<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_27_1419208</id>
	<title>Political Affiliation Can Be Differentiated By Appearance</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1264615560000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>quaith writes <i>"It's not the way they dress, but the appearance of their face. A study published in PLoS One by Nicholas O. Rule and Nalini Ambady of Tufts University used closely cropped greyscale photos of people's faces, standardized for size. Undergrads were asked to categorize each person as either a Democrat or Republican. In the first study, students were able to <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info\%3Adoi\%2F10.1371\%2Fjournal.pone.0008733">differentiate Republican from Democrat</a> senate candidates. In the second, students were able to differentiate the political affiliation of other college students. Accuracy in both studies was about 60\% &mdash; not perfect, but way better than chance."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>quaith writes " It 's not the way they dress , but the appearance of their face .
A study published in PLoS One by Nicholas O. Rule and Nalini Ambady of Tufts University used closely cropped greyscale photos of people 's faces , standardized for size .
Undergrads were asked to categorize each person as either a Democrat or Republican .
In the first study , students were able to differentiate Republican from Democrat senate candidates .
In the second , students were able to differentiate the political affiliation of other college students .
Accuracy in both studies was about 60 \ %    not perfect , but way better than chance .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>quaith writes "It's not the way they dress, but the appearance of their face.
A study published in PLoS One by Nicholas O. Rule and Nalini Ambady of Tufts University used closely cropped greyscale photos of people's faces, standardized for size.
Undergrads were asked to categorize each person as either a Democrat or Republican.
In the first study, students were able to differentiate Republican from Democrat senate candidates.
In the second, students were able to differentiate the political affiliation of other college students.
Accuracy in both studies was about 60\% — not perfect, but way better than chance.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921554</id>
	<title>Guess my affiliation</title>
	<author>Bob-taro</author>
	<datestamp>1264622520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not going to state my party affiliation.  I'll just say that when I saw that this pointless study was funded by OUR TAX DOLLARS via an NSF grant, I thought, "God help us!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not going to state my party affiliation .
I 'll just say that when I saw that this pointless study was funded by OUR TAX DOLLARS via an NSF grant , I thought , " God help us !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not going to state my party affiliation.
I'll just say that when I saw that this pointless study was funded by OUR TAX DOLLARS via an NSF grant, I thought, "God help us!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921116</id>
	<title>Re:Way better than chance?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264621620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's put it this way.   Luck like that in a game of chance would land you in jail in Vegas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's put it this way .
Luck like that in a game of chance would land you in jail in Vegas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's put it this way.
Luck like that in a game of chance would land you in jail in Vegas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924566</id>
	<title>Sure. . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264586760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>. . . If they look fat, happy, and rich, they're probably Republicans. If they look malnourished, despondent, and poor, they're probably a democrat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .
If they look fat , happy , and rich , they 're probably Republicans .
If they look malnourished , despondent , and poor , they 're probably a democrat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.
. .
If they look fat, happy, and rich, they're probably Republicans.
If they look malnourished, despondent, and poor, they're probably a democrat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920418</id>
	<title>Better than chance?</title>
	<author>ElectricBuddha</author>
	<datestamp>1264619640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Considering that you have a 50\% chance of picking the right one when it just is up to chance, 60\% ain't impressing me much.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering that you have a 50 \ % chance of picking the right one when it just is up to chance , 60 \ % ai n't impressing me much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering that you have a 50\% chance of picking the right one when it just is up to chance, 60\% ain't impressing me much.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30929958</id>
	<title>Re:You forgot "on welfare with 10 kids in tow"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264617360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And you forgot the part where the 10 kids are all different shades of the rainbow and have never met their various daddies, whom strangely enough haven't been real easy to locate since mommy shared with them the good news.  They do manage to show up around the 1st for the month though for some reason.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And you forgot the part where the 10 kids are all different shades of the rainbow and have never met their various daddies , whom strangely enough have n't been real easy to locate since mommy shared with them the good news .
They do manage to show up around the 1st for the month though for some reason.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And you forgot the part where the 10 kids are all different shades of the rainbow and have never met their various daddies, whom strangely enough haven't been real easy to locate since mommy shared with them the good news.
They do manage to show up around the 1st for the month though for some reason.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922210</id>
	<title>60\%</title>
	<author>Wyatt Earp</author>
	<datestamp>1264623840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My Iguana has better liberal and conservative recognition chances than that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My Iguana has better liberal and conservative recognition chances than that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Iguana has better liberal and conservative recognition chances than that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921106</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264621560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"Hmm, large SUV and business suit. Republican."<br>"Large breasted college age chick. Democrat."<br>"Subaru Outback and peacenik bumper stickers. Green Party."<br>"Pick-up truck and AR-15. Libertarian." </i></p><p>Do you have drive-thru voting where you live? How do you know what they drive?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Hmm , large SUV and business suit .
Republican. " " Large breasted college age chick .
Democrat. " " Subaru Outback and peacenik bumper stickers .
Green Party .
" " Pick-up truck and AR-15 .
Libertarian. " Do you have drive-thru voting where you live ?
How do you know what they drive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Hmm, large SUV and business suit.
Republican.""Large breasted college age chick.
Democrat.""Subaru Outback and peacenik bumper stickers.
Green Party.
""Pick-up truck and AR-15.
Libertarian." Do you have drive-thru voting where you live?
How do you know what they drive?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922182</id>
	<title>Not statistically significant</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264623780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are at all familiar with testing identity of bitrate in music, known as ABX, you will realize that it requires a minimum of 13/16 correct selections, or around an 80\% accuracy rate, otherwise it is possible (and perhaps even probable) that the results are flawed due to factors of chance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are at all familiar with testing identity of bitrate in music , known as ABX , you will realize that it requires a minimum of 13/16 correct selections , or around an 80 \ % accuracy rate , otherwise it is possible ( and perhaps even probable ) that the results are flawed due to factors of chance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are at all familiar with testing identity of bitrate in music, known as ABX, you will realize that it requires a minimum of 13/16 correct selections, or around an 80\% accuracy rate, otherwise it is possible (and perhaps even probable) that the results are flawed due to factors of chance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924910</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264587720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>I volunteered to drive poor people to the polls in the last election.<br><br>my favorite comment came from an old black man:&nbsp; "You got a really nice car for a Democrat."</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>I volunteered to drive poor people to the polls in the last election.my favorite comment came from an old black man :   " You got a really nice car for a Democrat .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I volunteered to drive poor people to the polls in the last election.my favorite comment came from an old black man:  "You got a really nice car for a Democrat.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920352</id>
	<title>Geez, pick the black guy.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264619400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a dumb study.  Of course you can pick a party affiliation by appearance.  First off, if you always say a black guy is a Democrat, you'd be right 90\% of the time, based on voting records.  That would give you 60\% overall correct, even if everything else was 50,50, assuming a sample set that roughly mirrors the population.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a dumb study .
Of course you can pick a party affiliation by appearance .
First off , if you always say a black guy is a Democrat , you 'd be right 90 \ % of the time , based on voting records .
That would give you 60 \ % overall correct , even if everything else was 50,50 , assuming a sample set that roughly mirrors the population .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a dumb study.
Of course you can pick a party affiliation by appearance.
First off, if you always say a black guy is a Democrat, you'd be right 90\% of the time, based on voting records.
That would give you 60\% overall correct, even if everything else was 50,50, assuming a sample set that roughly mirrors the population.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924536</id>
	<title>Re:You can tell by their car</title>
	<author>nelsonal</author>
	<datestamp>1264586640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've seen a few around DC.  None top a wagon that only had small slits of paint showing between all the bumper stickers that covered every painted surface of the car.  I was surprised that they would devalue their car so much for a president who would be out within the year (I saw the car in late 2008 and it was pretty new).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen a few around DC .
None top a wagon that only had small slits of paint showing between all the bumper stickers that covered every painted surface of the car .
I was surprised that they would devalue their car so much for a president who would be out within the year ( I saw the car in late 2008 and it was pretty new ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen a few around DC.
None top a wagon that only had small slits of paint showing between all the bumper stickers that covered every painted surface of the car.
I was surprised that they would devalue their car so much for a president who would be out within the year (I saw the car in late 2008 and it was pretty new).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922504</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920306</id>
	<title>Affliction T's</title>
	<author>fhuglegads</author>
	<datestamp>1264619280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd to see Rush squeeze into one of those bad boys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd to see Rush squeeze into one of those bad boys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd to see Rush squeeze into one of those bad boys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920506</id>
	<title>One suite, two suite...</title>
	<author>pak9rabid</author>
	<datestamp>1264619880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Politicians are all the same, regardless of their affiliated party.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Politicians are all the same , regardless of their affiliated party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Politicians are all the same, regardless of their affiliated party.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924986</id>
	<title>Re:Anarchist van...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264587960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I drive an old, white, stickerless van and the FBI has had me on an Anarchy watch list for years.</p><p>So yeah.. you can tell by the vehicle-- the fedz happen to be correct!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I drive an old , white , stickerless van and the FBI has had me on an Anarchy watch list for years.So yeah.. you can tell by the vehicle-- the fedz happen to be correct !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I drive an old, white, stickerless van and the FBI has had me on an Anarchy watch list for years.So yeah.. you can tell by the vehicle-- the fedz happen to be correct!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30930242</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>Baki</author>
	<datestamp>1264621380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As for me, I was conservative when I was young (I convinced my parents to vote on a capitalist-conservative party when I was 11 years old, I was really a fanatic black&amp;white person at the time), and became more and more liberal when I got older. I am now over 40 and leaning towards outright socialism (b.t.w. not because of self interests, I have a family, pay low taxes and earn over $200k per year).</p><p>Churchill's suggestion that becoming wise equates to becoming conservative, of course, only reflects his personal opinion on what is wise. I disagree.</p><p>Even though this well known saying may sound interesting, I think it is dangerous and might even press people who think they are now old and thus should be wise into the wrong direction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As for me , I was conservative when I was young ( I convinced my parents to vote on a capitalist-conservative party when I was 11 years old , I was really a fanatic black&amp;white person at the time ) , and became more and more liberal when I got older .
I am now over 40 and leaning towards outright socialism ( b.t.w .
not because of self interests , I have a family , pay low taxes and earn over $ 200k per year ) .Churchill 's suggestion that becoming wise equates to becoming conservative , of course , only reflects his personal opinion on what is wise .
I disagree.Even though this well known saying may sound interesting , I think it is dangerous and might even press people who think they are now old and thus should be wise into the wrong direction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As for me, I was conservative when I was young (I convinced my parents to vote on a capitalist-conservative party when I was 11 years old, I was really a fanatic black&amp;white person at the time), and became more and more liberal when I got older.
I am now over 40 and leaning towards outright socialism (b.t.w.
not because of self interests, I have a family, pay low taxes and earn over $200k per year).Churchill's suggestion that becoming wise equates to becoming conservative, of course, only reflects his personal opinion on what is wise.
I disagree.Even though this well known saying may sound interesting, I think it is dangerous and might even press people who think they are now old and thus should be wise into the wrong direction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925642</id>
	<title>Re:correlation is not causation</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1264589940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where was causation claimed?</p><p>A lot of people seem to think that by repeating this particular maxim over and over, they somehow appear knowledgable of statistics and experimental methodology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where was causation claimed ? A lot of people seem to think that by repeating this particular maxim over and over , they somehow appear knowledgable of statistics and experimental methodology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where was causation claimed?A lot of people seem to think that by repeating this particular maxim over and over, they somehow appear knowledgable of statistics and experimental methodology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925024</id>
	<title>Re:You can tell by their car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264588140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have seen both Liberal Peaceniks and Hard-core Conservatives with such numbers of stickers on their cars.</p><p>Also Nascar fans and the rare case of a person with what I assume was large number of children.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have seen both Liberal Peaceniks and Hard-core Conservatives with such numbers of stickers on their cars.Also Nascar fans and the rare case of a person with what I assume was large number of children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have seen both Liberal Peaceniks and Hard-core Conservatives with such numbers of stickers on their cars.Also Nascar fans and the rare case of a person with what I assume was large number of children.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927118</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1264594680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>And if you're a Green who realizes that political power oscillating back and forth between the conservatives and the liberals is a control system with feedback seeking balanced policy over time, then what can we make of you?</p></div></blockquote><p>An idealistic fool.</p><p>The problem is the oscillation is only in one dimension.  Along other axes (where the two sides agree), things keep getting worse.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And if you 're a Green who realizes that political power oscillating back and forth between the conservatives and the liberals is a control system with feedback seeking balanced policy over time , then what can we make of you ? An idealistic fool.The problem is the oscillation is only in one dimension .
Along other axes ( where the two sides agree ) , things keep getting worse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if you're a Green who realizes that political power oscillating back and forth between the conservatives and the liberals is a control system with feedback seeking balanced policy over time, then what can we make of you?An idealistic fool.The problem is the oscillation is only in one dimension.
Along other axes (where the two sides agree), things keep getting worse.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920494</id>
	<title>Two things Liberals HATE!!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264619880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are two things Liberals hate!!!!!<br>1) Red-necks, and<br>2) Stereotyping</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are two things Liberals hate ! ! ! !
! 1 ) Red-necks , and2 ) Stereotyping</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are two things Liberals hate!!!!
!1) Red-necks, and2) Stereotyping</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30923092</id>
	<title>Cousin Parents...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264582800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they look like the offspring of cousins then they might be Republican...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) Oh course Palin was pretty, but she was also a little "touched" if you know what I mean.</p><p>Generally speaking I bet I could get a pretty good guess down anyway regardless of study.</p><p>Minority -&gt; Democrat<br>Old white rich dudes -&gt; Republican</p><p>You would like be wrong half the time no matter what, as that is about how many actually bother voting anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they look like the offspring of cousins then they might be Republican... : ) Oh course Palin was pretty , but she was also a little " touched " if you know what I mean.Generally speaking I bet I could get a pretty good guess down anyway regardless of study.Minority - &gt; DemocratOld white rich dudes - &gt; RepublicanYou would like be wrong half the time no matter what , as that is about how many actually bother voting anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they look like the offspring of cousins then they might be Republican... :) Oh course Palin was pretty, but she was also a little "touched" if you know what I mean.Generally speaking I bet I could get a pretty good guess down anyway regardless of study.Minority -&gt; DemocratOld white rich dudes -&gt; RepublicanYou would like be wrong half the time no matter what, as that is about how many actually bother voting anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920416</id>
	<title>Way better than chance?</title>
	<author>Amorymeltzer</author>
	<datestamp>1264619640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>60\% versus 50\%?  How is that WAY better?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>60 \ % versus 50 \ % ?
How is that WAY better ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>60\% versus 50\%?
How is that WAY better?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922200</id>
	<title>Re:One suite, two suite...</title>
	<author>StillNeedMoreCoffee</author>
	<datestamp>1264623840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your kidding of course. Well on one level you may be right, like evolution, the principal works on everything, but the strange bedfellows might be a squirel and a squid. So the process of politics, (making comprimises to come to a concensus to get things done is the same, a messy business for sure) but what is being legistlated is very different. You would not see the Republican party trying to enact a program that would keep people from loosing their houses to businesses, or from starving or freezing to death. They would not support making regulations that would protect banks from say failing, or for regulating compainies so they did not cheat honest folk out of their money. They would be for privatizing almost everything, selling off the National Forests, giving away the oil reserves to oil companies, giving no-bid contracts to large companies that they owned stock in, start unneeded wars to churn the military industrial complex, deregulate energy companies and when they get caught cheating people out of money and fail, hire 90\% of those exectutives into the government.</p><p>Lets not talk about the difference between message and reality with all the Family Values party member scandels in the last few years. The conservatives are master of message. To bad they are selling you a bill of goods, for their interests not yours.</p><p>I don't think you would find the Democratic party supporting or legislating any of those things. There is a stark difference in philosophy and approach, a stark difference in what is considered in the best interest of the country and its citizens.</p><p>Brother you have been sold a bill of goods by the Conservatives who know and have stated as a strategy, that they do better when voter turnout is low. They have you believing that your vote does not count because its all the same, Wake up, its not the same and your vote makes all the difference in the world. The whole world knows that, and even gave Obama a Nobel Peace prize because They know the difference.</p><p>Whatever you do dont waste your vote.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your kidding of course .
Well on one level you may be right , like evolution , the principal works on everything , but the strange bedfellows might be a squirel and a squid .
So the process of politics , ( making comprimises to come to a concensus to get things done is the same , a messy business for sure ) but what is being legistlated is very different .
You would not see the Republican party trying to enact a program that would keep people from loosing their houses to businesses , or from starving or freezing to death .
They would not support making regulations that would protect banks from say failing , or for regulating compainies so they did not cheat honest folk out of their money .
They would be for privatizing almost everything , selling off the National Forests , giving away the oil reserves to oil companies , giving no-bid contracts to large companies that they owned stock in , start unneeded wars to churn the military industrial complex , deregulate energy companies and when they get caught cheating people out of money and fail , hire 90 \ % of those exectutives into the government.Lets not talk about the difference between message and reality with all the Family Values party member scandels in the last few years .
The conservatives are master of message .
To bad they are selling you a bill of goods , for their interests not yours.I do n't think you would find the Democratic party supporting or legislating any of those things .
There is a stark difference in philosophy and approach , a stark difference in what is considered in the best interest of the country and its citizens.Brother you have been sold a bill of goods by the Conservatives who know and have stated as a strategy , that they do better when voter turnout is low .
They have you believing that your vote does not count because its all the same , Wake up , its not the same and your vote makes all the difference in the world .
The whole world knows that , and even gave Obama a Nobel Peace prize because They know the difference.Whatever you do dont waste your vote .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your kidding of course.
Well on one level you may be right, like evolution, the principal works on everything, but the strange bedfellows might be a squirel and a squid.
So the process of politics, (making comprimises to come to a concensus to get things done is the same, a messy business for sure) but what is being legistlated is very different.
You would not see the Republican party trying to enact a program that would keep people from loosing their houses to businesses, or from starving or freezing to death.
They would not support making regulations that would protect banks from say failing, or for regulating compainies so they did not cheat honest folk out of their money.
They would be for privatizing almost everything, selling off the National Forests, giving away the oil reserves to oil companies, giving no-bid contracts to large companies that they owned stock in, start unneeded wars to churn the military industrial complex, deregulate energy companies and when they get caught cheating people out of money and fail, hire 90\% of those exectutives into the government.Lets not talk about the difference between message and reality with all the Family Values party member scandels in the last few years.
The conservatives are master of message.
To bad they are selling you a bill of goods, for their interests not yours.I don't think you would find the Democratic party supporting or legislating any of those things.
There is a stark difference in philosophy and approach, a stark difference in what is considered in the best interest of the country and its citizens.Brother you have been sold a bill of goods by the Conservatives who know and have stated as a strategy, that they do better when voter turnout is low.
They have you believing that your vote does not count because its all the same, Wake up, its not the same and your vote makes all the difference in the world.
The whole world knows that, and even gave Obama a Nobel Peace prize because They know the difference.Whatever you do dont waste your vote.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927014</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1264594200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about a Mosin and a Che t-shirt?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about a Mosin and a Che t-shirt ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about a Mosin and a Che t-shirt?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925344</id>
	<title>Re:It's easy</title>
	<author>e2d2</author>
	<datestamp>1264589100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's the other way around actually. Dems = blue, reps = red. But that's just an over analysis of tie color by news pundits.</p><p>For instance GWB used a blue tie for all of this State of the Union addresses. Commentators said it was a good will gesture towards the dems. But he may have just liked the color blue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the other way around actually .
Dems = blue , reps = red .
But that 's just an over analysis of tie color by news pundits.For instance GWB used a blue tie for all of this State of the Union addresses .
Commentators said it was a good will gesture towards the dems .
But he may have just liked the color blue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the other way around actually.
Dems = blue, reps = red.
But that's just an over analysis of tie color by news pundits.For instance GWB used a blue tie for all of this State of the Union addresses.
Commentators said it was a good will gesture towards the dems.
But he may have just liked the color blue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30931682</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264682280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reagan said something similar: (not verbatim)</p><p>"You might remember me as sort of a bleeding-heart liberal in my  younger days. But then I grew up, and put away childish things."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reagan said something similar : ( not verbatim ) " You might remember me as sort of a bleeding-heart liberal in my younger days .
But then I grew up , and put away childish things .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reagan said something similar: (not verbatim)"You might remember me as sort of a bleeding-heart liberal in my  younger days.
But then I grew up, and put away childish things.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30929172</id>
	<title>Re:Way better than chance?</title>
	<author>ignavus</author>
	<datestamp>1264609020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...some incredible marble-colour-guessing gene that evolution or possibly archeobacteria had slipped you...</p></div><p>Were archeobacteria good at guessing the colour of marbles?</p><p>I didn't think they even <em>had</em> marbles back in those archeo-days.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...some incredible marble-colour-guessing gene that evolution or possibly archeobacteria had slipped you...Were archeobacteria good at guessing the colour of marbles ? I did n't think they even had marbles back in those archeo-days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...some incredible marble-colour-guessing gene that evolution or possibly archeobacteria had slipped you...Were archeobacteria good at guessing the colour of marbles?I didn't think they even had marbles back in those archeo-days.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922588</id>
	<title>Obama: Neither Democrat nor Republican</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264624800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obama isn't a democrat or a republican. He's just another asshole politician with bad ideas, bad leadership and bad execution. It is obvious that just because someone is considered intelligent, does not make them a good leader.</p><p>I voted for the guy. Drove seven hours to see him get sworn in, in the freezing cold. "Our generation's JFK!" he was going to be. Pfft. This asshole is destroying America piece by piece. Everything that makes us great, he seeks to undermine. Damn, even Dubya understood the symbolic importance and scientific value of the space program, which has given us so many new technologies over the years and keeps hundreds of thousands of people employed</p><p>Somebody needs to do SOMETHING about this idiot - the Republicans sure aren't. They're like babies: the only sound they can babble is "no, no, no, no, no..."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obama is n't a democrat or a republican .
He 's just another asshole politician with bad ideas , bad leadership and bad execution .
It is obvious that just because someone is considered intelligent , does not make them a good leader.I voted for the guy .
Drove seven hours to see him get sworn in , in the freezing cold .
" Our generation 's JFK !
" he was going to be .
Pfft. This asshole is destroying America piece by piece .
Everything that makes us great , he seeks to undermine .
Damn , even Dubya understood the symbolic importance and scientific value of the space program , which has given us so many new technologies over the years and keeps hundreds of thousands of people employedSomebody needs to do SOMETHING about this idiot - the Republicans sure are n't .
They 're like babies : the only sound they can babble is " no , no , no , no , no... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obama isn't a democrat or a republican.
He's just another asshole politician with bad ideas, bad leadership and bad execution.
It is obvious that just because someone is considered intelligent, does not make them a good leader.I voted for the guy.
Drove seven hours to see him get sworn in, in the freezing cold.
"Our generation's JFK!
" he was going to be.
Pfft. This asshole is destroying America piece by piece.
Everything that makes us great, he seeks to undermine.
Damn, even Dubya understood the symbolic importance and scientific value of the space program, which has given us so many new technologies over the years and keeps hundreds of thousands of people employedSomebody needs to do SOMETHING about this idiot - the Republicans sure aren't.
They're like babies: the only sound they can babble is "no, no, no, no, no..."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920790</id>
	<title>Hey wait</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1264620720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And I have invented a method for telling if someone is a criminal by taking various measurements of their head! I think I will call this "phrenology".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I have invented a method for telling if someone is a criminal by taking various measurements of their head !
I think I will call this " phrenology " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I have invented a method for telling if someone is a criminal by taking various measurements of their head!
I think I will call this "phrenology".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921874</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>Toonol</author>
	<datestamp>1264623240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wouldn't be surprised if you could reach a 60\% correlation between AGE and party affiliation; and I'm sure you can between GENDER and affiliation.  Was the study normalized for those sorts of obvious flags?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't be surprised if you could reach a 60 \ % correlation between AGE and party affiliation ; and I 'm sure you can between GENDER and affiliation .
Was the study normalized for those sorts of obvious flags ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't be surprised if you could reach a 60\% correlation between AGE and party affiliation; and I'm sure you can between GENDER and affiliation.
Was the study normalized for those sorts of obvious flags?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921406</id>
	<title>Correllation</title>
	<author>Citizen of Earth</author>
	<datestamp>1264622220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can get much better than 60\% simply by differentiating male and female faces, and improve that more by distinguishing age.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can get much better than 60 \ % simply by differentiating male and female faces , and improve that more by distinguishing age .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can get much better than 60\% simply by differentiating male and female faces, and improve that more by distinguishing age.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921550</id>
	<title>It's easy</title>
	<author>meheler</author>
	<datestamp>1264622520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Republicans = Blue Ties<br>Democrats = Red Ties</p><p>I never did get that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Republicans = Blue TiesDemocrats = Red TiesI never did get that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Republicans = Blue TiesDemocrats = Red TiesI never did get that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921112</id>
	<title>Disappointing...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264621560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Admittedly, i've only been browsing through the text and images, but i haven't seen anything to warrant a statement like the following:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>In sum, the finding that political affiliation can be accurately judged from targets' faces extends our knowledge of the power of facial cues in forming accurate impressions of others.</p></div><p>And looking at the results of study 3: Standard deviations that are consistently about twice the size of the difference of means are telling me only one thing: don't bother.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Admittedly , i 've only been browsing through the text and images , but i have n't seen anything to warrant a statement like the following : In sum , the finding that political affiliation can be accurately judged from targets ' faces extends our knowledge of the power of facial cues in forming accurate impressions of others.And looking at the results of study 3 : Standard deviations that are consistently about twice the size of the difference of means are telling me only one thing : do n't bother .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Admittedly, i've only been browsing through the text and images, but i haven't seen anything to warrant a statement like the following:In sum, the finding that political affiliation can be accurately judged from targets' faces extends our knowledge of the power of facial cues in forming accurate impressions of others.And looking at the results of study 3: Standard deviations that are consistently about twice the size of the difference of means are telling me only one thing: don't bother.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036</id>
	<title>Re:You can tell by their car</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1264621380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Usually easy to tell the in the field; but actually pretty hard from just your description.<br> <br>

There is the hippy version, which will be some sort of beat-up Volkswagen loaded with "Coexist" stickers and vegan knicknacks and faded campaign paraphernalia either for a local green party candidate or for Nader; back when he was cool. Also likely is the presence of an "evolve" fish, a sticker supporting some candidate for local school board, and the phrase "my karma ran over your dogma".<br> <br>

Then there is the crazy jesus freak version, which will be some sort of beat-up American car plastered with "choose life" and "abortion stops a beating heart" stickers, along with at least one jesus fish(just a basic outline, or an outline with a cross inside if it is a moderate crazy jesus freak, a jesus fish with "truth" inside devouring a legged darwin fish if it is a militant crazy jesus freak). If the driver is male, there will probably be a "Gun control means 3 rounds to center mass" or similar sticker along with proclamations of loyalty to Limbaugh and at least one republican candidate(or a Constitution Party candidate, if the car belongs to a truly 100\% USDA Prime wacko). If female, the stickers are more likely emphasize maudlin expressions of hyperemotional christian piety rather than politics.<br> <br>

In rare cases, you may encounter the Heavy Metal clunker, whose political leanings can be quite hard to discern. A rusting, but resplendently airbrushed, van adorned with stickers from bands that take skulls, spikes, umlauts, and succubus bikini chicks with battleaxes extremely seriously. You'll need a pretty solid knowledge of Metal to figure out the politics of the driver. Depending on the bands listed, you could be looking at a more or less apathetic individual who just likes that sort of music, or anything from an anarchist to a white power fascist.

A clunker with 80 bumper stickers is a <i>very</i> good indicator that the driver leans hard; but you actually need to read one or two to see which way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Usually easy to tell the in the field ; but actually pretty hard from just your description .
There is the hippy version , which will be some sort of beat-up Volkswagen loaded with " Coexist " stickers and vegan knicknacks and faded campaign paraphernalia either for a local green party candidate or for Nader ; back when he was cool .
Also likely is the presence of an " evolve " fish , a sticker supporting some candidate for local school board , and the phrase " my karma ran over your dogma " .
Then there is the crazy jesus freak version , which will be some sort of beat-up American car plastered with " choose life " and " abortion stops a beating heart " stickers , along with at least one jesus fish ( just a basic outline , or an outline with a cross inside if it is a moderate crazy jesus freak , a jesus fish with " truth " inside devouring a legged darwin fish if it is a militant crazy jesus freak ) .
If the driver is male , there will probably be a " Gun control means 3 rounds to center mass " or similar sticker along with proclamations of loyalty to Limbaugh and at least one republican candidate ( or a Constitution Party candidate , if the car belongs to a truly 100 \ % USDA Prime wacko ) .
If female , the stickers are more likely emphasize maudlin expressions of hyperemotional christian piety rather than politics .
In rare cases , you may encounter the Heavy Metal clunker , whose political leanings can be quite hard to discern .
A rusting , but resplendently airbrushed , van adorned with stickers from bands that take skulls , spikes , umlauts , and succubus bikini chicks with battleaxes extremely seriously .
You 'll need a pretty solid knowledge of Metal to figure out the politics of the driver .
Depending on the bands listed , you could be looking at a more or less apathetic individual who just likes that sort of music , or anything from an anarchist to a white power fascist .
A clunker with 80 bumper stickers is a very good indicator that the driver leans hard ; but you actually need to read one or two to see which way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Usually easy to tell the in the field; but actually pretty hard from just your description.
There is the hippy version, which will be some sort of beat-up Volkswagen loaded with "Coexist" stickers and vegan knicknacks and faded campaign paraphernalia either for a local green party candidate or for Nader; back when he was cool.
Also likely is the presence of an "evolve" fish, a sticker supporting some candidate for local school board, and the phrase "my karma ran over your dogma".
Then there is the crazy jesus freak version, which will be some sort of beat-up American car plastered with "choose life" and "abortion stops a beating heart" stickers, along with at least one jesus fish(just a basic outline, or an outline with a cross inside if it is a moderate crazy jesus freak, a jesus fish with "truth" inside devouring a legged darwin fish if it is a militant crazy jesus freak).
If the driver is male, there will probably be a "Gun control means 3 rounds to center mass" or similar sticker along with proclamations of loyalty to Limbaugh and at least one republican candidate(or a Constitution Party candidate, if the car belongs to a truly 100\% USDA Prime wacko).
If female, the stickers are more likely emphasize maudlin expressions of hyperemotional christian piety rather than politics.
In rare cases, you may encounter the Heavy Metal clunker, whose political leanings can be quite hard to discern.
A rusting, but resplendently airbrushed, van adorned with stickers from bands that take skulls, spikes, umlauts, and succubus bikini chicks with battleaxes extremely seriously.
You'll need a pretty solid knowledge of Metal to figure out the politics of the driver.
Depending on the bands listed, you could be looking at a more or less apathetic individual who just likes that sort of music, or anything from an anarchist to a white power fascist.
A clunker with 80 bumper stickers is a very good indicator that the driver leans hard; but you actually need to read one or two to see which way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30926200</id>
	<title>I can do this 100\% of the time...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264591620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they look like a Turd Sandwich, they are Republican.</p><p>If they look like a Giant Douche, they are a Democrat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they look like a Turd Sandwich , they are Republican.If they look like a Giant Douche , they are a Democrat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they look like a Turd Sandwich, they are Republican.If they look like a Giant Douche, they are a Democrat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30934472</id>
	<title>Causality?</title>
	<author>rebmemeR</author>
	<datestamp>1264698540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do politicians morph their appearance toward a targeted stereotype?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do politicians morph their appearance toward a targeted stereotype ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do politicians morph their appearance toward a targeted stereotype?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920580</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>0racle</author>
	<datestamp>1264620060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Large breasted college age chick. Democrat."<p>

Political affiliation is totally what I'd be thinking about here too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Large breasted college age chick .
Democrat. " Political affiliation is totally what I 'd be thinking about here too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Large breasted college age chick.
Democrat."

Political affiliation is totally what I'd be thinking about here too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921148</id>
	<title>Re:correlation is not causation</title>
	<author>mooingyak</author>
	<datestamp>1264621680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Out in the tag dorms, taking a nap and waiting for a story where it might actually be relevant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Out in the tag dorms , taking a nap and waiting for a story where it might actually be relevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Out in the tag dorms, taking a nap and waiting for a story where it might actually be relevant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920918</id>
	<title>Re:Factors Are Likeability, Trustworthiness and Ag</title>
	<author>fahrbot-bot</author>
	<datestamp>1264621020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Oh the sweet irony of that quote with the current popularity of Fox "News"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're not a liberal when you 're 25 , you have no heart .
If you 're not a conservative by the time you 're 35 , you have no brain .
Oh the sweet irony of that quote with the current popularity of Fox " News " : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart.
If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
Oh the sweet irony of that quote with the current popularity of Fox "News" :-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925662</id>
	<title>Re:Factors Are Likeability, Trustworthiness and Ag</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264590000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Churchill quote only demonstrates how clever rhetoric does not an argument make....</p></div><p>I propose to tell the difference between liberal and conservative by the appearance of their face when they hear this quote.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Churchill quote only demonstrates how clever rhetoric does not an argument make....I propose to tell the difference between liberal and conservative by the appearance of their face when they hear this quote .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Churchill quote only demonstrates how clever rhetoric does not an argument make....I propose to tell the difference between liberal and conservative by the appearance of their face when they hear this quote.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925414</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1264589280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Large breasted college age chick.  Democrat."</p></div><p>So small breasted college aged chicks are republicans? That explains why they're so angry...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Large breasted college age chick .
Democrat. " So small breasted college aged chicks are republicans ?
That explains why they 're so angry.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Large breasted college age chick.
Democrat."So small breasted college aged chicks are republicans?
That explains why they're so angry...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920570</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1264620060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And also, the guy who's actually drinking a beer during the photo shoot--probably a hick.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And also , the guy who 's actually drinking a beer during the photo shoot--probably a hick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And also, the guy who's actually drinking a beer during the photo shoot--probably a hick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922146</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>smellsofbikes</author>
	<datestamp>1264623720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We used to do that when we were election judges.  It was a great time.  See, my mom was the precinct leader for the Republicans, and I was the precinct leader for the Democrats, and we were 2/3 of the total election judges, so we'd sit there and make (very quiet) bets as people walked in.  A little tricky insofar as our precinct was about 40\% Republican, 40\% unaffiliated, and 20\% Democratic, so we had an awfully poor record for correctly guessing Democrats (except for the ones we knew.)  We very rarely had anyone who had affiliated outside R and D, though, so our choices were slimmer.  Still, a good time had by all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We used to do that when we were election judges .
It was a great time .
See , my mom was the precinct leader for the Republicans , and I was the precinct leader for the Democrats , and we were 2/3 of the total election judges , so we 'd sit there and make ( very quiet ) bets as people walked in .
A little tricky insofar as our precinct was about 40 \ % Republican , 40 \ % unaffiliated , and 20 \ % Democratic , so we had an awfully poor record for correctly guessing Democrats ( except for the ones we knew .
) We very rarely had anyone who had affiliated outside R and D , though , so our choices were slimmer .
Still , a good time had by all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We used to do that when we were election judges.
It was a great time.
See, my mom was the precinct leader for the Republicans, and I was the precinct leader for the Democrats, and we were 2/3 of the total election judges, so we'd sit there and make (very quiet) bets as people walked in.
A little tricky insofar as our precinct was about 40\% Republican, 40\% unaffiliated, and 20\% Democratic, so we had an awfully poor record for correctly guessing Democrats (except for the ones we knew.
)  We very rarely had anyone who had affiliated outside R and D, though, so our choices were slimmer.
Still, a good time had by all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30926752</id>
	<title>Interesting...</title>
	<author>jemenake</author>
	<datestamp>1264593300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I suspected this kind of thing when I started noticing those election-day photos of the rally headquarters for the various candidates. "All of the chicks in the Republican audience are always smokin' hot babes", I'd think to myself.
<br> <br>
And then it dawned on me. If there <i>is</i> a correlation between appearance and political leanings, how would any <i>causal</i> relationship work? I think the causation of politics determining appearance is the easier one to spot. Most conservatives I know seem to place more of an <i>emphasis</i> on appearance, while the liberals I know place more of an emphasis on <i>ideas</i>; feeling that ideas will stand or fall on their own merit, regardless of the appearance of the messenger. So, liberals don't see as much need for dressing up before trying to pitch their ideas.
<br> <br>
Now, the causation from appearance to politics is a little more subtle. My suspicion is that the people who are "less beautiful" are the ones who spend more of their time on the outside of popularity. They're they people who never made the ballot for prom queen, didn't get asked to the school dance, didn't have as many romantic opportunities. They got more of a taste of what it's like to be a "have not" or to be outside of the majority. This experience, I believe, can cause them to have the increased empathy and tendency to "look out for others" that seems to characterize liberal thought.
<br> <br>
On the other hand, the people are very attractive or physically gifted had an easier time of things. Athletic success came easier to the "natural born athletes", and the pretty or charismatic people had an easier time getting others to back their ideas or plans. Things just went a little easier for them. Because we can only experience the world through our own eyes, I can see how the "beautiful people" could believe that (as it was for them) one only needs to apply themselves to a goal and it'll work out. This could give rise to the "anybody willing to work hard will find success" mindset that we tend to see in conservatives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspected this kind of thing when I started noticing those election-day photos of the rally headquarters for the various candidates .
" All of the chicks in the Republican audience are always smokin ' hot babes " , I 'd think to myself .
And then it dawned on me .
If there is a correlation between appearance and political leanings , how would any causal relationship work ?
I think the causation of politics determining appearance is the easier one to spot .
Most conservatives I know seem to place more of an emphasis on appearance , while the liberals I know place more of an emphasis on ideas ; feeling that ideas will stand or fall on their own merit , regardless of the appearance of the messenger .
So , liberals do n't see as much need for dressing up before trying to pitch their ideas .
Now , the causation from appearance to politics is a little more subtle .
My suspicion is that the people who are " less beautiful " are the ones who spend more of their time on the outside of popularity .
They 're they people who never made the ballot for prom queen , did n't get asked to the school dance , did n't have as many romantic opportunities .
They got more of a taste of what it 's like to be a " have not " or to be outside of the majority .
This experience , I believe , can cause them to have the increased empathy and tendency to " look out for others " that seems to characterize liberal thought .
On the other hand , the people are very attractive or physically gifted had an easier time of things .
Athletic success came easier to the " natural born athletes " , and the pretty or charismatic people had an easier time getting others to back their ideas or plans .
Things just went a little easier for them .
Because we can only experience the world through our own eyes , I can see how the " beautiful people " could believe that ( as it was for them ) one only needs to apply themselves to a goal and it 'll work out .
This could give rise to the " anybody willing to work hard will find success " mindset that we tend to see in conservatives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspected this kind of thing when I started noticing those election-day photos of the rally headquarters for the various candidates.
"All of the chicks in the Republican audience are always smokin' hot babes", I'd think to myself.
And then it dawned on me.
If there is a correlation between appearance and political leanings, how would any causal relationship work?
I think the causation of politics determining appearance is the easier one to spot.
Most conservatives I know seem to place more of an emphasis on appearance, while the liberals I know place more of an emphasis on ideas; feeling that ideas will stand or fall on their own merit, regardless of the appearance of the messenger.
So, liberals don't see as much need for dressing up before trying to pitch their ideas.
Now, the causation from appearance to politics is a little more subtle.
My suspicion is that the people who are "less beautiful" are the ones who spend more of their time on the outside of popularity.
They're they people who never made the ballot for prom queen, didn't get asked to the school dance, didn't have as many romantic opportunities.
They got more of a taste of what it's like to be a "have not" or to be outside of the majority.
This experience, I believe, can cause them to have the increased empathy and tendency to "look out for others" that seems to characterize liberal thought.
On the other hand, the people are very attractive or physically gifted had an easier time of things.
Athletic success came easier to the "natural born athletes", and the pretty or charismatic people had an easier time getting others to back their ideas or plans.
Things just went a little easier for them.
Because we can only experience the world through our own eyes, I can see how the "beautiful people" could believe that (as it was for them) one only needs to apply themselves to a goal and it'll work out.
This could give rise to the "anybody willing to work hard will find success" mindset that we tend to see in conservatives.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922922</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>Onymous Coward</author>
	<datestamp>1264625520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And if you're a Green who realizes that political power oscillating back and forth between the conservatives and the liberals is a control system with feedback seeking balanced policy over time, then what can we make of you?</p></div><p>Clueless if not extremely interested in Preference Voting systems?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And if you 're a Green who realizes that political power oscillating back and forth between the conservatives and the liberals is a control system with feedback seeking balanced policy over time , then what can we make of you ? Clueless if not extremely interested in Preference Voting systems ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if you're a Green who realizes that political power oscillating back and forth between the conservatives and the liberals is a control system with feedback seeking balanced policy over time, then what can we make of you?Clueless if not extremely interested in Preference Voting systems?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921130</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>AB3A</author>
	<datestamp>1264621080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The old saw: "If you're not a liberal when you're young, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative when you're older, you have no brain."  (Variants have been attributed to Winston Churchill, though there is no indication that he ever said this)</p><p>Age may not be such a bad indicator after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The old saw : " If you 're not a liberal when you 're young , you have no heart ; if you 're not a conservative when you 're older , you have no brain .
" ( Variants have been attributed to Winston Churchill , though there is no indication that he ever said this ) Age may not be such a bad indicator after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The old saw: "If you're not a liberal when you're young, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative when you're older, you have no brain.
"  (Variants have been attributed to Winston Churchill, though there is no indication that he ever said this)Age may not be such a bad indicator after all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30929686</id>
	<title>Re:You can tell by their car</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1264614420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Jesus fish is called an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichthys" title="wikipedia.org">Ichthys</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Jesus fish is called an Ichthys [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Jesus fish is called an Ichthys [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922408</id>
	<title>Re:correlation is not causation</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1264624380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>True, correlation does not imply causation. However, lack of correlation does imply lack of causation. Therefore, correlation implies that causation hasn't been ruled out. So either A causes B, B causes A, A and B have a common cause, or it was a fluke and the null hypothesis is true. Further investigation distinguishes these cases.</htmltext>
<tokenext>True , correlation does not imply causation .
However , lack of correlation does imply lack of causation .
Therefore , correlation implies that causation has n't been ruled out .
So either A causes B , B causes A , A and B have a common cause , or it was a fluke and the null hypothesis is true .
Further investigation distinguishes these cases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, correlation does not imply causation.
However, lack of correlation does imply lack of causation.
Therefore, correlation implies that causation hasn't been ruled out.
So either A causes B, B causes A, A and B have a common cause, or it was a fluke and the null hypothesis is true.
Further investigation distinguishes these cases.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921058</id>
	<title>Re:One suite, two suite...</title>
	<author>mooingyak</author>
	<datestamp>1264621440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So Mr. Geisel was hiding social commentary in even the non-obvious spots.  Neat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So Mr. Geisel was hiding social commentary in even the non-obvious spots .
Neat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So Mr. Geisel was hiding social commentary in even the non-obvious spots.
Neat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921080</id>
	<title>Re:Geez, pick the black guy.</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1264621500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You didn't read the study. If you did, you would have seen that they actually tried to figure out what people were using to differentiate.<br> <br>
Apparently it's this: people with more powerful looking faces are more likely to be Republican (and are more likely to be chosen as Republican, regardless of their true affiliation), and people with warmer more friendly faces are picked to be Democratic<br> <br>
You should read the paper.  They actually linked to the full study this time, so it's a worthy read; if you've never actually read a scientific study before, you'll realize how different real science is compared to how the press is when it reports on science.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You did n't read the study .
If you did , you would have seen that they actually tried to figure out what people were using to differentiate .
Apparently it 's this : people with more powerful looking faces are more likely to be Republican ( and are more likely to be chosen as Republican , regardless of their true affiliation ) , and people with warmer more friendly faces are picked to be Democratic You should read the paper .
They actually linked to the full study this time , so it 's a worthy read ; if you 've never actually read a scientific study before , you 'll realize how different real science is compared to how the press is when it reports on science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You didn't read the study.
If you did, you would have seen that they actually tried to figure out what people were using to differentiate.
Apparently it's this: people with more powerful looking faces are more likely to be Republican (and are more likely to be chosen as Republican, regardless of their true affiliation), and people with warmer more friendly faces are picked to be Democratic 
You should read the paper.
They actually linked to the full study this time, so it's a worthy read; if you've never actually read a scientific study before, you'll realize how different real science is compared to how the press is when it reports on science.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924328</id>
	<title>You forgot "on welfare with 10 kids in tow"</title>
	<author>abbyful</author>
	<datestamp>1264585980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>= democrat</htmltext>
<tokenext>= democrat</tokentext>
<sentencetext>= democrat</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927240</id>
	<title>sixty percent??</title>
	<author>Syats</author>
	<datestamp>1264595220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>60\% is just slightly better than tossing a coin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>60 \ % is just slightly better than tossing a coin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>60\% is just slightly better than tossing a coin.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30926126</id>
	<title>Do they look like they want to work for a living?</title>
	<author>KudyardRipling</author>
	<datestamp>1264591380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If an individual by his or her body and verbal language suggest that he or she is ENTITLED to be protected from market forces, that individual is a state paternalist (a.k.a. 'liberal'). Think "musician hair" (goatees, soul patch, StalinStache, etc) for males and snootynose voices for females (pinch the nose, crimp the upper lip and with a squeaky voice pronounce the word "college student"). It is one who looks like one cannot get and hold a job.</p><p>If an individual by his or her body and verbal language suggest that he or she is NOT ENTITLED to be protected from market forces, that individual is a state minarchist (a.k.a. 'conservative'). Think 'conformity to market expectations' in dress, facial grooming, speech and tastes. It is one who looks like one can get and hold a job.</p><p>It's like the Potter Stewart opinion on obscenity "I know it when I see it". Only a fool is not 'conservative' with his or her own money. One's ideology is made manifest when it deals with OTHER people's money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If an individual by his or her body and verbal language suggest that he or she is ENTITLED to be protected from market forces , that individual is a state paternalist ( a.k.a .
'liberal ' ) . Think " musician hair " ( goatees , soul patch , StalinStache , etc ) for males and snootynose voices for females ( pinch the nose , crimp the upper lip and with a squeaky voice pronounce the word " college student " ) .
It is one who looks like one can not get and hold a job.If an individual by his or her body and verbal language suggest that he or she is NOT ENTITLED to be protected from market forces , that individual is a state minarchist ( a.k.a .
'conservative ' ) . Think 'conformity to market expectations ' in dress , facial grooming , speech and tastes .
It is one who looks like one can get and hold a job.It 's like the Potter Stewart opinion on obscenity " I know it when I see it " .
Only a fool is not 'conservative ' with his or her own money .
One 's ideology is made manifest when it deals with OTHER people 's money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If an individual by his or her body and verbal language suggest that he or she is ENTITLED to be protected from market forces, that individual is a state paternalist (a.k.a.
'liberal'). Think "musician hair" (goatees, soul patch, StalinStache, etc) for males and snootynose voices for females (pinch the nose, crimp the upper lip and with a squeaky voice pronounce the word "college student").
It is one who looks like one cannot get and hold a job.If an individual by his or her body and verbal language suggest that he or she is NOT ENTITLED to be protected from market forces, that individual is a state minarchist (a.k.a.
'conservative'). Think 'conformity to market expectations' in dress, facial grooming, speech and tastes.
It is one who looks like one can get and hold a job.It's like the Potter Stewart opinion on obscenity "I know it when I see it".
Only a fool is not 'conservative' with his or her own money.
One's ideology is made manifest when it deals with OTHER people's money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920722</id>
	<title>correlation is not causation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264620540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where's the "correlation is not causation" tag?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where 's the " correlation is not causation " tag ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where's the "correlation is not causation" tag?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927254</id>
	<title>Re:Guess my affiliation</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1264595280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Christian tribalist?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Christian tribalist ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Christian tribalist?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925086</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264588260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Large breasted college chick...<br>Work the poll...<br>There's a joke in there somewhere, I can feel it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Large breasted college chick...Work the poll...There 's a joke in there somewhere , I can feel it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Large breasted college chick...Work the poll...There's a joke in there somewhere, I can feel it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924378</id>
	<title>not necessarily practically useless</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1264586160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you had 10,000 black marbles and 10,000 white marbles, and I wanted you to separate them into two equally-sized piles, one containing approximately 6,000 black marbles and the rest white and one with 4,000 black marbles and the rest white, then this "60\% right guesser" is the right man for the job.</p><p>I'm assuming he's right 60\% of the time for both black and white marbles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you had 10,000 black marbles and 10,000 white marbles , and I wanted you to separate them into two equally-sized piles , one containing approximately 6,000 black marbles and the rest white and one with 4,000 black marbles and the rest white , then this " 60 \ % right guesser " is the right man for the job.I 'm assuming he 's right 60 \ % of the time for both black and white marbles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you had 10,000 black marbles and 10,000 white marbles, and I wanted you to separate them into two equally-sized piles, one containing approximately 6,000 black marbles and the rest white and one with 4,000 black marbles and the rest white, then this "60\% right guesser" is the right man for the job.I'm assuming he's right 60\% of the time for both black and white marbles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920676</id>
	<title>Re:Better than chance?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264620360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My thoughts exactly.  Especially when you factor in the fact, which others are posting about, that you can often tell by the way a person dresses/carries themselves whether they are mostly liberal or conservative.  That fact alone should more than make up for the above-chance positive rate that this study observed.
This sounds suspiciously like a researcher trying to make a big deal out of something that is fundamentally common sense.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My thoughts exactly .
Especially when you factor in the fact , which others are posting about , that you can often tell by the way a person dresses/carries themselves whether they are mostly liberal or conservative .
That fact alone should more than make up for the above-chance positive rate that this study observed .
This sounds suspiciously like a researcher trying to make a big deal out of something that is fundamentally common sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My thoughts exactly.
Especially when you factor in the fact, which others are posting about, that you can often tell by the way a person dresses/carries themselves whether they are mostly liberal or conservative.
That fact alone should more than make up for the above-chance positive rate that this study observed.
This sounds suspiciously like a researcher trying to make a big deal out of something that is fundamentally common sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922504</id>
	<title>Re:You can tell by their car</title>
	<author>jgtg32a</author>
	<datestamp>1264624560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was thinking the left leaning on my description, main indication being more than 3 bumper stickers.</p><p>I've never seen a Jesus freak w/ more than 3 bumper stickers, I've live in a couple of different area's in Jesus land.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was thinking the left leaning on my description , main indication being more than 3 bumper stickers.I 've never seen a Jesus freak w/ more than 3 bumper stickers , I 've live in a couple of different area 's in Jesus land .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was thinking the left leaning on my description, main indication being more than 3 bumper stickers.I've never seen a Jesus freak w/ more than 3 bumper stickers, I've live in a couple of different area's in Jesus land.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921474</id>
	<title>Re:Better than chance?</title>
	<author>jayme0227</author>
	<datestamp>1264622340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't expect you to have read the article, but at least read the summary.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>A study published in PLoS One by Nicholas O. Rule and Nalini Ambady of Tufts University used closely cropped greyscale photos of people's faces, standardized for size.</p></div><p>The article explained further:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Each photo was cropped to the extremes of the targets' heads (top of head, bottom of chin, sides of hair or ears), converted to grayscale, and standardized for size. To avoid race-based stereotypes, racial minority candidates were excluded from the study.</p></div><p>In the first study, they took photos from politicians websites and eliminated any responses that recognized said politicians. In the second study, they took random photos of college seniors from 2000-2008 and no participants recognized any of the photos.</p><p>So no, the way in which individuals carried themselves or their dress should not have had much affect, if any, on the way the photos were categorized. Certainly it should not have accounted for a 10\% increase in accuracy over random assignment, especially in a study with such a large sample size.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't expect you to have read the article , but at least read the summary.A study published in PLoS One by Nicholas O. Rule and Nalini Ambady of Tufts University used closely cropped greyscale photos of people 's faces , standardized for size.The article explained further : Each photo was cropped to the extremes of the targets ' heads ( top of head , bottom of chin , sides of hair or ears ) , converted to grayscale , and standardized for size .
To avoid race-based stereotypes , racial minority candidates were excluded from the study.In the first study , they took photos from politicians websites and eliminated any responses that recognized said politicians .
In the second study , they took random photos of college seniors from 2000-2008 and no participants recognized any of the photos.So no , the way in which individuals carried themselves or their dress should not have had much affect , if any , on the way the photos were categorized .
Certainly it should not have accounted for a 10 \ % increase in accuracy over random assignment , especially in a study with such a large sample size .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't expect you to have read the article, but at least read the summary.A study published in PLoS One by Nicholas O. Rule and Nalini Ambady of Tufts University used closely cropped greyscale photos of people's faces, standardized for size.The article explained further:Each photo was cropped to the extremes of the targets' heads (top of head, bottom of chin, sides of hair or ears), converted to grayscale, and standardized for size.
To avoid race-based stereotypes, racial minority candidates were excluded from the study.In the first study, they took photos from politicians websites and eliminated any responses that recognized said politicians.
In the second study, they took random photos of college seniors from 2000-2008 and no participants recognized any of the photos.So no, the way in which individuals carried themselves or their dress should not have had much affect, if any, on the way the photos were categorized.
Certainly it should not have accounted for a 10\% increase in accuracy over random assignment, especially in a study with such a large sample size.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920788</id>
	<title>Re:You can tell by their car</title>
	<author>orgelspieler</author>
	<datestamp>1264620720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>depends on the bumper stickers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>depends on the bumper stickers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>depends on the bumper stickers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925458</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1264589400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But don't join the Democratic party thinking you're going to score.  Those Dem babes only date Republican jerks.</p><p>It's a Democrat thing, and if you aren't in the party you wouldn't understand. We just can't resist a guy who will cynically screw with us then break our hearts.</p></div><p>Yeah...That's the sad thing about being a white liberal man. You're only attractive to other white liberal men.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But do n't join the Democratic party thinking you 're going to score .
Those Dem babes only date Republican jerks.It 's a Democrat thing , and if you are n't in the party you would n't understand .
We just ca n't resist a guy who will cynically screw with us then break our hearts.Yeah...That 's the sad thing about being a white liberal man .
You 're only attractive to other white liberal men .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But don't join the Democratic party thinking you're going to score.
Those Dem babes only date Republican jerks.It's a Democrat thing, and if you aren't in the party you wouldn't understand.
We just can't resist a guy who will cynically screw with us then break our hearts.Yeah...That's the sad thing about being a white liberal man.
You're only attractive to other white liberal men.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924016</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>Rob the Bold</author>
	<datestamp>1264585080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When I work the polls each year I try to pass the time by guessing the party affiliations of my voters.
</p><p>

"Large breasted college age chick.  Democrat."


</p><p>It's amazing how bored you get working a 15 hour day when you only get 40 voters....<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div><p>That's because nobody's ever heard of a nice piece of elephant.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I work the polls each year I try to pass the time by guessing the party affiliations of my voters .
" Large breasted college age chick .
Democrat. " It 's amazing how bored you get working a 15 hour day when you only get 40 voters.... ; ) That 's because nobody 's ever heard of a nice piece of elephant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I work the polls each year I try to pass the time by guessing the party affiliations of my voters.
"Large breasted college age chick.
Democrat."


It's amazing how bored you get working a 15 hour day when you only get 40 voters.... ;)That's because nobody's ever heard of a nice piece of elephant.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380</id>
	<title>You can tell by their car</title>
	<author>jgtg32a</author>
	<datestamp>1264619460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lets play a game someone's driving a clunker and they have 80 bumper stickers on it, which way to they lean?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets play a game someone 's driving a clunker and they have 80 bumper stickers on it , which way to they lean ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets play a game someone's driving a clunker and they have 80 bumper stickers on it, which way to they lean?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30928948</id>
	<title>One bleeping study--like that's "Science"!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264606380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who cares?  It's like the study that proves that Republicans flinch at scary images and Democrats don't.</p><p>I might be more impressed once I see 3 studies of the same thing, but perhaps that's not soft enough for social science.</p><p>We should all hold hands and think supportive thoughts about the researchers.  "Kumbaya..."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares ?
It 's like the study that proves that Republicans flinch at scary images and Democrats do n't.I might be more impressed once I see 3 studies of the same thing , but perhaps that 's not soft enough for social science.We should all hold hands and think supportive thoughts about the researchers .
" Kumbaya... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares?
It's like the study that proves that Republicans flinch at scary images and Democrats don't.I might be more impressed once I see 3 studies of the same thing, but perhaps that's not soft enough for social science.We should all hold hands and think supportive thoughts about the researchers.
"Kumbaya..."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30932704</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>DrMemory</author>
	<datestamp>1264691340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The old saw: "If you're not a liberal when you're young, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative when you're older, you have no brain."  (Variants have been attributed to Winston Churchill, though there is no indication that he ever said this)</p></div><p>Not surprisingly, this is a very popular quote among conservatives.  Translation:  liberals are young, foolish, and/or stupid.  It just sounds less like an bare-faced insult when phrased that way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The old saw : " If you 're not a liberal when you 're young , you have no heart ; if you 're not a conservative when you 're older , you have no brain .
" ( Variants have been attributed to Winston Churchill , though there is no indication that he ever said this ) Not surprisingly , this is a very popular quote among conservatives .
Translation : liberals are young , foolish , and/or stupid .
It just sounds less like an bare-faced insult when phrased that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The old saw: "If you're not a liberal when you're young, you have no heart; if you're not a conservative when you're older, you have no brain.
"  (Variants have been attributed to Winston Churchill, though there is no indication that he ever said this)Not surprisingly, this is a very popular quote among conservatives.
Translation:  liberals are young, foolish, and/or stupid.
It just sounds less like an bare-faced insult when phrased that way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921132</id>
	<title>Re:Better than chance?</title>
	<author>gandhi\_2</author>
	<datestamp>1264621620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>10\% == way better! RTFS!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>10 \ % = = way better !
RTFS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10\% == way better!
RTFS!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922264</id>
	<title>Re:Geez, pick the black guy.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264624020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's right! He's a BLACK guy, isn't he??</p><p>As black as the night itself, mayor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's right !
He 's a BLACK guy , is n't he ?
? As black as the night itself , mayor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's right!
He's a BLACK guy, isn't he?
?As black as the night itself, mayor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</id>
	<title>when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>Shakrai</author>
	<datestamp>1264619400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I work the polls each year I try to pass the time by guessing the party affiliations of my voters.
</p><p>"Hmm, large SUV and business suit.  Republican."
<br>"Large breasted college age chick.  Democrat."
<br>"Subaru Outback and peacenik bumper stickers.  Green Party."
<br>"Pick-up truck and AR-15.  Libertarian."
</p><p>It's amazing how bored you get working a 15 hour day when you only get 40 voters....<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I work the polls each year I try to pass the time by guessing the party affiliations of my voters .
" Hmm , large SUV and business suit .
Republican. " " Large breasted college age chick .
Democrat. " " Subaru Outback and peacenik bumper stickers .
Green Party .
" " Pick-up truck and AR-15 .
Libertarian. " It 's amazing how bored you get working a 15 hour day when you only get 40 voters.... ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I work the polls each year I try to pass the time by guessing the party affiliations of my voters.
"Hmm, large SUV and business suit.
Republican."
"Large breasted college age chick.
Democrat."
"Subaru Outback and peacenik bumper stickers.
Green Party.
"
"Pick-up truck and AR-15.
Libertarian."
It's amazing how bored you get working a 15 hour day when you only get 40 voters.... ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927102</id>
	<title>Re:You forgot "on welfare with 10 kids in tow"</title>
	<author>micheas</author>
	<datestamp>1264594620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>= democrat</p></div><p>
Surprisingly, If that woman is white and has a crucifix around her neck, The odds of her being Republican are quite high, and the variety of Republican that calls people like McCain and Schwarzenegger R.I.N.O.s (Republican In Name Only)</p><p>Listening to voters explain their voting reasons is enough to make you doubt the general intelligence of the general public.</p><p>To keep it fair, Environmentalists voted overwhelmingly for Obama, even though McCain said he would end mountain top removal coal mining, and Obama was only willing to look at mitigating the groundwater contamination. Running political campaigns will make you very cynical.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>= democrat Surprisingly , If that woman is white and has a crucifix around her neck , The odds of her being Republican are quite high , and the variety of Republican that calls people like McCain and Schwarzenegger R.I.N.O.s ( Republican In Name Only ) Listening to voters explain their voting reasons is enough to make you doubt the general intelligence of the general public.To keep it fair , Environmentalists voted overwhelmingly for Obama , even though McCain said he would end mountain top removal coal mining , and Obama was only willing to look at mitigating the groundwater contamination .
Running political campaigns will make you very cynical .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>= democrat
Surprisingly, If that woman is white and has a crucifix around her neck, The odds of her being Republican are quite high, and the variety of Republican that calls people like McCain and Schwarzenegger R.I.N.O.s (Republican In Name Only)Listening to voters explain their voting reasons is enough to make you doubt the general intelligence of the general public.To keep it fair, Environmentalists voted overwhelmingly for Obama, even though McCain said he would end mountain top removal coal mining, and Obama was only willing to look at mitigating the groundwater contamination.
Running political campaigns will make you very cynical.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921622</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264622700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This Libertarian has GOT to find one of THOSE Democrats...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This Libertarian has GOT to find one of THOSE Democrats... ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This Libertarian has GOT to find one of THOSE Democrats... ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30932428</id>
	<title>Does not compute</title>
	<author>h4x0t</author>
	<datestamp>1264689840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...and if anything but a Republican or Democrat was to be observed, the observers head rapidly expanded until skull breach was achieved.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and if anything but a Republican or Democrat was to be observed , the observers head rapidly expanded until skull breach was achieved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and if anything but a Republican or Democrat was to be observed, the observers head rapidly expanded until skull breach was achieved.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920692</id>
	<title>Re:Factors Are Likeability, Trustworthiness and Ag</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1264620420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Churchill quote only demonstrates how clever rhetoric does not an argument make.</p><p>I am often amazed at how powerful a beautiful but specious assertion can be.  Sometimes it is a compelling analogy that has no actual bearing on the topic at hand.  Other times (as in this Churchill case) it is a clever dichotomy that begs the question.   This particular quote is a wonderful example of begging the question. It is  no more possible to support conservatism with it than it is possible to literally pull yourself up by your bootstraps.</p><p>That was an analogy, wasn't it?   I hope you didn't find it too beguiling.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Churchill quote only demonstrates how clever rhetoric does not an argument make.I am often amazed at how powerful a beautiful but specious assertion can be .
Sometimes it is a compelling analogy that has no actual bearing on the topic at hand .
Other times ( as in this Churchill case ) it is a clever dichotomy that begs the question .
This particular quote is a wonderful example of begging the question .
It is no more possible to support conservatism with it than it is possible to literally pull yourself up by your bootstraps.That was an analogy , was n't it ?
I hope you did n't find it too beguiling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Churchill quote only demonstrates how clever rhetoric does not an argument make.I am often amazed at how powerful a beautiful but specious assertion can be.
Sometimes it is a compelling analogy that has no actual bearing on the topic at hand.
Other times (as in this Churchill case) it is a clever dichotomy that begs the question.
This particular quote is a wonderful example of begging the question.
It is  no more possible to support conservatism with it than it is possible to literally pull yourself up by your bootstraps.That was an analogy, wasn't it?
I hope you didn't find it too beguiling.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920996</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1264621320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But don't join the Democratic party thinking you're going to score.  Those Dem babes only date Republican jerks.</p><p>It's a Democrat thing, and if you aren't in the party you wouldn't understand. We just can't resist a guy who will cynically screw with us then break our hearts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But do n't join the Democratic party thinking you 're going to score .
Those Dem babes only date Republican jerks.It 's a Democrat thing , and if you are n't in the party you would n't understand .
We just ca n't resist a guy who will cynically screw with us then break our hearts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But don't join the Democratic party thinking you're going to score.
Those Dem babes only date Republican jerks.It's a Democrat thing, and if you aren't in the party you wouldn't understand.
We just can't resist a guy who will cynically screw with us then break our hearts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924820</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1264587420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Age may not be such a bad indicator after all.</p></div></blockquote><p>Unless you consider that most people don't change their political parties, whereas your theory would require that <b> <i>most</i></b>  people do.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Age may not be such a bad indicator after all.Unless you consider that most people do n't change their political parties , whereas your theory would require that most people do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Age may not be such a bad indicator after all.Unless you consider that most people don't change their political parties, whereas your theory would require that  most  people do.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920312</id>
	<title>Factors Are Likeability, Trustworthiness and Age</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1264619280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Factor 1 (46\% of variance explained) consisted of high loadings on likeability (.94) and trustworthiness (.97) and low loadings on dominance (.11) and facial maturity (.14). Factor 2 (42\% of variance explained) consisted of high loadings on dominance (.92) and <b>facial maturity</b></p> </div><p>My grandmother used to tell me something along the lines of what is <a href="http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Winston\_Churchill#Misattributed" title="wikiquote.org">often misattributed to Churchill</a> [wikiquote.org]:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.</p></div><p>And I would also like to point out for the college students that society (especially high school) often pigeonholes people and defines who they are on how they look.  The individual sometimes has no choice and sometimes just accepts it and goes with it in order to belong.  If you look older when you're young and people might instinctively treat you like a cold Republican.  Always looked young and innocent?  Then a warm Democrat.  <br> <br>
Would be an explanation that agrees with the correlation the research drew to define the deviation from random guessing but nothing conclusive.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Factor 1 ( 46 \ % of variance explained ) consisted of high loadings on likeability ( .94 ) and trustworthiness ( .97 ) and low loadings on dominance ( .11 ) and facial maturity ( .14 ) .
Factor 2 ( 42 \ % of variance explained ) consisted of high loadings on dominance ( .92 ) and facial maturity My grandmother used to tell me something along the lines of what is often misattributed to Churchill [ wikiquote.org ] : If you 're not a liberal when you 're 25 , you have no heart .
If you 're not a conservative by the time you 're 35 , you have no brain.And I would also like to point out for the college students that society ( especially high school ) often pigeonholes people and defines who they are on how they look .
The individual sometimes has no choice and sometimes just accepts it and goes with it in order to belong .
If you look older when you 're young and people might instinctively treat you like a cold Republican .
Always looked young and innocent ?
Then a warm Democrat .
Would be an explanation that agrees with the correlation the research drew to define the deviation from random guessing but nothing conclusive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Factor 1 (46\% of variance explained) consisted of high loadings on likeability (.94) and trustworthiness (.97) and low loadings on dominance (.11) and facial maturity (.14).
Factor 2 (42\% of variance explained) consisted of high loadings on dominance (.92) and facial maturity My grandmother used to tell me something along the lines of what is often misattributed to Churchill [wikiquote.org]:If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart.
If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.And I would also like to point out for the college students that society (especially high school) often pigeonholes people and defines who they are on how they look.
The individual sometimes has no choice and sometimes just accepts it and goes with it in order to belong.
If you look older when you're young and people might instinctively treat you like a cold Republican.
Always looked young and innocent?
Then a warm Democrat.
Would be an explanation that agrees with the correlation the research drew to define the deviation from random guessing but nothing conclusive.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921806</id>
	<title>Mental Pictures Of Libertarians</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264623120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I think of the libertarians, one of two images usually come to mind:</p><p>1. An overweight wife-swapping gun nut with lots of unkept facial hair chomping on a large turkey leg (and getting large pieces of meat stuck in the beard/mustache). In other words, someone who sort of resembles ESR.</p><p>2. A rail thin wife-swapping gun nut who's shaved off all his body hair except what's on his head and who gets all his nutrients from a liquid diet that's supposed to make him live 140 years. In other words, picture someone who sort of resembles poo-master and Dual-Action Cleanse spokesperson Klee Irwin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I think of the libertarians , one of two images usually come to mind : 1 .
An overweight wife-swapping gun nut with lots of unkept facial hair chomping on a large turkey leg ( and getting large pieces of meat stuck in the beard/mustache ) .
In other words , someone who sort of resembles ESR.2 .
A rail thin wife-swapping gun nut who 's shaved off all his body hair except what 's on his head and who gets all his nutrients from a liquid diet that 's supposed to make him live 140 years .
In other words , picture someone who sort of resembles poo-master and Dual-Action Cleanse spokesperson Klee Irwin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I think of the libertarians, one of two images usually come to mind:1.
An overweight wife-swapping gun nut with lots of unkept facial hair chomping on a large turkey leg (and getting large pieces of meat stuck in the beard/mustache).
In other words, someone who sort of resembles ESR.2.
A rail thin wife-swapping gun nut who's shaved off all his body hair except what's on his head and who gets all his nutrients from a liquid diet that's supposed to make him live 140 years.
In other words, picture someone who sort of resembles poo-master and Dual-Action Cleanse spokesperson Klee Irwin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925456</id>
	<title>Re:You can tell by their car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264589400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my area, the jesus fish is more likely to show up on newer, or at least well-maintained rust-free, vehicles.  This is especially true for the jesus fish having the insatiable hunger for the blood of darwin fish.  The ravenous jesus fish are often found here on a shiny Toyota Avalon or some new minivan.  The darwin fish are slightly more common on older cars, but there's a large university here, so that seems reasonable.</p><p>If you see a jesus fish on a rust bucket around here, there's a good chance it's traveling with a "9/11 was an inside job" sticker.  Creepy.</p><p>I have seen one "Speeders Aren't True Christians" bumper sticker - now <em>that's</em> "militant crazy jesus freak" if anything is.</p><p>- T</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my area , the jesus fish is more likely to show up on newer , or at least well-maintained rust-free , vehicles .
This is especially true for the jesus fish having the insatiable hunger for the blood of darwin fish .
The ravenous jesus fish are often found here on a shiny Toyota Avalon or some new minivan .
The darwin fish are slightly more common on older cars , but there 's a large university here , so that seems reasonable.If you see a jesus fish on a rust bucket around here , there 's a good chance it 's traveling with a " 9/11 was an inside job " sticker .
Creepy.I have seen one " Speeders Are n't True Christians " bumper sticker - now that 's " militant crazy jesus freak " if anything is.- T</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my area, the jesus fish is more likely to show up on newer, or at least well-maintained rust-free, vehicles.
This is especially true for the jesus fish having the insatiable hunger for the blood of darwin fish.
The ravenous jesus fish are often found here on a shiny Toyota Avalon or some new minivan.
The darwin fish are slightly more common on older cars, but there's a large university here, so that seems reasonable.If you see a jesus fish on a rust bucket around here, there's a good chance it's traveling with a "9/11 was an inside job" sticker.
Creepy.I have seen one "Speeders Aren't True Christians" bumper sticker - now that's "militant crazy jesus freak" if anything is.- T</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921098</id>
	<title>could it be age?</title>
	<author>gandhi\_2</author>
	<datestamp>1264621560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain."<br>--Not Winston Churchill.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" If you 're not a liberal when you 're 25 , you have no heart .
If you 're not a conservative by the time you 're 35 , you have no brain .
" --Not Winston Churchill .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart.
If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
"--Not Winston Churchill.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922142</id>
	<title>Re:Way better than chance?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264623720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>60\% versus 50\%? How is that WAY better?</i></p><p>With a large enough sample size a result like this can be highly statistically significant, but still useless as a predictor.</p><p>For example, if I have 2000 marbles, half white and half black, and pull them out randomly and ask you to predict what colour each one is, if you guessed correctly 60\% of the time (you got 600 white marbles correct and 600 black marbles correct) you'd be bumping up against three sigma (over 99\%) odds of your results NOT being due to chance, but some incredible marble-colour-guessing gene that evolution or possibly archeobacteria had slipped you.  Up the number to 20,000 marbles with 60\% accuracy and you'd be a proven phenomenon, even though you utility as a marble-colour picker would be pretty much useless unless it also happened to work on a roulette wheel.</p><p>This is something that it can be hard for people outside the machine learning community to understand:  an enormously significant result, statistically, can still make for a practically useless classifier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>60 \ % versus 50 \ % ?
How is that WAY better ? With a large enough sample size a result like this can be highly statistically significant , but still useless as a predictor.For example , if I have 2000 marbles , half white and half black , and pull them out randomly and ask you to predict what colour each one is , if you guessed correctly 60 \ % of the time ( you got 600 white marbles correct and 600 black marbles correct ) you 'd be bumping up against three sigma ( over 99 \ % ) odds of your results NOT being due to chance , but some incredible marble-colour-guessing gene that evolution or possibly archeobacteria had slipped you .
Up the number to 20,000 marbles with 60 \ % accuracy and you 'd be a proven phenomenon , even though you utility as a marble-colour picker would be pretty much useless unless it also happened to work on a roulette wheel.This is something that it can be hard for people outside the machine learning community to understand : an enormously significant result , statistically , can still make for a practically useless classifier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>60\% versus 50\%?
How is that WAY better?With a large enough sample size a result like this can be highly statistically significant, but still useless as a predictor.For example, if I have 2000 marbles, half white and half black, and pull them out randomly and ask you to predict what colour each one is, if you guessed correctly 60\% of the time (you got 600 white marbles correct and 600 black marbles correct) you'd be bumping up against three sigma (over 99\%) odds of your results NOT being due to chance, but some incredible marble-colour-guessing gene that evolution or possibly archeobacteria had slipped you.
Up the number to 20,000 marbles with 60\% accuracy and you'd be a proven phenomenon, even though you utility as a marble-colour picker would be pretty much useless unless it also happened to work on a roulette wheel.This is something that it can be hard for people outside the machine learning community to understand:  an enormously significant result, statistically, can still make for a practically useless classifier.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922792</id>
	<title>60\% of all statistics are made up on the spot</title>
	<author>bonkeydcow</author>
	<datestamp>1264625220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>60\%, not far enough off from standard deviation to make me care. Just more crap, how much did this study cost me?</htmltext>
<tokenext>60 \ % , not far enough off from standard deviation to make me care .
Just more crap , how much did this study cost me ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>60\%, not far enough off from standard deviation to make me care.
Just more crap, how much did this study cost me?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30928474</id>
	<title>How I'd do it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264602780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do they look happy? Then they're probably Republican.
<p>
(<a href="http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/" title="umanitoba.ca" rel="nofollow">
page 123</a> [umanitoba.ca])</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do they look happy ?
Then they 're probably Republican .
( page 123 [ umanitoba.ca ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do they look happy?
Then they're probably Republican.
(
page 123 [umanitoba.ca])</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922964</id>
	<title>Studied differences between Liberals/Conservatives</title>
	<author>OnTheEdge</author>
	<datestamp>1264625640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>Psychologist Jonathan Haidt has an interesting discussion on TED (&lt;a href="/talks/lang/eng/jonathan\_haidt\_on\_the\_moral\_mind.html"&gt;http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jonathan\_haidt\_on\_the\_moral\_mind.html&lt;/a&gt;) about 5 distinct moral values and the different ways liberals and conservatives score on each of them. I can see where those mental differences/preferences might expose themselves physically in dress or emotionally in facial expressions. Speculation yes, but it seems plausible given that there are so many subtle visual clues we each give off that we are very much unaware of.</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>Psychologist Jonathan Haidt has an interesting discussion on TED ( http : //www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jonathan \ _haidt \ _on \ _the \ _moral \ _mind.html ) about 5 distinct moral values and the different ways liberals and conservatives score on each of them .
I can see where those mental differences/preferences might expose themselves physically in dress or emotionally in facial expressions .
Speculation yes , but it seems plausible given that there are so many subtle visual clues we each give off that we are very much unaware of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Psychologist Jonathan Haidt has an interesting discussion on TED (http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jonathan\_haidt\_on\_the\_moral\_mind.html) about 5 distinct moral values and the different ways liberals and conservatives score on each of them.
I can see where those mental differences/preferences might expose themselves physically in dress or emotionally in facial expressions.
Speculation yes, but it seems plausible given that there are so many subtle visual clues we each give off that we are very much unaware of.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30934268</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>phlinn</author>
	<datestamp>1264697940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm curious about dietary habits.  I don't know of any vegan republicans, and vegans tend to be thinner than average in my experience...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm curious about dietary habits .
I do n't know of any vegan republicans , and vegans tend to be thinner than average in my experience.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm curious about dietary habits.
I don't know of any vegan republicans, and vegans tend to be thinner than average in my experience...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30923414</id>
	<title>Re:What is the point of this w/o socialized medici</title>
	<author>Princeofcups</author>
	<datestamp>1264583580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When the progressives nationalized healthcare system started going up in smoke I assumed eugenics wouldn't stand a chance of coming back, because if you can't force "healthcare" on people then what good is sorting them out by appearance.  I'm not sure where this is going unless they truly feel they can get the socialized healthcare (circa germany turn of the century) fully implemented.</p><p>Appearance for political stance<br>Head bumps for intelligence<br>eyebrows for demeanor<br>nose shape for whether you should be humanely euthanized.</p><p>We've seen this movie before.</p></div><p>Completely wrong conclusion.  This study would be an indicator of facial expression, tension, stress level, and other subtle cues.  My guess from experience is that the Reps were more likely to have tension/anger lines, and the Dems were more likely to have silly smiles.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When the progressives nationalized healthcare system started going up in smoke I assumed eugenics would n't stand a chance of coming back , because if you ca n't force " healthcare " on people then what good is sorting them out by appearance .
I 'm not sure where this is going unless they truly feel they can get the socialized healthcare ( circa germany turn of the century ) fully implemented.Appearance for political stanceHead bumps for intelligenceeyebrows for demeanornose shape for whether you should be humanely euthanized.We 've seen this movie before.Completely wrong conclusion .
This study would be an indicator of facial expression , tension , stress level , and other subtle cues .
My guess from experience is that the Reps were more likely to have tension/anger lines , and the Dems were more likely to have silly smiles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When the progressives nationalized healthcare system started going up in smoke I assumed eugenics wouldn't stand a chance of coming back, because if you can't force "healthcare" on people then what good is sorting them out by appearance.
I'm not sure where this is going unless they truly feel they can get the socialized healthcare (circa germany turn of the century) fully implemented.Appearance for political stanceHead bumps for intelligenceeyebrows for demeanornose shape for whether you should be humanely euthanized.We've seen this movie before.Completely wrong conclusion.
This study would be an indicator of facial expression, tension, stress level, and other subtle cues.
My guess from experience is that the Reps were more likely to have tension/anger lines, and the Dems were more likely to have silly smiles.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925760</id>
	<title>RTFA</title>
	<author>martin-boundary</author>
	<datestamp>1264590240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>A single "accuracy" number is useless. Always report for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False\_positive" title="wikipedia.org">TWO misclassification rates</a> [wikipedia.org]: the rate of False Positives (=incorrectly identified as 1st class) and the
rate of False Negatives (=incorrectly identified as 2nd class).
<p>
A cursory look at TFA indicates that both types of misclassification rates
in this study are found to be in the range 40\%-50\% (approximately in each study). That is piss-poor. For comparison, a typical Bayesian spam filter has both misclassification rates in the 1\% range, and people <i>still</i> complain about that.
</p><p>
The correct conclusion should really be that looking only at peoples' faces is
a really <i>bad</i> way to gauge political affiliation. Slow news day, eh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A single " accuracy " number is useless .
Always report for TWO misclassification rates [ wikipedia.org ] : the rate of False Positives ( = incorrectly identified as 1st class ) and the rate of False Negatives ( = incorrectly identified as 2nd class ) .
A cursory look at TFA indicates that both types of misclassification rates in this study are found to be in the range 40 \ % -50 \ % ( approximately in each study ) .
That is piss-poor .
For comparison , a typical Bayesian spam filter has both misclassification rates in the 1 \ % range , and people still complain about that .
The correct conclusion should really be that looking only at peoples ' faces is a really bad way to gauge political affiliation .
Slow news day , eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A single "accuracy" number is useless.
Always report for TWO misclassification rates [wikipedia.org]: the rate of False Positives (=incorrectly identified as 1st class) and the
rate of False Negatives (=incorrectly identified as 2nd class).
A cursory look at TFA indicates that both types of misclassification rates
in this study are found to be in the range 40\%-50\% (approximately in each study).
That is piss-poor.
For comparison, a typical Bayesian spam filter has both misclassification rates in the 1\% range, and people still complain about that.
The correct conclusion should really be that looking only at peoples' faces is
a really bad way to gauge political affiliation.
Slow news day, eh?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920540</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1264619940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This should be easy enough.  Hipsters are liberal, hicks are conservative.  Pretty easy to identify them from facial hair amongst other cues.</p></div><p>There are strange boundary cases however.  Like when someone becomes so <a href="http://www.latfh.com/" title="latfh.com">hipster they're hicks</a> [latfh.com] [Warning, NSFW] like in the Jan 21st picture on that blog.  And, like the theoretical Higgs Boson, if one traverses the hick spectrum far enough right they will eventually stumble upon some sort of strange class of so-Broke-Back-Mountain-it's-hipster<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... while I don't have any pictures for you the Hipsters/Hicks Research Community That Takes Money from Parents Who Are Worried about Their Youths is all abuzz with the existence of them<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... we're just not sure how to test for it yet without a dedicated blog sending us pictures of that particular subculture wildlife.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This should be easy enough .
Hipsters are liberal , hicks are conservative .
Pretty easy to identify them from facial hair amongst other cues.There are strange boundary cases however .
Like when someone becomes so hipster they 're hicks [ latfh.com ] [ Warning , NSFW ] like in the Jan 21st picture on that blog .
And , like the theoretical Higgs Boson , if one traverses the hick spectrum far enough right they will eventually stumble upon some sort of strange class of so-Broke-Back-Mountain-it 's-hipster ... while I do n't have any pictures for you the Hipsters/Hicks Research Community That Takes Money from Parents Who Are Worried about Their Youths is all abuzz with the existence of them ... we 're just not sure how to test for it yet without a dedicated blog sending us pictures of that particular subculture wildlife .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This should be easy enough.
Hipsters are liberal, hicks are conservative.
Pretty easy to identify them from facial hair amongst other cues.There are strange boundary cases however.
Like when someone becomes so hipster they're hicks [latfh.com] [Warning, NSFW] like in the Jan 21st picture on that blog.
And, like the theoretical Higgs Boson, if one traverses the hick spectrum far enough right they will eventually stumble upon some sort of strange class of so-Broke-Back-Mountain-it's-hipster ... while I don't have any pictures for you the Hipsters/Hicks Research Community That Takes Money from Parents Who Are Worried about Their Youths is all abuzz with the existence of them ... we're just not sure how to test for it yet without a dedicated blog sending us pictures of that particular subculture wildlife.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921130</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>presidenteloco</author>
	<datestamp>1264621620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And if you're a Green who realizes that political power oscillating back and forth between the conservatives and the liberals is a control system with feedback seeking balanced policy over time, then what can we make of you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if you 're a Green who realizes that political power oscillating back and forth between the conservatives and the liberals is a control system with feedback seeking balanced policy over time , then what can we make of you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if you're a Green who realizes that political power oscillating back and forth between the conservatives and the liberals is a control system with feedback seeking balanced policy over time, then what can we make of you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922348</id>
	<title>What is the point of this w/o socialized medicine?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264624260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When the progressives nationalized healthcare system started going up in smoke I assumed eugenics wouldn't stand a chance of coming back, because if you can't force "healthcare" on people then what good is sorting them out by appearance.  I'm not sure where this is going unless they truly feel they can get the socialized healthcare (circa germany turn of the century) fully implemented.</p><p>Appearance for political stance<br>Head bumps for intelligence<br>eyebrows for demeanor<br>nose shape for whether you should be humanely euthanized.</p><p>We've seen this movie before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When the progressives nationalized healthcare system started going up in smoke I assumed eugenics would n't stand a chance of coming back , because if you ca n't force " healthcare " on people then what good is sorting them out by appearance .
I 'm not sure where this is going unless they truly feel they can get the socialized healthcare ( circa germany turn of the century ) fully implemented.Appearance for political stanceHead bumps for intelligenceeyebrows for demeanornose shape for whether you should be humanely euthanized.We 've seen this movie before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When the progressives nationalized healthcare system started going up in smoke I assumed eugenics wouldn't stand a chance of coming back, because if you can't force "healthcare" on people then what good is sorting them out by appearance.
I'm not sure where this is going unless they truly feel they can get the socialized healthcare (circa germany turn of the century) fully implemented.Appearance for political stanceHead bumps for intelligenceeyebrows for demeanornose shape for whether you should be humanely euthanized.We've seen this movie before.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921108</id>
	<title>Re:correlation is not causation</title>
	<author>DriedClexler</author>
	<datestamp>1264621560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right next to the "I don't understand statistics and won't bother to read their methodology" tag.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right next to the " I do n't understand statistics and wo n't bother to read their methodology " tag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right next to the "I don't understand statistics and won't bother to read their methodology" tag.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920722</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921312</id>
	<title>Re:Factors Are Likeability, Trustworthiness and Ag</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1264622100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's also the neurological differences between left and right leaning people.  If your neurology might lead one toward one direction it might be that trait also carried some... *gasp* physiognomic traits.</p><p>Might be neat to do this experiment again by having all the people in the pics clean shaven, wearing a plain white T, and having a neutral facial expression.</p><p>Then run it again with the people smiling.  Would a smiling face skew the results?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's also the neurological differences between left and right leaning people .
If your neurology might lead one toward one direction it might be that trait also carried some... * gasp * physiognomic traits.Might be neat to do this experiment again by having all the people in the pics clean shaven , wearing a plain white T , and having a neutral facial expression.Then run it again with the people smiling .
Would a smiling face skew the results ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's also the neurological differences between left and right leaning people.
If your neurology might lead one toward one direction it might be that trait also carried some... *gasp* physiognomic traits.Might be neat to do this experiment again by having all the people in the pics clean shaven, wearing a plain white T, and having a neutral facial expression.Then run it again with the people smiling.
Would a smiling face skew the results?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30923030</id>
	<title>Re:What is the point of this w/o socialized medici</title>
	<author>Tekfactory</author>
	<datestamp>1264625880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey buddy,</p><p>We've turned -another- century since then, so what did Germany do with their Healthcare in the 2000s?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey buddy,We 've turned -another- century since then , so what did Germany do with their Healthcare in the 2000s ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey buddy,We've turned -another- century since then, so what did Germany do with their Healthcare in the 2000s?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30933620</id>
	<title>Citation</title>
	<author>zimboptoo</author>
	<datestamp>1264696020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/120083259/abstract?CRETRY=1&amp;SRETRY=0" title="wiley.com" rel="nofollow">Studies show</a> [wiley.com] that people with more bumper stickers have higher levels of road rage.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Studies show [ wiley.com ] that people with more bumper stickers have higher levels of road rage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Studies show [wiley.com] that people with more bumper stickers have higher levels of road rage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30928440</id>
	<title>Slashcrap? In my articles?</title>
	<author>uuddlrlrab</author>
	<datestamp>1264602420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, what's next? Articles on how you can determine how socialist-leaning someone is by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology" title="wikipedia.org">reading their scalp?</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , what 's next ?
Articles on how you can determine how socialist-leaning someone is by reading their scalp ?
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, what's next?
Articles on how you can determine how socialist-leaning someone is by reading their scalp?
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308</id>
	<title>Obvious</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264619280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This should be easy enough.  Hipsters are liberal, hicks are conservative.  Pretty easy to identify them from facial hair amongst other cues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This should be easy enough .
Hipsters are liberal , hicks are conservative .
Pretty easy to identify them from facial hair amongst other cues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This should be easy enough.
Hipsters are liberal, hicks are conservative.
Pretty easy to identify them from facial hair amongst other cues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920636</id>
	<title>Re:when I work the polls I like to try and guess</title>
	<author>jocabergs</author>
	<datestamp>1264620240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was going to say something about stereotypes and how wrong you are, but then I looked out the window correlated cars in driveways along my street with political ideology and found you were right.  Except for one glaring mistake, it doesn't matter what political ideology a college chick with big breasts has, I'll agree with what ever she says.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to say something about stereotypes and how wrong you are , but then I looked out the window correlated cars in driveways along my street with political ideology and found you were right .
Except for one glaring mistake , it does n't matter what political ideology a college chick with big breasts has , I 'll agree with what ever she says .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to say something about stereotypes and how wrong you are, but then I looked out the window correlated cars in driveways along my street with political ideology and found you were right.
Except for one glaring mistake, it doesn't matter what political ideology a college chick with big breasts has, I'll agree with what ever she says.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30923610</id>
	<title>If you look stupid...</title>
	<author>tommyhj</author>
	<datestamp>1264584060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>lol, this study reminds me of something my pediatrics professor said during a lecture: "If you look stupid, chances are, you are!"</p><p>(reffering to deformed facial features of retarded kids)</p><p>Now, it's up to whoever reads this to choose which side looks more stupid<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>lol , this study reminds me of something my pediatrics professor said during a lecture : " If you look stupid , chances are , you are !
" ( reffering to deformed facial features of retarded kids ) Now , it 's up to whoever reads this to choose which side looks more stupid : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lol, this study reminds me of something my pediatrics professor said during a lecture: "If you look stupid, chances are, you are!
"(reffering to deformed facial features of retarded kids)Now, it's up to whoever reads this to choose which side looks more stupid :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30931730</id>
	<title>face recog-ignition</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264683060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh yeah, really great!
Beyond non-sense!

Glad that the nazis managed to prove that EUGENICS is a really stupid idea!

Remember the face features book?

This is real IDIOCRACY</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh yeah , really great !
Beyond non-sense !
Glad that the nazis managed to prove that EUGENICS is a really stupid idea !
Remember the face features book ?
This is real IDIOCRACY</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh yeah, really great!
Beyond non-sense!
Glad that the nazis managed to prove that EUGENICS is a really stupid idea!
Remember the face features book?
This is real IDIOCRACY</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30923940</id>
	<title>I'd love to have a conservative to vote for</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1264584840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.</i></p><p>Give me a real conservative to vote for, someone who stays out of both my pocket book and my bedroom, someone who restores free markets, someone who slashes corporate subsidies, and someone who restores the principle of personal responsibility in areas such as drugs and medical care and I will vote for him.</p><p>Sadly, the closest to a conservative in US politics are Democrats; while far from perfect conservatives, they do better in terms of liberties and fiscal responsibility.  Republicans, on the other hand, restrict liberties, want a nanny state, are fiscally irresponsible, and waste even more money than the Democrats on their corporate buddies; Republicans, sadly, are even less conservative than Democrats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're not a liberal when you 're 25 , you have no heart .
If you 're not a conservative by the time you 're 35 , you have no brain.Give me a real conservative to vote for , someone who stays out of both my pocket book and my bedroom , someone who restores free markets , someone who slashes corporate subsidies , and someone who restores the principle of personal responsibility in areas such as drugs and medical care and I will vote for him.Sadly , the closest to a conservative in US politics are Democrats ; while far from perfect conservatives , they do better in terms of liberties and fiscal responsibility .
Republicans , on the other hand , restrict liberties , want a nanny state , are fiscally irresponsible , and waste even more money than the Democrats on their corporate buddies ; Republicans , sadly , are even less conservative than Democrats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart.
If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.Give me a real conservative to vote for, someone who stays out of both my pocket book and my bedroom, someone who restores free markets, someone who slashes corporate subsidies, and someone who restores the principle of personal responsibility in areas such as drugs and medical care and I will vote for him.Sadly, the closest to a conservative in US politics are Democrats; while far from perfect conservatives, they do better in terms of liberties and fiscal responsibility.
Republicans, on the other hand, restrict liberties, want a nanny state, are fiscally irresponsible, and waste even more money than the Democrats on their corporate buddies; Republicans, sadly, are even less conservative than Democrats.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922996</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264625760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>So if you want to stay young, stay liberal?  Works for me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So if you want to stay young , stay liberal ?
Works for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if you want to stay young, stay liberal?
Works for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925792</id>
	<title>Re:Guess my affiliation</title>
	<author>yurtinus</author>
	<datestamp>1264590300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dammit, up until the last part I thought you were a dead ringer for Pastafarian...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dammit , up until the last part I thought you were a dead ringer for Pastafarian.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dammit, up until the last part I thought you were a dead ringer for Pastafarian...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924654</id>
	<title>60\% is NOT conclusive!  WORTHLES Study!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264586940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What idiot, moron, democrat posted this garbage?!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What idiot , moron , democrat posted this garbage ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What idiot, moron, democrat posted this garbage?!
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924910
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30923030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30934268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30932704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924378
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927254
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30929172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30929958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30923414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925662
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30929686
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30931682
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30933620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30930242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30923940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_27_1419208_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921080
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922200
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925344
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30923414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30923030
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921036
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922504
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924536
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30929686
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30933620
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925024
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921116
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922142
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30929172
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924378
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920692
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925662
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30923940
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920306
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927254
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920676
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921132
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30928474
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921108
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921874
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30934268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920942
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30930242
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30932704
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921130
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927118
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922922
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922996
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30931682
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920540
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920996
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30925086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924328
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30927102
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30929958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30924016
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30920790
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30922182
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30921098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_27_1419208.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_27_1419208.30926752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
