<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_22_0233255</id>
	<title>The Chinese Route To a Web Free of Porn</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1261502160000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Despite repeated 'for the children' campaigns, the Western Web as a whole has provided little or no isolation of pornography. This is why the Chinese are now attempting to march to a place where no country has been before: <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BF2MW20091216">a Web without porn</a>. Recent regulations have included closing down 'vulgar' mobile sites, disconnecting 'obscene' servers, and restricting domain registrations. Yet the breaking news for Monday is that China is planning to enforce a whitelist on foreign domains: in particular, any e-commerce will have to register locally and obey Chinese law before they get whitelisted. Domains will otherwise be 'irresolvable' to Chinese Internet users. Meanwhile, the government is promoting this campaign heavily, calling it a 'fresh start.' It seems the Chinese may have to do without the Internet, before they can rid it of porn."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Despite repeated 'for the children ' campaigns , the Western Web as a whole has provided little or no isolation of pornography .
This is why the Chinese are now attempting to march to a place where no country has been before : a Web without porn .
Recent regulations have included closing down 'vulgar ' mobile sites , disconnecting 'obscene ' servers , and restricting domain registrations .
Yet the breaking news for Monday is that China is planning to enforce a whitelist on foreign domains : in particular , any e-commerce will have to register locally and obey Chinese law before they get whitelisted .
Domains will otherwise be 'irresolvable ' to Chinese Internet users .
Meanwhile , the government is promoting this campaign heavily , calling it a 'fresh start .
' It seems the Chinese may have to do without the Internet , before they can rid it of porn .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Despite repeated 'for the children' campaigns, the Western Web as a whole has provided little or no isolation of pornography.
This is why the Chinese are now attempting to march to a place where no country has been before: a Web without porn.
Recent regulations have included closing down 'vulgar' mobile sites, disconnecting 'obscene' servers, and restricting domain registrations.
Yet the breaking news for Monday is that China is planning to enforce a whitelist on foreign domains: in particular, any e-commerce will have to register locally and obey Chinese law before they get whitelisted.
Domains will otherwise be 'irresolvable' to Chinese Internet users.
Meanwhile, the government is promoting this campaign heavily, calling it a 'fresh start.
' It seems the Chinese may have to do without the Internet, before they can rid it of porn.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520950</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>grimw</author>
	<datestamp>1261422720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I definitely did read it like that.  I was like, "Wow, the Chinese are pulling a 180!"  Then I read the summary and got a little confused.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I definitely did read it like that .
I was like , " Wow , the Chinese are pulling a 180 !
" Then I read the summary and got a little confused .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I definitely did read it like that.
I was like, "Wow, the Chinese are pulling a 180!
"  Then I read the summary and got a little confused.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30530170</id>
	<title>As Mal would say...</title>
	<author>hallux.sinister</author>
	<datestamp>1261481520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... I am going to grant your greatest wish.  I'm going to show you a web without sin.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... I am going to grant your greatest wish .
I 'm going to show you a web without sin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... I am going to grant your greatest wish.
I'm going to show you a web without sin.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521364</id>
	<title>Re:Join the club, China</title>
	<author>quenda</author>
	<datestamp>1261514820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Australia's censorship is awful but at least it's proposed to be a blacklist not a whitelist.</p></div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... at first. What happens when they find out blacklists don't work?</p><p><tt>Greetings, you have selected a website that has not yet been vetted. To continue you will need to<br>1) declare that to the best of your knowledge the site does not contravene Moral Standards.<br>2) provide you Australia-Card number and password.<br>Substantial penalties apply to false declarations.</tt></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Australia 's censorship is awful but at least it 's proposed to be a blacklist not a whitelist .
... at first .
What happens when they find out blacklists do n't work ? Greetings , you have selected a website that has not yet been vetted .
To continue you will need to1 ) declare that to the best of your knowledge the site does not contravene Moral Standards.2 ) provide you Australia-Card number and password.Substantial penalties apply to false declarations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Australia's censorship is awful but at least it's proposed to be a blacklist not a whitelist.
... at first.
What happens when they find out blacklists don't work?Greetings, you have selected a website that has not yet been vetted.
To continue you will need to1) declare that to the best of your knowledge the site does not contravene Moral Standards.2) provide you Australia-Card number and password.Substantial penalties apply to false declarations.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30529296</id>
	<title>Re:Yea Right, it's all about "Porn."</title>
	<author>Phil\_At\_NHS</author>
	<datestamp>1261477560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the Chinese government thought that giving away free porn would end the criticism of their dealings with Tibet, Taiwan, Tainammen Square, Human rights, etc, they would be handing it out on the streets.  The Chinese govt does not believe in "morals", otherwise they would not have run over innocent unarmed college students in Tiannamen square, would not have secret laws against talking about Tainammen square, or any secret laws and secret courts, all of which are inherently immoral.

Sorry, but you have to be pretty damned niave to believe otherwise.  As a matter of fact, you have to be pretty damned naive to believe anything that comes from that government.

It is nothing more then another layer of control to further oppress those who would otherwise rebel against the evil that is the Chinese government.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the Chinese government thought that giving away free porn would end the criticism of their dealings with Tibet , Taiwan , Tainammen Square , Human rights , etc , they would be handing it out on the streets .
The Chinese govt does not believe in " morals " , otherwise they would not have run over innocent unarmed college students in Tiannamen square , would not have secret laws against talking about Tainammen square , or any secret laws and secret courts , all of which are inherently immoral .
Sorry , but you have to be pretty damned niave to believe otherwise .
As a matter of fact , you have to be pretty damned naive to believe anything that comes from that government .
It is nothing more then another layer of control to further oppress those who would otherwise rebel against the evil that is the Chinese government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the Chinese government thought that giving away free porn would end the criticism of their dealings with Tibet, Taiwan, Tainammen Square, Human rights, etc, they would be handing it out on the streets.
The Chinese govt does not believe in "morals", otherwise they would not have run over innocent unarmed college students in Tiannamen square, would not have secret laws against talking about Tainammen square, or any secret laws and secret courts, all of which are inherently immoral.
Sorry, but you have to be pretty damned niave to believe otherwise.
As a matter of fact, you have to be pretty damned naive to believe anything that comes from that government.
It is nothing more then another layer of control to further oppress those who would otherwise rebel against the evil that is the Chinese government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918</id>
	<title>The Internet as "default-deny"</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1261422300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China (and the rest of the world to a lesser extent) is slowly moving away from the "default accept" ideology of the free, open internet and towards a network where only approved devices can connect.  Slashbots will rave and foam at the mouth about that "censorship is interpreted as damage" meme but it's sadly out of date.  The Chinese can and will control what filth reaches their people.  Sure, VPNs will be there...for a while at least...but the average Zhou won't bother with it.  </p><p>It's hard for a lot of bicoastal Americans to understand - and even more difficult for transnational progressivist Europeans - but the Chinese people really do love their country.  And their country has one government, which is the best government China has ever had.  Ever since Deng Xiaoping ditched university Marxism and took the Communist Party on the capitalist road ("socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious") life has only gotten better in China.  For all the bad press the Chinese government gets, they really are trying to do right, by their own standards.  The problem arises when blinkered Westerners insist on judging China by "universal" standards. In fact, these "universal standards" have their roots in the Enlightenment...which China didn't have.  </p><p>Aaah, kinda lost my point there.  Anyhow, I'm no panda hugger but you simply have to put yourself in their shoes.  A mere seventeen years ago socialism couldn't even provide clean drinking water and now China is the world's largest market for Rolls-Royce automobiles.  This doesn't mean that the Communist Party of China will be relinquishing power anytime soon, though.  They still maintain control over the economy via the allocation and issuance of business licenses and the denial of debilitating foreign influences, such as pornography.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China ( and the rest of the world to a lesser extent ) is slowly moving away from the " default accept " ideology of the free , open internet and towards a network where only approved devices can connect .
Slashbots will rave and foam at the mouth about that " censorship is interpreted as damage " meme but it 's sadly out of date .
The Chinese can and will control what filth reaches their people .
Sure , VPNs will be there...for a while at least...but the average Zhou wo n't bother with it .
It 's hard for a lot of bicoastal Americans to understand - and even more difficult for transnational progressivist Europeans - but the Chinese people really do love their country .
And their country has one government , which is the best government China has ever had .
Ever since Deng Xiaoping ditched university Marxism and took the Communist Party on the capitalist road ( " socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious " ) life has only gotten better in China .
For all the bad press the Chinese government gets , they really are trying to do right , by their own standards .
The problem arises when blinkered Westerners insist on judging China by " universal " standards .
In fact , these " universal standards " have their roots in the Enlightenment...which China did n't have .
Aaah , kinda lost my point there .
Anyhow , I 'm no panda hugger but you simply have to put yourself in their shoes .
A mere seventeen years ago socialism could n't even provide clean drinking water and now China is the world 's largest market for Rolls-Royce automobiles .
This does n't mean that the Communist Party of China will be relinquishing power anytime soon , though .
They still maintain control over the economy via the allocation and issuance of business licenses and the denial of debilitating foreign influences , such as pornography .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China (and the rest of the world to a lesser extent) is slowly moving away from the "default accept" ideology of the free, open internet and towards a network where only approved devices can connect.
Slashbots will rave and foam at the mouth about that "censorship is interpreted as damage" meme but it's sadly out of date.
The Chinese can and will control what filth reaches their people.
Sure, VPNs will be there...for a while at least...but the average Zhou won't bother with it.
It's hard for a lot of bicoastal Americans to understand - and even more difficult for transnational progressivist Europeans - but the Chinese people really do love their country.
And their country has one government, which is the best government China has ever had.
Ever since Deng Xiaoping ditched university Marxism and took the Communist Party on the capitalist road ("socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious") life has only gotten better in China.
For all the bad press the Chinese government gets, they really are trying to do right, by their own standards.
The problem arises when blinkered Westerners insist on judging China by "universal" standards.
In fact, these "universal standards" have their roots in the Enlightenment...which China didn't have.
Aaah, kinda lost my point there.
Anyhow, I'm no panda hugger but you simply have to put yourself in their shoes.
A mere seventeen years ago socialism couldn't even provide clean drinking water and now China is the world's largest market for Rolls-Royce automobiles.
This doesn't mean that the Communist Party of China will be relinquishing power anytime soon, though.
They still maintain control over the economy via the allocation and issuance of business licenses and the denial of debilitating foreign influences, such as pornography.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524036</id>
	<title>I for one would like the opposite.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261499520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I for one would like the opposite. How about nothing but porn when I'm on the internet. I don't want to stumble onto a news site or blog by accident.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one would like the opposite .
How about nothing but porn when I 'm on the internet .
I do n't want to stumble onto a news site or blog by accident .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one would like the opposite.
How about nothing but porn when I'm on the internet.
I don't want to stumble onto a news site or blog by accident.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520826</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261421220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes.  Go to any DVD shop and ask for "huang de DVD" (yellow DVD, in Chinese yellow means porno, think "blue movies").  They have them behind the counter.  They're not that great, mostly Hong Kong and Taiwan actresses.  Pretty generic scenes.  Funny though, all the male pornstars have small cocks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
Go to any DVD shop and ask for " huang de DVD " ( yellow DVD , in Chinese yellow means porno , think " blue movies " ) .
They have them behind the counter .
They 're not that great , mostly Hong Kong and Taiwan actresses .
Pretty generic scenes .
Funny though , all the male pornstars have small cocks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
Go to any DVD shop and ask for "huang de DVD" (yellow DVD, in Chinese yellow means porno, think "blue movies").
They have them behind the counter.
They're not that great, mostly Hong Kong and Taiwan actresses.
Pretty generic scenes.
Funny though, all the male pornstars have small cocks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522022</id>
	<title>Re:Censor this!</title>
	<author>gmhowell</author>
	<datestamp>1261480440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OMFG, that's actually blocked at work...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OMFG , that 's actually blocked at work.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OMFG, that's actually blocked at work...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520904</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>ikono</author>
	<datestamp>1261422120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait, so you are saying that a child's "coming-of-age" porn-look is supervised by a parent? I don't see any difference, other than bringing up the demystification of nudity, between a first peek at people furping on the internet than on a fuzzy VHS or snowy ppv channel...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , so you are saying that a child 's " coming-of-age " porn-look is supervised by a parent ?
I do n't see any difference , other than bringing up the demystification of nudity , between a first peek at people furping on the internet than on a fuzzy VHS or snowy ppv channel.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, so you are saying that a child's "coming-of-age" porn-look is supervised by a parent?
I don't see any difference, other than bringing up the demystification of nudity, between a first peek at people furping on the internet than on a fuzzy VHS or snowy ppv channel...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522616</id>
	<title>This is NOT NEWS!!! The TOPIC IS A TROLL.</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1261489380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, the rule that foreign e-commerce web sites have to register with the Chinese authorities and hosting porn is illegal has been around for many years. It was part of the law when I lived there over 5 years ago, and the "porn" excuse was well known cover for cracking down on politically sensitive issues. Nothing that I can see is new or interesting in this report that was not just as true 5 years ago.</p><p>Moderators are letting a lot of crap slip through these days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , the rule that foreign e-commerce web sites have to register with the Chinese authorities and hosting porn is illegal has been around for many years .
It was part of the law when I lived there over 5 years ago , and the " porn " excuse was well known cover for cracking down on politically sensitive issues .
Nothing that I can see is new or interesting in this report that was not just as true 5 years ago.Moderators are letting a lot of crap slip through these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, the rule that foreign e-commerce web sites have to register with the Chinese authorities and hosting porn is illegal has been around for many years.
It was part of the law when I lived there over 5 years ago, and the "porn" excuse was well known cover for cracking down on politically sensitive issues.
Nothing that I can see is new or interesting in this report that was not just as true 5 years ago.Moderators are letting a lot of crap slip through these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30532812</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>vtstarin</author>
	<datestamp>1261506540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Australia is next in list.

i wish every country follows this</htmltext>
<tokenext>Australia is next in list .
i wish every country follows this</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Australia is next in list.
i wish every country follows this</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522004</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>gmhowell</author>
	<datestamp>1261480200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you watch porn for the cock? Just want to clear that up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you watch porn for the cock ?
Just want to clear that up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you watch porn for the cock?
Just want to clear that up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522466</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261487940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, I really did read it like that.  I was like "free porn!"</p><p>What kind of porn does the average Chinese person prefer?  Porn with Chinese in it or is most of their porn non-Chinese?  (just wondering because they seem to prefer Chinese products when possible but I haven't seen very much Chinese porn)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I really did read it like that .
I was like " free porn !
" What kind of porn does the average Chinese person prefer ?
Porn with Chinese in it or is most of their porn non-Chinese ?
( just wondering because they seem to prefer Chinese products when possible but I have n't seen very much Chinese porn )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I really did read it like that.
I was like "free porn!
"What kind of porn does the average Chinese person prefer?
Porn with Chinese in it or is most of their porn non-Chinese?
(just wondering because they seem to prefer Chinese products when possible but I haven't seen very much Chinese porn)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526676</id>
	<title>Giving the people a target?</title>
	<author>JSBiff</author>
	<datestamp>1261511280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It strikes me that, possibly, one reason for such measures is to give the people a different 'target' for their moral outrage. Evil terrorists. Evil pornographers. Evil communists.</p><p>Once you have the people sufficiently outraged by the 'menace', you can then label anyone you find. 'uncooperative' as the villain du jour, and enact all sorts of measures "the people" wouldn't normally accept (people disappearing without a public trial, censoring the press, monitoring communications, etc).</p><p>As for porno specifically, I'm no anthropologist or historian, but my experience has been that, by and large, people from all over the world, from different religious backgrounds, different cultural backgrounds, frequently have had a cultural bias against promiscuity, and pornography is linked in many people's minds with promiscuity. So, it's easier to start with a bias that people already largely have, and 'inflate' it, than to create a new one from whole cloth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It strikes me that , possibly , one reason for such measures is to give the people a different 'target ' for their moral outrage .
Evil terrorists .
Evil pornographers .
Evil communists.Once you have the people sufficiently outraged by the 'menace ' , you can then label anyone you find .
'uncooperative ' as the villain du jour , and enact all sorts of measures " the people " would n't normally accept ( people disappearing without a public trial , censoring the press , monitoring communications , etc ) .As for porno specifically , I 'm no anthropologist or historian , but my experience has been that , by and large , people from all over the world , from different religious backgrounds , different cultural backgrounds , frequently have had a cultural bias against promiscuity , and pornography is linked in many people 's minds with promiscuity .
So , it 's easier to start with a bias that people already largely have , and 'inflate ' it , than to create a new one from whole cloth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It strikes me that, possibly, one reason for such measures is to give the people a different 'target' for their moral outrage.
Evil terrorists.
Evil pornographers.
Evil communists.Once you have the people sufficiently outraged by the 'menace', you can then label anyone you find.
'uncooperative' as the villain du jour, and enact all sorts of measures "the people" wouldn't normally accept (people disappearing without a public trial, censoring the press, monitoring communications, etc).As for porno specifically, I'm no anthropologist or historian, but my experience has been that, by and large, people from all over the world, from different religious backgrounds, different cultural backgrounds, frequently have had a cultural bias against promiscuity, and pornography is linked in many people's minds with promiscuity.
So, it's easier to start with a bias that people already largely have, and 'inflate' it, than to create a new one from whole cloth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30537030</id>
	<title>Re:The Internet as "default-deny"</title>
	<author>ahabswhale</author>
	<datestamp>1259780340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're confusing love of country with love of government.  They are two very different things.  It's safe to say that Iranians LOVE their country and its rich history but many passionately hate their government.  So, I would find it hard to understand the Chinese loving their government but wouldn't have any difficulty understanding their love of country.  In fact, I know many Chinese DO NOT love their government so please don't try to sell that bullshit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're confusing love of country with love of government .
They are two very different things .
It 's safe to say that Iranians LOVE their country and its rich history but many passionately hate their government .
So , I would find it hard to understand the Chinese loving their government but would n't have any difficulty understanding their love of country .
In fact , I know many Chinese DO NOT love their government so please do n't try to sell that bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're confusing love of country with love of government.
They are two very different things.
It's safe to say that Iranians LOVE their country and its rich history but many passionately hate their government.
So, I would find it hard to understand the Chinese loving their government but wouldn't have any difficulty understanding their love of country.
In fact, I know many Chinese DO NOT love their government so please don't try to sell that bullshit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523236</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261495080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dude, hivemind</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , hivemind</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, hivemind</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521120</id>
	<title>Re:Lies</title>
	<author>foo fighter</author>
	<datestamp>1261425000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mods, this is supposed to be funny and/or flaimbait.</p><p>Wow. Insightful? Really?</p><p>Well played, Anenome, well played.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mods , this is supposed to be funny and/or flaimbait.Wow .
Insightful ? Really ? Well played , Anenome , well played .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mods, this is supposed to be funny and/or flaimbait.Wow.
Insightful? Really?Well played, Anenome, well played.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521158</id>
	<title>hate to state the obvious...but</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> I'm more interested in the porn coming "out" of China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm more interested in the porn coming " out " of China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I'm more interested in the porn coming "out" of China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522818</id>
	<title>Also free...</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1261491660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...of Falun Gong, Chinese democracy advocates and other such irritants.  I'm sure everyone will be relieved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...of Falun Gong , Chinese democracy advocates and other such irritants .
I 'm sure everyone will be relieved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...of Falun Gong, Chinese democracy advocates and other such irritants.
I'm sure everyone will be relieved.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521004</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261423500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>+1</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>+ 1</tokentext>
<sentencetext>+1</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524224</id>
	<title>In other news...</title>
	<author>Xacid</author>
	<datestamp>1261500360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...Titan Rain has completely given up having anything to do with the internet citing that "it is now really, really boring".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...Titan Rain has completely given up having anything to do with the internet citing that " it is now really , really boring " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Titan Rain has completely given up having anything to do with the internet citing that "it is now really, really boring".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523696</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1261497600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When answering accusations by the Catholic Church that our society is obsessed with sex, Stephen Fry turned the allegations around by equating sex with food and stating that the only people obsessed with food are anorexics and the morbidly obese. This, of course, is to say that trying to avoid sex and to not think about it is an extremely unhealthy viewpoint.

<br> <br>I think a lot of the neuroses people have about sex stem from the fact that it is taboo and that we try to shield people from it for as long as possible -- having a healthy and honest relationship to our sexuality will only result in a happier and healthier society. I mean, it is has been statistically shown that abstinence only sex-ed leads to higher rates of teen pregnancy -- why don't we just cut the bullshit and recognize that humans are ALWAYS going to be obsessed with sex, no matter what we do.

<br> <br>The entirety of our bodies and minds exist solely to pass on our genetic information, making sex our prime directive! There is no way that you can undo 3 billion years of this sort of genetic programming, and I see no good reason that we ought to try.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When answering accusations by the Catholic Church that our society is obsessed with sex , Stephen Fry turned the allegations around by equating sex with food and stating that the only people obsessed with food are anorexics and the morbidly obese .
This , of course , is to say that trying to avoid sex and to not think about it is an extremely unhealthy viewpoint .
I think a lot of the neuroses people have about sex stem from the fact that it is taboo and that we try to shield people from it for as long as possible -- having a healthy and honest relationship to our sexuality will only result in a happier and healthier society .
I mean , it is has been statistically shown that abstinence only sex-ed leads to higher rates of teen pregnancy -- why do n't we just cut the bullshit and recognize that humans are ALWAYS going to be obsessed with sex , no matter what we do .
The entirety of our bodies and minds exist solely to pass on our genetic information , making sex our prime directive !
There is no way that you can undo 3 billion years of this sort of genetic programming , and I see no good reason that we ought to try .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When answering accusations by the Catholic Church that our society is obsessed with sex, Stephen Fry turned the allegations around by equating sex with food and stating that the only people obsessed with food are anorexics and the morbidly obese.
This, of course, is to say that trying to avoid sex and to not think about it is an extremely unhealthy viewpoint.
I think a lot of the neuroses people have about sex stem from the fact that it is taboo and that we try to shield people from it for as long as possible -- having a healthy and honest relationship to our sexuality will only result in a happier and healthier society.
I mean, it is has been statistically shown that abstinence only sex-ed leads to higher rates of teen pregnancy -- why don't we just cut the bullshit and recognize that humans are ALWAYS going to be obsessed with sex, no matter what we do.
The entirety of our bodies and minds exist solely to pass on our genetic information, making sex our prime directive!
There is no way that you can undo 3 billion years of this sort of genetic programming, and I see no good reason that we ought to try.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766</id>
	<title>Conspiracy, or just idiocy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261420500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So China institutes a one-child-per-family policy. Due to social and traditional reasons, male children are far preferred. As a result, the population is already skewed male, and continuing to trend that way.</p><p>Now China's blocking the porn? How do they plan on dealing with the ah, excess males? Send them off to war?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So China institutes a one-child-per-family policy .
Due to social and traditional reasons , male children are far preferred .
As a result , the population is already skewed male , and continuing to trend that way.Now China 's blocking the porn ?
How do they plan on dealing with the ah , excess males ?
Send them off to war ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So China institutes a one-child-per-family policy.
Due to social and traditional reasons, male children are far preferred.
As a result, the population is already skewed male, and continuing to trend that way.Now China's blocking the porn?
How do they plan on dealing with the ah, excess males?
Send them off to war?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522794</id>
	<title>Why The West Doesn't Do This</title>
	<author>ddillman</author>
	<datestamp>1261491360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's simple, really.  We could have a web free of porn, too, if we were willing to give up free speech and expression of ideas.  Once you start censoring 'porn' (which is defined, how, exactly?) then it's easy to start censoring other things as well.  Western culture, at least the US/Canada, values the free speech idea more than the porn-free possibility.  I think most Australians also value free speech, but I wonder about the people they seem to elect...   I don't know about the average Chinese person.  I think they've lived with totalitarian communist rule for so long, they're used to the government controlling many aspects of their lives, and as long as they're being controlled, they might as well get the 'benefit' of not having to deal with 'porn' online.  Of course, that doesn't speak to what they need to do if they WANT 'porn'...</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's simple , really .
We could have a web free of porn , too , if we were willing to give up free speech and expression of ideas .
Once you start censoring 'porn ' ( which is defined , how , exactly ?
) then it 's easy to start censoring other things as well .
Western culture , at least the US/Canada , values the free speech idea more than the porn-free possibility .
I think most Australians also value free speech , but I wonder about the people they seem to elect... I do n't know about the average Chinese person .
I think they 've lived with totalitarian communist rule for so long , they 're used to the government controlling many aspects of their lives , and as long as they 're being controlled , they might as well get the 'benefit ' of not having to deal with 'porn ' online .
Of course , that does n't speak to what they need to do if they WANT 'porn'.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's simple, really.
We could have a web free of porn, too, if we were willing to give up free speech and expression of ideas.
Once you start censoring 'porn' (which is defined, how, exactly?
) then it's easy to start censoring other things as well.
Western culture, at least the US/Canada, values the free speech idea more than the porn-free possibility.
I think most Australians also value free speech, but I wonder about the people they seem to elect...   I don't know about the average Chinese person.
I think they've lived with totalitarian communist rule for so long, they're used to the government controlling many aspects of their lives, and as long as they're being controlled, they might as well get the 'benefit' of not having to deal with 'porn' online.
Of course, that doesn't speak to what they need to do if they WANT 'porn'...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524884</id>
	<title>Re:The Internet as "default-deny"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261503180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A woman can love her lying, cheating, stealing husband too, but that doesn't make the relationship healthy, it just means she's deluded or foolish. So too with a government and its citizens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A woman can love her lying , cheating , stealing husband too , but that does n't make the relationship healthy , it just means she 's deluded or foolish .
So too with a government and its citizens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A woman can love her lying, cheating, stealing husband too, but that doesn't make the relationship healthy, it just means she's deluded or foolish.
So too with a government and its citizens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521322</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Whiteox</author>
	<datestamp>1261514220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Type "vagina" into your google search bar. Click on the first link. BAM!</p></div><p>So it came up with a Wikipedia entry and a pic. I note that it was hairless but retouched. It's not pornographic however and could not be classed as pornographic, rather descriptive, medical (physiological) and instructive.<br>I think your premise is flawed a bit. Cocooned is a better term. Most kids today with internet access make moral and ethical decisions when they see pornogaphy. Some shie away, some find perverted pleasure, others accept and wait for the real thing.<br>If people can't deal with that, then there is a host of other ethically challenged activities that children are exposed to, including sedentary activities that promote obesity, broken marriages, drugs, low socio-economic living etc.<br>If young Johnny and little Billy get to see 'bad stuff' then they may be a few years ahead of the rest of their peer group. They will all find out one way or another.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Type " vagina " into your google search bar .
Click on the first link .
BAM ! So it came up with a Wikipedia entry and a pic .
I note that it was hairless but retouched .
It 's not pornographic however and could not be classed as pornographic , rather descriptive , medical ( physiological ) and instructive.I think your premise is flawed a bit .
Cocooned is a better term .
Most kids today with internet access make moral and ethical decisions when they see pornogaphy .
Some shie away , some find perverted pleasure , others accept and wait for the real thing.If people ca n't deal with that , then there is a host of other ethically challenged activities that children are exposed to , including sedentary activities that promote obesity , broken marriages , drugs , low socio-economic living etc.If young Johnny and little Billy get to see 'bad stuff ' then they may be a few years ahead of the rest of their peer group .
They will all find out one way or another .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Type "vagina" into your google search bar.
Click on the first link.
BAM!So it came up with a Wikipedia entry and a pic.
I note that it was hairless but retouched.
It's not pornographic however and could not be classed as pornographic, rather descriptive, medical (physiological) and instructive.I think your premise is flawed a bit.
Cocooned is a better term.
Most kids today with internet access make moral and ethical decisions when they see pornogaphy.
Some shie away, some find perverted pleasure, others accept and wait for the real thing.If people can't deal with that, then there is a host of other ethically challenged activities that children are exposed to, including sedentary activities that promote obesity, broken marriages, drugs, low socio-economic living etc.If young Johnny and little Billy get to see 'bad stuff' then they may be a few years ahead of the rest of their peer group.
They will all find out one way or another.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524152</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, because the US is the bastion of freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261500060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh, gay marriage is banned in China as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , gay marriage is banned in China as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, gay marriage is banned in China as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520808</id>
	<title>Oh China, you silly goose you.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261421040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China basically couldn't match those Japanese artists at drawing tentacles so they decided to move to a different business. See, capitalism works!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China basically could n't match those Japanese artists at drawing tentacles so they decided to move to a different business .
See , capitalism works ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China basically couldn't match those Japanese artists at drawing tentacles so they decided to move to a different business.
See, capitalism works!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520876</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261421700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>The Chinese Route to Web of Free Porn?</i> </p><p>As a matter of fact<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>And then I got to thinking what free communist porn would look like<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:o</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chinese Route to Web of Free Porn ?
As a matter of fact ...And then I got to thinking what free communist porn would look like : o</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The Chinese Route to Web of Free Porn?
As a matter of fact ...And then I got to thinking what free communist porn would look like :o</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520956</id>
	<title>Lies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261422780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This rationale is a lie, of course. China couches their real aim in a moral sleeve. Their real aim is nothing more than protecting their fascist government from the revolution that's coming, to keep the ruling party in power and shield it from criticism and challenge.</p><p>It's the same lie that Hugo Chavez spoke recently in creating his state police designed to conduct a "war on crime" when the simple fact is that it simply ends up creating a secret police that answers to Chavez alone and will end up reinforcing his power.</p><p>The same lie that Obama spoke about insuring millions and reducing the deficit by taking over health care. Never ends with these politicians.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This rationale is a lie , of course .
China couches their real aim in a moral sleeve .
Their real aim is nothing more than protecting their fascist government from the revolution that 's coming , to keep the ruling party in power and shield it from criticism and challenge.It 's the same lie that Hugo Chavez spoke recently in creating his state police designed to conduct a " war on crime " when the simple fact is that it simply ends up creating a secret police that answers to Chavez alone and will end up reinforcing his power.The same lie that Obama spoke about insuring millions and reducing the deficit by taking over health care .
Never ends with these politicians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This rationale is a lie, of course.
China couches their real aim in a moral sleeve.
Their real aim is nothing more than protecting their fascist government from the revolution that's coming, to keep the ruling party in power and shield it from criticism and challenge.It's the same lie that Hugo Chavez spoke recently in creating his state police designed to conduct a "war on crime" when the simple fact is that it simply ends up creating a secret police that answers to Chavez alone and will end up reinforcing his power.The same lie that Obama spoke about insuring millions and reducing the deficit by taking over health care.
Never ends with these politicians.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521082</id>
	<title>Re:The Internet as "default-deny"</title>
	<author>Bitch-Face Jones</author>
	<datestamp>1261424700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey, check it out, I found a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Love\_play\_in\_China.jpg" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">debilitating, foreign picture</a> [wikipedia.org] of you and Deng Xaiopeng (you're the "bottom")</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , check it out , I found a debilitating , foreign picture [ wikipedia.org ] of you and Deng Xaiopeng ( you 're the " bottom " )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, check it out, I found a debilitating, foreign picture [wikipedia.org] of you and Deng Xaiopeng (you're the "bottom")</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30527670</id>
	<title>Re:Yea Right, it's all about "Porn."</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261514640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um. As far as I can tell this is completely new.  A default blacklist with whitelist for approved sites.</p><p>They haven't done that before, and using porn seems a convenient justification for measures which are much more unpleasant for the population.</p><p>Rather than having to say.  "We're blocking 98\% of the internet purely to maintain our hold on power" they can say "We're blocking 98\% of the internet for the children... and maintaining our hold on power is a nice side effect"</p><p>And yes, obviously they will probably not approve sites they don't agree with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um .
As far as I can tell this is completely new .
A default blacklist with whitelist for approved sites.They have n't done that before , and using porn seems a convenient justification for measures which are much more unpleasant for the population.Rather than having to say .
" We 're blocking 98 \ % of the internet purely to maintain our hold on power " they can say " We 're blocking 98 \ % of the internet for the children... and maintaining our hold on power is a nice side effect " And yes , obviously they will probably not approve sites they do n't agree with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um.
As far as I can tell this is completely new.
A default blacklist with whitelist for approved sites.They haven't done that before, and using porn seems a convenient justification for measures which are much more unpleasant for the population.Rather than having to say.
"We're blocking 98\% of the internet purely to maintain our hold on power" they can say "We're blocking 98\% of the internet for the children... and maintaining our hold on power is a nice side effect"And yes, obviously they will probably not approve sites they don't agree with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521102</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261424820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Now? Type "vagina" into your google search bar. Click on the first link. BAM! Know any 8 year olds that can't do that these days? I sure don't.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's nothing!  I just realized that if they look down after taking a dump, they'll see their own genitals!  In PERSON!  Alert the fashion police, we need to mandate that all children wear pants with a back door pooping flap.  It's the only way to protect our children!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now ?
Type " vagina " into your google search bar .
Click on the first link .
BAM ! Know any 8 year olds that ca n't do that these days ?
I sure do n't.That 's nothing !
I just realized that if they look down after taking a dump , they 'll see their own genitals !
In PERSON !
Alert the fashion police , we need to mandate that all children wear pants with a back door pooping flap .
It 's the only way to protect our children !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now?
Type "vagina" into your google search bar.
Click on the first link.
BAM! Know any 8 year olds that can't do that these days?
I sure don't.That's nothing!
I just realized that if they look down after taking a dump, they'll see their own genitals!
In PERSON!
Alert the fashion police, we need to mandate that all children wear pants with a back door pooping flap.
It's the only way to protect our children!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526630</id>
	<title>Re:Yup</title>
	<author>Thing 1</author>
	<datestamp>1261511100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ha, reminds me of the "Freudian Slip" that Meg Ryan wore to a costume party in the old movie <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094933/" title="imdb.com">DOA.</a> [imdb.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ha , reminds me of the " Freudian Slip " that Meg Ryan wore to a costume party in the old movie DOA .
[ imdb.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ha, reminds me of the "Freudian Slip" that Meg Ryan wore to a costume party in the old movie DOA.
[imdb.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521728</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524330</id>
	<title>Re:Conspiracy, or just idiocy?</title>
	<author>shambalagoon</author>
	<datestamp>1261500840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yikes. If they succeed, they're going to be creating a deeply sexually frustrated society, and that will be expressed in violence. But will that violence be directed inwards to revolution or outwards to war? Probably inwards since the government will be the source of the repression.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yikes .
If they succeed , they 're going to be creating a deeply sexually frustrated society , and that will be expressed in violence .
But will that violence be directed inwards to revolution or outwards to war ?
Probably inwards since the government will be the source of the repression .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yikes.
If they succeed, they're going to be creating a deeply sexually frustrated society, and that will be expressed in violence.
But will that violence be directed inwards to revolution or outwards to war?
Probably inwards since the government will be the source of the repression.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646</id>
	<title>Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261419420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Chinese Route to Web of Free Porn?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Chinese Route to Web of Free Porn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Chinese Route to Web of Free Porn?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521196</id>
	<title>Nice solution!</title>
	<author>schreiend</author>
	<datestamp>1261512360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To further lower fertility rate, I'd suggest redirecting every porn request to "2 girls 1 cup" video.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To further lower fertility rate , I 'd suggest redirecting every porn request to " 2 girls 1 cup " video .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To further lower fertility rate, I'd suggest redirecting every porn request to "2 girls 1 cup" video.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521780</id>
	<title>Fear WHAT?</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1261477260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Kids used to grow up on farms. Do you think the farm animals were trained to refrain from the facts of life just because a kid was around?
</p><p>For that matter, kids used to sleep in the same room as their parents and since lots of families had lots of kids, the facts of life went on right beside them.
</p><p>Puritan, you are doing it right.
</p><p>You would give cows trousers to hide their shame if you could.
</p><p>Kids are a lot less fragile then people think. But a lot of people like you seem to want to make up for parenting skills (have a full first aid kit and kisses to make the pain go away) with over-protectiveness. Childhood is a time for training for adulthood and this includes kids playing house and slowly learning that boys and girls got different bits and one day that may be important. But most young kids, if they are not ready to be interested simply ain't interested. I have dealt with young kids (6) and they think the whole deal has an appeal roughly equal to politics. Just allow them to experience the world and be ready to correct any misconceptions. But you are NOT going to stop them from seeing the cat from what comes naturally (hump the rabbit the wrong way around) because that is part of growing up.
</p><p>A kid who googles vagina is ready to learn about it. You just ain't ready to talk to him about it on his terms and so you wish the entire world to be shut down because you still giggle at something we all been through. Grow up and face your responsibilities as a parent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Kids used to grow up on farms .
Do you think the farm animals were trained to refrain from the facts of life just because a kid was around ?
For that matter , kids used to sleep in the same room as their parents and since lots of families had lots of kids , the facts of life went on right beside them .
Puritan , you are doing it right .
You would give cows trousers to hide their shame if you could .
Kids are a lot less fragile then people think .
But a lot of people like you seem to want to make up for parenting skills ( have a full first aid kit and kisses to make the pain go away ) with over-protectiveness .
Childhood is a time for training for adulthood and this includes kids playing house and slowly learning that boys and girls got different bits and one day that may be important .
But most young kids , if they are not ready to be interested simply ai n't interested .
I have dealt with young kids ( 6 ) and they think the whole deal has an appeal roughly equal to politics .
Just allow them to experience the world and be ready to correct any misconceptions .
But you are NOT going to stop them from seeing the cat from what comes naturally ( hump the rabbit the wrong way around ) because that is part of growing up .
A kid who googles vagina is ready to learn about it .
You just ai n't ready to talk to him about it on his terms and so you wish the entire world to be shut down because you still giggle at something we all been through .
Grow up and face your responsibilities as a parent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kids used to grow up on farms.
Do you think the farm animals were trained to refrain from the facts of life just because a kid was around?
For that matter, kids used to sleep in the same room as their parents and since lots of families had lots of kids, the facts of life went on right beside them.
Puritan, you are doing it right.
You would give cows trousers to hide their shame if you could.
Kids are a lot less fragile then people think.
But a lot of people like you seem to want to make up for parenting skills (have a full first aid kit and kisses to make the pain go away) with over-protectiveness.
Childhood is a time for training for adulthood and this includes kids playing house and slowly learning that boys and girls got different bits and one day that may be important.
But most young kids, if they are not ready to be interested simply ain't interested.
I have dealt with young kids (6) and they think the whole deal has an appeal roughly equal to politics.
Just allow them to experience the world and be ready to correct any misconceptions.
But you are NOT going to stop them from seeing the cat from what comes naturally (hump the rabbit the wrong way around) because that is part of growing up.
A kid who googles vagina is ready to learn about it.
You just ain't ready to talk to him about it on his terms and so you wish the entire world to be shut down because you still giggle at something we all been through.
Grow up and face your responsibilities as a parent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522090</id>
	<title>HI, I'm I talking to Steve Jobs?</title>
	<author>jbssm</author>
	<datestamp>1261481340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the Chinese should call good ol' Steve and ask how to do it.</p><p>
Just imagine, one big happy App Store China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the Chinese should call good ol ' Steve and ask how to do it .
Just imagine , one big happy App Store China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the Chinese should call good ol' Steve and ask how to do it.
Just imagine, one big happy App Store China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521042</id>
	<title>Re:What is with commies and sex?</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1261424160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It might be a coming of age thing in an authoritarian government. A bit like the gangster who has to kill someone to prove themselves to the organisation. To be in the Chinese government you have to be Against Something. And you have to Stop Something.</p><p>Its a bit like that in the multinational company I work for. New managers prove their ability by Stopping Stuff or Starting Stuff. Not always for good reasons. But the reasons are less important than the strengthening of the "us and them" configuration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It might be a coming of age thing in an authoritarian government .
A bit like the gangster who has to kill someone to prove themselves to the organisation .
To be in the Chinese government you have to be Against Something .
And you have to Stop Something.Its a bit like that in the multinational company I work for .
New managers prove their ability by Stopping Stuff or Starting Stuff .
Not always for good reasons .
But the reasons are less important than the strengthening of the " us and them " configuration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It might be a coming of age thing in an authoritarian government.
A bit like the gangster who has to kill someone to prove themselves to the organisation.
To be in the Chinese government you have to be Against Something.
And you have to Stop Something.Its a bit like that in the multinational company I work for.
New managers prove their ability by Stopping Stuff or Starting Stuff.
Not always for good reasons.
But the reasons are less important than the strengthening of the "us and them" configuration.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790</id>
	<title>Yea Right, it's all about "Porn."</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261420800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The person who brought this story up is an idiot if they believe this is all about "porn."  Yes, in the Tianamen Square incident a lot of people got screwed, but I would not call it "porn."  Anyone want to take bets about how many sites concerning that particular obscenity will get blocked by these new initiatives?

"Porn" my ass.

It is about control.  Plain and simple.  Control to let the evil murdering bastards that run that country continue to do so.  period.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The person who brought this story up is an idiot if they believe this is all about " porn .
" Yes , in the Tianamen Square incident a lot of people got screwed , but I would not call it " porn .
" Anyone want to take bets about how many sites concerning that particular obscenity will get blocked by these new initiatives ?
" Porn " my ass .
It is about control .
Plain and simple .
Control to let the evil murdering bastards that run that country continue to do so .
period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The person who brought this story up is an idiot if they believe this is all about "porn.
"  Yes, in the Tianamen Square incident a lot of people got screwed, but I would not call it "porn.
"  Anyone want to take bets about how many sites concerning that particular obscenity will get blocked by these new initiatives?
"Porn" my ass.
It is about control.
Plain and simple.
Control to let the evil murdering bastards that run that country continue to do so.
period.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520656</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>rbcd</author>
	<datestamp>1261419540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Yet the breaking news for Monday is that the China is planning to enforce a whitelist on foreign domains: in particular, any e-commerce will have to register locally and obey Chinese law before they get whitelisted.</i></p><p>Where does it say that? Citation needed!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet the breaking news for Monday is that the China is planning to enforce a whitelist on foreign domains : in particular , any e-commerce will have to register locally and obey Chinese law before they get whitelisted.Where does it say that ?
Citation needed !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet the breaking news for Monday is that the China is planning to enforce a whitelist on foreign domains: in particular, any e-commerce will have to register locally and obey Chinese law before they get whitelisted.Where does it say that?
Citation needed!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522776</id>
	<title>Re:Conspiracy, or just idiocy?</title>
	<author>Rich0</author>
	<datestamp>1261491120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not just a brother or a sister - no aunts, uncles, or cousins either.</p><p>Your ONLY relations (at least legally) are parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc.  Or, from the other a single child, a single grandchild, etc.</p><p>For a typical child with four living grandparents, on their birthday their entire family is in attendance, and that is the only birthday any of them will attend that year so they spend their entire annual birthday budget on them.  If you ever perceived single children in the US as being somewhat spoiled, just imagine single-grandchildren.</p><p>In 20 years the country is going to have a VERY interesting social dynamic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not just a brother or a sister - no aunts , uncles , or cousins either.Your ONLY relations ( at least legally ) are parents , grandparents , great-grandparents , etc .
Or , from the other a single child , a single grandchild , etc.For a typical child with four living grandparents , on their birthday their entire family is in attendance , and that is the only birthday any of them will attend that year so they spend their entire annual birthday budget on them .
If you ever perceived single children in the US as being somewhat spoiled , just imagine single-grandchildren.In 20 years the country is going to have a VERY interesting social dynamic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not just a brother or a sister - no aunts, uncles, or cousins either.Your ONLY relations (at least legally) are parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc.
Or, from the other a single child, a single grandchild, etc.For a typical child with four living grandparents, on their birthday their entire family is in attendance, and that is the only birthday any of them will attend that year so they spend their entire annual birthday budget on them.
If you ever perceived single children in the US as being somewhat spoiled, just imagine single-grandchildren.In 20 years the country is going to have a VERY interesting social dynamic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525080</id>
	<title>China removes self from Internet.  Ok.</title>
	<author>gavron</author>
	<datestamp>1261504140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's time to have ARIN get APNIC to take back the many millions of IPv4 addresses assigned to China.<p>
They don't want to be on the Internet.  They want to be on a firewalled segment. </p><p>
That's ok.  They don't need all those globally-routable addresses.  </p><p>
The rest of the world can use those addresses to BE connected.</p><p>
Hey China, next time you need concrete or steel fire up that ol' fax machine.  Oooh.  Sorry.  We turned ours off because we have Internet.
</p><p>
E</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's time to have ARIN get APNIC to take back the many millions of IPv4 addresses assigned to China .
They do n't want to be on the Internet .
They want to be on a firewalled segment .
That 's ok. They do n't need all those globally-routable addresses .
The rest of the world can use those addresses to BE connected .
Hey China , next time you need concrete or steel fire up that ol ' fax machine .
Oooh. Sorry .
We turned ours off because we have Internet .
E</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's time to have ARIN get APNIC to take back the many millions of IPv4 addresses assigned to China.
They don't want to be on the Internet.
They want to be on a firewalled segment.
That's ok.  They don't need all those globally-routable addresses.
The rest of the world can use those addresses to BE connected.
Hey China, next time you need concrete or steel fire up that ol' fax machine.
Oooh.  Sorry.
We turned ours off because we have Internet.
E</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522454</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>divisionbyzero</author>
	<datestamp>1261487820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am fairly certain the Chinese government cares very little for the loss of educational opportunity provided by the Internet.  It will allow them to control that more thoroughly as well.  I guess The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution didn't really end in 1976.  Anyhow it will be interesting to see if the Internet is really the untameable beast that many of its boosters have suggested and whether exercising so much control over the internet will stifle innovation and commerce.  Everyone should care about what happens in China because every other government is paying attention and if China succeeds, your government will try it next.  Look at Australia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am fairly certain the Chinese government cares very little for the loss of educational opportunity provided by the Internet .
It will allow them to control that more thoroughly as well .
I guess The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution did n't really end in 1976 .
Anyhow it will be interesting to see if the Internet is really the untameable beast that many of its boosters have suggested and whether exercising so much control over the internet will stifle innovation and commerce .
Everyone should care about what happens in China because every other government is paying attention and if China succeeds , your government will try it next .
Look at Australia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am fairly certain the Chinese government cares very little for the loss of educational opportunity provided by the Internet.
It will allow them to control that more thoroughly as well.
I guess The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution didn't really end in 1976.
Anyhow it will be interesting to see if the Internet is really the untameable beast that many of its boosters have suggested and whether exercising so much control over the internet will stifle innovation and commerce.
Everyone should care about what happens in China because every other government is paying attention and if China succeeds, your government will try it next.
Look at Australia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30533340</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>twoHats</author>
	<datestamp>1259785800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Just like those "free drug" workplaces?</p></div><p>I think you are looking for "Work Free Drug Place"...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like those " free drug " workplaces ? I think you are looking for " Work Free Drug Place " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like those "free drug" workplaces?I think you are looking for "Work Free Drug Place"...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523030</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, because the US is the bastion of freedom</title>
	<author>happy\_place</author>
	<datestamp>1261493520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>So your basis of a moral country is their promotion of homosexuality?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So your basis of a moral country is their promotion of homosexuality ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So your basis of a moral country is their promotion of homosexuality?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521950</id>
	<title>Re:The difference between China and the US</title>
	<author>californication</author>
	<datestamp>1261479480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a ridiculous argument.  Although the U.S. government's invasion in person communications in the last few years has increased due to the fears of terrorism that 9/11 brought on, it is no where near the all-seeing eye that China is when it comes to what their citizens do and how they are prosecuted.  Although most ISPs bent over for the NSA, there was at least one ISP that stood up to the NSA: Qwest.  If they served my area, I would sign up with them for that reason alone.  It shows that there are limits to what kind of secret deals the U.S. government can get away with.  Had a company stood up to the Chinese government that way, they would have not just been denied government contracts, but would have been kicked out of the country completely or had their company nationalized then sold to a friendlier corporation.</p><p>As for corporations knowing your information, they've been doing this for decades, it's just that their ability to collect information has grown more efficient.  If you are uncomfortable about this, then stop being a consumer, move to the middle of nowhere, raise horses for transportation and grow your own food.  Taking part in American Capitalism is one of the greatest opportunities in the world, but like anyting else that is great, it does not come free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a ridiculous argument .
Although the U.S. government 's invasion in person communications in the last few years has increased due to the fears of terrorism that 9/11 brought on , it is no where near the all-seeing eye that China is when it comes to what their citizens do and how they are prosecuted .
Although most ISPs bent over for the NSA , there was at least one ISP that stood up to the NSA : Qwest .
If they served my area , I would sign up with them for that reason alone .
It shows that there are limits to what kind of secret deals the U.S. government can get away with .
Had a company stood up to the Chinese government that way , they would have not just been denied government contracts , but would have been kicked out of the country completely or had their company nationalized then sold to a friendlier corporation.As for corporations knowing your information , they 've been doing this for decades , it 's just that their ability to collect information has grown more efficient .
If you are uncomfortable about this , then stop being a consumer , move to the middle of nowhere , raise horses for transportation and grow your own food .
Taking part in American Capitalism is one of the greatest opportunities in the world , but like anyting else that is great , it does not come free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a ridiculous argument.
Although the U.S. government's invasion in person communications in the last few years has increased due to the fears of terrorism that 9/11 brought on, it is no where near the all-seeing eye that China is when it comes to what their citizens do and how they are prosecuted.
Although most ISPs bent over for the NSA, there was at least one ISP that stood up to the NSA: Qwest.
If they served my area, I would sign up with them for that reason alone.
It shows that there are limits to what kind of secret deals the U.S. government can get away with.
Had a company stood up to the Chinese government that way, they would have not just been denied government contracts, but would have been kicked out of the country completely or had their company nationalized then sold to a friendlier corporation.As for corporations knowing your information, they've been doing this for decades, it's just that their ability to collect information has grown more efficient.
If you are uncomfortable about this, then stop being a consumer, move to the middle of nowhere, raise horses for transportation and grow your own food.
Taking part in American Capitalism is one of the greatest opportunities in the world, but like anyting else that is great, it does not come free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523068</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1261493880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>And please don't try the "it's the parent's job to monitor their kids" argument; when the kids are surrounded by restricted materials 24/7 parents would have to hold their kids eyes shut 24/7 to stand a chance. <b>With Internet access being as ubiquitous as it is</b>, there's no way to guarantee young Johnny or little Billy won't get some quality alone-time with Google before they're ready for it.</i></p><p>Really? So how exactly does your 8 year old obtain Internet access? Sign up for an ISP himself? Buy a phone or 3G data card with laptop? Walk into an Internet cafe on his own? Even if these things were possible for an 8 year old, I have no problem with restricting them to adults - that's still not a reason for censoring the Internet for adults.</p><p>If he uses your Internet connection, then yes, it is your job. And you are free to use filtering software to do the job for you (which may not do a perfect job, but then neither would any adult censoring scheme).</p><p><i>Type "vagina" into your google search bar. Click on the first link. </i></p><p>Er yes, I get Wikipedia, which has a medical picture of a vagina. You do realise that most schools will teach children these "shocking" adult images in biology lessons?</p><p><i>I fear for the future generations. I really do.</i></p><p>Yeah, we're still waiting for the alleged apocalypse that will come from having uncensored cinema, video, TV, rock music, computer games and the Internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And please do n't try the " it 's the parent 's job to monitor their kids " argument ; when the kids are surrounded by restricted materials 24/7 parents would have to hold their kids eyes shut 24/7 to stand a chance .
With Internet access being as ubiquitous as it is , there 's no way to guarantee young Johnny or little Billy wo n't get some quality alone-time with Google before they 're ready for it.Really ?
So how exactly does your 8 year old obtain Internet access ?
Sign up for an ISP himself ?
Buy a phone or 3G data card with laptop ?
Walk into an Internet cafe on his own ?
Even if these things were possible for an 8 year old , I have no problem with restricting them to adults - that 's still not a reason for censoring the Internet for adults.If he uses your Internet connection , then yes , it is your job .
And you are free to use filtering software to do the job for you ( which may not do a perfect job , but then neither would any adult censoring scheme ) .Type " vagina " into your google search bar .
Click on the first link .
Er yes , I get Wikipedia , which has a medical picture of a vagina .
You do realise that most schools will teach children these " shocking " adult images in biology lessons ? I fear for the future generations .
I really do.Yeah , we 're still waiting for the alleged apocalypse that will come from having uncensored cinema , video , TV , rock music , computer games and the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And please don't try the "it's the parent's job to monitor their kids" argument; when the kids are surrounded by restricted materials 24/7 parents would have to hold their kids eyes shut 24/7 to stand a chance.
With Internet access being as ubiquitous as it is, there's no way to guarantee young Johnny or little Billy won't get some quality alone-time with Google before they're ready for it.Really?
So how exactly does your 8 year old obtain Internet access?
Sign up for an ISP himself?
Buy a phone or 3G data card with laptop?
Walk into an Internet cafe on his own?
Even if these things were possible for an 8 year old, I have no problem with restricting them to adults - that's still not a reason for censoring the Internet for adults.If he uses your Internet connection, then yes, it is your job.
And you are free to use filtering software to do the job for you (which may not do a perfect job, but then neither would any adult censoring scheme).Type "vagina" into your google search bar.
Click on the first link.
Er yes, I get Wikipedia, which has a medical picture of a vagina.
You do realise that most schools will teach children these "shocking" adult images in biology lessons?I fear for the future generations.
I really do.Yeah, we're still waiting for the alleged apocalypse that will come from having uncensored cinema, video, TV, rock music, computer games and the Internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522694</id>
	<title>Simple low-tech solution:</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1261490220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Smash all the cameras.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Smash all the cameras .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Smash all the cameras.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521370</id>
	<title>Re:Yea Right, it's all about "Porn."</title>
	<author>Spad</author>
	<datestamp>1261515000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As other people have pointed out, China is already openly and unashamedly blocking and censoring political and cultural information it doesn't like; this is actually primarily about porn, which the government sees as corrupting and immoral.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As other people have pointed out , China is already openly and unashamedly blocking and censoring political and cultural information it does n't like ; this is actually primarily about porn , which the government sees as corrupting and immoral .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As other people have pointed out, China is already openly and unashamedly blocking and censoring political and cultural information it doesn't like; this is actually primarily about porn, which the government sees as corrupting and immoral.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522316</id>
	<title>Re:The difference between China and the US</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261485360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't say much about China, but I have never heard any western government discuss ways to prevent abuse of power. I do see them abusing their power constantly though, and it seems most of the population don't care. Almost as if they take it for granted. So when you say "in one people discuss ways to prevent abuses of power, and in the other they take it for granted" I have to wonder which countries you're actually talking about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't say much about China , but I have never heard any western government discuss ways to prevent abuse of power .
I do see them abusing their power constantly though , and it seems most of the population do n't care .
Almost as if they take it for granted .
So when you say " in one people discuss ways to prevent abuses of power , and in the other they take it for granted " I have to wonder which countries you 're actually talking about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't say much about China, but I have never heard any western government discuss ways to prevent abuse of power.
I do see them abusing their power constantly though, and it seems most of the population don't care.
Almost as if they take it for granted.
So when you say "in one people discuss ways to prevent abuses of power, and in the other they take it for granted" I have to wonder which countries you're actually talking about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521168</id>
	<title>Re:What is with commies and sex?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>was McCarthy a communist?</p><p>Suspected homosexuality was also a common cause for being targeted by McCarthyism. The hunt for "sexual perverts", who were presumed to be subversive by nature, resulted in thousands being harassed and denied employment.[45]</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>was McCarthy a communist ? Suspected homosexuality was also a common cause for being targeted by McCarthyism .
The hunt for " sexual perverts " , who were presumed to be subversive by nature , resulted in thousands being harassed and denied employment .
[ 45 ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism</tokentext>
<sentencetext>was McCarthy a communist?Suspected homosexuality was also a common cause for being targeted by McCarthyism.
The hunt for "sexual perverts", who were presumed to be subversive by nature, resulted in thousands being harassed and denied employment.
[45]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522052</id>
	<title>HAHAHA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261480860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get rid of porn...</p><p>of course</p><p>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get rid of porn...of courseHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get rid of porn...of courseHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521108</id>
	<title>Grow Some Cojones</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1261424940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think it is time for some Western (particularly U.S.) corporations to man up, "do less evil", and tell China to put it where the sun doesn't shine.
<br> <br>
Let them grow up ignorant, with half an internet. It's their choice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it is time for some Western ( particularly U.S. ) corporations to man up , " do less evil " , and tell China to put it where the sun does n't shine .
Let them grow up ignorant , with half an internet .
It 's their choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it is time for some Western (particularly U.S.) corporations to man up, "do less evil", and tell China to put it where the sun doesn't shine.
Let them grow up ignorant, with half an internet.
It's their choice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521024</id>
	<title>Re:Join the club, China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261423800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Australia's censorship is awful but at least it's proposed to be a blacklist not a whitelist.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Australia 's censorship is awful but at least it 's proposed to be a blacklist not a whitelist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Australia's censorship is awful but at least it's proposed to be a blacklist not a whitelist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30530880</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it</title>
	<author>gilgongo</author>
	<datestamp>1261485300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The ONLY reason I can see for their obsessiveness with blocking porn is that it can be used as the basis for developing the technology and infrastructure necessary to block whatever it is they want.</p> </div><p>Bingo. It's exactly the same with child porn in the West. Never mind that the actual number of paedophiles is minuscule and the chances of children being actually harmed are even tinier, governments find it incredibly easy to start spending bazillions on technology to stop it because those that sign off the budgets think that the same technologies will be easy to use for "other things" (and usually they're right).</p><p>Consider also that it's all self-perpetuating too: for anyone in power to actually oppose measures seen as eradicating evil scourges would be to pretty much sign their own political death warrant. Control = power = control = more power until everything is banned and nothing is permitted. In fact maybe the only difference between the Chinese and the West is that the Chinese are just a few steps ahead of us in this game.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The ONLY reason I can see for their obsessiveness with blocking porn is that it can be used as the basis for developing the technology and infrastructure necessary to block whatever it is they want .
Bingo. It 's exactly the same with child porn in the West .
Never mind that the actual number of paedophiles is minuscule and the chances of children being actually harmed are even tinier , governments find it incredibly easy to start spending bazillions on technology to stop it because those that sign off the budgets think that the same technologies will be easy to use for " other things " ( and usually they 're right ) .Consider also that it 's all self-perpetuating too : for anyone in power to actually oppose measures seen as eradicating evil scourges would be to pretty much sign their own political death warrant .
Control = power = control = more power until everything is banned and nothing is permitted .
In fact maybe the only difference between the Chinese and the West is that the Chinese are just a few steps ahead of us in this game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ONLY reason I can see for their obsessiveness with blocking porn is that it can be used as the basis for developing the technology and infrastructure necessary to block whatever it is they want.
Bingo. It's exactly the same with child porn in the West.
Never mind that the actual number of paedophiles is minuscule and the chances of children being actually harmed are even tinier, governments find it incredibly easy to start spending bazillions on technology to stop it because those that sign off the budgets think that the same technologies will be easy to use for "other things" (and usually they're right).Consider also that it's all self-perpetuating too: for anyone in power to actually oppose measures seen as eradicating evil scourges would be to pretty much sign their own political death warrant.
Control = power = control = more power until everything is banned and nothing is permitted.
In fact maybe the only difference between the Chinese and the West is that the Chinese are just a few steps ahead of us in this game.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30530486</id>
	<title>Re:Join the club, China</title>
	<author>VoltageX</author>
	<datestamp>1261482900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>also, connecting to proxy.australia.gov.au:3128 is going to get old, really fast.</htmltext>
<tokenext>also , connecting to proxy.australia.gov.au : 3128 is going to get old , really fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>also, connecting to proxy.australia.gov.au:3128 is going to get old, really fast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521024</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522666</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, because the US is the bastion of freedom</title>
	<author>SlappyBastard</author>
	<datestamp>1261489920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with the US us that we don't have one law, we have 51 separate legal systems, each with a major complex about the idea that there will ever be a single legal system.</p><p>The American legal was built of the perceived need for compromise after the Revolution to keep the nation together despite its vast differences over slavery.</p><p>The upshot of that autonomy is that at least tolerant states have a chance to act as testbeds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with the US us that we do n't have one law , we have 51 separate legal systems , each with a major complex about the idea that there will ever be a single legal system.The American legal was built of the perceived need for compromise after the Revolution to keep the nation together despite its vast differences over slavery.The upshot of that autonomy is that at least tolerant states have a chance to act as testbeds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with the US us that we don't have one law, we have 51 separate legal systems, each with a major complex about the idea that there will ever be a single legal system.The American legal was built of the perceived need for compromise after the Revolution to keep the nation together despite its vast differences over slavery.The upshot of that autonomy is that at least tolerant states have a chance to act as testbeds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30532410</id>
	<title>Re:Calling It Now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261501080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not going to happen, porn is too big of an industry in the west.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not going to happen , porn is too big of an industry in the west .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not going to happen, porn is too big of an industry in the west.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520804</id>
	<title>Web of free porn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261420980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did anyone else read this as "The Chinese Route To a Web of Free Porn" only to be disappointed?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone else read this as " The Chinese Route To a Web of Free Porn " only to be disappointed ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone else read this as "The Chinese Route To a Web of Free Porn" only to be disappointed?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520886</id>
	<title>Terrible political mistake</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261421880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is pretty much the anti net-neutrality law.<br>
&nbsp; <br>The bellow freezing point 'approval ratings' of the ruling Communist Party might deteriorate even more and unleash some sort of democratic reform (hopefully a non-violent one).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is pretty much the anti net-neutrality law .
  The bellow freezing point 'approval ratings ' of the ruling Communist Party might deteriorate even more and unleash some sort of democratic reform ( hopefully a non-violent one ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is pretty much the anti net-neutrality law.
  The bellow freezing point 'approval ratings' of the ruling Communist Party might deteriorate even more and unleash some sort of democratic reform (hopefully a non-violent one).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521204</id>
	<title>Why are commies such prudes?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261512480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are supposedly atheists, why are they inflicting their morals on everyone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are supposedly atheists , why are they inflicting their morals on everyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are supposedly atheists, why are they inflicting their morals on everyone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30533438</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, because the US is the bastion of freedom</title>
	<author>jdc18</author>
	<datestamp>1259744460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I live in China, and that is a lie. Most people dont even believe there is prostitution or homosexuals in china.  Even thought it is quite obvious there is, a lot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in China , and that is a lie .
Most people dont even believe there is prostitution or homosexuals in china .
Even thought it is quite obvious there is , a lot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in China, and that is a lie.
Most people dont even believe there is prostitution or homosexuals in china.
Even thought it is quite obvious there is, a lot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30532724</id>
	<title>I'm just going to leave this here...</title>
	<author>GregNorc</author>
	<datestamp>1261505340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now. There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy. There will be no art, no literature, no science." - 1984</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" We shall abolish the orgasm .
Our neurologists are at work upon it now .
There will be no loyalty , except loyalty towards the Party .
There will be no love , except the love of Big Brother .
There will be no laughter , except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy .
There will be no art , no literature , no science .
" - 1984</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We shall abolish the orgasm.
Our neurologists are at work upon it now.
There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party.
There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother.
There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy.
There will be no art, no literature, no science.
" - 1984</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520872</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261421700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://news.chinatimes.com/2007Cti/2007Cti-News/2007Cti-News-Content/0,4521,110505+112009122200166,00.html" title="chinatimes.com" rel="nofollow">chinese news</a> [chinatimes.com]</p><p><a href="http://translate.google.ca/translate?hl=en&amp;sl=zh-CN&amp;tl=en&amp;u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fnews.chinatimes.com\%2F2007Cti\%2F2007Cti-News\%2F2007Cti-News-Content\%2F0\%2C4521\%2C110505\%2B112009122200166\%2C00.html" title="google.ca" rel="nofollow">google.ca translate</a> [google.ca]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>chinese news [ chinatimes.com ] google.ca translate [ google.ca ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>chinese news [chinatimes.com]google.ca translate [google.ca]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520952</id>
	<title>porn in China works!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261422720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I knew guys in Beijing who would be on a date and just need to stop back to the hotel for a moment. They'd throw on some hardcore and the girls would be mesmerized. Then they'd play cards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I knew guys in Beijing who would be on a date and just need to stop back to the hotel for a moment .
They 'd throw on some hardcore and the girls would be mesmerized .
Then they 'd play cards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I knew guys in Beijing who would be on a date and just need to stop back to the hotel for a moment.
They'd throw on some hardcore and the girls would be mesmerized.
Then they'd play cards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524844</id>
	<title>Re:After a thorough review</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261502940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It works even better in Chinese:  vs</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It works even better in Chinese : vs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It works even better in Chinese:  vs</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882</id>
	<title>What is with commies and sex?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261421880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Soviets had a fetish for persecuting gay people.  Now the Red Chinese have developed a fetish for stopping porn.  Were the Soviet-Chinese border wars of the 1960s actually conflicts over gay porn?</p><p>It seems like it would be easier to let people have their perceived perversions within a communist framework than to go all-out against yet another thing.  I understand that it's not the nature of totalitarian regimes to let any erratic behavior slide, but still . . . It's just weird that every single communist regime ever has had it in for some type of sexual hang-up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Soviets had a fetish for persecuting gay people .
Now the Red Chinese have developed a fetish for stopping porn .
Were the Soviet-Chinese border wars of the 1960s actually conflicts over gay porn ? It seems like it would be easier to let people have their perceived perversions within a communist framework than to go all-out against yet another thing .
I understand that it 's not the nature of totalitarian regimes to let any erratic behavior slide , but still .
. .
It 's just weird that every single communist regime ever has had it in for some type of sexual hang-up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Soviets had a fetish for persecuting gay people.
Now the Red Chinese have developed a fetish for stopping porn.
Were the Soviet-Chinese border wars of the 1960s actually conflicts over gay porn?It seems like it would be easier to let people have their perceived perversions within a communist framework than to go all-out against yet another thing.
I understand that it's not the nature of totalitarian regimes to let any erratic behavior slide, but still .
. .
It's just weird that every single communist regime ever has had it in for some type of sexual hang-up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816</id>
	<title>Yeah, because the US is the bastion of freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261477680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, because the US is the bastion of freedom for homo-sexuals. Tell me again in wich nation the people voted to make homosexuals 2nd class citizens?
</p><p>Sometimes you got to think a little bit clearer before you comment. And China is pretty open about homosexual rights because they are not christians and as such do not have the WESTERN view that it is a sin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , because the US is the bastion of freedom for homo-sexuals .
Tell me again in wich nation the people voted to make homosexuals 2nd class citizens ?
Sometimes you got to think a little bit clearer before you comment .
And China is pretty open about homosexual rights because they are not christians and as such do not have the WESTERN view that it is a sin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, because the US is the bastion of freedom for homo-sexuals.
Tell me again in wich nation the people voted to make homosexuals 2nd class citizens?
Sometimes you got to think a little bit clearer before you comment.
And China is pretty open about homosexual rights because they are not christians and as such do not have the WESTERN view that it is a sin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525458</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, because the US is the bastion of freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261506120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They let homosexuals marry in China?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They let homosexuals marry in China ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They let homosexuals marry in China?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520976</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>LoRdTAW</author>
	<datestamp>1261423080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Best way to fix that problem is to put the computers in the living room or other place where the family gathers. this make its difficult to sneak stuff. My friend grew up like that, computer in living room. This was back in the day of gif porn from bbs's and 1.44 floppy's. I had a few floppies full and could view them when no one was around the computer/office room. He couldn't. But that wont stop them from seeing unwanted material at friends homes. You just have to accept that sooner or later your child is going to see it. Hell I first saw porn when I was 9 after my friend discovered her dads stash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Best way to fix that problem is to put the computers in the living room or other place where the family gathers .
this make its difficult to sneak stuff .
My friend grew up like that , computer in living room .
This was back in the day of gif porn from bbs 's and 1.44 floppy 's .
I had a few floppies full and could view them when no one was around the computer/office room .
He could n't .
But that wont stop them from seeing unwanted material at friends homes .
You just have to accept that sooner or later your child is going to see it .
Hell I first saw porn when I was 9 after my friend discovered her dads stash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Best way to fix that problem is to put the computers in the living room or other place where the family gathers.
this make its difficult to sneak stuff.
My friend grew up like that, computer in living room.
This was back in the day of gif porn from bbs's and 1.44 floppy's.
I had a few floppies full and could view them when no one was around the computer/office room.
He couldn't.
But that wont stop them from seeing unwanted material at friends homes.
You just have to accept that sooner or later your child is going to see it.
Hell I first saw porn when I was 9 after my friend discovered her dads stash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523138</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1261494420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Philosophers! Artists! Legislators! Gather round! The age old debate of art versus porn has finally been solved:</p><p><i>Nobody in their right mind has any difficulty distinguishing between depictions of nudity and pornography - the fundamental problem with porn is not that it depicts naked people engaged in the natural activity of copulation, but that it is so obviously false and artificial.</i></p><p>So if two people film themselves shagging all night long, and then post it on YouTube, everyone would agree it's not porn? Porn is only when it's pretend, but if you do it for real, it stops being porn?</p><p><i>Porn, in my view, does not make people obsessed with sex - it turns you off from it; especially if you imagine this is the way it should be.</i></p><p>If only the legislators agreed...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Philosophers !
Artists ! Legislators !
Gather round !
The age old debate of art versus porn has finally been solved : Nobody in their right mind has any difficulty distinguishing between depictions of nudity and pornography - the fundamental problem with porn is not that it depicts naked people engaged in the natural activity of copulation , but that it is so obviously false and artificial.So if two people film themselves shagging all night long , and then post it on YouTube , everyone would agree it 's not porn ?
Porn is only when it 's pretend , but if you do it for real , it stops being porn ? Porn , in my view , does not make people obsessed with sex - it turns you off from it ; especially if you imagine this is the way it should be.If only the legislators agreed.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Philosophers!
Artists! Legislators!
Gather round!
The age old debate of art versus porn has finally been solved:Nobody in their right mind has any difficulty distinguishing between depictions of nudity and pornography - the fundamental problem with porn is not that it depicts naked people engaged in the natural activity of copulation, but that it is so obviously false and artificial.So if two people film themselves shagging all night long, and then post it on YouTube, everyone would agree it's not porn?
Porn is only when it's pretend, but if you do it for real, it stops being porn?Porn, in my view, does not make people obsessed with sex - it turns you off from it; especially if you imagine this is the way it should be.If only the legislators agreed...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521860</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520892</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261421940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here is a reference:<br><a href="http://www.admin5.com/article/20091221/199510.shtml" title="admin5.com">http://www.admin5.com/article/20091221/199510.shtml</a> [admin5.com]</p><p><a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fwww.admin5.com\%2Farticle\%2F20091221\%2F199510.shtml&amp;sl=zh-CN&amp;tl=en&amp;hl=&amp;ie=UTF-8" title="google.com">http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fwww.admin5.com\%2Farticle\%2F20091221\%2F199510.shtml&amp;sl=zh-CN&amp;tl=en&amp;hl=&amp;ie=UTF-8</a> [google.com]</p><p>I can't find an English language source.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is a reference : http : //www.admin5.com/article/20091221/199510.shtml [ admin5.com ] http : //translate.google.com/translate ? u = http \ % 3A \ % 2F \ % 2Fwww.admin5.com \ % 2Farticle \ % 2F20091221 \ % 2F199510.shtml&amp;sl = zh-CN&amp;tl = en&amp;hl = &amp;ie = UTF-8 [ google.com ] I ca n't find an English language source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is a reference:http://www.admin5.com/article/20091221/199510.shtml [admin5.com]http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fwww.admin5.com\%2Farticle\%2F20091221\%2F199510.shtml&amp;sl=zh-CN&amp;tl=en&amp;hl=&amp;ie=UTF-8 [google.com]I can't find an English language source.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522524</id>
	<title>Whitelist vs. TOR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261488360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wouldn't a whitelist prevent any of the TOR nodes from being registered in China?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't a whitelist prevent any of the TOR nodes from being registered in China ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't a whitelist prevent any of the TOR nodes from being registered in China?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521136</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I could handle the links in the first paragraph, but that last link, damn dude, show some decency!  We don't want to see that kind of filth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I could handle the links in the first paragraph , but that last link , damn dude , show some decency !
We do n't want to see that kind of filth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I could handle the links in the first paragraph, but that last link, damn dude, show some decency!
We don't want to see that kind of filth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524776</id>
	<title>Those clever chinese, we should've thought of that</title>
	<author>stabiesoft</author>
	<datestamp>1261502700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China used the idea of "for the children" to control commerce &amp; thought, brilliant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China used the idea of " for the children " to control commerce &amp; thought , brilliant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China used the idea of "for the children" to control commerce &amp; thought, brilliant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30528256</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>IndustrialComplex</author>
	<datestamp>1261473360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Nonsense. Nobody in their right mind has any difficulty distinguishing between depictions of nudity and pornography - the fundamental problem with porn is not that it depicts naked people engaged in the natural activity of copulation, but that it is so obviously false and artificial. Porn, in my view, does not make people obsessed with sex - it turns you off from it; especially if you imagine this is the way it should be.</i></p><p>Nobody in their right mind...<br>Tell that to the Discovery Channel (and pretty much any other television station).</p><p>They are starting to censor animals now.  A dog standing up on its hind legs to grab something off the table will often be 'blurred' in a very specific location.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nonsense .
Nobody in their right mind has any difficulty distinguishing between depictions of nudity and pornography - the fundamental problem with porn is not that it depicts naked people engaged in the natural activity of copulation , but that it is so obviously false and artificial .
Porn , in my view , does not make people obsessed with sex - it turns you off from it ; especially if you imagine this is the way it should be.Nobody in their right mind...Tell that to the Discovery Channel ( and pretty much any other television station ) .They are starting to censor animals now .
A dog standing up on its hind legs to grab something off the table will often be 'blurred ' in a very specific location .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nonsense.
Nobody in their right mind has any difficulty distinguishing between depictions of nudity and pornography - the fundamental problem with porn is not that it depicts naked people engaged in the natural activity of copulation, but that it is so obviously false and artificial.
Porn, in my view, does not make people obsessed with sex - it turns you off from it; especially if you imagine this is the way it should be.Nobody in their right mind...Tell that to the Discovery Channel (and pretty much any other television station).They are starting to censor animals now.
A dog standing up on its hind legs to grab something off the table will often be 'blurred' in a very specific location.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521860</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521122</id>
	<title>Censor this!</title>
	<author>bronney</author>
	<datestamp>1261425000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.asciipr0n.com/pr0n/pinups.html" title="asciipr0n.com">http://www.asciipr0n.com/pr0n/pinups.html</a> [asciipr0n.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.asciipr0n.com/pr0n/pinups.html [ asciipr0n.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.asciipr0n.com/pr0n/pinups.html [asciipr0n.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30529324</id>
	<title>Re:Yea Right, it's all about "Porn."</title>
	<author>Phil\_At\_NHS</author>
	<datestamp>1261477680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let me put it this way.  Do you think anti China, Pro Tibet, or tiannamen Square activist sites will end up on this "whitelist?"

Wanna bet?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me put it this way .
Do you think anti China , Pro Tibet , or tiannamen Square activist sites will end up on this " whitelist ?
" Wan na bet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me put it this way.
Do you think anti China, Pro Tibet, or tiannamen Square activist sites will end up on this "whitelist?
"

Wanna bet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520758</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261420500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>sigh.  another lame ass meme.  hey wow, you can't fucking read, isn't that hilarious.  woo hoo for you.  tee hee its like you saw what you wanted to see instead of what was there, cuz you cant fucking read correctly, it is like the epitome of humor man, especially after seeing that same joke over and over again on this web site.  really though i wish this nigger shit would just get modded to -1 redundant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>sigh .
another lame ass meme .
hey wow , you ca n't fucking read , is n't that hilarious .
woo hoo for you .
tee hee its like you saw what you wanted to see instead of what was there , cuz you cant fucking read correctly , it is like the epitome of humor man , especially after seeing that same joke over and over again on this web site .
really though i wish this nigger shit would just get modded to -1 redundant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sigh.
another lame ass meme.
hey wow, you can't fucking read, isn't that hilarious.
woo hoo for you.
tee hee its like you saw what you wanted to see instead of what was there, cuz you cant fucking read correctly, it is like the epitome of humor man, especially after seeing that same joke over and over again on this web site.
really though i wish this nigger shit would just get modded to -1 redundant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525632</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>LionKimbro</author>
	<datestamp>1261506960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find Taoism lacking, often;  For example, I have never heard of a working civilization that based its thought in Taoism.  Nonetheless, the fact of its wisdom is undeniable.</p><p>Tao Te Ching 18</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; When the great Tao is declined,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; The doctrines of humanity (jen) and righteousness (yi) arose,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; When knowledge and wisdom appeared,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; There emerged great hypocrisy.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; When the six family relationships are not in harmony,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; There will be the advocacy of filial piety and deep love to children.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; When a country is in disorder,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; There will be praise of loyal ministers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find Taoism lacking , often ; For example , I have never heard of a working civilization that based its thought in Taoism .
Nonetheless , the fact of its wisdom is undeniable.Tao Te Ching 18         When the great Tao is declined ,         The doctrines of humanity ( jen ) and righteousness ( yi ) arose ,         When knowledge and wisdom appeared ,         There emerged great hypocrisy .
        When the six family relationships are not in harmony ,         There will be the advocacy of filial piety and deep love to children .
        When a country is in disorder ,         There will be praise of loyal ministers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find Taoism lacking, often;  For example, I have never heard of a working civilization that based its thought in Taoism.
Nonetheless, the fact of its wisdom is undeniable.Tao Te Ching 18
        When the great Tao is declined,
        The doctrines of humanity (jen) and righteousness (yi) arose,
        When knowledge and wisdom appeared,
        There emerged great hypocrisy.
        When the six family relationships are not in harmony,
        There will be the advocacy of filial piety and deep love to children.
        When a country is in disorder,
        There will be praise of loyal ministers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</id>
	<title>So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1261419660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>NSFW warning on all following links!</b> <br> <br>

So that takes care of wikipedia.org or are they censoring en.wikipedia.org differently than zh.wikipedia.org?  Because while an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin\_Killer" title="wikipedia.org">English</a> [wikipedia.org] versus <a href="http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin\_Killer" title="wikipedia.org">Chinese</a> [wikipedia.org] article may be more "culturally sensitive," there's still <a href="http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/\%E8\%A3\%B8\%E9\%AB\%94" title="wikipedia.org">some unavoidable images</a> [wikipedia.org] no matter how <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudity" title="wikipedia.org">different they are from the original</a> [wikipedia.org].  If they've never had to deal with the artwork versus pornography issue, they're soon going to discover that banning National Geographic for images of unclothed peoples is just not educationally sound. <br> <br>Looks like we've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users.  <br> <br> As a side note, I don't know if we ended up covering this story but <a href="http://slashdot.org/submission/1135136/China-Blocks-Citizens-From-Registering-cn-Domains?art\_pos=6" title="slashdot.org">citizens apparently can't register domains anymore either</a> [slashdot.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>NSFW warning on all following links !
So that takes care of wikipedia.org or are they censoring en.wikipedia.org differently than zh.wikipedia.org ?
Because while an English [ wikipedia.org ] versus Chinese [ wikipedia.org ] article may be more " culturally sensitive , " there 's still some unavoidable images [ wikipedia.org ] no matter how different they are from the original [ wikipedia.org ] .
If they 've never had to deal with the artwork versus pornography issue , they 're soon going to discover that banning National Geographic for images of unclothed peoples is just not educationally sound .
Looks like we 've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users .
As a side note , I do n't know if we ended up covering this story but citizens apparently ca n't register domains anymore either [ slashdot.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NSFW warning on all following links!
So that takes care of wikipedia.org or are they censoring en.wikipedia.org differently than zh.wikipedia.org?
Because while an English [wikipedia.org] versus Chinese [wikipedia.org] article may be more "culturally sensitive," there's still some unavoidable images [wikipedia.org] no matter how different they are from the original [wikipedia.org].
If they've never had to deal with the artwork versus pornography issue, they're soon going to discover that banning National Geographic for images of unclothed peoples is just not educationally sound.
Looks like we've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users.
As a side note, I don't know if we ended up covering this story but citizens apparently can't register domains anymore either [slashdot.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524590</id>
	<title>Re:After a thorough review</title>
	<author>pwfffff</author>
	<datestamp>1261501860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please change your sig. The first time an idiot fell for it, it was funny. Now it's just annoying.</p><p>Too many idiots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please change your sig .
The first time an idiot fell for it , it was funny .
Now it 's just annoying.Too many idiots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please change your sig.
The first time an idiot fell for it, it was funny.
Now it's just annoying.Too many idiots.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522224</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>ross.w</author>
	<datestamp>1261483860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No it's not legal, yes in places it's very easy.</p><p>In Shanghai I saw old ladies with children in tow selling pirated porn DVDs near a railway station.</p><p>No I didn't buy any.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No it 's not legal , yes in places it 's very easy.In Shanghai I saw old ladies with children in tow selling pirated porn DVDs near a railway station.No I did n't buy any .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No it's not legal, yes in places it's very easy.In Shanghai I saw old ladies with children in tow selling pirated porn DVDs near a railway station.No I didn't buy any.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520768</id>
	<title>After a thorough review</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261420500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Afer a thorough review, being very careful
to make sure that there is absolutely no sexual
connotation whatsoever, we have determined that
all but the following are prohibited:</p><p>Binary 1.  No.  Dammit.  OK.  Zero.  Dammit!!!
Nevermind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Afer a thorough review , being very careful to make sure that there is absolutely no sexual connotation whatsoever , we have determined that all but the following are prohibited : Binary 1 .
No. Dammit .
OK. Zero .
Dammit ! ! ! Nevermind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Afer a thorough review, being very careful
to make sure that there is absolutely no sexual
connotation whatsoever, we have determined that
all but the following are prohibited:Binary 1.
No.  Dammit.
OK.  Zero.
Dammit!!!
Nevermind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30532948</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, because the US is the bastion of freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261508340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the West, being ASIAN is a sin!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the West , being ASIAN is a sin !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the West, being ASIAN is a sin!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521424</id>
	<title>Re:The Internet as "default-deny"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261472640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not really true. Many Chinese especially the youth can differentiate between their government and their country. Also you forget the so called market reforms have only really improved the lives of roughly a third of the population. That means there is still 700 million or so people who live in relative poverty. And the rising middle-class is capped so to speak thanks to Chinese currency manipulation.</p><p>The Chinese government is trying its best to hold power over its people... but really it's too late. The real question is will China be democratic in 20 or 50 years? And will it be peaceful reforms or bloodshed?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not really true .
Many Chinese especially the youth can differentiate between their government and their country .
Also you forget the so called market reforms have only really improved the lives of roughly a third of the population .
That means there is still 700 million or so people who live in relative poverty .
And the rising middle-class is capped so to speak thanks to Chinese currency manipulation.The Chinese government is trying its best to hold power over its people... but really it 's too late .
The real question is will China be democratic in 20 or 50 years ?
And will it be peaceful reforms or bloodshed ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not really true.
Many Chinese especially the youth can differentiate between their government and their country.
Also you forget the so called market reforms have only really improved the lives of roughly a third of the population.
That means there is still 700 million or so people who live in relative poverty.
And the rising middle-class is capped so to speak thanks to Chinese currency manipulation.The Chinese government is trying its best to hold power over its people... but really it's too late.
The real question is will China be democratic in 20 or 50 years?
And will it be peaceful reforms or bloodshed?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521242</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>bronney</author>
	<datestamp>1261513080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But what's wrong with vagina??  There was a famous <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wong\_Jim" title="wikipedia.org">Chinese writer from Hong Kong</a> [wikipedia.org] who once wrote "It's ok for the kids to see vagina.  For the kids that aren't aroused by vagina, it'll be boring to look at and they will lose interest in a sec.  For the kids that are aroused, they will find their own vagina before you can do anything about it."</p><p>What's stopping "these kids" from googling vagina is their own disinterest.  Do you google "how to kill someone with bare hands" and "how to make a bomb from household substance"?  I think not.  And why not?  Should we ban those too?</p><p>Excuse my pun but fuck vaginas.  There's nothing wrong with the internet, what could be wrong, is all in our minds.  Wait I got some google images to view now...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But what 's wrong with vagina ? ?
There was a famous Chinese writer from Hong Kong [ wikipedia.org ] who once wrote " It 's ok for the kids to see vagina .
For the kids that are n't aroused by vagina , it 'll be boring to look at and they will lose interest in a sec .
For the kids that are aroused , they will find their own vagina before you can do anything about it .
" What 's stopping " these kids " from googling vagina is their own disinterest .
Do you google " how to kill someone with bare hands " and " how to make a bomb from household substance " ?
I think not .
And why not ?
Should we ban those too ? Excuse my pun but fuck vaginas .
There 's nothing wrong with the internet , what could be wrong , is all in our minds .
Wait I got some google images to view now.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But what's wrong with vagina??
There was a famous Chinese writer from Hong Kong [wikipedia.org] who once wrote "It's ok for the kids to see vagina.
For the kids that aren't aroused by vagina, it'll be boring to look at and they will lose interest in a sec.
For the kids that are aroused, they will find their own vagina before you can do anything about it.
"What's stopping "these kids" from googling vagina is their own disinterest.
Do you google "how to kill someone with bare hands" and "how to make a bomb from household substance"?
I think not.
And why not?
Should we ban those too?Excuse my pun but fuck vaginas.
There's nothing wrong with the internet, what could be wrong, is all in our minds.
Wait I got some google images to view now...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520998</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1261423500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why does a "vagina" have to be <i>taboo</i>?! If parents with 14th-century mentalities had spines and didn't make everything a "forbidden fruit", then kids wouldn't have a reason to become obsessed with finding the "meaning" of sex. A vagina is a part of the body like an arm or a leg. It performs one or more functions. Sex is a process, it performs a function. Sex takes raw materials and uses other natural bodily processes to build something. What's so funny about that?<br> <br>

Teaching children that things which come naturally to them are "taboo" only leads to confusion or worse. Though I understand where you're coming from, I'm one of those poor saps who felt the need during adolescence to acquire porn for the sake of discovery because I was led to believe that sex was something super-secret that only special people knew about.<br> <br>

It's as if parents are afraid of their offspring reaching earlier physical and emotional maturity. Why? It's a natural consequence of improved nutrition and availability of information.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does a " vagina " have to be taboo ? !
If parents with 14th-century mentalities had spines and did n't make everything a " forbidden fruit " , then kids would n't have a reason to become obsessed with finding the " meaning " of sex .
A vagina is a part of the body like an arm or a leg .
It performs one or more functions .
Sex is a process , it performs a function .
Sex takes raw materials and uses other natural bodily processes to build something .
What 's so funny about that ?
Teaching children that things which come naturally to them are " taboo " only leads to confusion or worse .
Though I understand where you 're coming from , I 'm one of those poor saps who felt the need during adolescence to acquire porn for the sake of discovery because I was led to believe that sex was something super-secret that only special people knew about .
It 's as if parents are afraid of their offspring reaching earlier physical and emotional maturity .
Why ? It 's a natural consequence of improved nutrition and availability of information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does a "vagina" have to be taboo?!
If parents with 14th-century mentalities had spines and didn't make everything a "forbidden fruit", then kids wouldn't have a reason to become obsessed with finding the "meaning" of sex.
A vagina is a part of the body like an arm or a leg.
It performs one or more functions.
Sex is a process, it performs a function.
Sex takes raw materials and uses other natural bodily processes to build something.
What's so funny about that?
Teaching children that things which come naturally to them are "taboo" only leads to confusion or worse.
Though I understand where you're coming from, I'm one of those poor saps who felt the need during adolescence to acquire porn for the sake of discovery because I was led to believe that sex was something super-secret that only special people knew about.
It's as if parents are afraid of their offspring reaching earlier physical and emotional maturity.
Why? It's a natural consequence of improved nutrition and availability of information.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30531578</id>
	<title>Re:Join the club, China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261491000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>lulz. enjoy your -lv L4D2</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>lulz .
enjoy your -lv L4D2</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lulz.
enjoy your -lv L4D2</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521164</id>
	<title>Re:Yea Right, it's all about "Porn."</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>uuhh... hello, the children??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>uuhh... hello , the children ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>uuhh... hello, the children?
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521084</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1261424700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just like those "free drug" workplaces?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like those " free drug " workplaces ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like those "free drug" workplaces?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521174</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261512000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I live in China, and most of the time English Wikipedia works fine. However, there are occasional times when I will search for something, and the whole site will be unreachable for a few minutes. Today I went to this page: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitreya" title="wikipedia.org">Maitreya</a> [wikipedia.org], and before the page could fully load, my connection was mysteriously reset. I was frustrated, but eventually I could connect again and other Wikipedia pages were accessible. Just to check to make sure there really was something strange, I just tried accessing the page again after several hours of otherwise-functional Wikipedia access. Same thing, and now I can't reach Wikipedia again! And now after a few minutes, I'm reading about other things without a problem. But I still have not been able to access the Maitreya page.<br> <br>This leads me to believe that there is a proxy that uses dynamic filtering that watches web page contents. "Maitreya" is a really tame page, and it's just about a Buddhist figure, and I never have any other problems with normal religious pages. However, there have been several movements and cults throughout history where the member will claim to be Maitreya (the future Buddha). There is a section on the Maitreya page that covers this ugly / strange side, so I'm guessing that any talk about cults may have the clamp on it. The way pages are filtered is pretty strange here. For example, half of the Google Images results will typically be missing. This may be because the government tries to only block out image results, but Google constantly adds new servers to host them.<br> <br>You can forget about Blogger, YouTube, Facebook, etc. They are all blocked here, but nobody cares in China because they use different websites. It's more of a pain in the ass than anything -- it's not really going to comprehensively censor anything, but it certainly makes using the Web a more frustrating and needlessly-limiting experience for any foreigners.<br> <br>The big thing now being pushed by the government in China is morality, and I actually agree with that emphasis. That is, taking the high road of governance and focusing on culture rather than overt methods of control and regulation. This idea is totally in harmony with China's ancient humanistic culture and the original teachings of Confucianism and Daoism. However, contrived morality by means of censorship is not really encouraging people to be kinder, more caring, or otherwise more ethical. It is not going to help people to develop notions of justice or equality, or to nurture individual consciousness of one's own actions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in China , and most of the time English Wikipedia works fine .
However , there are occasional times when I will search for something , and the whole site will be unreachable for a few minutes .
Today I went to this page : Maitreya [ wikipedia.org ] , and before the page could fully load , my connection was mysteriously reset .
I was frustrated , but eventually I could connect again and other Wikipedia pages were accessible .
Just to check to make sure there really was something strange , I just tried accessing the page again after several hours of otherwise-functional Wikipedia access .
Same thing , and now I ca n't reach Wikipedia again !
And now after a few minutes , I 'm reading about other things without a problem .
But I still have not been able to access the Maitreya page .
This leads me to believe that there is a proxy that uses dynamic filtering that watches web page contents .
" Maitreya " is a really tame page , and it 's just about a Buddhist figure , and I never have any other problems with normal religious pages .
However , there have been several movements and cults throughout history where the member will claim to be Maitreya ( the future Buddha ) .
There is a section on the Maitreya page that covers this ugly / strange side , so I 'm guessing that any talk about cults may have the clamp on it .
The way pages are filtered is pretty strange here .
For example , half of the Google Images results will typically be missing .
This may be because the government tries to only block out image results , but Google constantly adds new servers to host them .
You can forget about Blogger , YouTube , Facebook , etc .
They are all blocked here , but nobody cares in China because they use different websites .
It 's more of a pain in the ass than anything -- it 's not really going to comprehensively censor anything , but it certainly makes using the Web a more frustrating and needlessly-limiting experience for any foreigners .
The big thing now being pushed by the government in China is morality , and I actually agree with that emphasis .
That is , taking the high road of governance and focusing on culture rather than overt methods of control and regulation .
This idea is totally in harmony with China 's ancient humanistic culture and the original teachings of Confucianism and Daoism .
However , contrived morality by means of censorship is not really encouraging people to be kinder , more caring , or otherwise more ethical .
It is not going to help people to develop notions of justice or equality , or to nurture individual consciousness of one 's own actions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in China, and most of the time English Wikipedia works fine.
However, there are occasional times when I will search for something, and the whole site will be unreachable for a few minutes.
Today I went to this page: Maitreya [wikipedia.org], and before the page could fully load, my connection was mysteriously reset.
I was frustrated, but eventually I could connect again and other Wikipedia pages were accessible.
Just to check to make sure there really was something strange, I just tried accessing the page again after several hours of otherwise-functional Wikipedia access.
Same thing, and now I can't reach Wikipedia again!
And now after a few minutes, I'm reading about other things without a problem.
But I still have not been able to access the Maitreya page.
This leads me to believe that there is a proxy that uses dynamic filtering that watches web page contents.
"Maitreya" is a really tame page, and it's just about a Buddhist figure, and I never have any other problems with normal religious pages.
However, there have been several movements and cults throughout history where the member will claim to be Maitreya (the future Buddha).
There is a section on the Maitreya page that covers this ugly / strange side, so I'm guessing that any talk about cults may have the clamp on it.
The way pages are filtered is pretty strange here.
For example, half of the Google Images results will typically be missing.
This may be because the government tries to only block out image results, but Google constantly adds new servers to host them.
You can forget about Blogger, YouTube, Facebook, etc.
They are all blocked here, but nobody cares in China because they use different websites.
It's more of a pain in the ass than anything -- it's not really going to comprehensively censor anything, but it certainly makes using the Web a more frustrating and needlessly-limiting experience for any foreigners.
The big thing now being pushed by the government in China is morality, and I actually agree with that emphasis.
That is, taking the high road of governance and focusing on culture rather than overt methods of control and regulation.
This idea is totally in harmony with China's ancient humanistic culture and the original teachings of Confucianism and Daoism.
However, contrived morality by means of censorship is not really encouraging people to be kinder, more caring, or otherwise more ethical.
It is not going to help people to develop notions of justice or equality, or to nurture individual consciousness of one's own actions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521860</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1261478280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If they've never had to deal with the artwork versus pornography issue, they're soon going to discover that banning National Geographic for images of unclothed peoples is just not educationally sound.</p></div><p>Nonsense. Nobody in their right mind has any difficulty distinguishing between depictions of nudity and pornography - the fundamental problem with porn is not that it depicts naked people engaged in the natural activity of copulation, but that it is so obviously false and artificial. Porn, in my view, does not make people obsessed with sex - it turns you off from it; especially if you imagine this is the way it should be.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Looks like we've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users.</p></div><p>I'm not sure I can see that. Quite apart from the question whether it is "amusing" or not that other people have a "painful" experience, I don't think there is going to be anything painful about it. Contrary to common conceptions on slashdot, most people are not really all that interested in pornography - it is simply too shallow and artificial. So, just like people don't want to be bathed in ever more stupid and intrusive adverts when they browse, they also don't want to be annoyed with the imbecile ravings of those that think pornography is the most refined and advanced artform in the world. All in all, I think ridding the web of porn is going to be a very popular move, and I can't see that it is going to be much of a technological challenge either.</p><p>Western companies are very keen to be able to trade in the Chinese market, so they will comply, no doubt.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they 've never had to deal with the artwork versus pornography issue , they 're soon going to discover that banning National Geographic for images of unclothed peoples is just not educationally sound.Nonsense .
Nobody in their right mind has any difficulty distinguishing between depictions of nudity and pornography - the fundamental problem with porn is not that it depicts naked people engaged in the natural activity of copulation , but that it is so obviously false and artificial .
Porn , in my view , does not make people obsessed with sex - it turns you off from it ; especially if you imagine this is the way it should be.Looks like we 've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users.I 'm not sure I can see that .
Quite apart from the question whether it is " amusing " or not that other people have a " painful " experience , I do n't think there is going to be anything painful about it .
Contrary to common conceptions on slashdot , most people are not really all that interested in pornography - it is simply too shallow and artificial .
So , just like people do n't want to be bathed in ever more stupid and intrusive adverts when they browse , they also do n't want to be annoyed with the imbecile ravings of those that think pornography is the most refined and advanced artform in the world .
All in all , I think ridding the web of porn is going to be a very popular move , and I ca n't see that it is going to be much of a technological challenge either.Western companies are very keen to be able to trade in the Chinese market , so they will comply , no doubt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they've never had to deal with the artwork versus pornography issue, they're soon going to discover that banning National Geographic for images of unclothed peoples is just not educationally sound.Nonsense.
Nobody in their right mind has any difficulty distinguishing between depictions of nudity and pornography - the fundamental problem with porn is not that it depicts naked people engaged in the natural activity of copulation, but that it is so obviously false and artificial.
Porn, in my view, does not make people obsessed with sex - it turns you off from it; especially if you imagine this is the way it should be.Looks like we've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users.I'm not sure I can see that.
Quite apart from the question whether it is "amusing" or not that other people have a "painful" experience, I don't think there is going to be anything painful about it.
Contrary to common conceptions on slashdot, most people are not really all that interested in pornography - it is simply too shallow and artificial.
So, just like people don't want to be bathed in ever more stupid and intrusive adverts when they browse, they also don't want to be annoyed with the imbecile ravings of those that think pornography is the most refined and advanced artform in the world.
All in all, I think ridding the web of porn is going to be a very popular move, and I can't see that it is going to be much of a technological challenge either.Western companies are very keen to be able to trade in the Chinese market, so they will comply, no doubt.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521444</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261473000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The grammar nazi in me has to correct you - its  huang se de DVD (or huang se de dian ying), not huang de dvd.  Although more commonly known here in China as san ji pian.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The grammar nazi in me has to correct you - its huang se de DVD ( or huang se de dian ying ) , not huang de dvd .
Although more commonly known here in China as san ji pian .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The grammar nazi in me has to correct you - its  huang se de DVD (or huang se de dian ying), not huang de dvd.
Although more commonly known here in China as san ji pian.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522106</id>
	<title>hipocrisy!</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1261481640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the nation that brought us tubgirl and eel soup.  Oh, the hypocrisy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the nation that brought us tubgirl and eel soup .
Oh , the hypocrisy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the nation that brought us tubgirl and eel soup.
Oh, the hypocrisy!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524676</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>metlin</author>
	<datestamp>1261502280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would just say that porn is not the same as information.</p><p>Porn by its very definition has a different purpose than an image that's supposed to be informative. I mean, could you get it off with a picture of a tribal woman from East Africa? Umm, I suppose - but that's not the point of the image. By that definition, you could get it off with an abstract drawing of nudity, and I'm sure that Chinese glamor/pop magazines have hotter (and relatively scantily clad) women to look at.</p><p>I thought the article was talking about blocking porn, not necessarily every nude picture of a human on the Internet.</p><p>How you combined the two, I do not know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would just say that porn is not the same as information.Porn by its very definition has a different purpose than an image that 's supposed to be informative .
I mean , could you get it off with a picture of a tribal woman from East Africa ?
Umm , I suppose - but that 's not the point of the image .
By that definition , you could get it off with an abstract drawing of nudity , and I 'm sure that Chinese glamor/pop magazines have hotter ( and relatively scantily clad ) women to look at.I thought the article was talking about blocking porn , not necessarily every nude picture of a human on the Internet.How you combined the two , I do not know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would just say that porn is not the same as information.Porn by its very definition has a different purpose than an image that's supposed to be informative.
I mean, could you get it off with a picture of a tribal woman from East Africa?
Umm, I suppose - but that's not the point of the image.
By that definition, you could get it off with an abstract drawing of nudity, and I'm sure that Chinese glamor/pop magazines have hotter (and relatively scantily clad) women to look at.I thought the article was talking about blocking porn, not necessarily every nude picture of a human on the Internet.How you combined the two, I do not know.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521468</id>
	<title>Re:The difference between China and the US</title>
	<author>wvmarle</author>
	<datestamp>1261473180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Too black-and-white stated. On the Chinese side that is. A lot of censorship in China is in the form of self-censorship: newspapers have some vague guidelines on not publishing stories that could "cause civil unrest" for example. They are generally NOT checked before publishing, only afterwards, and punishment can be severe. Thus they self-censor. The same accounts for web sites and other media outlets.
</p><p>Allowing private persons to register domains of course helps them to publish their views, and that's I think the main reason of this new regulation. Porn is just a nice excuse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Too black-and-white stated .
On the Chinese side that is .
A lot of censorship in China is in the form of self-censorship : newspapers have some vague guidelines on not publishing stories that could " cause civil unrest " for example .
They are generally NOT checked before publishing , only afterwards , and punishment can be severe .
Thus they self-censor .
The same accounts for web sites and other media outlets .
Allowing private persons to register domains of course helps them to publish their views , and that 's I think the main reason of this new regulation .
Porn is just a nice excuse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too black-and-white stated.
On the Chinese side that is.
A lot of censorship in China is in the form of self-censorship: newspapers have some vague guidelines on not publishing stories that could "cause civil unrest" for example.
They are generally NOT checked before publishing, only afterwards, and punishment can be severe.
Thus they self-censor.
The same accounts for web sites and other media outlets.
Allowing private persons to register domains of course helps them to publish their views, and that's I think the main reason of this new regulation.
Porn is just a nice excuse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521726</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>ProfessionalCookie</author>
	<datestamp>1261476540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you meant <b>NSFC</b>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you meant NSFC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you meant NSFC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520792</id>
	<title>Join the club, China</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261420920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Glad I live in Australia, where freedom of speech rules and the population wouldn't put up with this bullshit. Oh wait<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Glad I live in Australia , where freedom of speech rules and the population would n't put up with this bullshit .
Oh wait .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Glad I live in Australia, where freedom of speech rules and the population wouldn't put up with this bullshit.
Oh wait ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520658</id>
	<title>I suspect...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261419600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[quote]the China is planning to enforce a whitelist on foreign domains[/quote]</p><p>written by a Chinese person?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ quote ] the China is planning to enforce a whitelist on foreign domains [ /quote ] written by a Chinese person ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[quote]the China is planning to enforce a whitelist on foreign domains[/quote]written by a Chinese person?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522778</id>
	<title>Re:Conspiracy, or just idiocy?</title>
	<author>desmogod</author>
	<datestamp>1261491180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How do they plan on dealing with the ah, excess males? Send them off to war?</p></div><p>You should perhaps be more concerned about this comment than you currently are....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do they plan on dealing with the ah , excess males ?
Send them off to war ? You should perhaps be more concerned about this comment than you currently are... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do they plan on dealing with the ah, excess males?
Send them off to war?You should perhaps be more concerned about this comment than you currently are....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30544416</id>
	<title>Re:The Internet as "default-deny"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261673880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm Mexican, there is a saying in my country "even if it is a golden cage, it is still a cage". Around 200 years ago the people here struggled to stop being the most prosperous Spanish colony in the Americas in order to become an independent country, 100 years ago people struggled to overthrown a prosperous dictatorship in order to become a democracy; both times people got screwed by the resulting new elite (the mestizo oligarchy and the revolutionary party) but still the conflicts showed great popular support as most of the people were very angry with both overthrown governments. Prosperity doesn't means equality, this was the case here and is the case in china because although high communist party officials and factory owners can collect rolls royces, most people have to make computers and shoes for a pay you and I would simply not take, sure some of the money pours down and being a "communist" country means there must be a lot of social programs, but still is not who many die of hunger but how different are the poor wallets from the rich wallets which causes contempt towards the system. Free of speech is welcomed everywhere but is very dangerous to totalitarian regimes no matter how good they are bringing prosperity, the enlightenment has reached China just because this is the same fucking world, the values put forward in that historic period of Europe had very deep consequences everywhere in how people interacted with the power, the Chinese revolution owes a lot ideologically not only to Marx but also to Rosseau, Locke, and many others. Modern China is a nation created with the illusion that after the revolution those very ideals would dictate the politics and economy, in the same fashion USA or Mexico were born; and just like in those countries the current government  pays no attention and only protects the interests of big money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm Mexican , there is a saying in my country " even if it is a golden cage , it is still a cage " .
Around 200 years ago the people here struggled to stop being the most prosperous Spanish colony in the Americas in order to become an independent country , 100 years ago people struggled to overthrown a prosperous dictatorship in order to become a democracy ; both times people got screwed by the resulting new elite ( the mestizo oligarchy and the revolutionary party ) but still the conflicts showed great popular support as most of the people were very angry with both overthrown governments .
Prosperity does n't means equality , this was the case here and is the case in china because although high communist party officials and factory owners can collect rolls royces , most people have to make computers and shoes for a pay you and I would simply not take , sure some of the money pours down and being a " communist " country means there must be a lot of social programs , but still is not who many die of hunger but how different are the poor wallets from the rich wallets which causes contempt towards the system .
Free of speech is welcomed everywhere but is very dangerous to totalitarian regimes no matter how good they are bringing prosperity , the enlightenment has reached China just because this is the same fucking world , the values put forward in that historic period of Europe had very deep consequences everywhere in how people interacted with the power , the Chinese revolution owes a lot ideologically not only to Marx but also to Rosseau , Locke , and many others .
Modern China is a nation created with the illusion that after the revolution those very ideals would dictate the politics and economy , in the same fashion USA or Mexico were born ; and just like in those countries the current government pays no attention and only protects the interests of big money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm Mexican, there is a saying in my country "even if it is a golden cage, it is still a cage".
Around 200 years ago the people here struggled to stop being the most prosperous Spanish colony in the Americas in order to become an independent country, 100 years ago people struggled to overthrown a prosperous dictatorship in order to become a democracy; both times people got screwed by the resulting new elite (the mestizo oligarchy and the revolutionary party) but still the conflicts showed great popular support as most of the people were very angry with both overthrown governments.
Prosperity doesn't means equality, this was the case here and is the case in china because although high communist party officials and factory owners can collect rolls royces, most people have to make computers and shoes for a pay you and I would simply not take, sure some of the money pours down and being a "communist" country means there must be a lot of social programs, but still is not who many die of hunger but how different are the poor wallets from the rich wallets which causes contempt towards the system.
Free of speech is welcomed everywhere but is very dangerous to totalitarian regimes no matter how good they are bringing prosperity, the enlightenment has reached China just because this is the same fucking world, the values put forward in that historic period of Europe had very deep consequences everywhere in how people interacted with the power, the Chinese revolution owes a lot ideologically not only to Marx but also to Rosseau, Locke, and many others.
Modern China is a nation created with the illusion that after the revolution those very ideals would dictate the politics and economy, in the same fashion USA or Mexico were born; and just like in those countries the current government  pays no attention and only protects the interests of big money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524458</id>
	<title>Re:Yea Right, it's all about "Porn."</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261501440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why did it take so long for someone to finally post a comment about what the actual issue is?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why did it take so long for someone to finally post a comment about what the actual issue is ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why did it take so long for someone to finally post a comment about what the actual issue is?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523148</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>PenisLands</author>
	<datestamp>1261494480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nice post. Everything about it screams "please moderate my comment favourably. I prefer insightful." And of course, you had to add an emotive and clever 'punchline' to the end of it, like all the cool people do.
<br> <br>
Why don't you go to google and search for "vagina" or something? Heh heh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice post .
Everything about it screams " please moderate my comment favourably .
I prefer insightful .
" And of course , you had to add an emotive and clever 'punchline ' to the end of it , like all the cool people do .
Why do n't you go to google and search for " vagina " or something ?
Heh heh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice post.
Everything about it screams "please moderate my comment favourably.
I prefer insightful.
" And of course, you had to add an emotive and clever 'punchline' to the end of it, like all the cool people do.
Why don't you go to google and search for "vagina" or something?
Heh heh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521386</id>
	<title>Re:The difference between China and the US</title>
	<author>cowboy76Spain</author>
	<datestamp>1261515180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It makes me sick of people saying that Western Countries are worse than China just because they are not perfect.</p><p>First of all, nobody is saying that, by registering, you won't be prosecuted by the Government. If you register, post things in favor of Falung Long, the Dalai Lama, the Tiananmen students, be sure you'll be prosecuted. No need for you to post false statement, putting verified truths that harm no one will put you in trouble. <b>Registering does not bring safety to you</b>, it brings security to the Government that they will know where to find you if they want to.</p><p>Also, here in Western People we have the Empire of Law. It means you have to be judged by the law of the country(*) and, if you find an unfair judge, you can appeal. In China and similar countries, if you are labeled Enemy of the State, it does not matter if you never broke one of their laws. Even if you don't get condemned, you can easily lose your job and become a pariah. And forget about complaining of the behaviour of the security forces of the country, maybe here there are cover-ups but there you'll probably just get beaten by the same police to which you complain.</p><p>Saying that this measure is better than we have, is like saying that censorship is good because it allows newspapers to know that they won't be sued for libel. You give your freedom, and you don't ever get a security back</p><p>Pick your choice</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It makes me sick of people saying that Western Countries are worse than China just because they are not perfect.First of all , nobody is saying that , by registering , you wo n't be prosecuted by the Government .
If you register , post things in favor of Falung Long , the Dalai Lama , the Tiananmen students , be sure you 'll be prosecuted .
No need for you to post false statement , putting verified truths that harm no one will put you in trouble .
Registering does not bring safety to you , it brings security to the Government that they will know where to find you if they want to.Also , here in Western People we have the Empire of Law .
It means you have to be judged by the law of the country ( * ) and , if you find an unfair judge , you can appeal .
In China and similar countries , if you are labeled Enemy of the State , it does not matter if you never broke one of their laws .
Even if you do n't get condemned , you can easily lose your job and become a pariah .
And forget about complaining of the behaviour of the security forces of the country , maybe here there are cover-ups but there you 'll probably just get beaten by the same police to which you complain.Saying that this measure is better than we have , is like saying that censorship is good because it allows newspapers to know that they wo n't be sued for libel .
You give your freedom , and you do n't ever get a security backPick your choice</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It makes me sick of people saying that Western Countries are worse than China just because they are not perfect.First of all, nobody is saying that, by registering, you won't be prosecuted by the Government.
If you register, post things in favor of Falung Long, the Dalai Lama, the Tiananmen students, be sure you'll be prosecuted.
No need for you to post false statement, putting verified truths that harm no one will put you in trouble.
Registering does not bring safety to you, it brings security to the Government that they will know where to find you if they want to.Also, here in Western People we have the Empire of Law.
It means you have to be judged by the law of the country(*) and, if you find an unfair judge, you can appeal.
In China and similar countries, if you are labeled Enemy of the State, it does not matter if you never broke one of their laws.
Even if you don't get condemned, you can easily lose your job and become a pariah.
And forget about complaining of the behaviour of the security forces of the country, maybe here there are cover-ups but there you'll probably just get beaten by the same police to which you complain.Saying that this measure is better than we have, is like saying that censorship is good because it allows newspapers to know that they won't be sued for libel.
You give your freedom, and you don't ever get a security backPick your choice</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521822</id>
	<title>Re:The difference between China and the US</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1261477740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Freedom is a completely judicial and philosophical concept. If enough people believe in this "hoax", if enough judges, lawyers, police officers, even a few non-corrupted-to-the-core politicians believe in it, it becomes something that has a weight.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Freedom is a completely judicial and philosophical concept .
If enough people believe in this " hoax " , if enough judges , lawyers , police officers , even a few non-corrupted-to-the-core politicians believe in it , it becomes something that has a weight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Freedom is a completely judicial and philosophical concept.
If enough people believe in this "hoax", if enough judges, lawyers, police officers, even a few non-corrupted-to-the-core politicians believe in it, it becomes something that has a weight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520834</id>
	<title>All authoritarian regimes do this</title>
	<author>MrSnivvel</author>
	<datestamp>1261421280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Repress the fuckin' - Repress the people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Repress the fuckin ' - Repress the people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Repress the fuckin' - Repress the people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521132</id>
	<title>Re:What is with commies and sex?</title>
	<author>Caraig</author>
	<datestamp>1261425120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not just the communists that get a hardon from making gay folk into some kind of second-class citizenry....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not just the communists that get a hardon from making gay folk into some kind of second-class citizenry... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not just the communists that get a hardon from making gay folk into some kind of second-class citizenry....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526272</id>
	<title>Re:The Internet as "default-deny"</title>
	<author>IgnoramusMaximus</author>
	<datestamp>1261509840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Ever since Deng Xiaoping ditched university Marxism and took the Communist Party on the capitalist road ("socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious") life has only gotten better in China.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>Now that is a mind-bender...
</p><p>It has a distinction of being the most illogical, incoherent, self-contradictory shot at one of the oldest intellectual pursuits of man: to "justify" ones' own greed and desire for power over others.
</p><p>While Marxism is quite demonstrably dysfunctional, at its core premise lie the notions that we are all responsible for the bulk of each other's success and that the disparities in talent and drive are, even at their extremes, nowhere near to the disparities in accumulation of wealth and power which the feudal and capitalist systems were constructed to <b>purposefully</b> allow (it is in fact their main function, to justify the very few to grab nearly all from the very many by creating an illusion of a popular increase in - usually endless-debt or trade-imbalance based - "standard of living", all behind superficially appealing but upon deeper analysis completely illogical assumptions). And so "socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious" idiocy is easily dispatched: in order to get "gloriously" rich one has to make sure that many, many others <b>do not</b> get "gloriously" rich - because if they do<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... one is no longer "gloriously" rich, one becomes only an "average" individual. You can easily observe this from global statistical trends - accumulation of ever more global wealth in the hands of ever proportionately fewer people and the disparity between very very few "gloriously rich" and the rest of the global population was (and is) growing since its previous reset in the 1929 market crash, having accelerated massively with the fall of the USSR and the Chinese about-face. It has now exceeded the pre-1929 levels. If Capitalism had the effect of getting everyone to become wealthy, the "tide" (speaking of the other oft-repeated idiotic imagery on the subject) having "lifted all the boats", this trend would not be occurring, instead there would be global narrowing of the gap as the unwashed masses got richer too. Alas, it seems that luxury yachts are the only ones that go up,  apparently the row-boat owners are to be encouraged to hold breath instead<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
</p><p>Add to this the fact that China, India and many others simply <b>cannot</b> (its physically impossible) to achieve the levels of locust-like consumerism that the USA and EU boast (it would mean total destruction of environment and depletion of most of global natural resources) and you have a recipe for the next social disaster. Its just a matter of time before consumerism-based ideologies fail in a lot of places (they already are mightily wobbly - just take a look at the financial shape the USA is in) and are replaced by a rash of Marxism-like meritocracy-based corrections again, which will then be thoroughly corrupted by the same people who come up with things like Capitalism, which will cause those to fail, to be replaced with some new "glorious to get rich" scheme<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... lather, rinse, repeat ad infinitum.
</p><p>The reality is that Humanity is, when you get down to it, rather imbecilic and hopeless as a group.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ever since Deng Xiaoping ditched university Marxism and took the Communist Party on the capitalist road ( " socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious " ) life has only gotten better in China .
Now that is a mind-bender.. . It has a distinction of being the most illogical , incoherent , self-contradictory shot at one of the oldest intellectual pursuits of man : to " justify " ones ' own greed and desire for power over others .
While Marxism is quite demonstrably dysfunctional , at its core premise lie the notions that we are all responsible for the bulk of each other 's success and that the disparities in talent and drive are , even at their extremes , nowhere near to the disparities in accumulation of wealth and power which the feudal and capitalist systems were constructed to purposefully allow ( it is in fact their main function , to justify the very few to grab nearly all from the very many by creating an illusion of a popular increase in - usually endless-debt or trade-imbalance based - " standard of living " , all behind superficially appealing but upon deeper analysis completely illogical assumptions ) .
And so " socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious " idiocy is easily dispatched : in order to get " gloriously " rich one has to make sure that many , many others do not get " gloriously " rich - because if they do ... one is no longer " gloriously " rich , one becomes only an " average " individual .
You can easily observe this from global statistical trends - accumulation of ever more global wealth in the hands of ever proportionately fewer people and the disparity between very very few " gloriously rich " and the rest of the global population was ( and is ) growing since its previous reset in the 1929 market crash , having accelerated massively with the fall of the USSR and the Chinese about-face .
It has now exceeded the pre-1929 levels .
If Capitalism had the effect of getting everyone to become wealthy , the " tide " ( speaking of the other oft-repeated idiotic imagery on the subject ) having " lifted all the boats " , this trend would not be occurring , instead there would be global narrowing of the gap as the unwashed masses got richer too .
Alas , it seems that luxury yachts are the only ones that go up , apparently the row-boat owners are to be encouraged to hold breath instead .. . Add to this the fact that China , India and many others simply can not ( its physically impossible ) to achieve the levels of locust-like consumerism that the USA and EU boast ( it would mean total destruction of environment and depletion of most of global natural resources ) and you have a recipe for the next social disaster .
Its just a matter of time before consumerism-based ideologies fail in a lot of places ( they already are mightily wobbly - just take a look at the financial shape the USA is in ) and are replaced by a rash of Marxism-like meritocracy-based corrections again , which will then be thoroughly corrupted by the same people who come up with things like Capitalism , which will cause those to fail , to be replaced with some new " glorious to get rich " scheme ... lather , rinse , repeat ad infinitum .
The reality is that Humanity is , when you get down to it , rather imbecilic and hopeless as a group .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ever since Deng Xiaoping ditched university Marxism and took the Communist Party on the capitalist road ("socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious") life has only gotten better in China.
Now that is a mind-bender...
It has a distinction of being the most illogical, incoherent, self-contradictory shot at one of the oldest intellectual pursuits of man: to "justify" ones' own greed and desire for power over others.
While Marxism is quite demonstrably dysfunctional, at its core premise lie the notions that we are all responsible for the bulk of each other's success and that the disparities in talent and drive are, even at their extremes, nowhere near to the disparities in accumulation of wealth and power which the feudal and capitalist systems were constructed to purposefully allow (it is in fact their main function, to justify the very few to grab nearly all from the very many by creating an illusion of a popular increase in - usually endless-debt or trade-imbalance based - "standard of living", all behind superficially appealing but upon deeper analysis completely illogical assumptions).
And so "socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious" idiocy is easily dispatched: in order to get "gloriously" rich one has to make sure that many, many others do not get "gloriously" rich - because if they do ... one is no longer "gloriously" rich, one becomes only an "average" individual.
You can easily observe this from global statistical trends - accumulation of ever more global wealth in the hands of ever proportionately fewer people and the disparity between very very few "gloriously rich" and the rest of the global population was (and is) growing since its previous reset in the 1929 market crash, having accelerated massively with the fall of the USSR and the Chinese about-face.
It has now exceeded the pre-1929 levels.
If Capitalism had the effect of getting everyone to become wealthy, the "tide" (speaking of the other oft-repeated idiotic imagery on the subject) having "lifted all the boats", this trend would not be occurring, instead there would be global narrowing of the gap as the unwashed masses got richer too.
Alas, it seems that luxury yachts are the only ones that go up,  apparently the row-boat owners are to be encouraged to hold breath instead ...
Add to this the fact that China, India and many others simply cannot (its physically impossible) to achieve the levels of locust-like consumerism that the USA and EU boast (it would mean total destruction of environment and depletion of most of global natural resources) and you have a recipe for the next social disaster.
Its just a matter of time before consumerism-based ideologies fail in a lot of places (they already are mightily wobbly - just take a look at the financial shape the USA is in) and are replaced by a rash of Marxism-like meritocracy-based corrections again, which will then be thoroughly corrupted by the same people who come up with things like Capitalism, which will cause those to fail, to be replaced with some new "glorious to get rich" scheme ... lather, rinse, repeat ad infinitum.
The reality is that Humanity is, when you get down to it, rather imbecilic and hopeless as a group.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521156</id>
	<title>Calling It Now</title>
	<author>bistromath007</author>
	<datestamp>1261425300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>In six years, this will be the whole internet, everywhere. They'll probably just stick it into ACTA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In six years , this will be the whole internet , everywhere .
They 'll probably just stick it into ACTA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In six years, this will be the whole internet, everywhere.
They'll probably just stick it into ACTA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526032</id>
	<title>Now they'll need another revolution</title>
	<author>chanio</author>
	<datestamp>1261508820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, now they'll need another revolution to overcome porn.<br>(richer burocrats)</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , now they 'll need another revolution to overcome porn .
( richer burocrats )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, now they'll need another revolution to overcome porn.
(richer burocrats)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524658</id>
	<title>Ob:</title>
	<author>ciderVisor</author>
	<datestamp>1261502220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chinese pr0n == Cream of Sum Yung Gai ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese pr0n = = Cream of Sum Yung Gai ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese pr0n == Cream of Sum Yung Gai ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522428</id>
	<title>Re:Why are commies such prudes?</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1261487460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a common myth that the Chinese are mostly atheists. The vast majority are actually monotheistic.</p><p>They believe in their preternatural and divine creators; <b>the state</b>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a common myth that the Chinese are mostly atheists .
The vast majority are actually monotheistic.They believe in their preternatural and divine creators ; the state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a common myth that the Chinese are mostly atheists.
The vast majority are actually monotheistic.They believe in their preternatural and divine creators; the state.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520764</id>
	<title>Chinese Censorship: Wtf?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261420500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really, really, really hope the Chinese people wake up one day and notice their government has a stranglehold on all information in and out of the country just so it can keep it's own power. Or at least that's how I see it. I really don't know why the Chinese government does what it does but I wish I knew.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really , really , really hope the Chinese people wake up one day and notice their government has a stranglehold on all information in and out of the country just so it can keep it 's own power .
Or at least that 's how I see it .
I really do n't know why the Chinese government does what it does but I wish I knew .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really, really, really hope the Chinese people wake up one day and notice their government has a stranglehold on all information in and out of the country just so it can keep it's own power.
Or at least that's how I see it.
I really don't know why the Chinese government does what it does but I wish I knew.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521390</id>
	<title>Re:What is with commies and sex?</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1261515240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The Soviets had a fetish for persecuting gay people. Now the Red Chinese have developed a fetish for stopping porn.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Because none of that happens is the good, god-fearing, democratic west now does it.<br> <br>

The only difference is that western politicians ban such things for God or the Children, Eastern politicians simply offer no excuse.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Soviets had a fetish for persecuting gay people .
Now the Red Chinese have developed a fetish for stopping porn .
Because none of that happens is the good , god-fearing , democratic west now does it .
The only difference is that western politicians ban such things for God or the Children , Eastern politicians simply offer no excuse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Soviets had a fetish for persecuting gay people.
Now the Red Chinese have developed a fetish for stopping porn.
Because none of that happens is the good, god-fearing, democratic west now does it.
The only difference is that western politicians ban such things for God or the Children, Eastern politicians simply offer no excuse.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521602</id>
	<title>you're insane</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1261475160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Honestly, you are screwed in either country. It's just that the Chinese government is more open about how they're screwing you.</i></p><p>If you think that the US and China are anything alike in terms of liberties, you're totally insane and unfamiliar with the last few decades of history.</p><p>Maybe you should lay off the boulevard press and get an education.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , you are screwed in either country .
It 's just that the Chinese government is more open about how they 're screwing you.If you think that the US and China are anything alike in terms of liberties , you 're totally insane and unfamiliar with the last few decades of history.Maybe you should lay off the boulevard press and get an education .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, you are screwed in either country.
It's just that the Chinese government is more open about how they're screwing you.If you think that the US and China are anything alike in terms of liberties, you're totally insane and unfamiliar with the last few decades of history.Maybe you should lay off the boulevard press and get an education.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523070</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>mog007</author>
	<datestamp>1261493940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article is about Buddhism.  Isn't religion a taboo in China?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article is about Buddhism .
Is n't religion a taboo in China ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article is about Buddhism.
Isn't religion a taboo in China?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522438</id>
	<title>Re:The Internet as "default-deny"</title>
	<author>mjwalshe</author>
	<datestamp>1261487520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>um so if this is the "best govenment" why is the Chniese army set up mostly as a force for internal controll. Though for a majority I suspect that the current state of play is better than the interwar system with warlords.</htmltext>
<tokenext>um so if this is the " best govenment " why is the Chniese army set up mostly as a force for internal controll .
Though for a majority I suspect that the current state of play is better than the interwar system with warlords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>um so if this is the "best govenment" why is the Chniese army set up mostly as a force for internal controll.
Though for a majority I suspect that the current state of play is better than the interwar system with warlords.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522892</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1261492260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who says they aren't ready for it? Who is to say that any of this is even harmful? I know that the mantra has been repeated time and time again throughout our society that seeing images of sexuality is harmful to children, but is there any evidence of this? I feel that it most likely comes from the false Judeo-Christian value system that has been drilled into our heads from before we knew how to talk -- the one that tries to tell us that everything related to sex is bad (at least until you are married) and that we ought to feel bad for being human. You could make at least as powerful a case (if not more so) for this mentality being the cause of harm and you could for pornography, methinks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who says they are n't ready for it ?
Who is to say that any of this is even harmful ?
I know that the mantra has been repeated time and time again throughout our society that seeing images of sexuality is harmful to children , but is there any evidence of this ?
I feel that it most likely comes from the false Judeo-Christian value system that has been drilled into our heads from before we knew how to talk -- the one that tries to tell us that everything related to sex is bad ( at least until you are married ) and that we ought to feel bad for being human .
You could make at least as powerful a case ( if not more so ) for this mentality being the cause of harm and you could for pornography , methinks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who says they aren't ready for it?
Who is to say that any of this is even harmful?
I know that the mantra has been repeated time and time again throughout our society that seeing images of sexuality is harmful to children, but is there any evidence of this?
I feel that it most likely comes from the false Judeo-Christian value system that has been drilled into our heads from before we knew how to talk -- the one that tries to tell us that everything related to sex is bad (at least until you are married) and that we ought to feel bad for being human.
You could make at least as powerful a case (if not more so) for this mentality being the cause of harm and you could for pornography, methinks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522392</id>
	<title>The Command economy will eventually</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261486920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>collapse under its own weight. No matter how many IOU's it has from the USA, the Communist Party of China only remains in power as long as it has a booming economy. The present economic miracle in China is a very recent phenomena and mostly results from the simple arithmetic of raising living standards from nothing to something which always appears to be a large increase. When the economic bubble bursts (and it will) the various factions within the CP and the Red Army will carve their own piece of the Chinese pie to the exclusion of all other interests. By that time, the great firewall and this nonsense won't make any difference.<br>Then Ikea will invade.</htmltext>
<tokenext>collapse under its own weight .
No matter how many IOU 's it has from the USA , the Communist Party of China only remains in power as long as it has a booming economy .
The present economic miracle in China is a very recent phenomena and mostly results from the simple arithmetic of raising living standards from nothing to something which always appears to be a large increase .
When the economic bubble bursts ( and it will ) the various factions within the CP and the Red Army will carve their own piece of the Chinese pie to the exclusion of all other interests .
By that time , the great firewall and this nonsense wo n't make any difference.Then Ikea will invade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>collapse under its own weight.
No matter how many IOU's it has from the USA, the Communist Party of China only remains in power as long as it has a booming economy.
The present economic miracle in China is a very recent phenomena and mostly results from the simple arithmetic of raising living standards from nothing to something which always appears to be a large increase.
When the economic bubble bursts (and it will) the various factions within the CP and the Red Army will carve their own piece of the Chinese pie to the exclusion of all other interests.
By that time, the great firewall and this nonsense won't make any difference.Then Ikea will invade.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520930</id>
	<title>Corruption enables free Internet</title>
	<author>LinuxLuver</author>
	<datestamp>1261422480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like everything in China, the rules are often ignored. Many ISPs sell "VPN"  connections to unfiltered Internet.  They are taking advantage of a loophole that allows private WANs to connect to networks outside China.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like everything in China , the rules are often ignored .
Many ISPs sell " VPN " connections to unfiltered Internet .
They are taking advantage of a loophole that allows private WANs to connect to networks outside China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like everything in China, the rules are often ignored.
Many ISPs sell "VPN"  connections to unfiltered Internet.
They are taking advantage of a loophole that allows private WANs to connect to networks outside China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>NotWithABang</author>
	<datestamp>1261420980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I'm not a big advocate of restricting knowledge, I think there's something to be said for parental supervision to make sure a mind has reached sufficient maturity before dealing with certain facts of life.

China may be going way overboard here, but maybe the rest of us aren't doing enough.  Seriously, when I was 8 years old I remember the female body parts and "nudie" pictures being a thing of myth and legend.  Getting your first peak at "adult" material was almost a coming of age event.
<br> <br>
Now?  Type "vagina" into your google search bar.  Click on the first link.  BAM!  Know any 8 year olds that can't do that these days?  I sure don't.
<br> <br>
And please don't try the "it's the parent's job to monitor their kids" argument; when the kids are surrounded by restricted materials 24/7 parents would have to hold their kids eyes shut 24/7 to stand a chance.  With Internet access being as ubiquitous as it is, there's no way to guarantee young Johnny or little Billy won't get some quality alone-time with Google before they're ready for it.
<br> <br>
I fear for the future generations.  I really do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I 'm not a big advocate of restricting knowledge , I think there 's something to be said for parental supervision to make sure a mind has reached sufficient maturity before dealing with certain facts of life .
China may be going way overboard here , but maybe the rest of us are n't doing enough .
Seriously , when I was 8 years old I remember the female body parts and " nudie " pictures being a thing of myth and legend .
Getting your first peak at " adult " material was almost a coming of age event .
Now ? Type " vagina " into your google search bar .
Click on the first link .
BAM ! Know any 8 year olds that ca n't do that these days ?
I sure do n't .
And please do n't try the " it 's the parent 's job to monitor their kids " argument ; when the kids are surrounded by restricted materials 24/7 parents would have to hold their kids eyes shut 24/7 to stand a chance .
With Internet access being as ubiquitous as it is , there 's no way to guarantee young Johnny or little Billy wo n't get some quality alone-time with Google before they 're ready for it .
I fear for the future generations .
I really do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I'm not a big advocate of restricting knowledge, I think there's something to be said for parental supervision to make sure a mind has reached sufficient maturity before dealing with certain facts of life.
China may be going way overboard here, but maybe the rest of us aren't doing enough.
Seriously, when I was 8 years old I remember the female body parts and "nudie" pictures being a thing of myth and legend.
Getting your first peak at "adult" material was almost a coming of age event.
Now?  Type "vagina" into your google search bar.
Click on the first link.
BAM!  Know any 8 year olds that can't do that these days?
I sure don't.
And please don't try the "it's the parent's job to monitor their kids" argument; when the kids are surrounded by restricted materials 24/7 parents would have to hold their kids eyes shut 24/7 to stand a chance.
With Internet access being as ubiquitous as it is, there's no way to guarantee young Johnny or little Billy won't get some quality alone-time with Google before they're ready for it.
I fear for the future generations.
I really do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520888</id>
	<title>I dunno...</title>
	<author>feepness</author>
	<datestamp>1261421880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The web's pretty much all full of free porn.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The web 's pretty much all full of free porn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The web's pretty much all full of free porn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521888</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261478700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For those looking for proper english source. see <a href="http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2009/12/22/china-white-listing-the-internet/" title="globalvoicesonline.org" rel="nofollow">Global Voices Advocacy</a> [globalvoicesonline.org] and <a href="http://www.danwei.org/front\_page\_of\_the\_day/domain\_name\_com\_cn.php" title="danwei.org" rel="nofollow">Danwei</a> [danwei.org]. This sort of news propogates quite a lot slower than straight "Human Right" news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For those looking for proper english source .
see Global Voices Advocacy [ globalvoicesonline.org ] and Danwei [ danwei.org ] .
This sort of news propogates quite a lot slower than straight " Human Right " news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those looking for proper english source.
see Global Voices Advocacy [globalvoicesonline.org] and Danwei [danwei.org].
This sort of news propogates quite a lot slower than straight "Human Right" news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523024</id>
	<title>Frankly...</title>
	<author>Nomaxxx</author>
	<datestamp>1261493400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who wants a web free of porn?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who wants a web free of porn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who wants a web free of porn?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520940</id>
	<title>SSH tunneling</title>
	<author>steveha</author>
	<datestamp>1261422540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll bet SSH tunneling will be illegal, and will be considered evidence on its face that you are Up To Something.  I wonder what the penalty will be.</p><p>On the other hand, the Chinese government does like money, and lack of SSL would make it rather hard to move money around via the Internet.</p><p>Either way, this is going to be about as successful as Prohibition was in the USA.</p><p>steveha</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll bet SSH tunneling will be illegal , and will be considered evidence on its face that you are Up To Something .
I wonder what the penalty will be.On the other hand , the Chinese government does like money , and lack of SSL would make it rather hard to move money around via the Internet.Either way , this is going to be about as successful as Prohibition was in the USA.steveha</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll bet SSH tunneling will be illegal, and will be considered evidence on its face that you are Up To Something.
I wonder what the penalty will be.On the other hand, the Chinese government does like money, and lack of SSL would make it rather hard to move money around via the Internet.Either way, this is going to be about as successful as Prohibition was in the USA.steveha</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522506</id>
	<title>Re:The Internet as "default-deny"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261488180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>China (and the rest of the world to a lesser extent) is slowly moving away from the "default accept" ideology of the free, open internet and towards a network where only approved devices can connect.  Slashbots will rave and foam at the mouth about that "censorship is interpreted as damage" meme but it's sadly out of date.  The Chinese can and will control what filth reaches their people.  Sure, VPNs will be there...for a while at least...but the average Zhou won't bother with it.  </p><p>It's hard for a lot of bicoastal Americans to understand - and even more difficult for transnational progressivist Europeans - but the Chinese people really do love their country.  And their country has one government, which is the best government China has ever had.  Ever since Deng Xiaoping ditched university Marxism and took the Communist Party on the capitalist road ("socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious") life has only gotten better in China.  For all the bad press the Chinese government gets, they really are trying to do right, by their own standards.  The problem arises when blinkered Westerners insist on judging China by "universal" standards. In fact, these "universal standards" have their roots in the Enlightenment...which China didn't have.  </p><p>Aaah, kinda lost my point there.  Anyhow, I'm no panda hugger but you simply have to put yourself in their shoes.  A mere seventeen years ago socialism couldn't even provide clean drinking water and now China is the world's largest market for Rolls-Royce automobiles.  This doesn't mean that the Communist Party of China will be relinquishing power anytime soon, though.  They still maintain control over the economy via the allocation and issuance of business licenses and the denial of debilitating foreign influences, such as pornography.</p></div><p>So because they are doing some good excuses them for the huge blunder they're undertaking now?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>China ( and the rest of the world to a lesser extent ) is slowly moving away from the " default accept " ideology of the free , open internet and towards a network where only approved devices can connect .
Slashbots will rave and foam at the mouth about that " censorship is interpreted as damage " meme but it 's sadly out of date .
The Chinese can and will control what filth reaches their people .
Sure , VPNs will be there...for a while at least...but the average Zhou wo n't bother with it .
It 's hard for a lot of bicoastal Americans to understand - and even more difficult for transnational progressivist Europeans - but the Chinese people really do love their country .
And their country has one government , which is the best government China has ever had .
Ever since Deng Xiaoping ditched university Marxism and took the Communist Party on the capitalist road ( " socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious " ) life has only gotten better in China .
For all the bad press the Chinese government gets , they really are trying to do right , by their own standards .
The problem arises when blinkered Westerners insist on judging China by " universal " standards .
In fact , these " universal standards " have their roots in the Enlightenment...which China did n't have .
Aaah , kinda lost my point there .
Anyhow , I 'm no panda hugger but you simply have to put yourself in their shoes .
A mere seventeen years ago socialism could n't even provide clean drinking water and now China is the world 's largest market for Rolls-Royce automobiles .
This does n't mean that the Communist Party of China will be relinquishing power anytime soon , though .
They still maintain control over the economy via the allocation and issuance of business licenses and the denial of debilitating foreign influences , such as pornography.So because they are doing some good excuses them for the huge blunder they 're undertaking now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China (and the rest of the world to a lesser extent) is slowly moving away from the "default accept" ideology of the free, open internet and towards a network where only approved devices can connect.
Slashbots will rave and foam at the mouth about that "censorship is interpreted as damage" meme but it's sadly out of date.
The Chinese can and will control what filth reaches their people.
Sure, VPNs will be there...for a while at least...but the average Zhou won't bother with it.
It's hard for a lot of bicoastal Americans to understand - and even more difficult for transnational progressivist Europeans - but the Chinese people really do love their country.
And their country has one government, which is the best government China has ever had.
Ever since Deng Xiaoping ditched university Marxism and took the Communist Party on the capitalist road ("socialism is not poverty / to get rich is glorious") life has only gotten better in China.
For all the bad press the Chinese government gets, they really are trying to do right, by their own standards.
The problem arises when blinkered Westerners insist on judging China by "universal" standards.
In fact, these "universal standards" have their roots in the Enlightenment...which China didn't have.
Aaah, kinda lost my point there.
Anyhow, I'm no panda hugger but you simply have to put yourself in their shoes.
A mere seventeen years ago socialism couldn't even provide clean drinking water and now China is the world's largest market for Rolls-Royce automobiles.
This doesn't mean that the Communist Party of China will be relinquishing power anytime soon, though.
They still maintain control over the economy via the allocation and issuance of business licenses and the denial of debilitating foreign influences, such as pornography.So because they are doing some good excuses them for the huge blunder they're undertaking now?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522278</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261484640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And I though the US were the ultimate prudes (and hypocrites) when it came to sex.</p></div><p>As an American, I had sort of bought into this idea that my culture was more uptight about sex while people in Asia were more relaxed. But then I traveled to Asia and was surprised to seem the mirror image of this idea: that people in Asia are uptight about sex while Americans are more relaxed.</p><p>In retrospect, in both cultures, sex is a topic riddled with a bizarre combination of paranoid superstition, unrealistic fantasy and scheming for power and control.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And I though the US were the ultimate prudes ( and hypocrites ) when it came to sex.As an American , I had sort of bought into this idea that my culture was more uptight about sex while people in Asia were more relaxed .
But then I traveled to Asia and was surprised to seem the mirror image of this idea : that people in Asia are uptight about sex while Americans are more relaxed.In retrospect , in both cultures , sex is a topic riddled with a bizarre combination of paranoid superstition , unrealistic fantasy and scheming for power and control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I though the US were the ultimate prudes (and hypocrites) when it came to sex.As an American, I had sort of bought into this idea that my culture was more uptight about sex while people in Asia were more relaxed.
But then I traveled to Asia and was surprised to seem the mirror image of this idea: that people in Asia are uptight about sex while Americans are more relaxed.In retrospect, in both cultures, sex is a topic riddled with a bizarre combination of paranoid superstition, unrealistic fantasy and scheming for power and control.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520870</id>
	<title>I don't get it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261421700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are they so obsessed with blocking porn? Are they really that prudish? And I though the US were the ultimate prudes (and hypocrites) when it came to sex.</p><p>It doesn't hurt anyone or break down society as near as I can tell. Plus, you can't stop the natural human natural instincts which hormones produce, short of requiring all men to take drugs to suppress the desire (Half-Life 2's suppression field anyone?)</p><p>The ONLY reason I can see for their obsessiveness with blocking porn is that it can be used as the basis for developing the technology and infrastructure necessary to block whatever it is they want. In other words, porn is used as a scapegoat for setting up the measures which can then be used to block other things, the stuff the Chinese Government ACTUALLY feels threatened about...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are they so obsessed with blocking porn ?
Are they really that prudish ?
And I though the US were the ultimate prudes ( and hypocrites ) when it came to sex.It does n't hurt anyone or break down society as near as I can tell .
Plus , you ca n't stop the natural human natural instincts which hormones produce , short of requiring all men to take drugs to suppress the desire ( Half-Life 2 's suppression field anyone ?
) The ONLY reason I can see for their obsessiveness with blocking porn is that it can be used as the basis for developing the technology and infrastructure necessary to block whatever it is they want .
In other words , porn is used as a scapegoat for setting up the measures which can then be used to block other things , the stuff the Chinese Government ACTUALLY feels threatened about.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are they so obsessed with blocking porn?
Are they really that prudish?
And I though the US were the ultimate prudes (and hypocrites) when it came to sex.It doesn't hurt anyone or break down society as near as I can tell.
Plus, you can't stop the natural human natural instincts which hormones produce, short of requiring all men to take drugs to suppress the desire (Half-Life 2's suppression field anyone?
)The ONLY reason I can see for their obsessiveness with blocking porn is that it can be used as the basis for developing the technology and infrastructure necessary to block whatever it is they want.
In other words, porn is used as a scapegoat for setting up the measures which can then be used to block other things, the stuff the Chinese Government ACTUALLY feels threatened about...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522516</id>
	<title>that's not the issue</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1261488240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>in a democracy, the people's agenda becomes the government's agenda on a regular basis. in china, and other authoritarian systems, what the government's agenda is is not necessarily what the people's agenda is. so you can't speak of what the chinese people want as you do above, you can only speak of what some grumpy technocrats in beijing want</p><p>of course many chinese people have faith in their technocrats. that's easy for the technocrats to have in good times. the technocrats have delivered on a massive economic success by throwing out the communism in Communism. but when times get tough, which is inevitable, the people will grow disillusioned, and when they do, they will have their own ideas about what their government should do. if china were a democracy, the people's disappointments will find solace in a new regime and a new diktat. but when they are looking at the same grumpy old men after a decade of stagflation or whatever, there is massive growth in social instability. its inevitable</p><p>on that basis, it is perfectly valid for anyone outside the country to judge the chinese government and find it defective, and most importantly, to find it defective IN THE NAME OF the chinese people. it would not be valid for an outsider to criticize the chinese government if it were a democracy. if china were a democracy, you would have to say you are criticizing china, or criticizing the chinese people. but right now, when i criticize the chinese government, i am in no way criticizing the people, simply because the chinese government is not composed of the will of the chinese people, only the will of a small cadre in beijing</p><p>its a constant problem people have when talking about china, or iran, or other authoritarian regimes: when the government does something, and outsiders criticize that policy, it is not valid to say "how dare you, this is what the chinese want", or "you have no right, this is what the iranians want". no: its what a small elite want in those countries. which is not necessarily what the people themselves want. like in iran right now, and like it will be in china someday when the economy stops growing. there's a disconnect in nondemocracies there that you need to recognize</p><p>since china is not a democracy, you can't talk about what china is, or what china wants. you can only talk about what the chinese government is, and the chinese government wants. that's the essential defect with nondemocracies, and why they inevitably fail: the agenda of the government and the agenda of the people eventually part ways and stray apart, often during tough times (which china is not in now, but all countries go through tough times)</p><p>what you see in iran does not happen in democracies. because the government is what the people actually want, because the government actually consulted the will of the people in a vote. there's no massive anger on the streets. oh sure, there's anger in democracies, always, in all countries. but if the democracy is genuinely functioning, then that anger is the minority of people, not the majority. the vote is the pressure release valve that nondemocracies don't have. in nondemocracies, that pressure can only grow. you can't ever get rid of malcontent, in any society. but only in a genuinely functioning democracy can you minimize it below the threshold of revolution and rioting and unrest</p><p>democracies, for all of their messiness, provide something far more important than anything the chinese government provides: legitimacy. "i am the legitimate representation of the will of the people": only a democracy can say this. the chinese government cannot say this. it doesn't matter how much propaganda they churn out, the truth is the truth: the will of the chinese people is not consulted, therefore, the chinese government is illegitimate</p><p>on that basis, it is perfectly valid for outsiders to criticize the chinese government, and most importantly, to criticize it in the name of the chinese people. the chinese government is a representation of the will of a bunch of grumpy technocrats. not a superior substitute for the people's will, ever, in any country, in any time</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in a democracy , the people 's agenda becomes the government 's agenda on a regular basis .
in china , and other authoritarian systems , what the government 's agenda is is not necessarily what the people 's agenda is .
so you ca n't speak of what the chinese people want as you do above , you can only speak of what some grumpy technocrats in beijing wantof course many chinese people have faith in their technocrats .
that 's easy for the technocrats to have in good times .
the technocrats have delivered on a massive economic success by throwing out the communism in Communism .
but when times get tough , which is inevitable , the people will grow disillusioned , and when they do , they will have their own ideas about what their government should do .
if china were a democracy , the people 's disappointments will find solace in a new regime and a new diktat .
but when they are looking at the same grumpy old men after a decade of stagflation or whatever , there is massive growth in social instability .
its inevitableon that basis , it is perfectly valid for anyone outside the country to judge the chinese government and find it defective , and most importantly , to find it defective IN THE NAME OF the chinese people .
it would not be valid for an outsider to criticize the chinese government if it were a democracy .
if china were a democracy , you would have to say you are criticizing china , or criticizing the chinese people .
but right now , when i criticize the chinese government , i am in no way criticizing the people , simply because the chinese government is not composed of the will of the chinese people , only the will of a small cadre in beijingits a constant problem people have when talking about china , or iran , or other authoritarian regimes : when the government does something , and outsiders criticize that policy , it is not valid to say " how dare you , this is what the chinese want " , or " you have no right , this is what the iranians want " .
no : its what a small elite want in those countries .
which is not necessarily what the people themselves want .
like in iran right now , and like it will be in china someday when the economy stops growing .
there 's a disconnect in nondemocracies there that you need to recognizesince china is not a democracy , you ca n't talk about what china is , or what china wants .
you can only talk about what the chinese government is , and the chinese government wants .
that 's the essential defect with nondemocracies , and why they inevitably fail : the agenda of the government and the agenda of the people eventually part ways and stray apart , often during tough times ( which china is not in now , but all countries go through tough times ) what you see in iran does not happen in democracies .
because the government is what the people actually want , because the government actually consulted the will of the people in a vote .
there 's no massive anger on the streets .
oh sure , there 's anger in democracies , always , in all countries .
but if the democracy is genuinely functioning , then that anger is the minority of people , not the majority .
the vote is the pressure release valve that nondemocracies do n't have .
in nondemocracies , that pressure can only grow .
you ca n't ever get rid of malcontent , in any society .
but only in a genuinely functioning democracy can you minimize it below the threshold of revolution and rioting and unrestdemocracies , for all of their messiness , provide something far more important than anything the chinese government provides : legitimacy .
" i am the legitimate representation of the will of the people " : only a democracy can say this .
the chinese government can not say this .
it does n't matter how much propaganda they churn out , the truth is the truth : the will of the chinese people is not consulted , therefore , the chinese government is illegitimateon that basis , it is perfectly valid for outsiders to criticize the chinese government , and most importantly , to criticize it in the name of the chinese people .
the chinese government is a representation of the will of a bunch of grumpy technocrats .
not a superior substitute for the people 's will , ever , in any country , in any time</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in a democracy, the people's agenda becomes the government's agenda on a regular basis.
in china, and other authoritarian systems, what the government's agenda is is not necessarily what the people's agenda is.
so you can't speak of what the chinese people want as you do above, you can only speak of what some grumpy technocrats in beijing wantof course many chinese people have faith in their technocrats.
that's easy for the technocrats to have in good times.
the technocrats have delivered on a massive economic success by throwing out the communism in Communism.
but when times get tough, which is inevitable, the people will grow disillusioned, and when they do, they will have their own ideas about what their government should do.
if china were a democracy, the people's disappointments will find solace in a new regime and a new diktat.
but when they are looking at the same grumpy old men after a decade of stagflation or whatever, there is massive growth in social instability.
its inevitableon that basis, it is perfectly valid for anyone outside the country to judge the chinese government and find it defective, and most importantly, to find it defective IN THE NAME OF the chinese people.
it would not be valid for an outsider to criticize the chinese government if it were a democracy.
if china were a democracy, you would have to say you are criticizing china, or criticizing the chinese people.
but right now, when i criticize the chinese government, i am in no way criticizing the people, simply because the chinese government is not composed of the will of the chinese people, only the will of a small cadre in beijingits a constant problem people have when talking about china, or iran, or other authoritarian regimes: when the government does something, and outsiders criticize that policy, it is not valid to say "how dare you, this is what the chinese want", or "you have no right, this is what the iranians want".
no: its what a small elite want in those countries.
which is not necessarily what the people themselves want.
like in iran right now, and like it will be in china someday when the economy stops growing.
there's a disconnect in nondemocracies there that you need to recognizesince china is not a democracy, you can't talk about what china is, or what china wants.
you can only talk about what the chinese government is, and the chinese government wants.
that's the essential defect with nondemocracies, and why they inevitably fail: the agenda of the government and the agenda of the people eventually part ways and stray apart, often during tough times (which china is not in now, but all countries go through tough times)what you see in iran does not happen in democracies.
because the government is what the people actually want, because the government actually consulted the will of the people in a vote.
there's no massive anger on the streets.
oh sure, there's anger in democracies, always, in all countries.
but if the democracy is genuinely functioning, then that anger is the minority of people, not the majority.
the vote is the pressure release valve that nondemocracies don't have.
in nondemocracies, that pressure can only grow.
you can't ever get rid of malcontent, in any society.
but only in a genuinely functioning democracy can you minimize it below the threshold of revolution and rioting and unrestdemocracies, for all of their messiness, provide something far more important than anything the chinese government provides: legitimacy.
"i am the legitimate representation of the will of the people": only a democracy can say this.
the chinese government cannot say this.
it doesn't matter how much propaganda they churn out, the truth is the truth: the will of the chinese people is not consulted, therefore, the chinese government is illegitimateon that basis, it is perfectly valid for outsiders to criticize the chinese government, and most importantly, to criticize it in the name of the chinese people.
the chinese government is a representation of the will of a bunch of grumpy technocrats.
not a superior substitute for the people's will, ever, in any country, in any time</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525992</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>currently\_awake</author>
	<datestamp>1261508640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>all successful religions use taboo's as a form of mind control of the faithful.  with Christianity it's sex.  so something you need is only available with their permission (marriage), or you've done something bad.  so naturally they have to yell at you and call you evil if you do/use/look at anything associated with that thing.  and that's why female body parts are "bad".</htmltext>
<tokenext>all successful religions use taboo 's as a form of mind control of the faithful .
with Christianity it 's sex .
so something you need is only available with their permission ( marriage ) , or you 've done something bad .
so naturally they have to yell at you and call you evil if you do/use/look at anything associated with that thing .
and that 's why female body parts are " bad " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>all successful religions use taboo's as a form of mind control of the faithful.
with Christianity it's sex.
so something you need is only available with their permission (marriage), or you've done something bad.
so naturally they have to yell at you and call you evil if you do/use/look at anything associated with that thing.
and that's why female body parts are "bad".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520894</id>
	<title>Does not compute</title>
	<author>Huzzah!</author>
	<datestamp>1261421940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>since they gave us the phrase, "as hard as Chinese arithmetic"</htmltext>
<tokenext>since they gave us the phrase , " as hard as Chinese arithmetic "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>since they gave us the phrase, "as hard as Chinese arithmetic"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522036</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261480560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Save the Children!</p></div><p>Fuck the Children!</p><p>They are being over-protected!</p><p>I'm sick of the idea of banning adults from accessing certain goods, because of the fear it might end up in the hands of children!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Save the Children ! Fuck the Children ! They are being over-protected ! I 'm sick of the idea of banning adults from accessing certain goods , because of the fear it might end up in the hands of children !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Save the Children!Fuck the Children!They are being over-protected!I'm sick of the idea of banning adults from accessing certain goods, because of the fear it might end up in the hands of children!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521138</id>
	<title>Re:What is with commies and sex?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261425180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It isn't commies vs. sex, it's authoritarianism vs. basic human rights.</p><p>You don't have to stretch too far back in history to see authoritarian theocratic governments placing heavy restrictions on human sexual expression (even to the extent of systematically lopping off clits and foreskins!).</p><p>Where there's a dictator, there's the suppression of humanity, and a very basic part of humanity is sex.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't commies vs. sex , it 's authoritarianism vs. basic human rights.You do n't have to stretch too far back in history to see authoritarian theocratic governments placing heavy restrictions on human sexual expression ( even to the extent of systematically lopping off clits and foreskins !
) .Where there 's a dictator , there 's the suppression of humanity , and a very basic part of humanity is sex .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't commies vs. sex, it's authoritarianism vs. basic human rights.You don't have to stretch too far back in history to see authoritarian theocratic governments placing heavy restrictions on human sexual expression (even to the extent of systematically lopping off clits and foreskins!
).Where there's a dictator, there's the suppression of humanity, and a very basic part of humanity is sex.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526402</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>Z34107</author>
	<datestamp>1261510320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems they prefer Japanese:  <a href="http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2009/05/11/chinese-men-lust-after-japanese-women-as-revenge/" title="sankakucomplex.com">link</a> [sankakucomplex.com] (Probably NSFW)</p><p>The linked website is somewhat biased, however.  And creepy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems they prefer Japanese : link [ sankakucomplex.com ] ( Probably NSFW ) The linked website is somewhat biased , however .
And creepy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems they prefer Japanese:  link [sankakucomplex.com] (Probably NSFW)The linked website is somewhat biased, however.
And creepy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30550736</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261754460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Serious question here, since trying to Google it brings up too many polluted results(read: Asian porn) -- Is it legal or even possible to buy porn in China? Like, going to a store and buying magazines or videos? I'm trying to determine just how much of a red herring censorship due to "porn" is since most of us grew up in places where buying paper porn is legal(if the buyer is of age, of course).</p></div></blockquote><p>
You won't find Playboy or Hustler or whatever in the 7-11.  Despite increasingly tantalizing magazine covers and web page sites, real porn isn't found from any "legitimate" source I've seen, or even from the guy selling pirated books from a cart openly on the corner.  However, there is an increasing proliferation of "artist books" of nudes, nominally for practicing your sketching, but I suspect the typical purchaser isn't very artistically talented.  Note that pirated books tend to have a small selection, only the most popular titles; these are likely much more profitable than printed porn, which would have much higher production costs.
</p><p>
For digital formats, it's trivial to find somewhat softcore stuff from the open street vendors of DVDs, next to copies of "2012" and "Gladiator 2 (sic)".  I also assume that people who swap programs and movies on USB keys in smaller towns probably also have porn of some sort to share, but also lots of viruses, so I haven't investigated further.
</p><p>
Hardcore porn might be a little harder to find, but on three different occasions, while passing by one of the international hotels in Beijing near my home, I've been accosted on the street by the same guy in a trench coat with really bad breath offering "porn DVD".  When I don't seem interested he offers: "porn, young girls, animals"  He smells so bad I suspect he's involved in the animal movie production.
</p><p>
Another time, in the IKEA parking lot some lady once offered me yellow movies; that was quite a while ago, and I had to ask someone what that meant.  I didn't have any way to sample her wares, so I abstained again that day.
</p><p>
The Chinese government is correct, that there is still a lot of porn available on Chinese web sites.  Much of it shows up on chat/bbs sites where users upload images.
</p><p>
However, the "porn" crackdown in China is not really about porn, and will do little for porn availability, except maybe give people like the bestiality DVD guy more business, and possibly reduce the freshness of images traded on USB keys.  People can still share porn just as before through "registered" local chatroom sites.  While they are legally required to monitor for and suppress politically inappropriate speech, the censorship of porn has always much lower priority than censoring bad comments about the government or the CCP.
</p><p>
Labeling the new wave of censorship as being about "porn" increases its legitimacy to Western audiences, and possibly also to a few easily duped locals.  But really it's about reducing internal communication and information about problems in China.  It will become even harder for anyone in China to know anything about Xinjiang's lack of internet and phones, Liu Xiaobo's arrest and sentencing, Xu Zhiyong's arrest, etc.
</p><p>
But to be fair, hardly any local Chinese I've talked to care at all about those things.  It's very sad.  I wish I knew how to wake them up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Serious question here , since trying to Google it brings up too many polluted results ( read : Asian porn ) -- Is it legal or even possible to buy porn in China ?
Like , going to a store and buying magazines or videos ?
I 'm trying to determine just how much of a red herring censorship due to " porn " is since most of us grew up in places where buying paper porn is legal ( if the buyer is of age , of course ) .
You wo n't find Playboy or Hustler or whatever in the 7-11 .
Despite increasingly tantalizing magazine covers and web page sites , real porn is n't found from any " legitimate " source I 've seen , or even from the guy selling pirated books from a cart openly on the corner .
However , there is an increasing proliferation of " artist books " of nudes , nominally for practicing your sketching , but I suspect the typical purchaser is n't very artistically talented .
Note that pirated books tend to have a small selection , only the most popular titles ; these are likely much more profitable than printed porn , which would have much higher production costs .
For digital formats , it 's trivial to find somewhat softcore stuff from the open street vendors of DVDs , next to copies of " 2012 " and " Gladiator 2 ( sic ) " .
I also assume that people who swap programs and movies on USB keys in smaller towns probably also have porn of some sort to share , but also lots of viruses , so I have n't investigated further .
Hardcore porn might be a little harder to find , but on three different occasions , while passing by one of the international hotels in Beijing near my home , I 've been accosted on the street by the same guy in a trench coat with really bad breath offering " porn DVD " .
When I do n't seem interested he offers : " porn , young girls , animals " He smells so bad I suspect he 's involved in the animal movie production .
Another time , in the IKEA parking lot some lady once offered me yellow movies ; that was quite a while ago , and I had to ask someone what that meant .
I did n't have any way to sample her wares , so I abstained again that day .
The Chinese government is correct , that there is still a lot of porn available on Chinese web sites .
Much of it shows up on chat/bbs sites where users upload images .
However , the " porn " crackdown in China is not really about porn , and will do little for porn availability , except maybe give people like the bestiality DVD guy more business , and possibly reduce the freshness of images traded on USB keys .
People can still share porn just as before through " registered " local chatroom sites .
While they are legally required to monitor for and suppress politically inappropriate speech , the censorship of porn has always much lower priority than censoring bad comments about the government or the CCP .
Labeling the new wave of censorship as being about " porn " increases its legitimacy to Western audiences , and possibly also to a few easily duped locals .
But really it 's about reducing internal communication and information about problems in China .
It will become even harder for anyone in China to know anything about Xinjiang 's lack of internet and phones , Liu Xiaobo 's arrest and sentencing , Xu Zhiyong 's arrest , etc .
But to be fair , hardly any local Chinese I 've talked to care at all about those things .
It 's very sad .
I wish I knew how to wake them up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Serious question here, since trying to Google it brings up too many polluted results(read: Asian porn) -- Is it legal or even possible to buy porn in China?
Like, going to a store and buying magazines or videos?
I'm trying to determine just how much of a red herring censorship due to "porn" is since most of us grew up in places where buying paper porn is legal(if the buyer is of age, of course).
You won't find Playboy or Hustler or whatever in the 7-11.
Despite increasingly tantalizing magazine covers and web page sites, real porn isn't found from any "legitimate" source I've seen, or even from the guy selling pirated books from a cart openly on the corner.
However, there is an increasing proliferation of "artist books" of nudes, nominally for practicing your sketching, but I suspect the typical purchaser isn't very artistically talented.
Note that pirated books tend to have a small selection, only the most popular titles; these are likely much more profitable than printed porn, which would have much higher production costs.
For digital formats, it's trivial to find somewhat softcore stuff from the open street vendors of DVDs, next to copies of "2012" and "Gladiator 2 (sic)".
I also assume that people who swap programs and movies on USB keys in smaller towns probably also have porn of some sort to share, but also lots of viruses, so I haven't investigated further.
Hardcore porn might be a little harder to find, but on three different occasions, while passing by one of the international hotels in Beijing near my home, I've been accosted on the street by the same guy in a trench coat with really bad breath offering "porn DVD".
When I don't seem interested he offers: "porn, young girls, animals"  He smells so bad I suspect he's involved in the animal movie production.
Another time, in the IKEA parking lot some lady once offered me yellow movies; that was quite a while ago, and I had to ask someone what that meant.
I didn't have any way to sample her wares, so I abstained again that day.
The Chinese government is correct, that there is still a lot of porn available on Chinese web sites.
Much of it shows up on chat/bbs sites where users upload images.
However, the "porn" crackdown in China is not really about porn, and will do little for porn availability, except maybe give people like the bestiality DVD guy more business, and possibly reduce the freshness of images traded on USB keys.
People can still share porn just as before through "registered" local chatroom sites.
While they are legally required to monitor for and suppress politically inappropriate speech, the censorship of porn has always much lower priority than censoring bad comments about the government or the CCP.
Labeling the new wave of censorship as being about "porn" increases its legitimacy to Western audiences, and possibly also to a few easily duped locals.
But really it's about reducing internal communication and information about problems in China.
It will become even harder for anyone in China to know anything about Xinjiang's lack of internet and phones, Liu Xiaobo's arrest and sentencing, Xu Zhiyong's arrest, etc.
But to be fair, hardly any local Chinese I've talked to care at all about those things.
It's very sad.
I wish I knew how to wake them up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124</id>
	<title>The difference between China and the US</title>
	<author>wickerprints</author>
	<datestamp>1261425060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is that with China, there's no pandering talk about "freedom" and "civil liberties."  Chinese citizens know exactly what's up, whereas your average American still thinks they have freedom.</p><p>You think this is a provocative claim?  It's not.  The way the state deals with internet regulation is a perfect illustration.  In China, you are forcibly blocked, end of story.  Simple, efficient.  In the US, law enforcement doesn't stop you outright, but instead they track you only to prosecute your ass later.  Massive amounts of data are collected on you, whether it is by companies or by the state.  The only real "freedom" your average American citizen has is the freedom to incriminate themselves, which, under the capitalist system, means complete financial destruction.</p><p>Honestly, you are screwed in either country.  It's just that the Chinese government is more open about how they're screwing you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is that with China , there 's no pandering talk about " freedom " and " civil liberties .
" Chinese citizens know exactly what 's up , whereas your average American still thinks they have freedom.You think this is a provocative claim ?
It 's not .
The way the state deals with internet regulation is a perfect illustration .
In China , you are forcibly blocked , end of story .
Simple , efficient .
In the US , law enforcement does n't stop you outright , but instead they track you only to prosecute your ass later .
Massive amounts of data are collected on you , whether it is by companies or by the state .
The only real " freedom " your average American citizen has is the freedom to incriminate themselves , which , under the capitalist system , means complete financial destruction.Honestly , you are screwed in either country .
It 's just that the Chinese government is more open about how they 're screwing you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is that with China, there's no pandering talk about "freedom" and "civil liberties.
"  Chinese citizens know exactly what's up, whereas your average American still thinks they have freedom.You think this is a provocative claim?
It's not.
The way the state deals with internet regulation is a perfect illustration.
In China, you are forcibly blocked, end of story.
Simple, efficient.
In the US, law enforcement doesn't stop you outright, but instead they track you only to prosecute your ass later.
Massive amounts of data are collected on you, whether it is by companies or by the state.
The only real "freedom" your average American citizen has is the freedom to incriminate themselves, which, under the capitalist system, means complete financial destruction.Honestly, you are screwed in either country.
It's just that the Chinese government is more open about how they're screwing you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522850</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>evanbd</author>
	<datestamp>1261491960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What ill effects, exactly, do you fear?</p></div><p>Well, I'm not sure.  The effects of porn might well be <a href="http://www.eurekalert.org/pub\_releases/2009-12/uom-ate120109.php" title="eurekalert.org">negligible</a> [eurekalert.org].</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The internet certainly makes porn rather easier to get than it has been in the recent past; but I'm not sure that it is something to get all that worked up over. Heck, the ability to afford enough rooms that the kids don't have to watch their parents, and the whole family doesn't have to watch the livestock, is a fairly recent innovation, on the historical scale.</p></div><p>Given the lack of sexual education our society seems to have, can't watch their parents and livestock might be a better description.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What ill effects , exactly , do you fear ? Well , I 'm not sure .
The effects of porn might well be negligible [ eurekalert.org ] .The internet certainly makes porn rather easier to get than it has been in the recent past ; but I 'm not sure that it is something to get all that worked up over .
Heck , the ability to afford enough rooms that the kids do n't have to watch their parents , and the whole family does n't have to watch the livestock , is a fairly recent innovation , on the historical scale.Given the lack of sexual education our society seems to have , ca n't watch their parents and livestock might be a better description .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What ill effects, exactly, do you fear?Well, I'm not sure.
The effects of porn might well be negligible [eurekalert.org].The internet certainly makes porn rather easier to get than it has been in the recent past; but I'm not sure that it is something to get all that worked up over.
Heck, the ability to afford enough rooms that the kids don't have to watch their parents, and the whole family doesn't have to watch the livestock, is a fairly recent innovation, on the historical scale.Given the lack of sexual education our society seems to have, can't watch their parents and livestock might be a better description.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520746</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1261420380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your Virgin Killer link isnt NSFW because they don't use the "bad" album cover, but I'm speaking from an American perspective.<blockquote><div><p>Looks like we've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users.</p></div> </blockquote><p>


Serious question here, since trying to Google it brings up too many polluted results(read: Asian porn) -- Is it legal or even possible to buy porn in China? Like, going to a store and buying magazines or videos? I'm trying to determine just how much of a red herring censorship due to "porn" is since most of us grew up in places where buying paper porn is legal(if the buyer is of age, of course).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your Virgin Killer link isnt NSFW because they do n't use the " bad " album cover , but I 'm speaking from an American perspective.Looks like we 've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users .
Serious question here , since trying to Google it brings up too many polluted results ( read : Asian porn ) -- Is it legal or even possible to buy porn in China ?
Like , going to a store and buying magazines or videos ?
I 'm trying to determine just how much of a red herring censorship due to " porn " is since most of us grew up in places where buying paper porn is legal ( if the buyer is of age , of course ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your Virgin Killer link isnt NSFW because they don't use the "bad" album cover, but I'm speaking from an American perspective.Looks like we've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users.
Serious question here, since trying to Google it brings up too many polluted results(read: Asian porn) -- Is it legal or even possible to buy porn in China?
Like, going to a store and buying magazines or videos?
I'm trying to determine just how much of a red herring censorship due to "porn" is since most of us grew up in places where buying paper porn is legal(if the buyer is of age, of course).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521678</id>
	<title>Re:Calling It Now</title>
	<author>hedleyroos</author>
	<datestamp>1261476180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the Chinese plan will work to some extent. Businesses will want to be on that register since China is a big market, so there's the corporate internet presence. Casual users (not<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. folk) will just accept it, kinda like how most people accept DRM.</p><p>I don't agree with the plan at all, and I think the only way to prevent it is if all businesses boycott them. Like that's going to happen...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the Chinese plan will work to some extent .
Businesses will want to be on that register since China is a big market , so there 's the corporate internet presence .
Casual users ( not / .
folk ) will just accept it , kinda like how most people accept DRM.I do n't agree with the plan at all , and I think the only way to prevent it is if all businesses boycott them .
Like that 's going to happen.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the Chinese plan will work to some extent.
Businesses will want to be on that register since China is a big market, so there's the corporate internet presence.
Casual users (not /.
folk) will just accept it, kinda like how most people accept DRM.I don't agree with the plan at all, and I think the only way to prevent it is if all businesses boycott them.
Like that's going to happen...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30533352</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>twoHats</author>
	<datestamp>1259785980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....But i am sure my new site "Donthaveacowchairmanmao.com" will be white listed immediately!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes ....But i am sure my new site " Donthaveacowchairmanmao.com " will be white listed immediately !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes ....But i am sure my new site "Donthaveacowchairmanmao.com" will be white listed immediately!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521962</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261479600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That would be Poln.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be Poln .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would be Poln.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523490</id>
	<title>Re:The difference between China and the US</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1261496580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry, but this is just not the case. I will agree that the U.S. is very far from perfect and that our civil liberties are being eroded at an alarming rate, but just because one is imperfect does not mean that it is equal to all other imperfect entities -- there certainly is the question of degree. China is much further to the totalitarian end of the scale than the U.S. -- this is a plain fact. Please note that I am not saying that because China is worse than the United States we need to ignore the pressing civil liberties issues at hand (nothing connects my palm to my face faster than hearing someone say "If you don't like it here why don't you just move to China?") -- they absolutely need to be addressed immediately. It does not, however, help the situation to make the problem look worse than it really is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , but this is just not the case .
I will agree that the U.S. is very far from perfect and that our civil liberties are being eroded at an alarming rate , but just because one is imperfect does not mean that it is equal to all other imperfect entities -- there certainly is the question of degree .
China is much further to the totalitarian end of the scale than the U.S. -- this is a plain fact .
Please note that I am not saying that because China is worse than the United States we need to ignore the pressing civil liberties issues at hand ( nothing connects my palm to my face faster than hearing someone say " If you do n't like it here why do n't you just move to China ?
" ) -- they absolutely need to be addressed immediately .
It does not , however , help the situation to make the problem look worse than it really is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, but this is just not the case.
I will agree that the U.S. is very far from perfect and that our civil liberties are being eroded at an alarming rate, but just because one is imperfect does not mean that it is equal to all other imperfect entities -- there certainly is the question of degree.
China is much further to the totalitarian end of the scale than the U.S. -- this is a plain fact.
Please note that I am not saying that because China is worse than the United States we need to ignore the pressing civil liberties issues at hand (nothing connects my palm to my face faster than hearing someone say "If you don't like it here why don't you just move to China?
") -- they absolutely need to be addressed immediately.
It does not, however, help the situation to make the problem look worse than it really is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30621506</id>
	<title>Why'd you run you mere user w/ a better password?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1230903600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See subject-line above, &amp; see how "the user with a better password" who calls himself "ihuntrocks" (more like "dumb as a box of rocks", lol) ran from this -&gt;</p><p><a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1490078&amp;cid=30562472" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1490078&amp;cid=30562472</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>Typical - he did just like most "users with a better password" usually go and do: Run! Especially when they shoot their pie hole's off &amp; can't back up their b.s.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>----</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"Outside of being completely amused by your rantings at others for criticizing your awful posting style"</b> - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)</p></div><p>Care to show us your PHD in English, you undereducated little dolt?</p><p>What's terribly amusing here, is WATCHING YOU RUN LIKE A SCARED BEYOTCH WHO SHOT HIS MOUTH OFF &amp; NOW IS AFRAID TO BACK UP HIS B.S.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or, are you showing others differently now? Not.</p><p>----</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"I am highly amused that you have honestly made the absolute worst mistake an IT security professional can make: believing that you have found a solution that someone can't break."</b> - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)</p></div><p>First of all: The use of a HOSTS file is only a SMALL PART of what's needed, but it is a HIGHLY EFFECTIVE ONE (especially in this very case) &amp;, one that's easily obtained (see the HOSTS file section on wikipedia for example, &amp; the mvps.org model's probably the best one listed imo @ least, because it's regularly maintained) &amp; easily maintained as well (text editor, anyone?)...</p><p>So, once more? Care to prove me wrong?? Why don't you "grow a pair", &amp; back up your b.s. I quote above:</p><p><b>Show where I am SUPPOSEDLY "wrong" here, or, in the URL above, and I will rip you up in seconds with very simple, easy, &amp; effective work-arounds for your b.s. here</b> (and I think you KNOW it, &amp; this is why you outright RAN, you moronic little coward).</p><p>----</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"I'm glad you think you are clever, and I encourage you to keep a healthy level of confidence."</b> - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)</p></div><p>LOL: AND, who the hell are you?</p><p>Clearly, based on your lack of reply? Well - You're NOTHING MORE THAN JUST ANOTHER "USER WITH A BETTER PASSWORD" &amp; that's it, "Mr. Admin", lol... so, please:</p><p>Don't even TRY to be "clever" with me, OR "look down your nose @ me" you condescending little douchebag... because I will shred you, and again - I think you KNOW it, because you ran like a scared little child who has done wrong (I can only presume that by your running away from answering me here).</p><p>----</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"However, your solution isn't exactly flawless"</b> - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)</p></div><p>Well, once more?</p><p>Tell me where it is "flawed" &amp; I will tear up your stupid replies, literally in seconds, with very easy work-arounds (ones that are probably way, Way, WAY over your undereducated "user with a better password" dim brain's capability to come up with yourself).</p><p>I'll be waiting...</p><p>----</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"and rather than showing healthy confidence, you're over posting, becoming belligerent toward others, and generally being a prick."</b> - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)</p></div><p>You're the one calling the names FIRST, in the URL above no less as proof thereof, you LIMITED LITTLE DOLT (lol, "user with a better password"), &amp; now?</p><p>NOW, I am only returning the favor, in kind, &amp; patiently waiting to see if you actually possess a set of testicles.</p><p>After all - you running like a scared little "beyotch" now after I asked you to show me where my solution is supposedly "flawed", &amp; especially in the case of the NetBIOS problem...</p><p>(Using HOSTS as a "total security solution", dummy - I never ONCE said it was that. It's only a partial one, it needs a LOT MORE to be safer than a HOSTS alone, but a HOSTS file is a hell of a good measure, easily maintained, &amp; easily obtained AND THAT WORKS (on a very simple principal no less of "you can't get burned if you can't go into a fire" basically))?</p><p>Well, after all your "big talk", which I quote now?</p><p>Please... you're only proving my point for me. Keep running "big talking user with a better password only"...</p><p>----</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"Mod me down for honesty, I won't care."</b> - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)</p></div><p>Uhm, "dumpkopf"? I am the one being honest here, and calling YOU what you are, first of all.</p><p>In case you hadn't noticed, I post as "A/C" - we ac's can't dispense "mod points".</p><p>SECONDLY, all your kind here has (the "wannabe almighty easily tracked registered user" lol) , is your effete little "mod points", but apparently, based on your lack of showing &amp; replying here OR in the URL above?</p><p>That's really ALL you have (and your big talk, plus your "better password" user, lol, as a mere "admin").</p><p>LASTLY, as far as "honesty"? You ran 'beyotch', like a scared child, despite all your 'big talk' &amp; I think that folks reading here can HONESTLY ASSUME you are nothing more than a "big talker" who can't back up his b.s., &amp; nothing more...</p><p>----</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"On the topic of securing your network, everyone alive knows that this is the only way to do it with certainty:"</b> - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)</p></div><p>At this point?</p><p><b>Everyone reading here knows 1 thing: YOU RUN LIKE A LITTLE BEYOTCH WHEN CONFRONTED FOR YOUR "BIG TALK"</b>... typical.</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; Well, as all here reading can now see? So much for "admins" - "See admin RUN", lol... hilarious!</p><p>(AND? I'll just say it again, to reinforce the point: ADMINS ARE USUALLY NOTHING MORE THAN MERE USERS WITH A BETTER PASSWORD, who "talk a good game", but run when things go "over their head" &amp; they talk big, but, they run when they shoot their mouths off &amp; can't back up their b.s.)... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>See subject-line above , &amp; see how " the user with a better password " who calls himself " ihuntrocks " ( more like " dumb as a box of rocks " , lol ) ran from this - &gt; http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1490078&amp;cid = 30562472 [ slashdot.org ] Typical - he did just like most " users with a better password " usually go and do : Run !
Especially when they shoot their pie hole 's off &amp; ca n't back up their b.s .
...---- " Outside of being completely amused by your rantings at others for criticizing your awful posting style " - by ihuntrocks ( 870257 ) on Saturday December 26 , @ 10 : 44PM ( # 30560500 ) Care to show us your PHD in English , you undereducated little dolt ? What 's terribly amusing here , is WATCHING YOU RUN LIKE A SCARED BEYOTCH WHO SHOT HIS MOUTH OFF &amp; NOW IS AFRAID TO BACK UP HIS B.S .
... or , are you showing others differently now ?
Not.---- " I am highly amused that you have honestly made the absolute worst mistake an IT security professional can make : believing that you have found a solution that someone ca n't break .
" - by ihuntrocks ( 870257 ) on Saturday December 26 , @ 10 : 44PM ( # 30560500 ) First of all : The use of a HOSTS file is only a SMALL PART of what 's needed , but it is a HIGHLY EFFECTIVE ONE ( especially in this very case ) &amp; , one that 's easily obtained ( see the HOSTS file section on wikipedia for example , &amp; the mvps.org model 's probably the best one listed imo @ least , because it 's regularly maintained ) &amp; easily maintained as well ( text editor , anyone ?
) ...So , once more ?
Care to prove me wrong ? ?
Why do n't you " grow a pair " , &amp; back up your b.s .
I quote above : Show where I am SUPPOSEDLY " wrong " here , or , in the URL above , and I will rip you up in seconds with very simple , easy , &amp; effective work-arounds for your b.s .
here ( and I think you KNOW it , &amp; this is why you outright RAN , you moronic little coward ) .---- " I 'm glad you think you are clever , and I encourage you to keep a healthy level of confidence .
" - by ihuntrocks ( 870257 ) on Saturday December 26 , @ 10 : 44PM ( # 30560500 ) LOL : AND , who the hell are you ? Clearly , based on your lack of reply ?
Well - You 're NOTHING MORE THAN JUST ANOTHER " USER WITH A BETTER PASSWORD " &amp; that 's it , " Mr. Admin " , lol... so , please : Do n't even TRY to be " clever " with me , OR " look down your nose @ me " you condescending little douchebag... because I will shred you , and again - I think you KNOW it , because you ran like a scared little child who has done wrong ( I can only presume that by your running away from answering me here ) .---- " However , your solution is n't exactly flawless " - by ihuntrocks ( 870257 ) on Saturday December 26 , @ 10 : 44PM ( # 30560500 ) Well , once more ? Tell me where it is " flawed " &amp; I will tear up your stupid replies , literally in seconds , with very easy work-arounds ( ones that are probably way , Way , WAY over your undereducated " user with a better password " dim brain 's capability to come up with yourself ) .I 'll be waiting...---- " and rather than showing healthy confidence , you 're over posting , becoming belligerent toward others , and generally being a prick .
" - by ihuntrocks ( 870257 ) on Saturday December 26 , @ 10 : 44PM ( # 30560500 ) You 're the one calling the names FIRST , in the URL above no less as proof thereof , you LIMITED LITTLE DOLT ( lol , " user with a better password " ) , &amp; now ? NOW , I am only returning the favor , in kind , &amp; patiently waiting to see if you actually possess a set of testicles.After all - you running like a scared little " beyotch " now after I asked you to show me where my solution is supposedly " flawed " , &amp; especially in the case of the NetBIOS problem... ( Using HOSTS as a " total security solution " , dummy - I never ONCE said it was that .
It 's only a partial one , it needs a LOT MORE to be safer than a HOSTS alone , but a HOSTS file is a hell of a good measure , easily maintained , &amp; easily obtained AND THAT WORKS ( on a very simple principal no less of " you ca n't get burned if you ca n't go into a fire " basically ) ) ? Well , after all your " big talk " , which I quote now ? Please... you 're only proving my point for me .
Keep running " big talking user with a better password only " ...---- " Mod me down for honesty , I wo n't care .
" - by ihuntrocks ( 870257 ) on Saturday December 26 , @ 10 : 44PM ( # 30560500 ) Uhm , " dumpkopf " ?
I am the one being honest here , and calling YOU what you are , first of all.In case you had n't noticed , I post as " A/C " - we ac 's ca n't dispense " mod points " .SECONDLY , all your kind here has ( the " wannabe almighty easily tracked registered user " lol ) , is your effete little " mod points " , but apparently , based on your lack of showing &amp; replying here OR in the URL above ? That 's really ALL you have ( and your big talk , plus your " better password " user , lol , as a mere " admin " ) .LASTLY , as far as " honesty " ?
You ran 'beyotch ' , like a scared child , despite all your 'big talk ' &amp; I think that folks reading here can HONESTLY ASSUME you are nothing more than a " big talker " who ca n't back up his b.s. , &amp; nothing more...---- " On the topic of securing your network , everyone alive knows that this is the only way to do it with certainty : " - by ihuntrocks ( 870257 ) on Saturday December 26 , @ 10 : 44PM ( # 30560500 ) At this point ? Everyone reading here knows 1 thing : YOU RUN LIKE A LITTLE BEYOTCH WHEN CONFRONTED FOR YOUR " BIG TALK " ... typical.APKP.S. = &gt; Well , as all here reading can now see ?
So much for " admins " - " See admin RUN " , lol.. .
hilarious ! ( AND ? I 'll just say it again , to reinforce the point : ADMINS ARE USUALLY NOTHING MORE THAN MERE USERS WITH A BETTER PASSWORD , who " talk a good game " , but run when things go " over their head " &amp; they talk big , but , they run when they shoot their mouths off &amp; ca n't back up their b.s. ) .. .
apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See subject-line above, &amp; see how "the user with a better password" who calls himself "ihuntrocks" (more like "dumb as a box of rocks", lol) ran from this -&gt;http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1490078&amp;cid=30562472 [slashdot.org]Typical - he did just like most "users with a better password" usually go and do: Run!
Especially when they shoot their pie hole's off &amp; can't back up their b.s.
...----"Outside of being completely amused by your rantings at others for criticizing your awful posting style" - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)Care to show us your PHD in English, you undereducated little dolt?What's terribly amusing here, is WATCHING YOU RUN LIKE A SCARED BEYOTCH WHO SHOT HIS MOUTH OFF &amp; NOW IS AFRAID TO BACK UP HIS B.S.
... or, are you showing others differently now?
Not.----"I am highly amused that you have honestly made the absolute worst mistake an IT security professional can make: believing that you have found a solution that someone can't break.
" - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)First of all: The use of a HOSTS file is only a SMALL PART of what's needed, but it is a HIGHLY EFFECTIVE ONE (especially in this very case) &amp;, one that's easily obtained (see the HOSTS file section on wikipedia for example, &amp; the mvps.org model's probably the best one listed imo @ least, because it's regularly maintained) &amp; easily maintained as well (text editor, anyone?
)...So, once more?
Care to prove me wrong??
Why don't you "grow a pair", &amp; back up your b.s.
I quote above:Show where I am SUPPOSEDLY "wrong" here, or, in the URL above, and I will rip you up in seconds with very simple, easy, &amp; effective work-arounds for your b.s.
here (and I think you KNOW it, &amp; this is why you outright RAN, you moronic little coward).----"I'm glad you think you are clever, and I encourage you to keep a healthy level of confidence.
" - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)LOL: AND, who the hell are you?Clearly, based on your lack of reply?
Well - You're NOTHING MORE THAN JUST ANOTHER "USER WITH A BETTER PASSWORD" &amp; that's it, "Mr. Admin", lol... so, please:Don't even TRY to be "clever" with me, OR "look down your nose @ me" you condescending little douchebag... because I will shred you, and again - I think you KNOW it, because you ran like a scared little child who has done wrong (I can only presume that by your running away from answering me here).----"However, your solution isn't exactly flawless" - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)Well, once more?Tell me where it is "flawed" &amp; I will tear up your stupid replies, literally in seconds, with very easy work-arounds (ones that are probably way, Way, WAY over your undereducated "user with a better password" dim brain's capability to come up with yourself).I'll be waiting...----"and rather than showing healthy confidence, you're over posting, becoming belligerent toward others, and generally being a prick.
" - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)You're the one calling the names FIRST, in the URL above no less as proof thereof, you LIMITED LITTLE DOLT (lol, "user with a better password"), &amp; now?NOW, I am only returning the favor, in kind, &amp; patiently waiting to see if you actually possess a set of testicles.After all - you running like a scared little "beyotch" now after I asked you to show me where my solution is supposedly "flawed", &amp; especially in the case of the NetBIOS problem...(Using HOSTS as a "total security solution", dummy - I never ONCE said it was that.
It's only a partial one, it needs a LOT MORE to be safer than a HOSTS alone, but a HOSTS file is a hell of a good measure, easily maintained, &amp; easily obtained AND THAT WORKS (on a very simple principal no less of "you can't get burned if you can't go into a fire" basically))?Well, after all your "big talk", which I quote now?Please... you're only proving my point for me.
Keep running "big talking user with a better password only"...----"Mod me down for honesty, I won't care.
" - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)Uhm, "dumpkopf"?
I am the one being honest here, and calling YOU what you are, first of all.In case you hadn't noticed, I post as "A/C" - we ac's can't dispense "mod points".SECONDLY, all your kind here has (the "wannabe almighty easily tracked registered user" lol) , is your effete little "mod points", but apparently, based on your lack of showing &amp; replying here OR in the URL above?That's really ALL you have (and your big talk, plus your "better password" user, lol, as a mere "admin").LASTLY, as far as "honesty"?
You ran 'beyotch', like a scared child, despite all your 'big talk' &amp; I think that folks reading here can HONESTLY ASSUME you are nothing more than a "big talker" who can't back up his b.s., &amp; nothing more...----"On the topic of securing your network, everyone alive knows that this is the only way to do it with certainty:" - by ihuntrocks (870257)  on Saturday December 26, @10:44PM (#30560500)At this point?Everyone reading here knows 1 thing: YOU RUN LIKE A LITTLE BEYOTCH WHEN CONFRONTED FOR YOUR "BIG TALK"... typical.APKP.S.=&gt; Well, as all here reading can now see?
So much for "admins" - "See admin RUN", lol...
hilarious!(AND? I'll just say it again, to reinforce the point: ADMINS ARE USUALLY NOTHING MORE THAN MERE USERS WITH A BETTER PASSWORD, who "talk a good game", but run when things go "over their head" &amp; they talk big, but, they run when they shoot their mouths off &amp; can't back up their b.s.)...
apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525644</id>
	<title>Anonymous epSos.de</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261507080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Their efforts seem to be working, because the amount of Chinese pr=n is proportionally less spread than that of the uncensored world. And YES, I have checked it out myself<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Their efforts seem to be working , because the amount of Chinese pr = n is proportionally less spread than that of the uncensored world .
And YES , I have checked it out myself : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their efforts seem to be working, because the amount of Chinese pr=n is proportionally less spread than that of the uncensored world.
And YES, I have checked it out myself :-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522236</id>
	<title>Re:What is with commies and sex?</title>
	<author>Edmund Blackadder</author>
	<datestamp>1261484040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>General references to communism in terms of the left/right spectrum just miss the point. The communists in eastern europe and china are/were very conservative and reactionary in many if not most ways.</p><p>It just shows that the left/right thinking is just not a very good way to distinguish political beliefs in the real world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>General references to communism in terms of the left/right spectrum just miss the point .
The communists in eastern europe and china are/were very conservative and reactionary in many if not most ways.It just shows that the left/right thinking is just not a very good way to distinguish political beliefs in the real world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>General references to communism in terms of the left/right spectrum just miss the point.
The communists in eastern europe and china are/were very conservative and reactionary in many if not most ways.It just shows that the left/right thinking is just not a very good way to distinguish political beliefs in the real world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30529982</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>AmberBlackCat</author>
	<datestamp>1261480680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In the United States, lawmakers use "think of the children" and "our nation's security" to justify any law, invasion, or restriction they want. Maybe the Chinese are just doing the same thing the United States does. Maybe they don't care about pornography at all, but it's a good excuse to only allow sites that they consider to be acceptable, and they can appear to be taking a moral stand in the process.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the United States , lawmakers use " think of the children " and " our nation 's security " to justify any law , invasion , or restriction they want .
Maybe the Chinese are just doing the same thing the United States does .
Maybe they do n't care about pornography at all , but it 's a good excuse to only allow sites that they consider to be acceptable , and they can appear to be taking a moral stand in the process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the United States, lawmakers use "think of the children" and "our nation's security" to justify any law, invasion, or restriction they want.
Maybe the Chinese are just doing the same thing the United States does.
Maybe they don't care about pornography at all, but it's a good excuse to only allow sites that they consider to be acceptable, and they can appear to be taking a moral stand in the process.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521336</id>
	<title>Re:Conspiracy, or just idiocy?</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1261514340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Male children are not preferred.  They WERE.  The skew has changed the preference so that now girls are preferred.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Male children are not preferred .
They WERE .
The skew has changed the preference so that now girls are preferred .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Male children are not preferred.
They WERE.
The skew has changed the preference so that now girls are preferred.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523168</id>
	<title>Re:Yea Right, it's all about "Porn."</title>
	<author>batquux</author>
	<datestamp>1261494600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Porn" my ass.</p></div><p>Quote of the day...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Porn " my ass.Quote of the day.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Porn" my ass.Quote of the day...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521842</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261478040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>really though i wish this nigger shit would just get modded to <b>-1 redundant</b>.</p></div><p>-1 Troll.</p><p>Fail!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>really though i wish this nigger shit would just get modded to -1 redundant.-1 Troll.Fail !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>really though i wish this nigger shit would just get modded to -1 redundant.-1 Troll.Fail!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520758</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525328</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, because the US is the bastion of freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261505400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, can gay people get married in China and adopt kids?</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality\_in\_China</p><p>"In April 20, 2001, the Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders formally removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses"</p><p>"slight majority disagreed with the proposition that an openly-gay person should be a school teacher, and 40\% of respondents said that homosexuality was "completely wrong"</p><p>"During the evaluation of the amendment of the marriage law in the Chinese mainland in 2003, there was the first discussion about same-sex marriage. Though this issue was rejected, this was the first time that an item of gay rights was discussed in China."</p><p>So stop your US bashing and nationalistic tantrums. Your comment is no better than the original tantrum. The bottom line is, most of Europe, Canada and US are much more TOLERANT of gays and lesbians than rest of the world, including China and Japan. If you are gay, you are much better off in the US than you are in most rest of the world simply because you can't be discriminated against and that's the law.</p><p>Simply the fact that it was gays were considered mentally ill until as recently as 2001 tells me China is not exactly tolerant place! As another example, Japan has no laws making homosexuality illegal. Why is it that there is very few open gay, high ranking people in Japan? The answer is they are in the closet, just as the gays of China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , can gay people get married in China and adopt kids ? http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality \ _in \ _China " In April 20 , 2001 , the Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders formally removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses " " slight majority disagreed with the proposition that an openly-gay person should be a school teacher , and 40 \ % of respondents said that homosexuality was " completely wrong " " During the evaluation of the amendment of the marriage law in the Chinese mainland in 2003 , there was the first discussion about same-sex marriage .
Though this issue was rejected , this was the first time that an item of gay rights was discussed in China .
" So stop your US bashing and nationalistic tantrums .
Your comment is no better than the original tantrum .
The bottom line is , most of Europe , Canada and US are much more TOLERANT of gays and lesbians than rest of the world , including China and Japan .
If you are gay , you are much better off in the US than you are in most rest of the world simply because you ca n't be discriminated against and that 's the law.Simply the fact that it was gays were considered mentally ill until as recently as 2001 tells me China is not exactly tolerant place !
As another example , Japan has no laws making homosexuality illegal .
Why is it that there is very few open gay , high ranking people in Japan ?
The answer is they are in the closet , just as the gays of China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, can gay people get married in China and adopt kids?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality\_in\_China"In April 20, 2001, the Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders formally removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses""slight majority disagreed with the proposition that an openly-gay person should be a school teacher, and 40\% of respondents said that homosexuality was "completely wrong""During the evaluation of the amendment of the marriage law in the Chinese mainland in 2003, there was the first discussion about same-sex marriage.
Though this issue was rejected, this was the first time that an item of gay rights was discussed in China.
"So stop your US bashing and nationalistic tantrums.
Your comment is no better than the original tantrum.
The bottom line is, most of Europe, Canada and US are much more TOLERANT of gays and lesbians than rest of the world, including China and Japan.
If you are gay, you are much better off in the US than you are in most rest of the world simply because you can't be discriminated against and that's the law.Simply the fact that it was gays were considered mentally ill until as recently as 2001 tells me China is not exactly tolerant place!
As another example, Japan has no laws making homosexuality illegal.
Why is it that there is very few open gay, high ranking people in Japan?
The answer is they are in the closet, just as the gays of China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525146</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, because the US is the bastion of freedom</title>
	<author>misexistentialist</author>
	<datestamp>1261504500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a minority homosexuals will always have it hard. And which provinces of China allow gays to marry?</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a minority homosexuals will always have it hard .
And which provinces of China allow gays to marry ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a minority homosexuals will always have it hard.
And which provinces of China allow gays to marry?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522746</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1261490760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because of this, I think that these restrictions will not last long. Above and beyond anything else, the Chinese government wants to become the next world superpower. They are well on their way to doing this now by utterly pwning us in the fields of math and science. If they restrict access to the Internet in such a fundamental way (whitelist vs. blacklist), they will seriously hamper education and slow their ascendancy as the dominant superpower. This seems to me to be a bit more of a sacrifice than the Chinese government will be willing to make to get rid of some nudie pictures, but hey, I have been wrong before and certainly will be again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because of this , I think that these restrictions will not last long .
Above and beyond anything else , the Chinese government wants to become the next world superpower .
They are well on their way to doing this now by utterly pwning us in the fields of math and science .
If they restrict access to the Internet in such a fundamental way ( whitelist vs. blacklist ) , they will seriously hamper education and slow their ascendancy as the dominant superpower .
This seems to me to be a bit more of a sacrifice than the Chinese government will be willing to make to get rid of some nudie pictures , but hey , I have been wrong before and certainly will be again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because of this, I think that these restrictions will not last long.
Above and beyond anything else, the Chinese government wants to become the next world superpower.
They are well on their way to doing this now by utterly pwning us in the fields of math and science.
If they restrict access to the Internet in such a fundamental way (whitelist vs. blacklist), they will seriously hamper education and slow their ascendancy as the dominant superpower.
This seems to me to be a bit more of a sacrifice than the Chinese government will be willing to make to get rid of some nudie pictures, but hey, I have been wrong before and certainly will be again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522140</id>
	<title>Crouching woman, hidden boner</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1261482360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Speaking of asian porn. The funniest porno I have ever seen, <a href="http://www.vimeo.com/1177507" title="vimeo.com">Crouching woman, hidden boner</a> [vimeo.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking of asian porn .
The funniest porno I have ever seen , Crouching woman , hidden boner [ vimeo.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking of asian porn.
The funniest porno I have ever seen, Crouching woman, hidden boner [vimeo.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521626</id>
	<title>Re:Anyone else read that as</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261475520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would look exactly like this: <a href="http://www.commujism.com/" title="commujism.com">http://www.commujism.com/</a> [commujism.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would look exactly like this : http : //www.commujism.com/ [ commujism.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would look exactly like this: http://www.commujism.com/ [commujism.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522424</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>spakka</author>
	<datestamp>1261487400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Looks like we've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users. </i>

<p>On the plus side, their eyes may go back to normal after a generation or two.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like we 've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users .
On the plus side , their eyes may go back to normal after a generation or two .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like we've got a new amusingly painful chapter ahead of us for Chinese internet users.
On the plus side, their eyes may go back to normal after a generation or two.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526532</id>
	<title>Re:Censor this!</title>
	<author>GameboyRMH</author>
	<datestamp>1261510740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>LOL same here!
<br> <br>
(how bad can it be....right?)</htmltext>
<tokenext>LOL same here !
( how bad can it be....right ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOL same here!
(how bad can it be....right?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521446</id>
	<title>Re:The difference between China and the US</title>
	<author>whancock</author>
	<datestamp>1261473000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Honestly, I've heard this argument so many times and there always seems to be something wrong with it.

What you are doing here is comparing two entities with the direct knowledge that it is theoretically impossible for any of them to be perfect. You then use this as a basis for your attack, essentially stating that since none can be perfect, that they must all be the exact same.

What you are missing is degrees. Do you honestly believe that a system founded under the notion of absolute power is essentially the same as one where at least some running it believe in limitations? Where in one people discuss ways to prevent abuses of power, and in the other they take it for granted?

No system will ever be perfect, but some are trying harder than others.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , I 've heard this argument so many times and there always seems to be something wrong with it .
What you are doing here is comparing two entities with the direct knowledge that it is theoretically impossible for any of them to be perfect .
You then use this as a basis for your attack , essentially stating that since none can be perfect , that they must all be the exact same .
What you are missing is degrees .
Do you honestly believe that a system founded under the notion of absolute power is essentially the same as one where at least some running it believe in limitations ?
Where in one people discuss ways to prevent abuses of power , and in the other they take it for granted ?
No system will ever be perfect , but some are trying harder than others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, I've heard this argument so many times and there always seems to be something wrong with it.
What you are doing here is comparing two entities with the direct knowledge that it is theoretically impossible for any of them to be perfect.
You then use this as a basis for your attack, essentially stating that since none can be perfect, that they must all be the exact same.
What you are missing is degrees.
Do you honestly believe that a system founded under the notion of absolute power is essentially the same as one where at least some running it believe in limitations?
Where in one people discuss ways to prevent abuses of power, and in the other they take it for granted?
No system will ever be perfect, but some are trying harder than others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30535994</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>skeeto</author>
	<datestamp>1259774340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How is an 8 year old boy seeing a vagina, a 100\% natural human body part, harmful? (hint: it's not)</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is an 8 year old boy seeing a vagina , a 100 \ % natural human body part , harmful ?
( hint : it 's not )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is an 8 year old boy seeing a vagina, a 100\% natural human body part, harmful?
(hint: it's not)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522070</id>
	<title>Re:Conspiracy, or just idiocy?</title>
	<author>molnarcs</author>
	<datestamp>1261481100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now China's blocking the porn? How do they plan on dealing with the ah, excess males? Send them off to war?</p></div><p>hmmm... Not a bad idea.

Hu Jintao</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now China 's blocking the porn ?
How do they plan on dealing with the ah , excess males ?
Send them off to war ? hmmm... Not a bad idea .
Hu Jintao</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now China's blocking the porn?
How do they plan on dealing with the ah, excess males?
Send them off to war?hmmm... Not a bad idea.
Hu Jintao
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521692</id>
	<title>Re:Conspiracy, or just idiocy?</title>
	<author>initialE</author>
	<datestamp>1261476240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Coming from a nation full of chinese immigrants, I think the main problem of the one-child policy is that it does not end up in a lot of abortions, hidden children or what not, the main problem is that the family structure is totally broken down. The children are now the bosses, the little kings, leading to an entire generation of sociopaths and socially-inept people. Think of this - what if everyone in your country did not have a brother or sister? Where do you learn your family values?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Coming from a nation full of chinese immigrants , I think the main problem of the one-child policy is that it does not end up in a lot of abortions , hidden children or what not , the main problem is that the family structure is totally broken down .
The children are now the bosses , the little kings , leading to an entire generation of sociopaths and socially-inept people .
Think of this - what if everyone in your country did not have a brother or sister ?
Where do you learn your family values ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coming from a nation full of chinese immigrants, I think the main problem of the one-child policy is that it does not end up in a lot of abortions, hidden children or what not, the main problem is that the family structure is totally broken down.
The children are now the bosses, the little kings, leading to an entire generation of sociopaths and socially-inept people.
Think of this - what if everyone in your country did not have a brother or sister?
Where do you learn your family values?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523206</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Sir\_Real</author>
	<datestamp>1261494900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What's so funny about that?</i></p><p>Usually the noises.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's so funny about that ? Usually the noises .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's so funny about that?Usually the noises.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524358</id>
	<title>A web free of porn.</title>
	<author>ZarathustraDK</author>
	<datestamp>1261500960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because what the chinese government want right now is a huge population of young angry and sexually frustrated males. What could possibly go wrong?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because what the chinese government want right now is a huge population of young angry and sexually frustrated males .
What could possibly go wrong ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because what the chinese government want right now is a huge population of young angry and sexually frustrated males.
What could possibly go wrong?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521728</id>
	<title>Yup</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1261476540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Should I be worried? Is it a freudian slip? And why is there such a big deal about freudian's underwear? Any pics of it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should I be worried ?
Is it a freudian slip ?
And why is there such a big deal about freudian 's underwear ?
Any pics of it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Should I be worried?
Is it a freudian slip?
And why is there such a big deal about freudian's underwear?
Any pics of it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520794</id>
	<title>'think of the children' censorship of dissidence</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261420920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whitelisting the net is a serious blow for net neutrality. Best case scenario, foreign companies just need to slip regulators some money to get on the whitelist, worst case scenario is that China ends up with their own isolated Internet, with the only foreign sites available being ones that curiously promote the CCP's agenda. Social networking sites can't possibly comply with any 'no porn' rule; video-sharing sites like Youtube and blogs would also be conveniently blocked. Any site that can possibly be used by dissidents to spread political messages can also be used to host porn, therefore any politically inconvenient site can be kept off the whitelist, with the argument that 'it contains pornography' and no way for Chinese citizens to verify this.<br>This will also have the unintended consequence of breaking a huge number of links/page includes/images making even e-commerce sites unusable unless rejiggered to all be on one domain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whitelisting the net is a serious blow for net neutrality .
Best case scenario , foreign companies just need to slip regulators some money to get on the whitelist , worst case scenario is that China ends up with their own isolated Internet , with the only foreign sites available being ones that curiously promote the CCP 's agenda .
Social networking sites ca n't possibly comply with any 'no porn ' rule ; video-sharing sites like Youtube and blogs would also be conveniently blocked .
Any site that can possibly be used by dissidents to spread political messages can also be used to host porn , therefore any politically inconvenient site can be kept off the whitelist , with the argument that 'it contains pornography ' and no way for Chinese citizens to verify this.This will also have the unintended consequence of breaking a huge number of links/page includes/images making even e-commerce sites unusable unless rejiggered to all be on one domain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whitelisting the net is a serious blow for net neutrality.
Best case scenario, foreign companies just need to slip regulators some money to get on the whitelist, worst case scenario is that China ends up with their own isolated Internet, with the only foreign sites available being ones that curiously promote the CCP's agenda.
Social networking sites can't possibly comply with any 'no porn' rule; video-sharing sites like Youtube and blogs would also be conveniently blocked.
Any site that can possibly be used by dissidents to spread political messages can also be used to host porn, therefore any politically inconvenient site can be kept off the whitelist, with the argument that 'it contains pornography' and no way for Chinese citizens to verify this.This will also have the unintended consequence of breaking a huge number of links/page includes/images making even e-commerce sites unusable unless rejiggered to all be on one domain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520884</id>
	<title>Re:So That Takes Care of Wikipedia Then?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261421880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What ill effects, exactly, do you fear?<br> <br>

The internet certainly makes porn rather easier to get than it has been in the recent past; but I'm not sure that it is something to get all that worked up over. Heck, the ability to afford enough rooms that the kids don't have to watch their parents, and the whole family doesn't have to watch the livestock, is a fairly recent innovation, on the historical scale.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What ill effects , exactly , do you fear ?
The internet certainly makes porn rather easier to get than it has been in the recent past ; but I 'm not sure that it is something to get all that worked up over .
Heck , the ability to afford enough rooms that the kids do n't have to watch their parents , and the whole family does n't have to watch the livestock , is a fairly recent innovation , on the historical scale .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What ill effects, exactly, do you fear?
The internet certainly makes porn rather easier to get than it has been in the recent past; but I'm not sure that it is something to get all that worked up over.
Heck, the ability to afford enough rooms that the kids don't have to watch their parents, and the whole family doesn't have to watch the livestock, is a fairly recent innovation, on the historical scale.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30544416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30529324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525328
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30533352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30530880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30530486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521336
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521168
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521390
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521728
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522516
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30621506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520758
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30533438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523168
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30532948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30532812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30532410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524590
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523696
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521888
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30529982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30527670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30529296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30528256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30531578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30537030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30535994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521678
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30533340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_0233255_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30550736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521692
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524330
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522022
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526532
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522392
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520940
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520764
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520758
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522466
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30532812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520876
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521626
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30621506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521728
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521084
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30533340
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520892
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30529982
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520662
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30533352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521860
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523138
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30528256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520806
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520884
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522850
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521322
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520976
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521102
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523068
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523148
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521780
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520998
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525992
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523206
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523696
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524776
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520904
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30535994
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522892
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521242
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521174
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523070
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520746
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30550736
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520826
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522140
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522004
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521444
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524676
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30531578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521024
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30530486
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521364
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30530880
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520886
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521370
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30529324
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30527670
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30529296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524458
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520658
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521446
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30544416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30537030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524884
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30532410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521678
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521120
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30526676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525328
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524152
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30532948
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30533438
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525458
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30523030
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30525146
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522666
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524590
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30524844
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30520930
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_0233255.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30521204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_0233255.30522428
</commentlist>
</conversation>
