers should have They tend to disagree with the proposed measures , and they usually get upset when someone of the first category is upset about them being upset about restricting the " kids " they think the article refers to ( phew... that was n't so hard now , was it ?
) the kind that reads the article and gets upset when the first two categories rant .
I must admit , I 'm usually in the second category .
However , my point remains : chillax , bro !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop overreacting.
There are three kind of people when it comes to what they first think when they see an article like this:

the kind that thinks it's about protecting the young (prepubescent) kids.
They tend to agree with the proposed measures, and they usually get upset when someone of the second category is upset about restricting the "kids" they think the article refers tothe kind that thinks it's about restricting the right of exploring and learning the world around them teenagers should have
They tend to disagree with the proposed measures, and they usually get upset when someone of the first category is upset about them being upset about restricting the "kids" they think the article refers to (phew... that wasn't so hard now, was it?
)the kind that reads the article and gets upset when the first two categories rant.
I must admit, I'm usually in the second category.
However, my point remains: chillax, bro!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394262</id>
	<title>Re:Keep the kids away from the rest of us</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260440160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed, kids should also be keep off youtube. So so fucking sick of seeing those idiot ME TOO video in the recently posted.<br>They should be keep off the net altogether!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed , kids should also be keep off youtube .
So so fucking sick of seeing those idiot ME TOO video in the recently posted.They should be keep off the net altogether !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed, kids should also be keep off youtube.
So so fucking sick of seeing those idiot ME TOO video in the recently posted.They should be keep off the net altogether!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395514</id>
	<title>Re:No such thing as bad words.</title>
	<author>Alpha830RulZ</author>
	<datestamp>1260444540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Preach it, brother.  I have done the same with my kids.  Further, we've had many conversations around the notion that the religious factions in the US have made talk of sex 'dirty' when it really is simply a natural, pleasurable act that unfortunately can also have some unfortunate side effects (STD, pregnancy, heartbreak).  I've told them that I don't particularly think porn is anything that unusually evil, and I don't spend a single minute worrying about them finding some 'bad' place on the internet.  As a result, we're able to be pretty open about it, they don't seem to be hung about it, and thus far, at 14 and 17, we've had no issues.</p><p>A couple of generations ago, people learned about sex by seeing it in the barnyard, or by hearing their parents across the room before we were all well enough off to have separate bedrooms.  It's only in recent years that people have been able to pretend that sex doesn't happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Preach it , brother .
I have done the same with my kids .
Further , we 've had many conversations around the notion that the religious factions in the US have made talk of sex 'dirty ' when it really is simply a natural , pleasurable act that unfortunately can also have some unfortunate side effects ( STD , pregnancy , heartbreak ) .
I 've told them that I do n't particularly think porn is anything that unusually evil , and I do n't spend a single minute worrying about them finding some 'bad ' place on the internet .
As a result , we 're able to be pretty open about it , they do n't seem to be hung about it , and thus far , at 14 and 17 , we 've had no issues.A couple of generations ago , people learned about sex by seeing it in the barnyard , or by hearing their parents across the room before we were all well enough off to have separate bedrooms .
It 's only in recent years that people have been able to pretend that sex does n't happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Preach it, brother.
I have done the same with my kids.
Further, we've had many conversations around the notion that the religious factions in the US have made talk of sex 'dirty' when it really is simply a natural, pleasurable act that unfortunately can also have some unfortunate side effects (STD, pregnancy, heartbreak).
I've told them that I don't particularly think porn is anything that unusually evil, and I don't spend a single minute worrying about them finding some 'bad' place on the internet.
As a result, we're able to be pretty open about it, they don't seem to be hung about it, and thus far, at 14 and 17, we've had no issues.A couple of generations ago, people learned about sex by seeing it in the barnyard, or by hearing their parents across the room before we were all well enough off to have separate bedrooms.
It's only in recent years that people have been able to pretend that sex doesn't happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394166</id>
	<title>Moderation of Chat in Games like WoW is minimal</title>
	<author>flythebike</author>
	<datestamp>1260439680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've enjoyed playing WoW for several years and during that time I've seen things like people typing the word Anal and then linking a character skill, such as the warrior ability Rampage. I've seen this go in in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/2 trade chat, which is visible in all cities, for as long as it is 'funny', which can be about 30 minutes. No moderation is done and to get someone in trouble you have to open a ticket and complain. This went on across many different servers and lasted for months before I heard of anyone getting banned for it. Profanity is tossed around rather frequently as well.

In other words, it is basically just like the real world, which it is basically futile to try to protect kids from. My concern is simply for parents who are naive about what their kid is getting into. I personally don't see a huge problem with this. I was a latch key kid, found my dad's stash of Hustler mags at an early age, and I'm a normal adult with a young family etc. I rode my bicycle all over town, bought cigarettes from a machine, yada yada yada.

I remember in college I learned to prey upon girls who had been aggressively sheltered all their lives. Once they got to college they were just looking for a guy to go crazy with. I was determined to be that guy for as many beautiful young women as I could find. So really, as a parent, ask yourself, is it really the best thing to own a helicopter?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've enjoyed playing WoW for several years and during that time I 've seen things like people typing the word Anal and then linking a character skill , such as the warrior ability Rampage .
I 've seen this go in in /2 trade chat , which is visible in all cities , for as long as it is 'funny ' , which can be about 30 minutes .
No moderation is done and to get someone in trouble you have to open a ticket and complain .
This went on across many different servers and lasted for months before I heard of anyone getting banned for it .
Profanity is tossed around rather frequently as well .
In other words , it is basically just like the real world , which it is basically futile to try to protect kids from .
My concern is simply for parents who are naive about what their kid is getting into .
I personally do n't see a huge problem with this .
I was a latch key kid , found my dad 's stash of Hustler mags at an early age , and I 'm a normal adult with a young family etc .
I rode my bicycle all over town , bought cigarettes from a machine , yada yada yada .
I remember in college I learned to prey upon girls who had been aggressively sheltered all their lives .
Once they got to college they were just looking for a guy to go crazy with .
I was determined to be that guy for as many beautiful young women as I could find .
So really , as a parent , ask yourself , is it really the best thing to own a helicopter ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've enjoyed playing WoW for several years and during that time I've seen things like people typing the word Anal and then linking a character skill, such as the warrior ability Rampage.
I've seen this go in in /2 trade chat, which is visible in all cities, for as long as it is 'funny', which can be about 30 minutes.
No moderation is done and to get someone in trouble you have to open a ticket and complain.
This went on across many different servers and lasted for months before I heard of anyone getting banned for it.
Profanity is tossed around rather frequently as well.
In other words, it is basically just like the real world, which it is basically futile to try to protect kids from.
My concern is simply for parents who are naive about what their kid is getting into.
I personally don't see a huge problem with this.
I was a latch key kid, found my dad's stash of Hustler mags at an early age, and I'm a normal adult with a young family etc.
I rode my bicycle all over town, bought cigarettes from a machine, yada yada yada.
I remember in college I learned to prey upon girls who had been aggressively sheltered all their lives.
Once they got to college they were just looking for a guy to go crazy with.
I was determined to be that guy for as many beautiful young women as I could find.
So really, as a parent, ask yourself, is it really the best thing to own a helicopter?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393958</id>
	<title>Re:No such thing as bad words.</title>
	<author>gapagos</author>
	<datestamp>1260438660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mod parent up insightful.<br>I have a hard time understanding why parents can't just teach their kids to be RESPONSIBLE and be aware that some things are inappropriate in certain contexts, but it doesn't mean their existence should be denied.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent up insightful.I have a hard time understanding why parents ca n't just teach their kids to be RESPONSIBLE and be aware that some things are inappropriate in certain contexts , but it does n't mean their existence should be denied .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent up insightful.I have a hard time understanding why parents can't just teach their kids to be RESPONSIBLE and be aware that some things are inappropriate in certain contexts, but it doesn't mean their existence should be denied.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393256</id>
	<title>true in the real world, too</title>
	<author>loshwomp</author>
	<datestamp>1260436020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[...] minors have access to explicit content via online virtual worlds [...]</p></div><p>Minors have access to "explicit" content in the real world, too.  How is this any different?  Are these concerns merely puritanical in nature, or is there evidence that this is actually harmful?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ ... ] minors have access to explicit content via online virtual worlds [ ... ] Minors have access to " explicit " content in the real world , too .
How is this any different ?
Are these concerns merely puritanical in nature , or is there evidence that this is actually harmful ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[...] minors have access to explicit content via online virtual worlds [...]Minors have access to "explicit" content in the real world, too.
How is this any different?
Are these concerns merely puritanical in nature, or is there evidence that this is actually harmful?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30406366</id>
	<title>Re:No such thing as bad words.</title>
	<author>trenton</author>
	<datestamp>1260523500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I couldn't agree more. Along the same lines, it's words that are conveying an idea.... and it's that idea that is appropriate or not. Whether a person says penis, dick, scholong -- or grabs his crotch -- the idea is conveyed. That's why I think bleeping out profanity in TV shows is so lame. The concept of swearing has been conveyed. The fact that you didn't hear it is irrelevant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I could n't agree more .
Along the same lines , it 's words that are conveying an idea.... and it 's that idea that is appropriate or not .
Whether a person says penis , dick , scholong -- or grabs his crotch -- the idea is conveyed .
That 's why I think bleeping out profanity in TV shows is so lame .
The concept of swearing has been conveyed .
The fact that you did n't hear it is irrelevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I couldn't agree more.
Along the same lines, it's words that are conveying an idea.... and it's that idea that is appropriate or not.
Whether a person says penis, dick, scholong -- or grabs his crotch -- the idea is conveyed.
That's why I think bleeping out profanity in TV shows is so lame.
The concept of swearing has been conveyed.
The fact that you didn't hear it is irrelevant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393080</id>
	<title>Re:Or parents...</title>
	<author>Narpak</author>
	<datestamp>1260478620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Or parents could be parents. Don't want you kids looking at something? Act as the filter don't let them buy/play games that expose them to things you don't want 'em to see....</p></div><p>Or better yet lobby for introducing mandatory implantation of filter chips directly into children's brain; tracking their movements, emotions and thoughts. That way bad and anti-social behaviour can be punished with electroshocks immediately. Remember it is all about keeping our children safe!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or parents could be parents .
Do n't want you kids looking at something ?
Act as the filter do n't let them buy/play games that expose them to things you do n't want 'em to see....Or better yet lobby for introducing mandatory implantation of filter chips directly into children 's brain ; tracking their movements , emotions and thoughts .
That way bad and anti-social behaviour can be punished with electroshocks immediately .
Remember it is all about keeping our children safe !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or parents could be parents.
Don't want you kids looking at something?
Act as the filter don't let them buy/play games that expose them to things you don't want 'em to see....Or better yet lobby for introducing mandatory implantation of filter chips directly into children's brain; tracking their movements, emotions and thoughts.
That way bad and anti-social behaviour can be punished with electroshocks immediately.
Remember it is all about keeping our children safe!
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393116</id>
	<title>You may have a bigger problem...</title>
	<author>LordDax</author>
	<datestamp>1260478740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If they can figure out how to get an MMO up installed, port forwarded and running with good FPS and low lat, you might want to also try asking your ISP to not allow them to download anything else to "My-book-reports-and-class-notes" which happens to be over 1gig in size...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they can figure out how to get an MMO up installed , port forwarded and running with good FPS and low lat , you might want to also try asking your ISP to not allow them to download anything else to " My-book-reports-and-class-notes " which happens to be over 1gig in size.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they can figure out how to get an MMO up installed, port forwarded and running with good FPS and low lat, you might want to also try asking your ISP to not allow them to download anything else to "My-book-reports-and-class-notes" which happens to be over 1gig in size...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30420334</id>
	<title>Funny stuff</title>
	<author>rogerrogerwil</author>
	<datestamp>1260642600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Awesome. The Government is finding another way to step in and take power. Next thing you know the EPA is going to try and get control of all the water. Oh wait, they already are.
<a href="http://www.fabricsofas.org/" title="fabricsofas.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.fabricsofas.org/</a> [fabricsofas.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Awesome .
The Government is finding another way to step in and take power .
Next thing you know the EPA is going to try and get control of all the water .
Oh wait , they already are .
http : //www.fabricsofas.org/ [ fabricsofas.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Awesome.
The Government is finding another way to step in and take power.
Next thing you know the EPA is going to try and get control of all the water.
Oh wait, they already are.
http://www.fabricsofas.org/ [fabricsofas.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397776</id>
	<title>Re:No surprise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260458160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a few years, I was one of those 'specially-trained moderators' that the summary briefly mentions at the end. I was working for a company that produced and ran moderated chat services for companies that wanted to have users chatting to each other, but reduce their liability if anything went legally wrong. We were a 24 hour office employing around 60 casual staff, half a dozen supervisors, and paid everybody decently well for what they did.</p><p>The thing is; everybody knew we were, essentially, just there to make things look good. Most of us did our job well, but most also eventually stopped caring and left. Everybody doing illegal things were doing it in 'private chat', and they'd go there as soon as they were warned. Sure, we picked up quite a few seriously-illegal activities over the years and got some people arrested, but we weren't actually stemming the flow at all.</p><p>Even in the under-18 services - where there was no private chat,where people were banned instantly for using a few rude words, posting a phone number or email, and where even saying you'd just turned 18 the day before would get you permanently thrown out - we weren't helping the situation. They were still managing to trade details, swap dirty pictures, and meet up for whatever kind of sexual acts they felt like. Human moderation will always have a lag of between a few seconds and a minute, and that is more than enough time for things to go horribly wrong.</p><p>We can protect children from some adults, but that's really all we can do. We can't protect them from what they're actively searching for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a few years , I was one of those 'specially-trained moderators ' that the summary briefly mentions at the end .
I was working for a company that produced and ran moderated chat services for companies that wanted to have users chatting to each other , but reduce their liability if anything went legally wrong .
We were a 24 hour office employing around 60 casual staff , half a dozen supervisors , and paid everybody decently well for what they did.The thing is ; everybody knew we were , essentially , just there to make things look good .
Most of us did our job well , but most also eventually stopped caring and left .
Everybody doing illegal things were doing it in 'private chat ' , and they 'd go there as soon as they were warned .
Sure , we picked up quite a few seriously-illegal activities over the years and got some people arrested , but we were n't actually stemming the flow at all.Even in the under-18 services - where there was no private chat,where people were banned instantly for using a few rude words , posting a phone number or email , and where even saying you 'd just turned 18 the day before would get you permanently thrown out - we were n't helping the situation .
They were still managing to trade details , swap dirty pictures , and meet up for whatever kind of sexual acts they felt like .
Human moderation will always have a lag of between a few seconds and a minute , and that is more than enough time for things to go horribly wrong.We can protect children from some adults , but that 's really all we can do .
We ca n't protect them from what they 're actively searching for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a few years, I was one of those 'specially-trained moderators' that the summary briefly mentions at the end.
I was working for a company that produced and ran moderated chat services for companies that wanted to have users chatting to each other, but reduce their liability if anything went legally wrong.
We were a 24 hour office employing around 60 casual staff, half a dozen supervisors, and paid everybody decently well for what they did.The thing is; everybody knew we were, essentially, just there to make things look good.
Most of us did our job well, but most also eventually stopped caring and left.
Everybody doing illegal things were doing it in 'private chat', and they'd go there as soon as they were warned.
Sure, we picked up quite a few seriously-illegal activities over the years and got some people arrested, but we weren't actually stemming the flow at all.Even in the under-18 services - where there was no private chat,where people were banned instantly for using a few rude words, posting a phone number or email, and where even saying you'd just turned 18 the day before would get you permanently thrown out - we weren't helping the situation.
They were still managing to trade details, swap dirty pictures, and meet up for whatever kind of sexual acts they felt like.
Human moderation will always have a lag of between a few seconds and a minute, and that is more than enough time for things to go horribly wrong.We can protect children from some adults, but that's really all we can do.
We can't protect them from what they're actively searching for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30402998</id>
	<title>Re:As a parent of a 7 year old ....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260552420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You sound like an asshat.  3 year olds get trampled by overfriendly dogs and are quick to taste-test new objects and substances.. and yes while I would encourage my imaginary 3 year old child to play with older kids and my older kids to play with a 3 year old, I wouldn't be all quotation marks when they understandably didn't want to play with someone so far outside of their age group, it's fairly natural.</p><p>As far as low income people having more common sense.  I think that if you did a court records search on 10 people in the suburbs and 10 people in the hood, you'd find DUIs and speeding tickets all over in both groups... but the rich people would overall have fewer offenses stemming from horrifically bad judgement (before you talk about lawyers... dropped charges and the like still show on your record.</p><p>
&nbsp; Furthermore the whole too busy to hover over their kids.. maybe the hoods in my completely shitty city are worse.. but believe me, there isn't a whole lot of busy people waddling around (and they do waddle.. their fatness a side effect of their stupidity and lack of control) in mine.</p><p>I think you just have bad judgement dude.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You sound like an asshat .
3 year olds get trampled by overfriendly dogs and are quick to taste-test new objects and substances.. and yes while I would encourage my imaginary 3 year old child to play with older kids and my older kids to play with a 3 year old , I would n't be all quotation marks when they understandably did n't want to play with someone so far outside of their age group , it 's fairly natural.As far as low income people having more common sense .
I think that if you did a court records search on 10 people in the suburbs and 10 people in the hood , you 'd find DUIs and speeding tickets all over in both groups... but the rich people would overall have fewer offenses stemming from horrifically bad judgement ( before you talk about lawyers... dropped charges and the like still show on your record .
  Furthermore the whole too busy to hover over their kids.. maybe the hoods in my completely shitty city are worse.. but believe me , there is n't a whole lot of busy people waddling around ( and they do waddle.. their fatness a side effect of their stupidity and lack of control ) in mine.I think you just have bad judgement dude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You sound like an asshat.
3 year olds get trampled by overfriendly dogs and are quick to taste-test new objects and substances.. and yes while I would encourage my imaginary 3 year old child to play with older kids and my older kids to play with a 3 year old, I wouldn't be all quotation marks when they understandably didn't want to play with someone so far outside of their age group, it's fairly natural.As far as low income people having more common sense.
I think that if you did a court records search on 10 people in the suburbs and 10 people in the hood, you'd find DUIs and speeding tickets all over in both groups... but the rich people would overall have fewer offenses stemming from horrifically bad judgement (before you talk about lawyers... dropped charges and the like still show on your record.
  Furthermore the whole too busy to hover over their kids.. maybe the hoods in my completely shitty city are worse.. but believe me, there isn't a whole lot of busy people waddling around (and they do waddle.. their fatness a side effect of their stupidity and lack of control) in mine.I think you just have bad judgement dude.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394716</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982</id>
	<title>Or parents...</title>
	<author>i.r.id10t</author>
	<datestamp>1260478200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or parents could be parents.  Don't want you kids looking at something? Act as the filter don't let them buy/play games that expose them to things you don't want 'em to see....</p><p>Take some responsibility here folks!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or parents could be parents .
Do n't want you kids looking at something ?
Act as the filter do n't let them buy/play games that expose them to things you do n't want 'em to see....Take some responsibility here folks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or parents could be parents.
Don't want you kids looking at something?
Act as the filter don't let them buy/play games that expose them to things you don't want 'em to see....Take some responsibility here folks!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393714</id>
	<title>Kids aren't exposed to Barrens chat...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260437700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All the kiddies play alliance<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All the kiddies play alliance : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the kiddies play alliance :P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396050</id>
	<title>Re:No surprise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260446640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>***You know what they're really missing here? Teenaged boys and girls are looking for explicit content and you'll never be able to stop them from finding it.</p><p>Fixed that for you. Fixed many a PC of people with only girls that browse for porn and get trojans. Unlike boys they tend not to hide their tracks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* * * You know what they 're really missing here ?
Teenaged boys and girls are looking for explicit content and you 'll never be able to stop them from finding it.Fixed that for you .
Fixed many a PC of people with only girls that browse for porn and get trojans .
Unlike boys they tend not to hide their tracks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>***You know what they're really missing here?
Teenaged boys and girls are looking for explicit content and you'll never be able to stop them from finding it.Fixed that for you.
Fixed many a PC of people with only girls that browse for porn and get trojans.
Unlike boys they tend not to hide their tracks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30399456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393690
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30404928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30406366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30399996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398874
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394168
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30402998
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30400160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30399786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_10_1922250_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393888
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393116
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393714
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394692
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396194
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394106
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30392982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393326
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30399456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393080
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393134
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397714
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393586
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396972
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394168
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394358
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395482
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393690
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394306
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30399786
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393498
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393120
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394124
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394132
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397666
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398372
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393530
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395196
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394342
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396878
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396364
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30406366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393962
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394512
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393494
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398874
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30399996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393710
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393388
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30400160
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30396050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30397776
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30398024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393988
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30404928
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395126
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394262
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394350
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30393760
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30394716
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30402998
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_10_1922250.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_10_1922250.30395028
</commentlist>
</conversation>
