<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_07_1437234</id>
	<title>Windows 7 Has Lots of "God Modes"</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1262880000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Those intrigued by the 'GodMode' in Windows 7 may be interested to know that there are <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860\_3-10426627-56.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1\_3-0-20">many other similar shortcuts</a> hidden within the operating system &mdash; some going back to Vista or before. Steven Sinofsky, Windows division president, said several similar undocumented features provide direct access to all kinds of settings, from choosing a location to managing power settings to identifying biometric sensors."</i> <b>Update: 01/07 23:46 GMT</b> by <b> <a href="http://cmdrtaco.net/">CT</a> </b>: Link updated to source.</htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Those intrigued by the 'GodMode ' in Windows 7 may be interested to know that there are many other similar shortcuts hidden within the operating system    some going back to Vista or before .
Steven Sinofsky , Windows division president , said several similar undocumented features provide direct access to all kinds of settings , from choosing a location to managing power settings to identifying biometric sensors .
" Update : 01/07 23 : 46 GMT by CT : Link updated to source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Those intrigued by the 'GodMode' in Windows 7 may be interested to know that there are many other similar shortcuts hidden within the operating system — some going back to Vista or before.
Steven Sinofsky, Windows division president, said several similar undocumented features provide direct access to all kinds of settings, from choosing a location to managing power settings to identifying biometric sensors.
" Update: 01/07 23:46 GMT by  CT : Link updated to source.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685758</id>
	<title>Plagiarist Alert!</title>
	<author>al0ha</author>
	<datestamp>1262893500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why did you link to the plagiarist's site instead of the original CNET article from which the text was copied verbatim.
<br>
<br>
Oh I know - it was submitted anonymously by the site owner.
<br>
<br>
Shame on the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.'ers who modded this story up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why did you link to the plagiarist 's site instead of the original CNET article from which the text was copied verbatim .
Oh I know - it was submitted anonymously by the site owner .
Shame on the / .
'ers who modded this story up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why did you link to the plagiarist's site instead of the original CNET article from which the text was copied verbatim.
Oh I know - it was submitted anonymously by the site owner.
Shame on the /.
'ers who modded this story up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683378</id>
	<title>It is true</title>
	<author>boef</author>
	<datestamp>1262883900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mutter "Oh god..." all the time when it spins its wheels while trying to make things shiny instead of making things happen...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mutter " Oh god... " all the time when it spins its wheels while trying to make things shiny instead of making things happen.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mutter "Oh god..." all the time when it spins its wheels while trying to make things shiny instead of making things happen...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686728</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Bodero</author>
	<datestamp>1262854980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It took me three minutes playing around in the Windows Seven control panel just to figure out how to change the TCP/IP settings.</i> </p><p>Microsoft emphasizes search. Click Start (screen or keyboard). Type "tcp/ip." There it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It took me three minutes playing around in the Windows Seven control panel just to figure out how to change the TCP/IP settings .
Microsoft emphasizes search .
Click Start ( screen or keyboard ) .
Type " tcp/ip .
" There it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It took me three minutes playing around in the Windows Seven control panel just to figure out how to change the TCP/IP settings.
Microsoft emphasizes search.
Click Start (screen or keyboard).
Type "tcp/ip.
" There it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688860</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>The MAZZTer</author>
	<datestamp>1262865240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did you try typing "TCP/IP" into the search box?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you try typing " TCP/IP " into the search box ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you try typing "TCP/IP" into the search box?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683744</id>
	<title>Re:Those strings can't be right</title>
	<author>Lord Bitman</author>
	<datestamp>1262885340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just did "bind q impulse 255", never needed a god mode.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just did " bind q impulse 255 " , never needed a god mode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just did "bind q impulse 255", never needed a god mode.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684260</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>jefu</author>
	<datestamp>1262887140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Heh.   Someone told me yesterday that Unix is all voodoo and yet Windows has XXX.{BB64F8A7-BEE7-4E1A-AB8D-7D8273F7FDB6}!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Heh .
Someone told me yesterday that Unix is all voodoo and yet Windows has XXX .
{ BB64F8A7-BEE7-4E1A-AB8D-7D8273F7FDB6 } !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heh.
Someone told me yesterday that Unix is all voodoo and yet Windows has XXX.
{BB64F8A7-BEE7-4E1A-AB8D-7D8273F7FDB6}!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683652</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262884860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?"</p><p>Are you kidding?  Have you tried to use the Windows 7 control panel?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" what 's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges ?
" Are you kidding ?
Have you tried to use the Windows 7 control panel ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?
"Are you kidding?
Have you tried to use the Windows 7 control panel?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685418</id>
	<title>Re:The real question is...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1262891940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, if I ever see a box of it in my home, you can be sure it gets some damage from this little buddy here:<br><a href="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/37/114315512\_a8c8669676.jpg?v=0" title="flickr.com">http://farm1.static.flickr.com/37/114315512\_a8c8669676.jpg?v=0</a> [flickr.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if I ever see a box of it in my home , you can be sure it gets some damage from this little buddy here : http : //farm1.static.flickr.com/37/114315512 \ _a8c8669676.jpg ? v = 0 [ flickr.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if I ever see a box of it in my home, you can be sure it gets some damage from this little buddy here:http://farm1.static.flickr.com/37/114315512\_a8c8669676.jpg?v=0 [flickr.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688018</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>gad\_zuki!</author>
	<datestamp>1262861340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just like in linux, if you want something close to standardization then learn the command line. netsh.exe examples here:</p><p><a href="http://www.petri.co.il/configure\_tcp\_ip\_from\_cmd.htm" title="petri.co.il">http://www.petri.co.il/configure\_tcp\_ip\_from\_cmd.htm</a> [petri.co.il]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like in linux , if you want something close to standardization then learn the command line .
netsh.exe examples here : http : //www.petri.co.il/configure \ _tcp \ _ip \ _from \ _cmd.htm [ petri.co.il ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like in linux, if you want something close to standardization then learn the command line.
netsh.exe examples here:http://www.petri.co.il/configure\_tcp\_ip\_from\_cmd.htm [petri.co.il]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684968</id>
	<title>Copy and paste article</title>
	<author>Saint Gerbil</author>
	<datestamp>1262890020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You copy and paste a Cnet article and post it up and expect no one to notice ?</p><p>At least give credit next time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You copy and paste a Cnet article and post it up and expect no one to notice ? At least give credit next time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You copy and paste a Cnet article and post it up and expect no one to notice ?At least give credit next time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683608</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1262884740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?</i></p><p>Is the Control Panel accessible via the CLI?  That would be a reason.  Still an awful way to provide CLI access to these functions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other words , what 's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges ? Is the Control Panel accessible via the CLI ?
That would be a reason .
Still an awful way to provide CLI access to these functions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?Is the Control Panel accessible via the CLI?
That would be a reason.
Still an awful way to provide CLI access to these functions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684466</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262887980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is REALLY old news.  I've been using folders with the CLSID appended for well over a decade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is REALLY old news .
I 've been using folders with the CLSID appended for well over a decade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is REALLY old news.
I've been using folders with the CLSID appended for well over a decade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684850</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262889540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Control Panel wasn't (and shouldn't be) designed for the operating system developers. The developers are going to need to change something back and forth, simulate the insertion and removal of four USB devices simultaneously, write scripts that change a slew of settings, etc. Conversely, the developers aren't likely to need a whole lot of explanation about a particular setting. Also, and perhaps most importantly, the OS devs working on implementing a particular feature (e.g., power management), will probably be developing it before or at the same time that the user interface devs are implementing the Control Panel dialog for that feature. So they wouldn't be able to use the Control Panel to test their code even if the Control Panel would be perfect for their purposes.</p><p>Asking why the OS developers need a special interface is like asking why general software doesn't automatically run itself in a debugger and show stack pointers and variable values.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Control Panel was n't ( and should n't be ) designed for the operating system developers .
The developers are going to need to change something back and forth , simulate the insertion and removal of four USB devices simultaneously , write scripts that change a slew of settings , etc .
Conversely , the developers are n't likely to need a whole lot of explanation about a particular setting .
Also , and perhaps most importantly , the OS devs working on implementing a particular feature ( e.g. , power management ) , will probably be developing it before or at the same time that the user interface devs are implementing the Control Panel dialog for that feature .
So they would n't be able to use the Control Panel to test their code even if the Control Panel would be perfect for their purposes.Asking why the OS developers need a special interface is like asking why general software does n't automatically run itself in a debugger and show stack pointers and variable values .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Control Panel wasn't (and shouldn't be) designed for the operating system developers.
The developers are going to need to change something back and forth, simulate the insertion and removal of four USB devices simultaneously, write scripts that change a slew of settings, etc.
Conversely, the developers aren't likely to need a whole lot of explanation about a particular setting.
Also, and perhaps most importantly, the OS devs working on implementing a particular feature (e.g., power management), will probably be developing it before or at the same time that the user interface devs are implementing the Control Panel dialog for that feature.
So they wouldn't be able to use the Control Panel to test their code even if the Control Panel would be perfect for their purposes.Asking why the OS developers need a special interface is like asking why general software doesn't automatically run itself in a debugger and show stack pointers and variable values.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683958</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>Digital\_Quartz</author>
	<datestamp>1262886120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The original "God Mode" one isn't in that list.  And, this doesn't say anything about creating folders with the canonical name as the extension.  It's an interesting hack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The original " God Mode " one is n't in that list .
And , this does n't say anything about creating folders with the canonical name as the extension .
It 's an interesting hack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original "God Mode" one isn't in that list.
And, this doesn't say anything about creating folders with the canonical name as the extension.
It's an interesting hack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686792</id>
	<title>These have been around for a long time</title>
	<author>PhunkySchtuff</author>
	<datestamp>1262855280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Back in, from memory, NT4 days, you could name a folder with a GUID on the end of the name to get, for instance, your Control Panels folder directly on the desktop (without a pesky shortcut arrow)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in , from memory , NT4 days , you could name a folder with a GUID on the end of the name to get , for instance , your Control Panels folder directly on the desktop ( without a pesky shortcut arrow )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in, from memory, NT4 days, you could name a folder with a GUID on the end of the name to get, for instance, your Control Panels folder directly on the desktop (without a pesky shortcut arrow)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262885760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you'd take half a second to stop complaining, you'd realize almost everything you said is ridiculously easy and obvious.<p><div class="quote"><p>How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter, and have it lock my screen, without having to wait in the middle for Windows to mode-switch to a different video screen, complete with fancy graphics, to ask me the same thing a simple dialog box asks me?</p></div><p>Windows-L.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>How about being able to edit the parameters of something you've "pinned to the taskbar"?</p></div><p>Right click the icon.  The top item in the popup list is a shortcut, so you can right click and select 'properties' (like any shortcut) and modify the parameters.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Whats up with this whole "Library" thing? What is wrong with "My Documents"</p></div><p>Library may refer to multiple folder locations.  Got music in two separate locations (like a portable drive a local one)? Now it's all accessible from one place.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Thank God at least they put your whole user profile in the c:\users\ directory - wait, do they, or is user crap still sprinkled around in c:\program files\blah</p></div><p>All of the microsoft stuff is there, but I suppose there's nothing stopping a program from not using it (UAC perhaps would complain about an app trying to create files in Program Files).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 'd take half a second to stop complaining , you 'd realize almost everything you said is ridiculously easy and obvious.How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter , and have it lock my screen , without having to wait in the middle for Windows to mode-switch to a different video screen , complete with fancy graphics , to ask me the same thing a simple dialog box asks me ? Windows-L.How about being able to edit the parameters of something you 've " pinned to the taskbar " ? Right click the icon .
The top item in the popup list is a shortcut , so you can right click and select 'properties ' ( like any shortcut ) and modify the parameters.Whats up with this whole " Library " thing ?
What is wrong with " My Documents " Library may refer to multiple folder locations .
Got music in two separate locations ( like a portable drive a local one ) ?
Now it 's all accessible from one place.Thank God at least they put your whole user profile in the c : \ users \ directory - wait , do they , or is user crap still sprinkled around in c : \ program files \ blahAll of the microsoft stuff is there , but I suppose there 's nothing stopping a program from not using it ( UAC perhaps would complain about an app trying to create files in Program Files ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you'd take half a second to stop complaining, you'd realize almost everything you said is ridiculously easy and obvious.How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter, and have it lock my screen, without having to wait in the middle for Windows to mode-switch to a different video screen, complete with fancy graphics, to ask me the same thing a simple dialog box asks me?Windows-L.How about being able to edit the parameters of something you've "pinned to the taskbar"?Right click the icon.
The top item in the popup list is a shortcut, so you can right click and select 'properties' (like any shortcut) and modify the parameters.Whats up with this whole "Library" thing?
What is wrong with "My Documents"Library may refer to multiple folder locations.
Got music in two separate locations (like a portable drive a local one)?
Now it's all accessible from one place.Thank God at least they put your whole user profile in the c:\users\ directory - wait, do they, or is user crap still sprinkled around in c:\program files\blahAll of the microsoft stuff is there, but I suppose there's nothing stopping a program from not using it (UAC perhaps would complain about an app trying to create files in Program Files).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683942</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Jeff DeMaagd</author>
	<datestamp>1262886060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not totally certain what this is, but I already make shortcuts to commonly used Control Panel items and put them where ever I like.  I've done it on Windows 2000.  Display properties, network configuration mouse settings are the three that I use most, it saves me a couple clicks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not totally certain what this is , but I already make shortcuts to commonly used Control Panel items and put them where ever I like .
I 've done it on Windows 2000 .
Display properties , network configuration mouse settings are the three that I use most , it saves me a couple clicks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not totally certain what this is, but I already make shortcuts to commonly used Control Panel items and put them where ever I like.
I've done it on Windows 2000.
Display properties, network configuration mouse settings are the three that I use most, it saves me a couple clicks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683426</id>
	<title>Microsoft Knows</title>
	<author>Kolie</author>
	<datestamp>1262884080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>it is a good day to die</htmltext>
<tokenext>it is a good day to die</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it is a good day to die</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685760</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1262893500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ummm... What do you mean by "undocumented"? <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx" title="microsoft.com">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx</a> [microsoft.com]

All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sites.  This is old news.  Move along.</p></div><p>FTA, this is probably why they are "hidden": "These canonical names do not change for different languages. They are always in English, even if the system's language is non-English."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ummm... What do you mean by " undocumented " ?
http : //msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741 ( VS.85 ) .aspx [ microsoft.com ] All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sites .
This is old news .
Move along.FTA , this is probably why they are " hidden " : " These canonical names do not change for different languages .
They are always in English , even if the system 's language is non-English .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ummm... What do you mean by "undocumented"?
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx [microsoft.com]

All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sites.
This is old news.
Move along.FTA, this is probably why they are "hidden": "These canonical names do not change for different languages.
They are always in English, even if the system's language is non-English.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685330</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>Gerzel</author>
	<datestamp>1262891580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know I think Google has a limited beta out to compete with this called gExist.  The main gheaven GoogleEarth and glight features are already live, and the glight feature is pretty good if I say so myself.  It all runs on the gwater framework but uses the gdarkness eula.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know I think Google has a limited beta out to compete with this called gExist .
The main gheaven GoogleEarth and glight features are already live , and the glight feature is pretty good if I say so myself .
It all runs on the gwater framework but uses the gdarkness eula .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know I think Google has a limited beta out to compete with this called gExist.
The main gheaven GoogleEarth and glight features are already live, and the glight feature is pretty good if I say so myself.
It all runs on the gwater framework but uses the gdarkness eula.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684324</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>JasterBobaMereel</author>
	<datestamp>1262887380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ummm... What do you mean by "undocumented"? <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx" title="microsoft.com">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx</a> [microsoft.com]</p><p>All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sites.  This is old news.  Move along.</p></div><p>All are on the linked MSDN article except {ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C} This is the undocumented Master Control Panel showing all the "Hidden" options that do not appear on the regular control panel.....</p><p>Documentation on this would be nice?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ummm... What do you mean by " undocumented " ?
http : //msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741 ( VS.85 ) .aspx [ microsoft.com ] All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sites .
This is old news .
Move along.All are on the linked MSDN article except { ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C } This is the undocumented Master Control Panel showing all the " Hidden " options that do not appear on the regular control panel.....Documentation on this would be nice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ummm... What do you mean by "undocumented"?
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx [microsoft.com]All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sites.
This is old news.
Move along.All are on the linked MSDN article except {ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C} This is the undocumented Master Control Panel showing all the "Hidden" options that do not appear on the regular control panel.....Documentation on this would be nice?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683782</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>recoiledsnake</author>
	<datestamp>1262885460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If all of the features are in the Control Panel, why do the developers need shortcuts?</p><p>In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?</p><p>And, yes, I consider a directory with a "special string" a horrible kludge.  Think of all the behind-the-scenes complications that this brings on.  Every directory creation/access has to be checked for these modes.  How does a godmode directory interact with a random app?</p><p>The mind reels.</p></div><p>I think 'developers' in that context meant Microsoft Developers who develop Windows and possibly testers of the OS. They would need it to quickly test something instead of going through an additional step. And no, it's not a kludge, atleast it wasn't created for the GodMode features. Control Panel items have been 'special' folders internally with those 'special strings' internally ever since atleast Windows 95.. All it does is call a COM component with that Class ID as a GUID which populates the folder with the special functionality. Asking how a GodMode directory interacts with a random app is like asking how does a app interact with Control Panel. I am guess Microsoft just left it internally because there would no point stripping out a working feature that's is not easily user accessible unless they take special action to do so.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If all of the features are in the Control Panel , why do the developers need shortcuts ? In other words , what 's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges ? And , yes , I consider a directory with a " special string " a horrible kludge .
Think of all the behind-the-scenes complications that this brings on .
Every directory creation/access has to be checked for these modes .
How does a godmode directory interact with a random app ? The mind reels.I think 'developers ' in that context meant Microsoft Developers who develop Windows and possibly testers of the OS .
They would need it to quickly test something instead of going through an additional step .
And no , it 's not a kludge , atleast it was n't created for the GodMode features .
Control Panel items have been 'special ' folders internally with those 'special strings ' internally ever since atleast Windows 95.. All it does is call a COM component with that Class ID as a GUID which populates the folder with the special functionality .
Asking how a GodMode directory interacts with a random app is like asking how does a app interact with Control Panel .
I am guess Microsoft just left it internally because there would no point stripping out a working feature that 's is not easily user accessible unless they take special action to do so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If all of the features are in the Control Panel, why do the developers need shortcuts?In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?And, yes, I consider a directory with a "special string" a horrible kludge.
Think of all the behind-the-scenes complications that this brings on.
Every directory creation/access has to be checked for these modes.
How does a godmode directory interact with a random app?The mind reels.I think 'developers' in that context meant Microsoft Developers who develop Windows and possibly testers of the OS.
They would need it to quickly test something instead of going through an additional step.
And no, it's not a kludge, atleast it wasn't created for the GodMode features.
Control Panel items have been 'special' folders internally with those 'special strings' internally ever since atleast Windows 95.. All it does is call a COM component with that Class ID as a GUID which populates the folder with the special functionality.
Asking how a GodMode directory interacts with a random app is like asking how does a app interact with Control Panel.
I am guess Microsoft just left it internally because there would no point stripping out a working feature that's is not easily user accessible unless they take special action to do so.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684822</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>jonadab</author>
	<datestamp>1262889420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers<br><br>You mean besides the fact that it's been completely rearranged and the various bits renamed and specific settings moved from place to place so many times nobody can find anything?<br><br>It took me three minutes playing around in the Windows Seven control panel just to figure out how to change the TCP/IP settings.  They're in a different place from Vista, where they were in a different place from XP, which in turn put them in a different place from both 98 and 2000.  Almost every setting in the control panel has been moved around like that, and some of them have seen worse, being moved into places where you can only get to them through "Advanced Settings" menu items and/or links in sidebars that don't even show at all if you have Windows Explorer set to classic folders.<br><br>I can definitely see how the developers could become frustrated with it, especially if they were working on a not-yet-released future version at work while still using an actually released version elsewhere (say, at home, or on the laptop).  The inconsistency could be maddening.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; what 's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developersYou mean besides the fact that it 's been completely rearranged and the various bits renamed and specific settings moved from place to place so many times nobody can find anything ? It took me three minutes playing around in the Windows Seven control panel just to figure out how to change the TCP/IP settings .
They 're in a different place from Vista , where they were in a different place from XP , which in turn put them in a different place from both 98 and 2000 .
Almost every setting in the control panel has been moved around like that , and some of them have seen worse , being moved into places where you can only get to them through " Advanced Settings " menu items and/or links in sidebars that do n't even show at all if you have Windows Explorer set to classic folders.I can definitely see how the developers could become frustrated with it , especially if they were working on a not-yet-released future version at work while still using an actually released version elsewhere ( say , at home , or on the laptop ) .
The inconsistency could be maddening .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developersYou mean besides the fact that it's been completely rearranged and the various bits renamed and specific settings moved from place to place so many times nobody can find anything?It took me three minutes playing around in the Windows Seven control panel just to figure out how to change the TCP/IP settings.
They're in a different place from Vista, where they were in a different place from XP, which in turn put them in a different place from both 98 and 2000.
Almost every setting in the control panel has been moved around like that, and some of them have seen worse, being moved into places where you can only get to them through "Advanced Settings" menu items and/or links in sidebars that don't even show at all if you have Windows Explorer set to classic folders.I can definitely see how the developers could become frustrated with it, especially if they were working on a not-yet-released future version at work while still using an actually released version elsewhere (say, at home, or on the laptop).
The inconsistency could be maddening.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683906</id>
	<title>Re:The real question is...</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1262885940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only if you dual wield dual core processors...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only if you dual wield dual core processors.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only if you dual wield dual core processors...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688852</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262865180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Getting the full documentation requires a subscription, but there is a lot online at http://msdn.microsoft.com./ [msdn.microsoft.com]</i> </p><p>What?  You mean like this <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&amp;FamilyID=7bbe5eda-5062-4ebb-83c7-d3c5ff92a373" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">free link here</a> [microsoft.com]?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Getting the full documentation requires a subscription , but there is a lot online at http : //msdn.microsoft.com./ [ msdn.microsoft.com ] What ?
You mean like this free link here [ microsoft.com ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Getting the full documentation requires a subscription, but there is a lot online at http://msdn.microsoft.com./ [msdn.microsoft.com] What?
You mean like this free link here [microsoft.com]?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684448</id>
	<title>Re:Direct Copy article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262887860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These folders are a bit more than mere shortcuts. They expose the contents of the corresponding folder to anything using the proper APIs to examine it. One of the canonical uses is to create a folder named "Control Panel.{21EC2020-3AEA-1069-A2DD-08002B30309D}" in the path used for start menu entries, which results in a start menu folder that contains all the control panel icons, allowing you to directly select one of them. This feature is not really as useful in Vista or Windows 7 (with the nice program finding box), but was quite useful before then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These folders are a bit more than mere shortcuts .
They expose the contents of the corresponding folder to anything using the proper APIs to examine it .
One of the canonical uses is to create a folder named " Control Panel .
{ 21EC2020-3AEA-1069-A2DD-08002B30309D } " in the path used for start menu entries , which results in a start menu folder that contains all the control panel icons , allowing you to directly select one of them .
This feature is not really as useful in Vista or Windows 7 ( with the nice program finding box ) , but was quite useful before then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These folders are a bit more than mere shortcuts.
They expose the contents of the corresponding folder to anything using the proper APIs to examine it.
One of the canonical uses is to create a folder named "Control Panel.
{21EC2020-3AEA-1069-A2DD-08002B30309D}" in the path used for start menu entries, which results in a start menu folder that contains all the control panel icons, allowing you to directly select one of them.
This feature is not really as useful in Vista or Windows 7 (with the nice program finding box), but was quite useful before then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683792</id>
	<title>Re:Those strings can't be right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262885460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, but everybody knows that running in god mode in Windows is a security risk.  You're better off running as a limited user, such as IDKFA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but everybody knows that running in god mode in Windows is a security risk .
You 're better off running as a limited user , such as IDKFA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but everybody knows that running in god mode in Windows is a security risk.
You're better off running as a limited user, such as IDKFA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685812</id>
	<title>GUIDS and God Mode</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262893680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>G - God
U - Understands,
I - Idiots
D - Die

If one wonders why there are so many viruses, trojans, and other malware for Windows, it is because of this cruft. All you need to get admin access to an MS operating system is the secret decoder ring, and the black-hats out there are experts in finding it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>G - God U - Understands , I - Idiots D - Die If one wonders why there are so many viruses , trojans , and other malware for Windows , it is because of this cruft .
All you need to get admin access to an MS operating system is the secret decoder ring , and the black-hats out there are experts in finding it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>G - God
U - Understands,
I - Idiots
D - Die

If one wonders why there are so many viruses, trojans, and other malware for Windows, it is because of this cruft.
All you need to get admin access to an MS operating system is the secret decoder ring, and the black-hats out there are experts in finding it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684832</id>
	<title>Re:Direct Copy article</title>
	<author>FiloEleven</author>
	<datestamp>1262889420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would <a href="http://slashdot.org/zoo.pl?op=check&amp;type=friend&amp;uid=806737" title="slashdot.org">Aviran</a> [slashdot.org] use this?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>For example, the first one could be a folder named &ldquo;<strong>thankscnet</strong>.{00C6D95F-329C-409a-81D7-C46C66EA7F33}&rdquo;</p></div><p>Also, a response further down in blog comments:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Yeah, sure.<br>your post: 1/7/2010 @ 10:09 am<br>cnet&rsquo;s post: January 6, 2010 12:04 PM PST</p></div><p>There appears to be a lot of plagiarism going on there.  I googled text from several other posts and every single one matched something written previously elsewhere.</p><p>Tsk tsk.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would Aviran [ slashdot.org ] use this ? For example , the first one could be a folder named    thankscnet .
{ 00C6D95F-329C-409a-81D7-C46C66EA7F33 }    Also , a response further down in blog comments : Yeah , sure.your post : 1/7/2010 @ 10 : 09 amcnet    s post : January 6 , 2010 12 : 04 PM PSTThere appears to be a lot of plagiarism going on there .
I googled text from several other posts and every single one matched something written previously elsewhere.Tsk tsk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would Aviran [slashdot.org] use this?For example, the first one could be a folder named “thankscnet.
{00C6D95F-329C-409a-81D7-C46C66EA7F33}”Also, a response further down in blog comments:Yeah, sure.your post: 1/7/2010 @ 10:09 amcnet’s post: January 6, 2010 12:04 PM PSTThere appears to be a lot of plagiarism going on there.
I googled text from several other posts and every single one matched something written previously elsewhere.Tsk tsk.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684994</id>
	<title>Re:Direct Copy article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262890140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I inferred these god mode settings were just (basically) command lines to initiate control panel activities? Not a big deal if that is the case. It is shortcuts of a way I guess.  Or is there something more to this?</p></div><p>I thought that too, but nothing happens when I type "iddqd" at the command prompt.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I inferred these god mode settings were just ( basically ) command lines to initiate control panel activities ?
Not a big deal if that is the case .
It is shortcuts of a way I guess .
Or is there something more to this ? I thought that too , but nothing happens when I type " iddqd " at the command prompt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I inferred these god mode settings were just (basically) command lines to initiate control panel activities?
Not a big deal if that is the case.
It is shortcuts of a way I guess.
Or is there something more to this?I thought that too, but nothing happens when I type "iddqd" at the command prompt.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685398</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>Bigjeff5</author>
	<datestamp>1262891880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's odd that as their OSes became more complex, they also had less and less documentation.</p> </div><p>This is not even remotely true.</p><p>I have in my drawer a large DVD case filled with MSDN documentation on primarily Microsoft OS and Server products.  I get a new disk every couple of months.  This is the Microsoft documentation, and it is vast.</p><p>In fact, if it were on paper, I'd probably need an entire library dedicated to it.</p><p>In other words, you don't know what you are talking about.  There is, in fact, so much documentation that it can be difficult to find exactly what you need in the MSDN library.</p><p>The documentation isn't meant for end users, Microsoft designs their OS to be as easy as they can manage to make it for the user at the expense of making things more difficult for the developer.  As such, all of the documentation is for developers, not users, because it is the developers who need it.</p><p>Getting the full documentation requires a subscription, but there is a lot online at <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com./" title="msdn.microsoft.com">http://msdn.microsoft.com./</a> [msdn.microsoft.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's odd that as their OSes became more complex , they also had less and less documentation .
This is not even remotely true.I have in my drawer a large DVD case filled with MSDN documentation on primarily Microsoft OS and Server products .
I get a new disk every couple of months .
This is the Microsoft documentation , and it is vast.In fact , if it were on paper , I 'd probably need an entire library dedicated to it.In other words , you do n't know what you are talking about .
There is , in fact , so much documentation that it can be difficult to find exactly what you need in the MSDN library.The documentation is n't meant for end users , Microsoft designs their OS to be as easy as they can manage to make it for the user at the expense of making things more difficult for the developer .
As such , all of the documentation is for developers , not users , because it is the developers who need it.Getting the full documentation requires a subscription , but there is a lot online at http : //msdn.microsoft.com./ [ msdn.microsoft.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's odd that as their OSes became more complex, they also had less and less documentation.
This is not even remotely true.I have in my drawer a large DVD case filled with MSDN documentation on primarily Microsoft OS and Server products.
I get a new disk every couple of months.
This is the Microsoft documentation, and it is vast.In fact, if it were on paper, I'd probably need an entire library dedicated to it.In other words, you don't know what you are talking about.
There is, in fact, so much documentation that it can be difficult to find exactly what you need in the MSDN library.The documentation isn't meant for end users, Microsoft designs their OS to be as easy as they can manage to make it for the user at the expense of making things more difficult for the developer.
As such, all of the documentation is for developers, not users, because it is the developers who need it.Getting the full documentation requires a subscription, but there is a lot online at http://msdn.microsoft.com./ [msdn.microsoft.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683564</id>
	<title>does not compute</title>
	<author>shadowrat</author>
	<datestamp>1262884620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>it's intended to be used by developers as a shortcut, but it's undocumented. How does hiding a feature from a developer make things easy on the developer?</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's intended to be used by developers as a shortcut , but it 's undocumented .
How does hiding a feature from a developer make things easy on the developer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's intended to be used by developers as a shortcut, but it's undocumented.
How does hiding a feature from a developer make things easy on the developer?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683550</id>
	<title>Re:Those strings can't be right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262884560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Awesome! I loved Duke Nukem!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Awesome !
I loved Duke Nukem !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Awesome!
I loved Duke Nukem!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30690116</id>
	<title>Re:Direct Copy article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262876220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I had this to, before XP made the control panel part of the start menu. I've also used it in the past to hide ugly extensions in some places, like in menus. I know you can turn off file extensions but at least back then it made it impossible to detect things like executables masking as documents and such nastiness, and also made it impossible to change the file type in the rare cases that I had to. Did MS do something about those problems? If they have, I might change back, because it looked a lot cleaner and I usually look at the icon to see what the file type is anyway (except for files I get from other people or the internet).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I had this to , before XP made the control panel part of the start menu .
I 've also used it in the past to hide ugly extensions in some places , like in menus .
I know you can turn off file extensions but at least back then it made it impossible to detect things like executables masking as documents and such nastiness , and also made it impossible to change the file type in the rare cases that I had to .
Did MS do something about those problems ?
If they have , I might change back , because it looked a lot cleaner and I usually look at the icon to see what the file type is anyway ( except for files I get from other people or the internet ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I had this to, before XP made the control panel part of the start menu.
I've also used it in the past to hide ugly extensions in some places, like in menus.
I know you can turn off file extensions but at least back then it made it impossible to detect things like executables masking as documents and such nastiness, and also made it impossible to change the file type in the rare cases that I had to.
Did MS do something about those problems?
If they have, I might change back, because it looked a lot cleaner and I usually look at the icon to see what the file type is anyway (except for files I get from other people or the internet).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684660</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Tacvek</author>
	<datestamp>1262888820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The new paradigm:</p><p>Program Files: This folder should be treated as read-only by applications, and thus may only contain static data.</p><p>ProgramData: This folder is where machine-wide (not user specific) data is stored, and is generally read-write.</p><p>AppData/Roaming: User-specific data that is not machine specific goes here. This data will roam to other machines in the domain if things are set up right. This is read-write.</p><p>AppData/Local: User-specific data that is machine specific belongs here. This is read-write.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The new paradigm : Program Files : This folder should be treated as read-only by applications , and thus may only contain static data.ProgramData : This folder is where machine-wide ( not user specific ) data is stored , and is generally read-write.AppData/Roaming : User-specific data that is not machine specific goes here .
This data will roam to other machines in the domain if things are set up right .
This is read-write.AppData/Local : User-specific data that is machine specific belongs here .
This is read-write .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The new paradigm:Program Files: This folder should be treated as read-only by applications, and thus may only contain static data.ProgramData: This folder is where machine-wide (not user specific) data is stored, and is generally read-write.AppData/Roaming: User-specific data that is not machine specific goes here.
This data will roam to other machines in the domain if things are set up right.
This is read-write.AppData/Local: User-specific data that is machine specific belongs here.
This is read-write.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686638</id>
	<title>Nothing new here.</title>
	<author>retro.sufi</author>
	<datestamp>1262897760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Second Mr. Silver! There is nothing new here.
You can do this in XP too and had been discovered a long time ago. Just rename the folder with the appropriate class id and away you go.

Reference:
<a href="http://windowstricks.spaces.live.com/?\_c11\_BlogPart\_pagedir=Next&amp;\_c11\_BlogPart\_handle=cns!BAFA39A62A57009C!141&amp;\_c11\_BlogPart\_BlogPart=blogview&amp;\_c=BlogPart" title="live.com" rel="nofollow">http://windowstricks.spaces.live.com/?\_c11\_BlogPart\_pagedir=Next&amp;\_c11\_BlogPart\_handle=cns!BAFA39A62A57009C!141&amp;\_c11\_BlogPart\_BlogPart=blogview&amp;\_c=BlogPart</a> [live.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Second Mr. Silver ! There is nothing new here .
You can do this in XP too and had been discovered a long time ago .
Just rename the folder with the appropriate class id and away you go .
Reference : http : //windowstricks.spaces.live.com/ ? \ _c11 \ _BlogPart \ _pagedir = Next&amp; \ _c11 \ _BlogPart \ _handle = cns ! BAFA39A62A57009C ! 141&amp; \ _c11 \ _BlogPart \ _BlogPart = blogview&amp; \ _c = BlogPart [ live.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Second Mr. Silver! There is nothing new here.
You can do this in XP too and had been discovered a long time ago.
Just rename the folder with the appropriate class id and away you go.
Reference:
http://windowstricks.spaces.live.com/?\_c11\_BlogPart\_pagedir=Next&amp;\_c11\_BlogPart\_handle=cns!BAFA39A62A57009C!141&amp;\_c11\_BlogPart\_BlogPart=blogview&amp;\_c=BlogPart [live.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</id>
	<title>I don't get it....</title>
	<author>cptdondo</author>
	<datestamp>1262884200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If all of the features are in the Control Panel, why do the developers need shortcuts?</p><p>In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?</p><p>And, yes, I consider a directory with a "special string" a horrible kludge.  Think of all the behind-the-scenes complications that this brings on.  Every directory creation/access has to be checked for these modes.  How does a godmode directory interact with a random app?</p><p>The mind reels.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If all of the features are in the Control Panel , why do the developers need shortcuts ? In other words , what 's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges ? And , yes , I consider a directory with a " special string " a horrible kludge .
Think of all the behind-the-scenes complications that this brings on .
Every directory creation/access has to be checked for these modes .
How does a godmode directory interact with a random app ? The mind reels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If all of the features are in the Control Panel, why do the developers need shortcuts?In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?And, yes, I consider a directory with a "special string" a horrible kludge.
Think of all the behind-the-scenes complications that this brings on.
Every directory creation/access has to be checked for these modes.
How does a godmode directory interact with a random app?The mind reels.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30689624</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1262871300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Library may refer to multiple folder locations. Got music in two separate locations (like a portable drive a local one)? Now it's all accessible from one place.</p></div><p>That sounds like a perfect way to sow confusion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Library may refer to multiple folder locations .
Got music in two separate locations ( like a portable drive a local one ) ?
Now it 's all accessible from one place.That sounds like a perfect way to sow confusion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Library may refer to multiple folder locations.
Got music in two separate locations (like a portable drive a local one)?
Now it's all accessible from one place.That sounds like a perfect way to sow confusion.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684430</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Hythlodaeus</author>
	<datestamp>1262887800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The developers need it because the settings exist before the control panels that manipulate them.  Totally different teams of people are involved in kernel/infrastructure coding as opposed to UI/HMI.  The "special strings" are a general feature used since Windows 95 to make things appear in the file system that don't actually reside on the disk, including printers and the standard control panel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The developers need it because the settings exist before the control panels that manipulate them .
Totally different teams of people are involved in kernel/infrastructure coding as opposed to UI/HMI .
The " special strings " are a general feature used since Windows 95 to make things appear in the file system that do n't actually reside on the disk , including printers and the standard control panel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The developers need it because the settings exist before the control panels that manipulate them.
Totally different teams of people are involved in kernel/infrastructure coding as opposed to UI/HMI.
The "special strings" are a general feature used since Windows 95 to make things appear in the file system that don't actually reside on the disk, including printers and the standard control panel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684128</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>GigaHurtsMyRobot</author>
	<datestamp>1262886720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about hitting your Windows Key along with the L key to instantly lock your workstation without question?

</p><p>How about holding shift and right clicking the pinned item to get access to the properties link?

</p><p>What's up with having My Music, My Photos, and My Videos INSIDE My Documents?  I'd rather have a Libraries folder with Documents/Music/Photos separated properly...

</p><p>The Users folder does contain your full profile, but really, what are you going to do with it even if it wasn't?

</p><p>All of these answers existed when you wrote and submitted your post.  Inexcusable.

</p><p>Sorry, just having fun.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about hitting your Windows Key along with the L key to instantly lock your workstation without question ?
How about holding shift and right clicking the pinned item to get access to the properties link ?
What 's up with having My Music , My Photos , and My Videos INSIDE My Documents ?
I 'd rather have a Libraries folder with Documents/Music/Photos separated properly.. . The Users folder does contain your full profile , but really , what are you going to do with it even if it was n't ?
All of these answers existed when you wrote and submitted your post .
Inexcusable . Sorry , just having fun .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about hitting your Windows Key along with the L key to instantly lock your workstation without question?
How about holding shift and right clicking the pinned item to get access to the properties link?
What's up with having My Music, My Photos, and My Videos INSIDE My Documents?
I'd rather have a Libraries folder with Documents/Music/Photos separated properly...

The Users folder does contain your full profile, but really, what are you going to do with it even if it wasn't?
All of these answers existed when you wrote and submitted your post.
Inexcusable.

Sorry, just having fun.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683832</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1262885640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It takes a lot less time to type a dozen characters into a box/console than it does to click through a half dozen menus and panel interfaces to get where you're going.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It takes a lot less time to type a dozen characters into a box/console than it does to click through a half dozen menus and panel interfaces to get where you 're going .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It takes a lot less time to type a dozen characters into a box/console than it does to click through a half dozen menus and panel interfaces to get where you're going.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684776</id>
	<title>Exists in Windows 95</title>
	<author>Derf\_X</author>
	<datestamp>1262889300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is not news, it existed in previous Windows versions. I remember making shortcuts with these names in Windows 95. These names point to registry keys if I am not mistaken.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not news , it existed in previous Windows versions .
I remember making shortcuts with these names in Windows 95 .
These names point to registry keys if I am not mistaken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not news, it existed in previous Windows versions.
I remember making shortcuts with these names in Windows 95.
These names point to registry keys if I am not mistaken.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685098</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1262890560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And all the stupid posts like the GP are simply anti-M$ zealots that are just trying to get karma points. (Seeing how it is at +4 insightful right now shows how successful they are at gaming the moderator system).</p></div><p>Oh, wah, popular sentiments get modded up!  I'm gonna tell!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And all the stupid posts like the GP are simply anti-M $ zealots that are just trying to get karma points .
( Seeing how it is at + 4 insightful right now shows how successful they are at gaming the moderator system ) .Oh , wah , popular sentiments get modded up !
I 'm gon na tell !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And all the stupid posts like the GP are simply anti-M$ zealots that are just trying to get karma points.
(Seeing how it is at +4 insightful right now shows how successful they are at gaming the moderator system).Oh, wah, popular sentiments get modded up!
I'm gonna tell!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684612</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262888580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I, for one, hate the mouse interface.  I do as much of my Human-Computer Interactions (HCI) via the keyboard.  It's much faster, and I don't have to worry about grabbing the mouse to interact with something, then 'home' my hands on the keyboard to type.  Going back and forth annoys me to no end.</p><p>If more developers took some basic HCI courses, and learned to properly order tab-focus changes, and add mnemonics to every screen object you can interact with (text boxes, buttons, menus, etc.), then I would be a MUCH happier computer user.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I , for one , hate the mouse interface .
I do as much of my Human-Computer Interactions ( HCI ) via the keyboard .
It 's much faster , and I do n't have to worry about grabbing the mouse to interact with something , then 'home ' my hands on the keyboard to type .
Going back and forth annoys me to no end.If more developers took some basic HCI courses , and learned to properly order tab-focus changes , and add mnemonics to every screen object you can interact with ( text boxes , buttons , menus , etc .
) , then I would be a MUCH happier computer user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, for one, hate the mouse interface.
I do as much of my Human-Computer Interactions (HCI) via the keyboard.
It's much faster, and I don't have to worry about grabbing the mouse to interact with something, then 'home' my hands on the keyboard to type.
Going back and forth annoys me to no end.If more developers took some basic HCI courses, and learned to properly order tab-focus changes, and add mnemonics to every screen object you can interact with (text boxes, buttons, menus, etc.
), then I would be a MUCH happier computer user.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398</id>
	<title>Direct Copy article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262883960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>1) The article is a copy/paste of the cnet article (kind of a fail for aviran's place).<br>
2) More importantly, from the article, I inferred these god mode settings were just (basically) command lines to initiate control panel activities? Not a big deal if that is the case. It is shortcuts of a way I guess.  Or is there something more to this?</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) The article is a copy/paste of the cnet article ( kind of a fail for aviran 's place ) .
2 ) More importantly , from the article , I inferred these god mode settings were just ( basically ) command lines to initiate control panel activities ?
Not a big deal if that is the case .
It is shortcuts of a way I guess .
Or is there something more to this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) The article is a copy/paste of the cnet article (kind of a fail for aviran's place).
2) More importantly, from the article, I inferred these god mode settings were just (basically) command lines to initiate control panel activities?
Not a big deal if that is the case.
It is shortcuts of a way I guess.
Or is there something more to this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30695962</id>
	<title>Re:</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1262971800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>This isn't a bug.  If it crashed when changing the theme then yes, that's a bug.  Her using a given option as it's intended though is not.  The worst you could say is that there was no root-settable option to lock the desktop to a single theme, but that's more "lack of feature" than a bug.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't a bug .
If it crashed when changing the theme then yes , that 's a bug .
Her using a given option as it 's intended though is not .
The worst you could say is that there was no root-settable option to lock the desktop to a single theme , but that 's more " lack of feature " than a bug .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't a bug.
If it crashed when changing the theme then yes, that's a bug.
Her using a given option as it's intended though is not.
The worst you could say is that there was no root-settable option to lock the desktop to a single theme, but that's more "lack of feature" than a bug.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</id>
	<title>How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1262884740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter, and have it lock my screen, without having to wait in the middle for Windows to mode-switch to a different video screen, complete with fancy graphics, to ask me the same thing a simple dialog box asks me?</p><p>How about being able to edit the parameters of something you've "pinned to the taskbar"?</p><p>Whats up with this whole "Library" thing?   What is wrong with "My Documents"</p><p>Thank God at least they put your whole user profile in the c:\users\ directory - wait, do they, or is user crap still sprinkled around in c:\program files\blah ?</p><p>Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS.  Inexcusable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter , and have it lock my screen , without having to wait in the middle for Windows to mode-switch to a different video screen , complete with fancy graphics , to ask me the same thing a simple dialog box asks me ? How about being able to edit the parameters of something you 've " pinned to the taskbar " ? Whats up with this whole " Library " thing ?
What is wrong with " My Documents " Thank God at least they put your whole user profile in the c : \ users \ directory - wait , do they , or is user crap still sprinkled around in c : \ program files \ blah ? Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS .
Inexcusable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter, and have it lock my screen, without having to wait in the middle for Windows to mode-switch to a different video screen, complete with fancy graphics, to ask me the same thing a simple dialog box asks me?How about being able to edit the parameters of something you've "pinned to the taskbar"?Whats up with this whole "Library" thing?
What is wrong with "My Documents"Thank God at least they put your whole user profile in the c:\users\ directory - wait, do they, or is user crap still sprinkled around in c:\program files\blah ?Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS.
Inexcusable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683774</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1262885400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.... oh <a href="http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&amp;hl=en&amp;safe=off&amp;sa=1&amp;q=blue+sky&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=&amp;aqi=g-sx10&amp;start=0" title="google.com">shit</a> [google.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.... oh shit [ google.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.... oh shit [google.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30692388</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>xtracto</author>
	<datestamp>1262949120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Thank God at least they put your whole user profile in the c:\users\ directory - wait, do they, or is user crap still sprinkled around in c:\program files\blah</p></div><p>Which  incidentally, can not be moved to an alternative partition or drive (something that could be done in previous versions of Windows, at least until XP).</p><p>Why does Microsoft keeps disabling features with each new version of Windows?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank God at least they put your whole user profile in the c : \ users \ directory - wait , do they , or is user crap still sprinkled around in c : \ program files \ blahWhich incidentally , can not be moved to an alternative partition or drive ( something that could be done in previous versions of Windows , at least until XP ) .Why does Microsoft keeps disabling features with each new version of Windows ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank God at least they put your whole user profile in the c:\users\ directory - wait, do they, or is user crap still sprinkled around in c:\program files\blahWhich  incidentally, can not be moved to an alternative partition or drive (something that could be done in previous versions of Windows, at least until XP).Why does Microsoft keeps disabling features with each new version of Windows?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683798</id>
	<title>Re:Those strings can't be right</title>
	<author>techno-vampire</author>
	<datestamp>1262885520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Personally I prefer RDELVIS.  Of course, I always appreciated having to hit Bubba over the head with a crow bar to end most of the levels.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally I prefer RDELVIS .
Of course , I always appreciated having to hit Bubba over the head with a crow bar to end most of the levels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally I prefer RDELVIS.
Of course, I always appreciated having to hit Bubba over the head with a crow bar to end most of the levels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683424</id>
	<title>Re:Those strings can't be right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262884080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To me, god mode will always be IDDQD.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To me , god mode will always be IDDQD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To me, god mode will always be IDDQD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683494</id>
	<title>The real question is...</title>
	<author>tnk1</author>
	<datestamp>1262884320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does Windows 7 have Quad Damage?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does Windows 7 have Quad Damage ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does Windows 7 have Quad Damage?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685770</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Fred IV</author>
	<datestamp>1262893560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Whats up with this whole "Library" thing? What is wrong with "My Documents"</p></div><p>"My Documents" still exists if you want it. The key advantage of the Library is allowing the user to define additional locations (local or remote) where content of a certain type exists. The OS indexes the contents of all directories defined in this way and presents the user with a combined view of all defined content in within a section of the library.</p><p>Let's say you like to keep your local video content on a different hard drive than the one your OS is installed on. You also have a removable drive that you use to carry very large video files between locations with. In addition, there's a share on your network that has video content that you need to access from time to time. You can add those locations to your video library and then have a unified view of all related content. It lets you initially focus on WHAT you want, not WHERE it may be hiding</p><p>Yeah, it is a little different, but it is a pretty big improvement over the if you deal with multiple directories or just wish to keep your content someplace different than your OS. I always ignored the MyWhatever folders in XP because I keep my local content on an external drive, but I find myself using the library all the time now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whats up with this whole " Library " thing ?
What is wrong with " My Documents " " My Documents " still exists if you want it .
The key advantage of the Library is allowing the user to define additional locations ( local or remote ) where content of a certain type exists .
The OS indexes the contents of all directories defined in this way and presents the user with a combined view of all defined content in within a section of the library.Let 's say you like to keep your local video content on a different hard drive than the one your OS is installed on .
You also have a removable drive that you use to carry very large video files between locations with .
In addition , there 's a share on your network that has video content that you need to access from time to time .
You can add those locations to your video library and then have a unified view of all related content .
It lets you initially focus on WHAT you want , not WHERE it may be hidingYeah , it is a little different , but it is a pretty big improvement over the if you deal with multiple directories or just wish to keep your content someplace different than your OS .
I always ignored the MyWhatever folders in XP because I keep my local content on an external drive , but I find myself using the library all the time now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whats up with this whole "Library" thing?
What is wrong with "My Documents""My Documents" still exists if you want it.
The key advantage of the Library is allowing the user to define additional locations (local or remote) where content of a certain type exists.
The OS indexes the contents of all directories defined in this way and presents the user with a combined view of all defined content in within a section of the library.Let's say you like to keep your local video content on a different hard drive than the one your OS is installed on.
You also have a removable drive that you use to carry very large video files between locations with.
In addition, there's a share on your network that has video content that you need to access from time to time.
You can add those locations to your video library and then have a unified view of all related content.
It lets you initially focus on WHAT you want, not WHERE it may be hidingYeah, it is a little different, but it is a pretty big improvement over the if you deal with multiple directories or just wish to keep your content someplace different than your OS.
I always ignored the MyWhatever folders in XP because I keep my local content on an external drive, but I find myself using the library all the time now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684310</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>lymond01</author>
	<datestamp>1262887320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's the WTOL* not the BSOD and is already quite famous.</p><p>* White Tunnel of Light</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the WTOL * not the BSOD and is already quite famous .
* White Tunnel of Light</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the WTOL* not the BSOD and is already quite famous.
* White Tunnel of Light</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684412</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262887740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So that's why he's also referred to as the "Cloud Guy"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So that 's why he 's also referred to as the " Cloud Guy "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So that's why he's also referred to as the "Cloud Guy"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30696192</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262972640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, just think of it. This comes from people who inveted GOTO command.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , just think of it .
This comes from people who inveted GOTO command .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, just think of it.
This comes from people who inveted GOTO command.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683802</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>tomhudson</author>
	<datestamp>1262885580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS. Inexcusable.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Wrong.  MS didn't write DOS - t<a href="http://www.patersontech.com/Dos/Encyclo.aspx" title="patersontech.com">hey bought it.</a> [patersontech.com].  $10k for the right to sell it, + $15k for the sale of an OEM license to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... IBM.  Total: $25k.
</p><p>
Lawsuits eventually drove the final price to $1M.
</p><p>
Considering that Microsoft made tens of billions in profit (not revenue - profit) off dos,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS .
Inexcusable . Wrong .
MS did n't write DOS - they bought it .
[ patersontech.com ] . $ 10k for the right to sell it , + $ 15k for the sale of an OEM license to ... IBM. Total : $ 25k .
Lawsuits eventually drove the final price to $ 1M .
Considering that Microsoft made tens of billions in profit ( not revenue - profit ) off dos , .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS.
Inexcusable.

Wrong.
MS didn't write DOS - they bought it.
[patersontech.com].  $10k for the right to sell it, + $15k for the sale of an OEM license to ... IBM.  Total: $25k.
Lawsuits eventually drove the final price to $1M.
Considering that Microsoft made tens of billions in profit (not revenue - profit) off dos, ...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683826</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262885640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And all the stupid posts like the GP are simply anti-M$ zealots that are just trying to get karma points. (Seeing how it is at +4 insightful right now shows how successful they are at gaming the moderator system). This is old news too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And all the stupid posts like the GP are simply anti-M $ zealots that are just trying to get karma points .
( Seeing how it is at + 4 insightful right now shows how successful they are at gaming the moderator system ) .
This is old news too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And all the stupid posts like the GP are simply anti-M$ zealots that are just trying to get karma points.
(Seeing how it is at +4 insightful right now shows how successful they are at gaming the moderator system).
This is old news too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30687052</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1262856540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to defend the new networking layout in Control Panel (which I also think is overly complex and confusing), but the prescribed course of action is to open Control Panel, then type what you want to do in the search box.</p><p>"TCP/IP"... bam, there it is, top result.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to defend the new networking layout in Control Panel ( which I also think is overly complex and confusing ) , but the prescribed course of action is to open Control Panel , then type what you want to do in the search box. " TCP/IP " .. .
bam , there it is , top result .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to defend the new networking layout in Control Panel (which I also think is overly complex and confusing), but the prescribed course of action is to open Control Panel, then type what you want to do in the search box."TCP/IP"...
bam, there it is, top result.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688542</id>
	<title>Re:Direct Copy article</title>
	<author>Lehk228</author>
	<datestamp>1262863680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>no he definitely is, one of the examples is a folder "thankscnet{blah blah blah}"</htmltext>
<tokenext>no he definitely is , one of the examples is a folder " thankscnet { blah blah blah } "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no he definitely is, one of the examples is a folder "thankscnet{blah blah blah}"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685574</id>
	<title>Oh God</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262892660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, how many "Oh God Dammit" modes are still in there?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , how many " Oh God Dammit " modes are still in there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, how many "Oh God Dammit" modes are still in there?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685460</id>
	<title>Just like in DOOM</title>
	<author>al3</author>
	<datestamp>1262892180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Windows as in DOOM, GodMode helps you defeat UAC</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Windows as in DOOM , GodMode helps you defeat UAC</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Windows as in DOOM, GodMode helps you defeat UAC</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686784</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1262855220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If all of the features are in the Control Panel, why do the developers need shortcuts?</i></p><p><i>In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?</i></p><p>Are you implying that an interface that's good for developers is by definition also good for average users?</p><p>Or, as another poster in an above thread pointed out, do you really want your great aunt to have one-click access to the "Format Harddrives" control panel applet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If all of the features are in the Control Panel , why do the developers need shortcuts ? In other words , what 's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges ? Are you implying that an interface that 's good for developers is by definition also good for average users ? Or , as another poster in an above thread pointed out , do you really want your great aunt to have one-click access to the " Format Harddrives " control panel applet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If all of the features are in the Control Panel, why do the developers need shortcuts?In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?Are you implying that an interface that's good for developers is by definition also good for average users?Or, as another poster in an above thread pointed out, do you really want your great aunt to have one-click access to the "Format Harddrives" control panel applet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685312</id>
	<title>Re:does not compute</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262891460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It works fine on my x64.

Perhaps you should have tried it? Or followed the instructions a little closer?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It works fine on my x64 .
Perhaps you should have tried it ?
Or followed the instructions a little closer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It works fine on my x64.
Perhaps you should have tried it?
Or followed the instructions a little closer?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30687714</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>pluther</author>
	<datestamp>1262859720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...God has a "MicrosoftMode". </p></div>
</blockquote><p>
That would explain why he freaked so much about his users interfacing with that Apple a while back...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...God has a " MicrosoftMode " .
That would explain why he freaked so much about his users interfacing with that Apple a while back.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...God has a "MicrosoftMode".
That would explain why he freaked so much about his users interfacing with that Apple a while back...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683584</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>v1</author>
	<datestamp>1262884680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>having more than one way to do something can have a variety of benefits:</p><p>1) power users can take a faster path to the action and avoid confirmation dialogues when they know what they're doing.  Terminal/console windows are great examples.</p><p>2) there's often two or more "intuitive" places for something to be.  instead of picking one, put it in <i>both places</i> and it becomes a tad easier for 50\% of the population to use.  Is sleep after so long in screensaver a screensaver feature or an energysaver feature?  Give access from <b>both</b> panels and make things easier for the users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>having more than one way to do something can have a variety of benefits : 1 ) power users can take a faster path to the action and avoid confirmation dialogues when they know what they 're doing .
Terminal/console windows are great examples.2 ) there 's often two or more " intuitive " places for something to be .
instead of picking one , put it in both places and it becomes a tad easier for 50 \ % of the population to use .
Is sleep after so long in screensaver a screensaver feature or an energysaver feature ?
Give access from both panels and make things easier for the users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>having more than one way to do something can have a variety of benefits:1) power users can take a faster path to the action and avoid confirmation dialogues when they know what they're doing.
Terminal/console windows are great examples.2) there's often two or more "intuitive" places for something to be.
instead of picking one, put it in both places and it becomes a tad easier for 50\% of the population to use.
Is sleep after so long in screensaver a screensaver feature or an energysaver feature?
Give access from both panels and make things easier for the users.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684124</id>
	<title>Re:Those strings can't be right</title>
	<author>Azureflare</author>
	<datestamp>1262886720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Doom was my first shmup and I spent about 4 years playing that game (along with writing mods).  I still remember a mod I wrote that added in Monty Python + Simpsons sounds to all the monster effects just for lulz. <br> <br>Oh yeah, and I think I may be the only student to use Doom for my Geometry project in high school. That was fun. I built a castle that used geometric shapes we were covering in class... Not that hard to do but my teacher thought it was cool, haha. Oh, early nineties how I miss thee, it was a simpler time. Maybe just because I was a kid but still.

<br> <br> It's probably the game I have spent the most time playing in my life, so I have the most vivid memories of it I suppose.
<br> <br>
Never really got into Quake...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Doom was my first shmup and I spent about 4 years playing that game ( along with writing mods ) .
I still remember a mod I wrote that added in Monty Python + Simpsons sounds to all the monster effects just for lulz .
Oh yeah , and I think I may be the only student to use Doom for my Geometry project in high school .
That was fun .
I built a castle that used geometric shapes we were covering in class... Not that hard to do but my teacher thought it was cool , haha .
Oh , early nineties how I miss thee , it was a simpler time .
Maybe just because I was a kid but still .
It 's probably the game I have spent the most time playing in my life , so I have the most vivid memories of it I suppose .
Never really got into Quake.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doom was my first shmup and I spent about 4 years playing that game (along with writing mods).
I still remember a mod I wrote that added in Monty Python + Simpsons sounds to all the monster effects just for lulz.
Oh yeah, and I think I may be the only student to use Doom for my Geometry project in high school.
That was fun.
I built a castle that used geometric shapes we were covering in class... Not that hard to do but my teacher thought it was cool, haha.
Oh, early nineties how I miss thee, it was a simpler time.
Maybe just because I was a kid but still.
It's probably the game I have spent the most time playing in my life, so I have the most vivid memories of it I suppose.
Never really got into Quake...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683932</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>nielsm</author>
	<datestamp>1262886000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So all that stuff about a "tunnel of light" is a lie? It's just infinite blue?</p><p>I want my money back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So all that stuff about a " tunnel of light " is a lie ?
It 's just infinite blue ? I want my money back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So all that stuff about a "tunnel of light" is a lie?
It's just infinite blue?I want my money back.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30690908</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>JustNilt</author>
	<datestamp>1262885700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?</i> </p><p>Is the Control Panel accessible via the CLI?  That would be a reason.  Still an awful way to provide CLI access to these functions.</p></div><p>Well, it is, sort of.  The control panel applets are easily searched for if you click the start Orb (I hate that name, BTW) and start typing.  This assumes you have left the default Start Menu in place instead of Classic.  Basically, Start (key or orb) then type Programs (or just P) and you can get to the "Programs and features" applet.  Now, granted, this isn't <b>really</b> a command line but it is nearly as handy in many cases.  Considering this feature, I fail to see why they left this GUID now known as "Godmode" (shudder) in the final builds.  Too much hassle to remove it, I suppose.</p><p>As an aside, it took me ages to remember not to look for Add or Remove Programs<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... hehe.</p><p>Oh, and I do like the ability to make a Manage Wireless Networks icon on the Desktop quite easily.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In other words , what 's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges ?
Is the Control Panel accessible via the CLI ?
That would be a reason .
Still an awful way to provide CLI access to these functions.Well , it is , sort of .
The control panel applets are easily searched for if you click the start Orb ( I hate that name , BTW ) and start typing .
This assumes you have left the default Start Menu in place instead of Classic .
Basically , Start ( key or orb ) then type Programs ( or just P ) and you can get to the " Programs and features " applet .
Now , granted , this is n't really a command line but it is nearly as handy in many cases .
Considering this feature , I fail to see why they left this GUID now known as " Godmode " ( shudder ) in the final builds .
Too much hassle to remove it , I suppose.As an aside , it took me ages to remember not to look for Add or Remove Programs ... hehe.Oh , and I do like the ability to make a Manage Wireless Networks icon on the Desktop quite easily .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext> In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?
Is the Control Panel accessible via the CLI?
That would be a reason.
Still an awful way to provide CLI access to these functions.Well, it is, sort of.
The control panel applets are easily searched for if you click the start Orb (I hate that name, BTW) and start typing.
This assumes you have left the default Start Menu in place instead of Classic.
Basically, Start (key or orb) then type Programs (or just P) and you can get to the "Programs and features" applet.
Now, granted, this isn't really a command line but it is nearly as handy in many cases.
Considering this feature, I fail to see why they left this GUID now known as "Godmode" (shudder) in the final builds.
Too much hassle to remove it, I suppose.As an aside, it took me ages to remember not to look for Add or Remove Programs ... hehe.Oh, and I do like the ability to make a Manage Wireless Networks icon on the Desktop quite easily.
:-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683594</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262884680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The documentation you are talking about is for their APIs that would be used by third party developers. They now release the API documentation well before the product ever ships. There is no reason to fully document GUI features that aren't actually intended for users or developers to actually use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The documentation you are talking about is for their APIs that would be used by third party developers .
They now release the API documentation well before the product ever ships .
There is no reason to fully document GUI features that are n't actually intended for users or developers to actually use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The documentation you are talking about is for their APIs that would be used by third party developers.
They now release the API documentation well before the product ever ships.
There is no reason to fully document GUI features that aren't actually intended for users or developers to actually use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684292</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>John.P.Jones</author>
	<datestamp>1262887260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, if you wanted to formalize something like this why not add a system call that accepts a GUID and a void* and then if the GUID is a 'special' one then it forwards to the internal code to interpret the void* argument and do random stuff?  Why tie it in with the filesystem and string parsing at all?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , if you wanted to formalize something like this why not add a system call that accepts a GUID and a void * and then if the GUID is a 'special ' one then it forwards to the internal code to interpret the void * argument and do random stuff ?
Why tie it in with the filesystem and string parsing at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, if you wanted to formalize something like this why not add a system call that accepts a GUID and a void* and then if the GUID is a 'special' one then it forwards to the internal code to interpret the void* argument and do random stuff?
Why tie it in with the filesystem and string parsing at all?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683370</id>
	<title>Those strings can't be right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262883900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>God mode is DNKROZ or DNCORNHOLIO, not {ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C}.

Maybe the other codes are for infinite ammo, all weapons, etc?</htmltext>
<tokenext>God mode is DNKROZ or DNCORNHOLIO , not { ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C } .
Maybe the other codes are for infinite ammo , all weapons , etc ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God mode is DNKROZ or DNCORNHOLIO, not {ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C}.
Maybe the other codes are for infinite ammo, all weapons, etc?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684372</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Ant P.</author>
	<datestamp>1262887560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS.</p></div><p>McDonalds' $0.99 turds-in-a-box are a relatively new concept too. Instant gratification at any cost is what sells these days.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS.McDonalds ' $ 0.99 turds-in-a-box are a relatively new concept too .
Instant gratification at any cost is what sells these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS.McDonalds' $0.99 turds-in-a-box are a relatively new concept too.
Instant gratification at any cost is what sells these days.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30691348</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262892480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My IBM keyboard (born in 1988) doesn't have a Windows key you insensitive clod!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My IBM keyboard ( born in 1988 ) does n't have a Windows key you insensitive clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My IBM keyboard (born in 1988) doesn't have a Windows key you insensitive clod!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685278</id>
	<title>Re:does not compute</title>
	<author>Cytotoxic</author>
	<datestamp>1262891340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx" title="microsoft.com">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx</a> [microsoft.com] </p><p>godmode isn't needed, that's just the name of the folder (Cnet named thiers thankscnet).  Also, that so-called 'godmode' folder probably isn't documented because it's broken on x64.</p></div><p>Works fine on my copy of Win7 x64.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741 ( VS.85 ) .aspx [ microsoft.com ] godmode is n't needed , that 's just the name of the folder ( Cnet named thiers thankscnet ) .
Also , that so-called 'godmode ' folder probably is n't documented because it 's broken on x64.Works fine on my copy of Win7 x64 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx [microsoft.com] godmode isn't needed, that's just the name of the folder (Cnet named thiers thankscnet).
Also, that so-called 'godmode' folder probably isn't documented because it's broken on x64.Works fine on my copy of Win7 x64.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686320</id>
	<title>You mean the sky?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262896320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man... talk about a big screen...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man... talk about a big screen.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man... talk about a big screen...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683726</id>
	<title>Re:The real question is...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262885220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just to your data.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just to your data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just to your data.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684482</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>xouumalperxe</author>
	<datestamp>1262888040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, God's BSOD is actually a "Black Sky of Death", as per the standard Deluge myth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , God 's BSOD is actually a " Black Sky of Death " , as per the standard Deluge myth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, God's BSOD is actually a "Black Sky of Death", as per the standard Deluge myth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684164</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Elwood P Dowd</author>
	<datestamp>1262886840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is obviously how the control panel and other special folders are implemented in the first place. Not a short cut. Put in the right code &amp; you'll get the regular control panel directory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is obviously how the control panel and other special folders are implemented in the first place .
Not a short cut .
Put in the right code &amp; you 'll get the regular control panel directory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is obviously how the control panel and other special folders are implemented in the first place.
Not a short cut.
Put in the right code &amp; you'll get the regular control panel directory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685182</id>
	<title>this is stupid</title>
	<author>Kral\_Blbec</author>
	<datestamp>1262890980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>soooo its like a shortcut to the control panel. yippeee.</htmltext>
<tokenext>soooo its like a shortcut to the control panel .
yippeee .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>soooo its like a shortcut to the control panel.
yippeee.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683870</id>
	<title>Re:does not compute</title>
	<author>glennpratt</author>
	<datestamp>1262885820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx" title="microsoft.com">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx</a> [microsoft.com]</p><p>godmode isn't needed, that's just the name of the folder (Cnet named thiers thankscnet).  Also, that so-called 'godmode' folder probably isn't documented because it's broken on x64.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741 ( VS.85 ) .aspx [ microsoft.com ] godmode is n't needed , that 's just the name of the folder ( Cnet named thiers thankscnet ) .
Also , that so-called 'godmode ' folder probably is n't documented because it 's broken on x64 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx [microsoft.com]godmode isn't needed, that's just the name of the folder (Cnet named thiers thankscnet).
Also, that so-called 'godmode' folder probably isn't documented because it's broken on x64.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685896</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>ashridah</author>
	<datestamp>1262894040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm going to go with 'testability'.</p><p>If your automated tests all need to go through a set of gui steps to get to a control panel, and someone accidentally or deliberately moves it, but your tests don't get updated, they're all going to fail, and you lose a large amount of coverage for a small change.</p><p>However, if you've only got one test who's purpose it is to test the path and make sure it's reachable, and all the rest use a "horrible kludge" as you put it to just get to the feature, then you've improved test reliablity, and you're testing specific things with each test.</p><p>I could also see this being useful with particular types of model-based monkey testing, and other things like that.</p><p>Of course, most control panels can be accessed by running the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.cpl file itself, so this would seem superfluous.</p><p>So, on that note, i'd suggest that this is more likely a side-effect of a feature that exists for some other purpose, similar to how explorer maps special folders to specific tasks. Like, say, if you go to c:\windows\fonts\, or c:\windows\assembly and get special views.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to go with 'testability'.If your automated tests all need to go through a set of gui steps to get to a control panel , and someone accidentally or deliberately moves it , but your tests do n't get updated , they 're all going to fail , and you lose a large amount of coverage for a small change.However , if you 've only got one test who 's purpose it is to test the path and make sure it 's reachable , and all the rest use a " horrible kludge " as you put it to just get to the feature , then you 've improved test reliablity , and you 're testing specific things with each test.I could also see this being useful with particular types of model-based monkey testing , and other things like that.Of course , most control panels can be accessed by running the .cpl file itself , so this would seem superfluous.So , on that note , i 'd suggest that this is more likely a side-effect of a feature that exists for some other purpose , similar to how explorer maps special folders to specific tasks .
Like , say , if you go to c : \ windows \ fonts \ , or c : \ windows \ assembly and get special views .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to go with 'testability'.If your automated tests all need to go through a set of gui steps to get to a control panel, and someone accidentally or deliberately moves it, but your tests don't get updated, they're all going to fail, and you lose a large amount of coverage for a small change.However, if you've only got one test who's purpose it is to test the path and make sure it's reachable, and all the rest use a "horrible kludge" as you put it to just get to the feature, then you've improved test reliablity, and you're testing specific things with each test.I could also see this being useful with particular types of model-based monkey testing, and other things like that.Of course, most control panels can be accessed by running the .cpl file itself, so this would seem superfluous.So, on that note, i'd suggest that this is more likely a side-effect of a feature that exists for some other purpose, similar to how explorer maps special folders to specific tasks.
Like, say, if you go to c:\windows\fonts\, or c:\windows\assembly and get special views.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684924</id>
	<title>Re:The real question is...</title>
	<author>cheezfreek</author>
	<datestamp>1262889840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While picking up my computer so I could more easily pop a new hard drive inside, I managed to drop it on my thigh.  Yes, I can definitely confirm quad damage.  (groan, boo, hiss, I know...sorry)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While picking up my computer so I could more easily pop a new hard drive inside , I managed to drop it on my thigh .
Yes , I can definitely confirm quad damage .
( groan , boo , hiss , I know...sorry )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While picking up my computer so I could more easily pop a new hard drive inside, I managed to drop it on my thigh.
Yes, I can definitely confirm quad damage.
(groan, boo, hiss, I know...sorry)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683880</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1262885880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Why don't you document everything and release it at the same time as the software?<br></i><br>It's odd that as their OSes became more complex, they also had less and less documentation. The IBM XT came with fat books that completely explained line commands, interrupts, and all sorts of other goodies. Now you get a skinny booklet geared to a 5th grade reader.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't you document everything and release it at the same time as the software ? It 's odd that as their OSes became more complex , they also had less and less documentation .
The IBM XT came with fat books that completely explained line commands , interrupts , and all sorts of other goodies .
Now you get a skinny booklet geared to a 5th grade reader .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't you document everything and release it at the same time as the software?It's odd that as their OSes became more complex, they also had less and less documentation.
The IBM XT came with fat books that completely explained line commands, interrupts, and all sorts of other goodies.
Now you get a skinny booklet geared to a 5th grade reader.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683810</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262885580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Programs that don't have administrative rights are incapable of saving data to Program Files.  Applications that try face virtual directory redirection into c:\users\yourname, so yes, it is stored per-user anyway.</p><p>Stupid apps lose, OS wins.</p><p>With a few exceptions (such as the ability to tinker), Windows "problems" are PEBCAK and failure to comprehend how things work as you've just amply demonstrated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Programs that do n't have administrative rights are incapable of saving data to Program Files .
Applications that try face virtual directory redirection into c : \ users \ yourname , so yes , it is stored per-user anyway.Stupid apps lose , OS wins.With a few exceptions ( such as the ability to tinker ) , Windows " problems " are PEBCAK and failure to comprehend how things work as you 've just amply demonstrated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Programs that don't have administrative rights are incapable of saving data to Program Files.
Applications that try face virtual directory redirection into c:\users\yourname, so yes, it is stored per-user anyway.Stupid apps lose, OS wins.With a few exceptions (such as the ability to tinker), Windows "problems" are PEBCAK and failure to comprehend how things work as you've just amply demonstrated.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683668</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262884920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reason they're undocumented is that these features make it that much easier for a novice user to screw up a system. Remember that Windows is used by hundreds of millions of people with most people not being computer savvy. Power users like Slashdotters and people who read CNET can easily enable this functionality if they want. On top of that these features might be changed without notice in a hotfix or service pack, hence they don't want to commit themselves to supporting it in the future by documenting it now.</p><p>You wouldn't want a shortcut for a command similar to "Format C: without warning" to be placed on your Grandma's Desktop would you? But power users can do it if that's what they really want.(Yes, I know even Format<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/Y C: doesn't work because C is the boot partition, but you get my drift).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason they 're undocumented is that these features make it that much easier for a novice user to screw up a system .
Remember that Windows is used by hundreds of millions of people with most people not being computer savvy .
Power users like Slashdotters and people who read CNET can easily enable this functionality if they want .
On top of that these features might be changed without notice in a hotfix or service pack , hence they do n't want to commit themselves to supporting it in the future by documenting it now.You would n't want a shortcut for a command similar to " Format C : without warning " to be placed on your Grandma 's Desktop would you ?
But power users can do it if that 's what they really want .
( Yes , I know even Format /Y C : does n't work because C is the boot partition , but you get my drift ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason they're undocumented is that these features make it that much easier for a novice user to screw up a system.
Remember that Windows is used by hundreds of millions of people with most people not being computer savvy.
Power users like Slashdotters and people who read CNET can easily enable this functionality if they want.
On top of that these features might be changed without notice in a hotfix or service pack, hence they don't want to commit themselves to supporting it in the future by documenting it now.You wouldn't want a shortcut for a command similar to "Format C: without warning" to be placed on your Grandma's Desktop would you?
But power users can do it if that's what they really want.
(Yes, I know even Format /Y C: doesn't work because C is the boot partition, but you get my drift).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684096</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1262886660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Whats up with this whole "Library" thing? What is wrong with "My Documents"</p></div><p>The problem with "My Documents" is that it (and the rest of one's home folder, i.e. C:\Users\Foo) only open for read to the user who owns it. Which is as it should be, of course, but when you have multiple user accounts, you do sometimes (quite often, in fact) want certain documents shared between users.</p><p>Now, there was a folder for "All Users", which did just that, since... er... NT I believe? 2K and above had it for sure. The problem is that few people actually knew it was there and used it.</p><p>The idea of libraries in 7 is to expose that folder in a useful but unobtrusive way without making things unsecure. Thus, if you just save something to "Libraries\Documents", it goes to your own "Documents" folder, and isn't accessible by other users. On the other hand, when you browse the contents of "Libraries\Documents", you see the merged listing of your "Documents", and the shared "Documents" folder, and have immediate access to both. So if another user saved something as shared, it just appears in the listing right there.</p><p>From tech perspective, it's pretty much like unionfs done on shell level (file APIs don't see it as a single folder, but shell APIs do).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whats up with this whole " Library " thing ?
What is wrong with " My Documents " The problem with " My Documents " is that it ( and the rest of one 's home folder , i.e .
C : \ Users \ Foo ) only open for read to the user who owns it .
Which is as it should be , of course , but when you have multiple user accounts , you do sometimes ( quite often , in fact ) want certain documents shared between users.Now , there was a folder for " All Users " , which did just that , since... er... NT I believe ?
2K and above had it for sure .
The problem is that few people actually knew it was there and used it.The idea of libraries in 7 is to expose that folder in a useful but unobtrusive way without making things unsecure .
Thus , if you just save something to " Libraries \ Documents " , it goes to your own " Documents " folder , and is n't accessible by other users .
On the other hand , when you browse the contents of " Libraries \ Documents " , you see the merged listing of your " Documents " , and the shared " Documents " folder , and have immediate access to both .
So if another user saved something as shared , it just appears in the listing right there.From tech perspective , it 's pretty much like unionfs done on shell level ( file APIs do n't see it as a single folder , but shell APIs do ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whats up with this whole "Library" thing?
What is wrong with "My Documents"The problem with "My Documents" is that it (and the rest of one's home folder, i.e.
C:\Users\Foo) only open for read to the user who owns it.
Which is as it should be, of course, but when you have multiple user accounts, you do sometimes (quite often, in fact) want certain documents shared between users.Now, there was a folder for "All Users", which did just that, since... er... NT I believe?
2K and above had it for sure.
The problem is that few people actually knew it was there and used it.The idea of libraries in 7 is to expose that folder in a useful but unobtrusive way without making things unsecure.
Thus, if you just save something to "Libraries\Documents", it goes to your own "Documents" folder, and isn't accessible by other users.
On the other hand, when you browse the contents of "Libraries\Documents", you see the merged listing of your "Documents", and the shared "Documents" folder, and have immediate access to both.
So if another user saved something as shared, it just appears in the listing right there.From tech perspective, it's pretty much like unionfs done on shell level (file APIs don't see it as a single folder, but shell APIs do).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685062</id>
	<title>Re:Direct Copy article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262890380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"from the article, I inferred these god mode settings were just (basically) command lines to initiate control panel activities?"</p><p>yeah, based on the (short) summary, I was hoping for more.  A feature that gave root-like access would be nice - or a tool that overrode error messages.  Something to get around messages like "File is in use and cannot be deleted", or to \_really\_ delete/rename a file (instead of letting WinSxS restore it.  I was trying to deal with Roxio BackOnTrack (backup/system restore program) that went awry.  It ate up all the disk space, and somehow got itself protected so you couldn't delete it (you could delete it, but it would restore itself like Windows File Protection does).  I've seen viruses less tenacious than that piece of junk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" from the article , I inferred these god mode settings were just ( basically ) command lines to initiate control panel activities ?
" yeah , based on the ( short ) summary , I was hoping for more .
A feature that gave root-like access would be nice - or a tool that overrode error messages .
Something to get around messages like " File is in use and can not be deleted " , or to \ _really \ _ delete/rename a file ( instead of letting WinSxS restore it .
I was trying to deal with Roxio BackOnTrack ( backup/system restore program ) that went awry .
It ate up all the disk space , and somehow got itself protected so you could n't delete it ( you could delete it , but it would restore itself like Windows File Protection does ) .
I 've seen viruses less tenacious than that piece of junk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"from the article, I inferred these god mode settings were just (basically) command lines to initiate control panel activities?
"yeah, based on the (short) summary, I was hoping for more.
A feature that gave root-like access would be nice - or a tool that overrode error messages.
Something to get around messages like "File is in use and cannot be deleted", or to \_really\_ delete/rename a file (instead of letting WinSxS restore it.
I was trying to deal with Roxio BackOnTrack (backup/system restore program) that went awry.
It ate up all the disk space, and somehow got itself protected so you couldn't delete it (you could delete it, but it would restore itself like Windows File Protection does).
I've seen viruses less tenacious than that piece of junk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685984</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>LoudMusic</author>
	<datestamp>1262894400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In XP and Vista I've had issues with "Win+L" causing a 'stuck key' situation. It's been heavily discussed and apparently patched in service packs but I continued to have the problem until I stopped using Win+L several months ago. I'm looking forward to trying it again in 7 but I'm not holding my breath either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In XP and Vista I 've had issues with " Win + L " causing a 'stuck key ' situation .
It 's been heavily discussed and apparently patched in service packs but I continued to have the problem until I stopped using Win + L several months ago .
I 'm looking forward to trying it again in 7 but I 'm not holding my breath either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In XP and Vista I've had issues with "Win+L" causing a 'stuck key' situation.
It's been heavily discussed and apparently patched in service packs but I continued to have the problem until I stopped using Win+L several months ago.
I'm looking forward to trying it again in 7 but I'm not holding my breath either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685380</id>
	<title>How about they just fix stuff?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262891760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like why my "windows explorer has stopped working"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....2-3 times a day?

And while they are at it, fix the Zune software so it works better with W7.
Its so buggy, its just a PITA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like why my " windows explorer has stopped working " ....2-3 times a day ?
And while they are at it , fix the Zune software so it works better with W7 .
Its so buggy , its just a PITA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like why my "windows explorer has stopped working" ....2-3 times a day?
And while they are at it, fix the Zune software so it works better with W7.
Its so buggy, its just a PITA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683778</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262885460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This isn't a special way to access the Control Panel for developers because there is some sort of problem with the new layout.</p><p>Rather, this is part of a more general feature for developers to create and display namespaces within Windows. Microsoft simply used the same method for managing the Control Panels applets that it suggests its developers use for their own applications.</p><p>Now, the article points out there is a way users can exploit this feature to get the Control Panel applets listed discretely without any flair, bells, or whistles (like classic Windows) rather than navigating through a hand-holding GUI.</p><p>I prefer the tweak in the article because I'm used to the applets and know what they all do. At the same time, I can still see where the new Control Panel GUI is probably more intuitive to novice users and will get them to the options they need more easily (albeit with a few more clicks as they're guided through).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't a special way to access the Control Panel for developers because there is some sort of problem with the new layout.Rather , this is part of a more general feature for developers to create and display namespaces within Windows .
Microsoft simply used the same method for managing the Control Panels applets that it suggests its developers use for their own applications.Now , the article points out there is a way users can exploit this feature to get the Control Panel applets listed discretely without any flair , bells , or whistles ( like classic Windows ) rather than navigating through a hand-holding GUI.I prefer the tweak in the article because I 'm used to the applets and know what they all do .
At the same time , I can still see where the new Control Panel GUI is probably more intuitive to novice users and will get them to the options they need more easily ( albeit with a few more clicks as they 're guided through ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't a special way to access the Control Panel for developers because there is some sort of problem with the new layout.Rather, this is part of a more general feature for developers to create and display namespaces within Windows.
Microsoft simply used the same method for managing the Control Panels applets that it suggests its developers use for their own applications.Now, the article points out there is a way users can exploit this feature to get the Control Panel applets listed discretely without any flair, bells, or whistles (like classic Windows) rather than navigating through a hand-holding GUI.I prefer the tweak in the article because I'm used to the applets and know what they all do.
At the same time, I can still see where the new Control Panel GUI is probably more intuitive to novice users and will get them to the options they need more easily (albeit with a few more clicks as they're guided through).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685338</id>
	<title>Re:Direct Copy article</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1262891580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It&rsquo;s easy to impersonate him. Just put Aviran in the name field and http://www.aviransplace.com/ in the website field.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It    s easy to impersonate him .
Just put Aviran in the name field and http : //www.aviransplace.com/ in the website field .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It’s easy to impersonate him.
Just put Aviran in the name field and http://www.aviransplace.com/ in the website field.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30687804</id>
	<title>Re:"Oh God, this is ****ed up mode"</title>
	<author>Gadget\_Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1262860140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Thank god they haven't forced me onto Win7 at work yet!</p></div><p>I hate to tell you this, but these shortcuts date back to Windows 95. If you didn't know about them before now then I really don't think that it will affect your Windows 7 experience one way or the other.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank god they have n't forced me onto Win7 at work yet ! I hate to tell you this , but these shortcuts date back to Windows 95 .
If you did n't know about them before now then I really do n't think that it will affect your Windows 7 experience one way or the other .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank god they haven't forced me onto Win7 at work yet!I hate to tell you this, but these shortcuts date back to Windows 95.
If you didn't know about them before now then I really don't think that it will affect your Windows 7 experience one way or the other.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684192</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>bschorr</author>
	<datestamp>1262886960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Same reason I add shortcuts to get into the program settings to the toolbars of all the apps I have to support.  The average user might go in there once or twice a year (if ever).  I have to go in there several times a week to test or demonstrate something.<br><br>We create shortcuts to the places we need to go often. The average user doesn't go the same places the devs or support guys do, most likely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Same reason I add shortcuts to get into the program settings to the toolbars of all the apps I have to support .
The average user might go in there once or twice a year ( if ever ) .
I have to go in there several times a week to test or demonstrate something.We create shortcuts to the places we need to go often .
The average user does n't go the same places the devs or support guys do , most likely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same reason I add shortcuts to get into the program settings to the toolbars of all the apps I have to support.
The average user might go in there once or twice a year (if ever).
I have to go in there several times a week to test or demonstrate something.We create shortcuts to the places we need to go often.
The average user doesn't go the same places the devs or support guys do, most likely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684388</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1262887620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter, and have it lock my screen</i></p><p>Windows key + L will do that.</p><p><i>How about being able to edit the parameters of something you've "pinned to the taskbar"?<br></i><br>To quote the late Lilly Tomlin's "Ernestine" character, "we're the phone company. We don't HAVE to."</p><p><i>What is wrong with "My Documents"<br></i><br>The "my computer" and "my documents" and the "my this" and "my that" has irked me ever since they implimented it. How about letting me make my own directories and name them what I want? Which I can and do, but the "my documents" is still there. Hell, I'm not supposed to have any of my documents on my work computer, only the company's documents.</p><p><i>Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS. Inexcusable.</i></p><p>Agreed, which is why I run Mandriva at home (yes, I know Linux isn't Unix). To me, KDE is far preferable to Windows in most respects.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter , and have it lock my screenWindows key + L will do that.How about being able to edit the parameters of something you 've " pinned to the taskbar " ? To quote the late Lilly Tomlin 's " Ernestine " character , " we 're the phone company .
We do n't HAVE to .
" What is wrong with " My Documents " The " my computer " and " my documents " and the " my this " and " my that " has irked me ever since they implimented it .
How about letting me make my own directories and name them what I want ?
Which I can and do , but the " my documents " is still there .
Hell , I 'm not supposed to have any of my documents on my work computer , only the company 's documents.Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS .
Inexcusable.Agreed , which is why I run Mandriva at home ( yes , I know Linux is n't Unix ) .
To me , KDE is far preferable to Windows in most respects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter, and have it lock my screenWindows key + L will do that.How about being able to edit the parameters of something you've "pinned to the taskbar"?To quote the late Lilly Tomlin's "Ernestine" character, "we're the phone company.
We don't HAVE to.
"What is wrong with "My Documents"The "my computer" and "my documents" and the "my this" and "my that" has irked me ever since they implimented it.
How about letting me make my own directories and name them what I want?
Which I can and do, but the "my documents" is still there.
Hell, I'm not supposed to have any of my documents on my work computer, only the company's documents.Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS.
Inexcusable.Agreed, which is why I run Mandriva at home (yes, I know Linux isn't Unix).
To me, KDE is far preferable to Windows in most respects.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683508</id>
	<title>How is this a new thing?</title>
	<author>filedil</author>
	<datestamp>1262884440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IIRC it was possible in Windows 95 or so to create a Menu Start folder with all of Control Panel's elements using a folder with a special "extension".</htmltext>
<tokenext>IIRC it was possible in Windows 95 or so to create a Menu Start folder with all of Control Panel 's elements using a folder with a special " extension " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IIRC it was possible in Windows 95 or so to create a Menu Start folder with all of Control Panel's elements using a folder with a special "extension".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684450</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>drsmithy</author>
	<datestamp>1262887860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>It's odd that as their OSes became more complex, they also had less and less documentation. The IBM XT came with fat books that completely explained line commands, interrupts, and all sorts of other goodies. Now you get a skinny booklet geared to a 5th grade reader.</i>
</p><p>This is not even remotely odd when you account for the interest level of the average user then and now.
</p><p>To say nothing of all the information still being there, if you want to look.  Only now it's in the Intarcloud in a constantly updated and searchable form.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's odd that as their OSes became more complex , they also had less and less documentation .
The IBM XT came with fat books that completely explained line commands , interrupts , and all sorts of other goodies .
Now you get a skinny booklet geared to a 5th grade reader .
This is not even remotely odd when you account for the interest level of the average user then and now .
To say nothing of all the information still being there , if you want to look .
Only now it 's in the Intarcloud in a constantly updated and searchable form .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> It's odd that as their OSes became more complex, they also had less and less documentation.
The IBM XT came with fat books that completely explained line commands, interrupts, and all sorts of other goodies.
Now you get a skinny booklet geared to a 5th grade reader.
This is not even remotely odd when you account for the interest level of the average user then and now.
To say nothing of all the information still being there, if you want to look.
Only now it's in the Intarcloud in a constantly updated and searchable form.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685920</id>
	<title>Re:Direct Copy article</title>
	<author>OhHellWithIt</author>
	<datestamp>1262894160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The original article is <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860\_3-10426627-56.html" title="cnet.com" rel="nofollow">here</a> [cnet.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>The original article is here [ cnet.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original article is here [cnet.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683776</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262885400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS. Inexcusable.</p></div><p>MS didn't write DOS - they bought it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS .
Inexcusable.MS did n't write DOS - they bought it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unix existed when MS wrote and sold DOS.
Inexcusable.MS didn't write DOS - they bought it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683602</id>
	<title>"Oh God, this is ****ed up mode"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262884680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, what in the name of the flying spaghetti monster is going on here? There must be all kinds of sauce in the code to support this kind of stuff... and if the control panel UI is so bad they are hacking this stuff in... what does it say about the control panel UI? Thank god they haven't forced me onto Win7 at work yet!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , what in the name of the flying spaghetti monster is going on here ?
There must be all kinds of sauce in the code to support this kind of stuff... and if the control panel UI is so bad they are hacking this stuff in... what does it say about the control panel UI ?
Thank god they have n't forced me onto Win7 at work yet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, what in the name of the flying spaghetti monster is going on here?
There must be all kinds of sauce in the code to support this kind of stuff... and if the control panel UI is so bad they are hacking this stuff in... what does it say about the control panel UI?
Thank god they haven't forced me onto Win7 at work yet!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686412</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>webmistressrachel</author>
	<datestamp>1262896860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's this? Windows has XXX.{BB64F8A7-BEE7-4E1A-AB8D-7D8273F7FDB6}?</p><p>Oh thanks, this has got to be cool (creates folder etc...)</p><p>Eagerly clicks away...</p><p>"Review Recent Messages and Solve Problems" - Windows Action Center.</p><p>Oh thanks. Great, real voodoo man<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-( What a disappointment!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's this ?
Windows has XXX .
{ BB64F8A7-BEE7-4E1A-AB8D-7D8273F7FDB6 } ? Oh thanks , this has got to be cool ( creates folder etc... ) Eagerly clicks away... " Review Recent Messages and Solve Problems " - Windows Action Center.Oh thanks .
Great , real voodoo man : - ( What a disappointment !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's this?
Windows has XXX.
{BB64F8A7-BEE7-4E1A-AB8D-7D8273F7FDB6}?Oh thanks, this has got to be cool (creates folder etc...)Eagerly clicks away..."Review Recent Messages and Solve Problems" - Windows Action Center.Oh thanks.
Great, real voodoo man :-( What a disappointment!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686152</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262895300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>UAC does not complain about an app creating user data in Program Files... instead the data is magically put into C:\Users\YourUserName\AppData\Local\VirtualStore\Program Files</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>UAC does not complain about an app creating user data in Program Files... instead the data is magically put into C : \ Users \ YourUserName \ AppData \ Local \ VirtualStore \ Program Files</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UAC does not complain about an app creating user data in Program Files... instead the data is magically put into C:\Users\YourUserName\AppData\Local\VirtualStore\Program Files</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684040</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Verteiron</author>
	<datestamp>1262886420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To lock the system, try Meta(windows key)+L. Been that way since Windows 2000.</p><p>To edit the parameters of "pinned" items, try shift+rightclick.</p><p>The library is actually pretty cool if you take the time to learn how to use it. My Documents is still there, too. The Documents library includes it by default.</p><p>Any app properly written for Windows 2000 or later will store all of its settings in c:\users\profilename. Programs that want to write to Program Files actually write to C:\Users\profilename\AppData\Local\VirtualStore instead.</p><p>I'm with you on the last point, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To lock the system , try Meta ( windows key ) + L .
Been that way since Windows 2000.To edit the parameters of " pinned " items , try shift + rightclick.The library is actually pretty cool if you take the time to learn how to use it .
My Documents is still there , too .
The Documents library includes it by default.Any app properly written for Windows 2000 or later will store all of its settings in c : \ users \ profilename .
Programs that want to write to Program Files actually write to C : \ Users \ profilename \ AppData \ Local \ VirtualStore instead.I 'm with you on the last point , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To lock the system, try Meta(windows key)+L.
Been that way since Windows 2000.To edit the parameters of "pinned" items, try shift+rightclick.The library is actually pretty cool if you take the time to learn how to use it.
My Documents is still there, too.
The Documents library includes it by default.Any app properly written for Windows 2000 or later will store all of its settings in c:\users\profilename.
Programs that want to write to Program Files actually write to C:\Users\profilename\AppData\Local\VirtualStore instead.I'm with you on the last point, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683438</id>
	<title>Why not link to the real article?</title>
	<author>Maestro485</author>
	<datestamp>1262884080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860\_3-10426627-56.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1\_3-0-20" title="cnet.com">http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860\_3-10426627-56.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1\_3-0-20</a> [cnet.com]
<br> <br>
Identical to the summary link, except from the actual source.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //news.cnet.com/8301-13860 \ _3-10426627-56.html ? part = rss&amp;subj = news&amp;tag = 2547-1 \ _3-0-20 [ cnet.com ] Identical to the summary link , except from the actual source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860\_3-10426627-56.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1\_3-0-20 [cnet.com]
 
Identical to the summary link, except from the actual source.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30687652</id>
	<title>Excellent!</title>
	<author>FatdogHaiku</author>
	<datestamp>1262859360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I always wanted to be many Gods...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I always wanted to be many Gods.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always wanted to be many Gods...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683950</id>
	<title>Re:Why not link to the real article?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262886120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, and written by some creepy dude who thinks he&rsquo;s a woman.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , and written by some creepy dude who thinks he    s a woman .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, and written by some creepy dude who thinks he’s a woman.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684608</id>
	<title>...and yet...</title>
	<author>nitrowing</author>
	<datestamp>1262888580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...with all the God Modes they have hidden, I \_still\_ have to go to cmd.exe to remove the hiberfil.sys</htmltext>
<tokenext>...with all the God Modes they have hidden , I \ _still \ _ have to go to cmd.exe to remove the hiberfil.sys</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...with all the God Modes they have hidden, I \_still\_ have to go to cmd.exe to remove the hiberfil.sys</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683430</id>
	<title>Whooo!!!  Its God on my Windows Computer w00t l33t</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262884080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What to find all these God Modes?  Just go to your registry and navigate to HKEY\_CLASSES\_ROOT\CLSID and search for "System.ApplicationName".  Every GUID listed under CLSID with a System.ApplicationName entry can be used to do this same thing.
</p><p>
While you are at it, delete the key.
</p><p>
There.  That should help.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What to find all these God Modes ?
Just go to your registry and navigate to HKEY \ _CLASSES \ _ROOT \ CLSID and search for " System.ApplicationName " .
Every GUID listed under CLSID with a System.ApplicationName entry can be used to do this same thing .
While you are at it , delete the key .
There. That should help .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What to find all these God Modes?
Just go to your registry and navigate to HKEY\_CLASSES\_ROOT\CLSID and search for "System.ApplicationName".
Every GUID listed under CLSID with a System.ApplicationName entry can be used to do this same thing.
While you are at it, delete the key.
There.  That should help.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683824</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1262885640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sites</i></p><p>Well, this one may be; it's firewalled off at work. But Google shows me a lot of FAs on the subject so I RTF C|NET A. Computerworld and a host of other larger sites also covered it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sitesWell , this one may be ; it 's firewalled off at work .
But Google shows me a lot of FAs on the subject so I RTF C | NET A. Computerworld and a host of other larger sites also covered it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sitesWell, this one may be; it's firewalled off at work.
But Google shows me a lot of FAs on the subject so I RTF C|NET A. Computerworld and a host of other larger sites also covered it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684992</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Skuld-Chan</author>
	<datestamp>1262890080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should really take a computer class at your local community college - all these things are doable by shortcuts built into the OS since Windows NT - Window key + L will lock the PC for instance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should really take a computer class at your local community college - all these things are doable by shortcuts built into the OS since Windows NT - Window key + L will lock the PC for instance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should really take a computer class at your local community college - all these things are doable by shortcuts built into the OS since Windows NT - Window key + L will lock the PC for instance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683454</id>
	<title>Mansions....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262884200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is like those large castlesque mansions in horror movies that have all of the secret entrances and false walls for baddies to spring from at the most inopportun times.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is like those large castlesque mansions in horror movies that have all of the secret entrances and false walls for baddies to spring from at the most inopportun times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is like those large castlesque mansions in horror movies that have all of the secret entrances and false walls for baddies to spring from at the most inopportun times.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685462</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>w0mprat</author>
	<datestamp>1262892180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...theologians have recently determined that God has a "MicrosoftMode". Watch out for the Blue <b>Sky</b> of Death.</p></div><p>Did I just fix that for you? Is that what you meant? <br> <br> If/when the universe implodes in a big crunch we would actually see the cosmic microwave background radiation, in all directions in the sky, <b>blue shifted</b>.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...theologians have recently determined that God has a " MicrosoftMode " .
Watch out for the Blue Sky of Death.Did I just fix that for you ?
Is that what you meant ?
If/when the universe implodes in a big crunch we would actually see the cosmic microwave background radiation , in all directions in the sky , blue shifted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...theologians have recently determined that God has a "MicrosoftMode".
Watch out for the Blue Sky of Death.Did I just fix that for you?
Is that what you meant?
If/when the universe implodes in a big crunch we would actually see the cosmic microwave background radiation, in all directions in the sky, blue shifted.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683890</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Tim C</author>
	<datestamp>1262885880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter, and have it lock my screen, without having to wait in the middle for Windows to mode-switch to a different video screen, complete with fancy graphics, to ask me the same thing a simple dialog box asks me?</i></p><p>Winkey-L locks your screen, no waiting, no confirmations.</p><p><i>Whats up with this whole "Library" thing? What is wrong with "My Documents"</i></p><p>Libraries allow you to add other folders (e.g. public photo or music folders) and have their contents appear alongside that of any others (e.g. your "My Pictures" or "My Music" folder)</p><p><i>is user crap still sprinkled around in c:\program files\blah ?</i></p><p>You'll be wanting to talk to your software vendors about that - that's been against recommended practice since at least Windows 2000 (or Win XP if you want to take it from when the DOS-based home OS line finally died; but even that's now 9 years ago)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter , and have it lock my screen , without having to wait in the middle for Windows to mode-switch to a different video screen , complete with fancy graphics , to ask me the same thing a simple dialog box asks me ? Winkey-L locks your screen , no waiting , no confirmations.Whats up with this whole " Library " thing ?
What is wrong with " My Documents " Libraries allow you to add other folders ( e.g .
public photo or music folders ) and have their contents appear alongside that of any others ( e.g .
your " My Pictures " or " My Music " folder ) is user crap still sprinkled around in c : \ program files \ blah ? You 'll be wanting to talk to your software vendors about that - that 's been against recommended practice since at least Windows 2000 ( or Win XP if you want to take it from when the DOS-based home OS line finally died ; but even that 's now 9 years ago )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about a mode where I can hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and hit Enter, and have it lock my screen, without having to wait in the middle for Windows to mode-switch to a different video screen, complete with fancy graphics, to ask me the same thing a simple dialog box asks me?Winkey-L locks your screen, no waiting, no confirmations.Whats up with this whole "Library" thing?
What is wrong with "My Documents"Libraries allow you to add other folders (e.g.
public photo or music folders) and have their contents appear alongside that of any others (e.g.
your "My Pictures" or "My Music" folder)is user crap still sprinkled around in c:\program files\blah ?You'll be wanting to talk to your software vendors about that - that's been against recommended practice since at least Windows 2000 (or Win XP if you want to take it from when the DOS-based home OS line finally died; but even that's now 9 years ago)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686862</id>
	<title>Re:does not compute</title>
	<author>flimflammer</author>
	<datestamp>1262855580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'GodMode' isn't even really hidden, though it wasn't designed to be accessed in the folder list format. You can access the same list by typing into the Windows Vista/Windows 7 start menu. If you know even part of one of the phrases, you'll see it in the start menu as you're typing.</p><p>The phrases were designed for people with little computer knowledge to be able to find settings by typing out questions into the start menu and hoping for a result.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'GodMode ' is n't even really hidden , though it was n't designed to be accessed in the folder list format .
You can access the same list by typing into the Windows Vista/Windows 7 start menu .
If you know even part of one of the phrases , you 'll see it in the start menu as you 're typing.The phrases were designed for people with little computer knowledge to be able to find settings by typing out questions into the start menu and hoping for a result .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'GodMode' isn't even really hidden, though it wasn't designed to be accessed in the folder list format.
You can access the same list by typing into the Windows Vista/Windows 7 start menu.
If you know even part of one of the phrases, you'll see it in the start menu as you're typing.The phrases were designed for people with little computer knowledge to be able to find settings by typing out questions into the start menu and hoping for a result.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684750</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>recoiledsnake</author>
	<datestamp>1262889180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>All of the microsoft stuff is there, but I suppose there's nothing stopping a program from not using it (UAC perhaps would complain about an app trying to create files in Program Files).</p></div><p>Starting with Vista, all write calls by a non Admin program to the program startup folder (Program Files) are virtualized to C:\Users\Username\LocalSettings etc. etc. folder. Same with the HKEY\_LOCAL\_MACHINE registry folder This works for some programs but other badly written ones broke and needed elevation to admin with a UAC prompt.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of the microsoft stuff is there , but I suppose there 's nothing stopping a program from not using it ( UAC perhaps would complain about an app trying to create files in Program Files ) .Starting with Vista , all write calls by a non Admin program to the program startup folder ( Program Files ) are virtualized to C : \ Users \ Username \ LocalSettings etc .
etc. folder .
Same with the HKEY \ _LOCAL \ _MACHINE registry folder This works for some programs but other badly written ones broke and needed elevation to admin with a UAC prompt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of the microsoft stuff is there, but I suppose there's nothing stopping a program from not using it (UAC perhaps would complain about an app trying to create files in Program Files).Starting with Vista, all write calls by a non Admin program to the program startup folder (Program Files) are virtualized to C:\Users\Username\LocalSettings etc.
etc. folder.
Same with the HKEY\_LOCAL\_MACHINE registry folder This works for some programs but other badly written ones broke and needed elevation to admin with a UAC prompt.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684012</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262886300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows Key + L will lock windows</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows Key + L will lock windows</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows Key + L will lock windows</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684270</id>
	<title>Re:Direct Copy article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262887200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The author claims in the comments that CNet copied him.  No may be lying, but maybe not.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The author claims in the comments that CNet copied him .
No may be lying , but maybe not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The author claims in the comments that CNet copied him.
No may be lying, but maybe not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30689632</id>
	<title>godmode</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262871420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>whatever happened to NSAMode?</htmltext>
<tokenext>whatever happened to NSAMode ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>whatever happened to NSAMode?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683992</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262886240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...theologians have recently determined that God has a "MicrosoftMode". Watch out for the Blue Screen of Death.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm atheist, you insensitive clod!</p><p>Though, I guess it also means I don't have to worry about BSoDs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...theologians have recently determined that God has a " MicrosoftMode " .
Watch out for the Blue Screen of Death.I 'm atheist , you insensitive clod ! Though , I guess it also means I do n't have to worry about BSoDs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...theologians have recently determined that God has a "MicrosoftMode".
Watch out for the Blue Screen of Death.I'm atheist, you insensitive clod!Though, I guess it also means I don't have to worry about BSoDs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</id>
	<title>Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262883720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...theologians have recently determined that God has a "MicrosoftMode".  Watch out for the Blue Screen of Death.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...theologians have recently determined that God has a " MicrosoftMode " .
Watch out for the Blue Screen of Death .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...theologians have recently determined that God has a "MicrosoftMode".
Watch out for the Blue Screen of Death.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372</id>
	<title>Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>RotateLeftByte</author>
	<datestamp>1262883900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Come on Microsoft. Remember the problems you had with the EU over Documentation.</p><p>Why don't you ever learn? Why don't you document everything and release it at the same time as the software?</p><p>Other companies seem to do this quite well (release of docs, not its quality).</p><p>Fail again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come on Microsoft .
Remember the problems you had with the EU over Documentation.Why do n't you ever learn ?
Why do n't you document everything and release it at the same time as the software ? Other companies seem to do this quite well ( release of docs , not its quality ) .Fail again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come on Microsoft.
Remember the problems you had with the EU over Documentation.Why don't you ever learn?
Why don't you document everything and release it at the same time as the software?Other companies seem to do this quite well (release of docs, not its quality).Fail again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684360</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>Tacvek</author>
	<datestamp>1262887500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This feature is deocumented. Take a look at the tips.txt file from Windows 95: <a href="http://support.microsoft.com/kb/135893" title="microsoft.com">http://support.microsoft.com/kb/135893</a> [microsoft.com]</p><p>That file first describes these magical folders. I will admit that it does not clearly document that other items can be created by using their GUID, but I suspect someplace they have documented that.</p><p>I will note the "All Tasks" GUID is undocumented (a search of msdn.microsoft.com, and the whole of microsoft.com confirms this, since the GUID only comes up in user posted content), with the exception that it is effectively documented by the registry entry responsible for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This feature is deocumented .
Take a look at the tips.txt file from Windows 95 : http : //support.microsoft.com/kb/135893 [ microsoft.com ] That file first describes these magical folders .
I will admit that it does not clearly document that other items can be created by using their GUID , but I suspect someplace they have documented that.I will note the " All Tasks " GUID is undocumented ( a search of msdn.microsoft.com , and the whole of microsoft.com confirms this , since the GUID only comes up in user posted content ) , with the exception that it is effectively documented by the registry entry responsible for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This feature is deocumented.
Take a look at the tips.txt file from Windows 95: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/135893 [microsoft.com]That file first describes these magical folders.
I will admit that it does not clearly document that other items can be created by using their GUID, but I suspect someplace they have documented that.I will note the "All Tasks" GUID is undocumented (a search of msdn.microsoft.com, and the whole of microsoft.com confirms this, since the GUID only comes up in user posted content), with the exception that it is effectively documented by the registry entry responsible for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30689428</id>
	<title>Hinduism</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1262869440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hinduism is polytheistic.  Clearly it was developed by Indians.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hinduism is polytheistic .
Clearly it was developed by Indians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hinduism is polytheistic.
Clearly it was developed by Indians.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684658</id>
	<title>Re:Direct Copy article</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262888820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"For example, the first one could be a folder named &amp;ldquo;thankscnet.{00C6D95F-329C-409a-81D7-C46C66EA7F33}&amp;rdquo; (use everything inside quotes&amp;ndash;but not the quotes themselves)."<br><br>Note the "thankscnet." part. I don't think CNet went and copied the article from him.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" For example , the first one could be a folder named    thankscnet .
{ 00C6D95F-329C-409a-81D7-C46C66EA7F33 }    ( use everything inside quotes    but not the quotes themselves ) .
" Note the " thankscnet .
" part .
I do n't think CNet went and copied the article from him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"For example, the first one could be a folder named “thankscnet.
{00C6D95F-329C-409a-81D7-C46C66EA7F33}” (use everything inside quotes–but not the quotes themselves).
"Note the "thankscnet.
" part.
I don't think CNet went and copied the article from him.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30692902</id>
	<title>Stuck in Satan-mode</title>
	<author>SanderDJ</author>
	<datestamp>1262956200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Finally they discovered God-modes. All these years I've been working with Win machines stuck in Satan-mode. Now life will be good...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally they discovered God-modes .
All these years I 've been working with Win machines stuck in Satan-mode .
Now life will be good.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally they discovered God-modes.
All these years I've been working with Win machines stuck in Satan-mode.
Now life will be good...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30692810</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>TheLink</author>
	<datestamp>1262955000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmm, but the sky is already blue where I am...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm , but the sky is already blue where I am.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm, but the sky is already blue where I am...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685462</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685104</id>
	<title>Re:does not compute</title>
	<author>Fred IV</author>
	<datestamp>1262890560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just to clarify: It's broken on Vista 64-bit. It works fine on Windows 7 64-bit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just to clarify : It 's broken on Vista 64-bit .
It works fine on Windows 7 64-bit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just to clarify: It's broken on Vista 64-bit.
It works fine on Windows 7 64-bit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683502</id>
	<title>Re:Those strings can't be right - DNSTUFF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262884440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>God mode is DNKROZ or DNCORNHOLIO, not {ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C}. Maybe the other codes are for infinite ammo, all weapons, etc?</i> </p><p>Nope. DNSTUFF gives you unlimited everything. Just remember to press U after typing that to turn mouse aiming back on.</p><p>BTW, I played Duke Nukem 3D a couple of days ago using eduke on Linux. Free of Microsoft and enjoying it! Yeah baby, gonna rip 'em a new one!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>God mode is DNKROZ or DNCORNHOLIO , not { ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C } .
Maybe the other codes are for infinite ammo , all weapons , etc ?
Nope. DNSTUFF gives you unlimited everything .
Just remember to press U after typing that to turn mouse aiming back on.BTW , I played Duke Nukem 3D a couple of days ago using eduke on Linux .
Free of Microsoft and enjoying it !
Yeah baby , gon na rip 'em a new one !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God mode is DNKROZ or DNCORNHOLIO, not {ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C}.
Maybe the other codes are for infinite ammo, all weapons, etc?
Nope. DNSTUFF gives you unlimited everything.
Just remember to press U after typing that to turn mouse aiming back on.BTW, I played Duke Nukem 3D a couple of days ago using eduke on Linux.
Free of Microsoft and enjoying it!
Yeah baby, gonna rip 'em a new one!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492</id>
	<title>Re:Undocumented features!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262884320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ummm... What do you mean by "undocumented"? <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx</a> [microsoft.com]

All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sites.  This is old news.  Move along.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ummm... What do you mean by " undocumented " ?
http : //msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741 ( VS.85 ) .aspx [ microsoft.com ] All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sites .
This is old news .
Move along .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ummm... What do you mean by "undocumented"?
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx [microsoft.com]

All these stupid articles are simply fanboys trying to get clicks on their sites.
This is old news.
Move along.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686198</id>
	<title>This is not news.  It is well documented.</title>
	<author>suman28</author>
	<datestamp>1262895600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This isn&rsquo;t new news. None of this is hidden, it&rsquo;s all documented. For the full list try here

<a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx" title="microsoft.com">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx</a> [microsoft.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This isn    t new news .
None of this is hidden , it    s all documented .
For the full list try here http : //msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741 ( VS.85 ) .aspx [ microsoft.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn’t new news.
None of this is hidden, it’s all documented.
For the full list try here

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx [microsoft.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683538</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>Ziekheid</author>
	<datestamp>1262884500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This has always been the case and is nothing new. This was already possible on 2k/XP and was actually abused by hackers like this:<br>1) Create directory and add a string that makes it look like the recycle bin (the folder will actually link to the recycle bin when clicked on by the user that tries to view the map and take on the same icon).<br>2) In that dir put whatever you want to be hidden from the operators of said computer<br>3) ???<br>4) Profit</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This has always been the case and is nothing new .
This was already possible on 2k/XP and was actually abused by hackers like this : 1 ) Create directory and add a string that makes it look like the recycle bin ( the folder will actually link to the recycle bin when clicked on by the user that tries to view the map and take on the same icon ) .2 ) In that dir put whatever you want to be hidden from the operators of said computer3 ) ? ?
? 4 ) Profit</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has always been the case and is nothing new.
This was already possible on 2k/XP and was actually abused by hackers like this:1) Create directory and add a string that makes it look like the recycle bin (the folder will actually link to the recycle bin when clicked on by the user that tries to view the map and take on the same icon).2) In that dir put whatever you want to be hidden from the operators of said computer3) ??
?4) Profit</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685468</id>
	<title>Re:How about a not-suck mode?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262892180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What is wrong with "My Documents"</p></div></blockquote><p>
Well, for one thing, that pathname has a space in it, which is something I've hated since Win9x.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is wrong with " My Documents " Well , for one thing , that pathname has a space in it , which is something I 've hated since Win9x .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is wrong with "My Documents"
Well, for one thing, that pathname has a space in it, which is something I've hated since Win9x.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684490</id>
	<title>Re:I don't get it....</title>
	<author>drsmithy</author>
	<datestamp>1262888100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?</i>
</p><p>An interface appropriate for end users may not be an interface appropriate for developers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other words , what 's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges ?
An interface appropriate for end users may not be an interface appropriate for developers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> In other words, what's wrong with the Control Panel interface that hinders developers to the point where they have to hack in these types of kludges?
An interface appropriate for end users may not be an interface appropriate for developers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685748</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262893500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OMFG - it's slashdotted - we've slashodotted God,  that is so fsckin' cool or uncool or somethin'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OMFG - it 's slashdotted - we 've slashodotted God , that is so fsckin ' cool or uncool or somethin' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OMFG - it's slashdotted - we've slashodotted God,  that is so fsckin' cool or uncool or somethin'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30687686</id>
	<title>Wrong credit and link given</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262859600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think sence aviransplace took their story from Cnet that it should link to Cnet and not aviransplace.</p><p>http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860\_3-10426627-56.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1\_3-0-20</p><p>Here is a list of a bunch more from MSDN:<br>http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think sence aviransplace took their story from Cnet that it should link to Cnet and not aviransplace.http : //news.cnet.com/8301-13860 \ _3-10426627-56.html ? part = rss&amp;subj = news&amp;tag = 2547-1 \ _3-0-20Here is a list of a bunch more from MSDN : http : //msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741 ( VS.85 ) .aspx</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think sence aviransplace took their story from Cnet that it should link to Cnet and not aviransplace.http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860\_3-10426627-56.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1\_3-0-20Here is a list of a bunch more from MSDN:http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee330741(VS.85).aspx</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30690116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30692810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683932
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684466
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683744
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30696192
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30691348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30687714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684096
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30687052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30687804
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30692388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30689624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684192
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30690908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688860
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684660
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685748
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_07_1437234_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683870
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685312
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685104
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686862
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30687804
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683802
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683864
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30691348
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30692388
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684660
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30689624
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686152
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685984
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685770
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685380
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683424
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683744
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684124
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683792
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683798
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685462
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30692810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30687714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683774
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683950
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30690908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684822
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30687052
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686728
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688018
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30696192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684260
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30686412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684850
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683492
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685760
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684324
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683824
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683826
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685098
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684466
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683880
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685398
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688852
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684360
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684924
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_07_1437234.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30683398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684448
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30690116
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684270
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30688542
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684832
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685338
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30685062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_07_1437234.30684994
</commentlist>
</conversation>
