<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_01_1457205</id>
	<title>Will Your Super Bowl Party Anger the Copyright Gods?</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1265051460000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>garg0yle writes <i>"According to some folks, watching the Super Bowl on a television bigger than 55 inches is illegal.  Is this true?  Yes and no &mdash; long story short, if you're in a private residence you're probably okay, but if you're running a sports bar you may technically have to <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/01/will-your-big-screen-super-bowl-party-violate-copyright-law.ars">negotiate a license with the NFL</a>.  Just don't charge for food, or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>garg0yle writes " According to some folks , watching the Super Bowl on a television bigger than 55 inches is illegal .
Is this true ?
Yes and no    long story short , if you 're in a private residence you 're probably okay , but if you 're running a sports bar you may technically have to negotiate a license with the NFL .
Just do n't charge for food , or call it a 'Super Bowl ' party , since the term itself is copyright .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>garg0yle writes "According to some folks, watching the Super Bowl on a television bigger than 55 inches is illegal.
Is this true?
Yes and no — long story short, if you're in a private residence you're probably okay, but if you're running a sports bar you may technically have to negotiate a license with the NFL.
Just don't charge for food, or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985156</id>
	<title>NFL soft on churches</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1265056080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The NFL used to crack down on churches for having pay-per-view football watching parties. But they've backed off on churches.
They're afraid to take on religion.  Wimps.
</p><p>
As for sports bars, they're a business mooching off someone else's content.  Of course they should pay.
</p><p>
Heinlein, in "Stranger in a Strange Land", saw this future of megachurches.  There's a scene where a church leader mentions that they have a big screen projection TV for football events.  (Heinlein also described megachurches with casinos, but so far, that's <a href="http://www.larknews.com/may\_2003/secondary.php?page=las\_vegas" title="larknews.com" rel="nofollow">only in Vegas.</a> [larknews.com])</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The NFL used to crack down on churches for having pay-per-view football watching parties .
But they 've backed off on churches .
They 're afraid to take on religion .
Wimps . As for sports bars , they 're a business mooching off someone else 's content .
Of course they should pay .
Heinlein , in " Stranger in a Strange Land " , saw this future of megachurches .
There 's a scene where a church leader mentions that they have a big screen projection TV for football events .
( Heinlein also described megachurches with casinos , but so far , that 's only in Vegas .
[ larknews.com ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The NFL used to crack down on churches for having pay-per-view football watching parties.
But they've backed off on churches.
They're afraid to take on religion.
Wimps.

As for sports bars, they're a business mooching off someone else's content.
Of course they should pay.
Heinlein, in "Stranger in a Strange Land", saw this future of megachurches.
There's a scene where a church leader mentions that they have a big screen projection TV for football events.
(Heinlein also described megachurches with casinos, but so far, that's only in Vegas.
[larknews.com])</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986894</id>
	<title>Re:Doubtful...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265018700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So no more ass grabbing or Peyton Manning footie pajamas?! That is the best part of your LAN parties!</htmltext>
<tokenext>So no more ass grabbing or Peyton Manning footie pajamas ? !
That is the best part of your LAN parties !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So no more ass grabbing or Peyton Manning footie pajamas?!
That is the best part of your LAN parties!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985232</id>
	<title>RTFA, submitter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265056380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the summary:</p><blockquote><div><p>Just don't charge for food, or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.</p></div></blockquote><p>The article directly contradicts both of those claims.</p><p>It's one thing to comment without RTFA, but to <i>submit</i> without RTFA takes a special kind of stupid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the summary : Just do n't charge for food , or call it a 'Super Bowl ' party , since the term itself is copyright.The article directly contradicts both of those claims.It 's one thing to comment without RTFA , but to submit without RTFA takes a special kind of stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the summary:Just don't charge for food, or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.The article directly contradicts both of those claims.It's one thing to comment without RTFA, but to submit without RTFA takes a special kind of stupid.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30999668</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1265141760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>-1 flaimbait? no. -1 myopic and stupid? yes.</p><p>If the Rams ever won the superbowl, I would say 'we won' because I've taken a hell of a lot of shit for being a Rams fan.</p><p>It's a game, some people like to watch competitive sports.</p><p>Most aren't drug addicts, and why do you begrudge someone because they make more money then you?</p><p>Your whole rant reeks of whiny elitism, based on incorrect assumption and talking points used to make you have something for your clique to hate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>-1 flaimbait ?
no. -1 myopic and stupid ?
yes.If the Rams ever won the superbowl , I would say 'we won ' because I 've taken a hell of a lot of shit for being a Rams fan.It 's a game , some people like to watch competitive sports.Most are n't drug addicts , and why do you begrudge someone because they make more money then you ? Your whole rant reeks of whiny elitism , based on incorrect assumption and talking points used to make you have something for your clique to hate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>-1 flaimbait?
no. -1 myopic and stupid?
yes.If the Rams ever won the superbowl, I would say 'we won' because I've taken a hell of a lot of shit for being a Rams fan.It's a game, some people like to watch competitive sports.Most aren't drug addicts, and why do you begrudge someone because they make more money then you?Your whole rant reeks of whiny elitism, based on incorrect assumption and talking points used to make you have something for your clique to hate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985608</id>
	<title>Re:Old news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265057640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, everyone saw the lack of clothing years ago after the Janet Jackson Nipplegate incident.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , everyone saw the lack of clothing years ago after the Janet Jackson Nipplegate incident .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, everyone saw the lack of clothing years ago after the Janet Jackson Nipplegate incident.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986738</id>
	<title>Re:NFL sued a church last year</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265018160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first rule of Superbowl Sunday is, you do not talk about Superbowl Sunday...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first rule of Superbowl Sunday is , you do not talk about Superbowl Sunday.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first rule of Superbowl Sunday is, you do not talk about Superbowl Sunday...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618</id>
	<title>Re:Old news</title>
	<author>timster</author>
	<datestamp>1265057700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know, this one might strike people as weird, but I'm not so sure.</p><p>If you had the idea to start up a $1 movie theater for profit, it sure would be nice if you could buy a $30 blu-ray version of a recent movie and show it to hundreds of people, but I don't see it as some huge injustice that this isn't legal.  There really is a difference between watching something in your home, with friends, etc and a for-profit public performance.  (And you can bet that the lawyers would be all over a theater that tried to pull something like that).</p><p>No surprise that the NFL would expect the same laws to apply.  It would be nice for Congress to pass an exemption for churches and such, though you might risk having people join the Church of the Celluloid and taking unfair advantage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know , this one might strike people as weird , but I 'm not so sure.If you had the idea to start up a $ 1 movie theater for profit , it sure would be nice if you could buy a $ 30 blu-ray version of a recent movie and show it to hundreds of people , but I do n't see it as some huge injustice that this is n't legal .
There really is a difference between watching something in your home , with friends , etc and a for-profit public performance .
( And you can bet that the lawyers would be all over a theater that tried to pull something like that ) .No surprise that the NFL would expect the same laws to apply .
It would be nice for Congress to pass an exemption for churches and such , though you might risk having people join the Church of the Celluloid and taking unfair advantage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know, this one might strike people as weird, but I'm not so sure.If you had the idea to start up a $1 movie theater for profit, it sure would be nice if you could buy a $30 blu-ray version of a recent movie and show it to hundreds of people, but I don't see it as some huge injustice that this isn't legal.
There really is a difference between watching something in your home, with friends, etc and a for-profit public performance.
(And you can bet that the lawyers would be all over a theater that tried to pull something like that).No surprise that the NFL would expect the same laws to apply.
It would be nice for Congress to pass an exemption for churches and such, though you might risk having people join the Church of the Celluloid and taking unfair advantage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1265057580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>There are sports nerds</i></p><p>That's an oxymoron and is completely incorrect. The people you refer to are called "jocks", as in "jock strap".</p><p><i>The guys who memorize every stat for everyone on all thirty-something teams.</i></p><p>Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are sports nerdsThat 's an oxymoron and is completely incorrect .
The people you refer to are called " jocks " , as in " jock strap " .The guys who memorize every stat for everyone on all thirty-something teams.Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are sports nerdsThat's an oxymoron and is completely incorrect.
The people you refer to are called "jocks", as in "jock strap".The guys who memorize every stat for everyone on all thirty-something teams.Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988164</id>
	<title>What if they had a SuperBowl &amp; nobody watched?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265023680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The NFL forgets that the people watching the game - wherever they may be - are the ones paying their salaries - the ones paying for tickets to games (win or lose), buying over priced merchandise, paying to keep the stadiums open and ALLOWING them/the networks to charge millions of dollars in advertising.</p><p>The FANS make the game as big as it is, not the owners, the league, the network or even the players.</p><p>NFL? Don't bite the hands that feed you...or it'll bite back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The NFL forgets that the people watching the game - wherever they may be - are the ones paying their salaries - the ones paying for tickets to games ( win or lose ) , buying over priced merchandise , paying to keep the stadiums open and ALLOWING them/the networks to charge millions of dollars in advertising.The FANS make the game as big as it is , not the owners , the league , the network or even the players.NFL ?
Do n't bite the hands that feed you...or it 'll bite back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The NFL forgets that the people watching the game - wherever they may be - are the ones paying their salaries - the ones paying for tickets to games (win or lose), buying over priced merchandise, paying to keep the stadiums open and ALLOWING them/the networks to charge millions of dollars in advertising.The FANS make the game as big as it is, not the owners, the league, the network or even the players.NFL?
Don't bite the hands that feed you...or it'll bite back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30995212</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>Gorphrim</author>
	<datestamp>1265126100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[rant]And if the team you cheered for won... don't say "we won".  If you didn't leave a drop of blood or sweat on the field... you were not a part of that victory.  You're a witness, that's it.  Watching something someone else did is not an accomplishment and no reason to be proud.  The team won.  You watched.
[/rant]</p></div><p>If I'm an American citizen and America's military wins a war, am I allowed to be proud of that even though I "didn't leave a drop of blood or sweat on the field [of battle]?  Sheesh, get off your high horse.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ rant ] And if the team you cheered for won... do n't say " we won " .
If you did n't leave a drop of blood or sweat on the field... you were not a part of that victory .
You 're a witness , that 's it .
Watching something someone else did is not an accomplishment and no reason to be proud .
The team won .
You watched .
[ /rant ] If I 'm an American citizen and America 's military wins a war , am I allowed to be proud of that even though I " did n't leave a drop of blood or sweat on the field [ of battle ] ?
Sheesh , get off your high horse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[rant]And if the team you cheered for won... don't say "we won".
If you didn't leave a drop of blood or sweat on the field... you were not a part of that victory.
You're a witness, that's it.
Watching something someone else did is not an accomplishment and no reason to be proud.
The team won.
You watched.
[/rant]If I'm an American citizen and America's military wins a war, am I allowed to be proud of that even though I "didn't leave a drop of blood or sweat on the field [of battle]?
Sheesh, get off your high horse.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985256</id>
	<title>Madness of the corporation</title>
	<author>jonfr</author>
	<datestamp>1265056500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is madness. Someone is going to have stop this, or it is going to mean the end of TV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is madness .
Someone is going to have stop this , or it is going to mean the end of TV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is madness.
Someone is going to have stop this, or it is going to mean the end of TV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986370</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265016840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And one for the lawyers - Sue Pa Bole Party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And one for the lawyers - Sue Pa Bole Party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And one for the lawyers - Sue Pa Bole Party.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986086</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265015940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BeOS purwl</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BeOS purwl</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BeOS purwl</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985266</id>
	<title>Variable screen size?</title>
	<author>durrr</author>
	<datestamp>1265056560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is why you should use a projector on a moveable screen, mark the 54" spot on the floor, and then allow some douche to move the screen to the 150" mark so you can claim plausible deniability.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why you should use a projector on a moveable screen , mark the 54 " spot on the floor , and then allow some douche to move the screen to the 150 " mark so you can claim plausible deniability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why you should use a projector on a moveable screen, mark the 54" spot on the floor, and then allow some douche to move the screen to the 150" mark so you can claim plausible deniability.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985332</id>
	<title>Re:The term itself...?</title>
	<author>JNSL</author>
	<datestamp>1265056740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>when you start charging for food, you move from being a collection of friends to a sport bar, and sports bars don't get fair use.</p></div><p>This is wrong. In a lot of ways.
<br> <br>
First, as has been said many times in these comments already, we're dealing with TM when using the term "Superbowl" and copyright when we dealing with showing it on TV. Though you probably don't know it, and besides the fact that a bar would also have to serve alcohol, the statutory exception you're referring to is an exception to the copyright rights. Certain kinds of establishments are allowed to violate the holder's copyright (and here I mean the prima facie violation of a section 106 right). And I believe I'm remembering this correctly, but the size of the TV's doesn't matter. It's the size of the establishment and the number of TV's.
<br> <br>
Second, sports bars can get fair use. Whether a court finds a fair use depends on a balance of assorted factors, only one of which is whether the organization is for profit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>when you start charging for food , you move from being a collection of friends to a sport bar , and sports bars do n't get fair use.This is wrong .
In a lot of ways .
First , as has been said many times in these comments already , we 're dealing with TM when using the term " Superbowl " and copyright when we dealing with showing it on TV .
Though you probably do n't know it , and besides the fact that a bar would also have to serve alcohol , the statutory exception you 're referring to is an exception to the copyright rights .
Certain kinds of establishments are allowed to violate the holder 's copyright ( and here I mean the prima facie violation of a section 106 right ) .
And I believe I 'm remembering this correctly , but the size of the TV 's does n't matter .
It 's the size of the establishment and the number of TV 's .
Second , sports bars can get fair use .
Whether a court finds a fair use depends on a balance of assorted factors , only one of which is whether the organization is for profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when you start charging for food, you move from being a collection of friends to a sport bar, and sports bars don't get fair use.This is wrong.
In a lot of ways.
First, as has been said many times in these comments already, we're dealing with TM when using the term "Superbowl" and copyright when we dealing with showing it on TV.
Though you probably don't know it, and besides the fact that a bar would also have to serve alcohol, the statutory exception you're referring to is an exception to the copyright rights.
Certain kinds of establishments are allowed to violate the holder's copyright (and here I mean the prima facie violation of a section 106 right).
And I believe I'm remembering this correctly, but the size of the TV's doesn't matter.
It's the size of the establishment and the number of TV's.
Second, sports bars can get fair use.
Whether a court finds a fair use depends on a balance of assorted factors, only one of which is whether the organization is for profit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985352</id>
	<title>Will Your Super Bowl Party Anger the Copyright God</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1265056800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Will Your Super Bowl Party Anger the Copyright Gods?" They're hardly gods; a more precise term would be "demons" or "devils".</p><p>The bar I go to has two TVs, if they show it on the big one they'll be in violation. TFA doesn't say what happens if you give food away, as the one mentioned will (regular readers of my journal will know the name of the bar). If I remember correctly, Sanmy's Sports Bar downtown doesn't have any screens <i>smaller</i> than 55 inches. It seems ironic that a sports bar can't show sports! And every bar I know of sells pizza; I think Sammy's has a kitchen.</p><p>Also, how can you copyright the term "super bowl?" Is someone confusing copyright with trademark?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Will Your Super Bowl Party Anger the Copyright Gods ?
" They 're hardly gods ; a more precise term would be " demons " or " devils " .The bar I go to has two TVs , if they show it on the big one they 'll be in violation .
TFA does n't say what happens if you give food away , as the one mentioned will ( regular readers of my journal will know the name of the bar ) .
If I remember correctly , Sanmy 's Sports Bar downtown does n't have any screens smaller than 55 inches .
It seems ironic that a sports bar ca n't show sports !
And every bar I know of sells pizza ; I think Sammy 's has a kitchen.Also , how can you copyright the term " super bowl ?
" Is someone confusing copyright with trademark ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Will Your Super Bowl Party Anger the Copyright Gods?
" They're hardly gods; a more precise term would be "demons" or "devils".The bar I go to has two TVs, if they show it on the big one they'll be in violation.
TFA doesn't say what happens if you give food away, as the one mentioned will (regular readers of my journal will know the name of the bar).
If I remember correctly, Sanmy's Sports Bar downtown doesn't have any screens smaller than 55 inches.
It seems ironic that a sports bar can't show sports!
And every bar I know of sells pizza; I think Sammy's has a kitchen.Also, how can you copyright the term "super bowl?
" Is someone confusing copyright with trademark?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984910</id>
	<title>who dat</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>so being in New Orleans, I'll have a "Who Dat" Party<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... oh wait... "&#169; Dat" Party.
<a href="http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/vitter\_to\_nfl\_back\_of\_who\_dat.html" title="nola.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/vitter\_to\_nfl\_back\_of\_who\_dat.html</a> [nola.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>so being in New Orleans , I 'll have a " Who Dat " Party ... oh wait... "   Dat " Party .
http : //www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/vitter \ _to \ _nfl \ _back \ _of \ _who \ _dat.html [ nola.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so being in New Orleans, I'll have a "Who Dat" Party ... oh wait... "© Dat" Party.
http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/vitter\_to\_nfl\_back\_of\_who\_dat.html [nola.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985184</id>
	<title>I've gotten around this...</title>
	<author>jnaujok</author>
	<datestamp>1265056140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You see, I'm having a party where I'll be serving soup.</p><p>It will be served in my wife's favorite dishware.</p><p>And my son will be serving it when I tell him to.</p><p>It will start during the daylight hours.</p><p>So I told all my friends to come over for a "Soup her bowl, Son - Day Party".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You see , I 'm having a party where I 'll be serving soup.It will be served in my wife 's favorite dishware.And my son will be serving it when I tell him to.It will start during the daylight hours.So I told all my friends to come over for a " Soup her bowl , Son - Day Party " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You see, I'm having a party where I'll be serving soup.It will be served in my wife's favorite dishware.And my son will be serving it when I tell him to.It will start during the daylight hours.So I told all my friends to come over for a "Soup her bowl, Son - Day Party".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986490</id>
	<title>Watch Sports or Cure Cancer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265017260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Americans spent $200 billion on sports merchandise, while the National Cancer Institute research budget is only $5 billion. How about we all turn off the Super Bowl (tm) and get a life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Americans spent $ 200 billion on sports merchandise , while the National Cancer Institute research budget is only $ 5 billion .
How about we all turn off the Super Bowl ( tm ) and get a life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Americans spent $200 billion on sports merchandise, while the National Cancer Institute research budget is only $5 billion.
How about we all turn off the Super Bowl (tm) and get a life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985542</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>iwaybandit</author>
	<datestamp>1265057460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Only if the party takes place at Hooters.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only if the party takes place at Hooters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only if the party takes place at Hooters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985644</id>
	<title>the Superbowl's achilles heel</title>
	<author>rev\_sanchez</author>
	<datestamp>1265057760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In much the same way the aliens in War of the Worlds were destroyed by simple micro-organisms they were ill equipt to deal with, the Superbowl has a simple yet fatal weakness when it comes to the common human nipple.  If the NFL gives you any guff about your party just lift your shirt and flash your nipples in a manner similar to the Care Bear Stare until they flee in terror.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In much the same way the aliens in War of the Worlds were destroyed by simple micro-organisms they were ill equipt to deal with , the Superbowl has a simple yet fatal weakness when it comes to the common human nipple .
If the NFL gives you any guff about your party just lift your shirt and flash your nipples in a manner similar to the Care Bear Stare until they flee in terror .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In much the same way the aliens in War of the Worlds were destroyed by simple micro-organisms they were ill equipt to deal with, the Superbowl has a simple yet fatal weakness when it comes to the common human nipple.
If the NFL gives you any guff about your party just lift your shirt and flash your nipples in a manner similar to the Care Bear Stare until they flee in terror.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985418</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>sunderland56</author>
	<datestamp>1265057100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The nerds will create a massive video wall constructed of 40" flat screens, to circumvent the 55" limitation....</htmltext>
<tokenext>The nerds will create a massive video wall constructed of 40 " flat screens , to circumvent the 55 " limitation... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The nerds will create a massive video wall constructed of 40" flat screens, to circumvent the 55" limitation....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987136</id>
	<title>Re:Doubtful...</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1265019480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You need to look into Arcane Legions.  It's a new game from the former guys who though up BattleTech and Shadowrun years ago.  Kinda like Warhammer, with lots and lots of pieces, but it's "formation" based, not unit based, so it;s quick to play (kill a few hundred units in 2 hours).  The pieces are cheap, a tiny fraction of WarHammer's costs.  (to get the complete set for 1 army, it's about $120).</p><p>It's nice as the "random" army packs are actually sold in a set of 8, and if you buy the set, you;re guaranteed the whole set.  Also, commons are sold SEPERATELY, so you can bulk up on gernal units cheap, or buy special packs.</p><p>Looks like there's opportunity for lots of expansions. Play style is nice too, lots of options in combat.</p><p>You naturally get to paint your own pieces too.  For about 3x the price, they're available direct from the manufacturer pre-painted if you're not into that.</p><p>Check out arcanelegions.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You need to look into Arcane Legions .
It 's a new game from the former guys who though up BattleTech and Shadowrun years ago .
Kinda like Warhammer , with lots and lots of pieces , but it 's " formation " based , not unit based , so it ; s quick to play ( kill a few hundred units in 2 hours ) .
The pieces are cheap , a tiny fraction of WarHammer 's costs .
( to get the complete set for 1 army , it 's about $ 120 ) .It 's nice as the " random " army packs are actually sold in a set of 8 , and if you buy the set , you ; re guaranteed the whole set .
Also , commons are sold SEPERATELY , so you can bulk up on gernal units cheap , or buy special packs.Looks like there 's opportunity for lots of expansions .
Play style is nice too , lots of options in combat.You naturally get to paint your own pieces too .
For about 3x the price , they 're available direct from the manufacturer pre-painted if you 're not into that.Check out arcanelegions.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need to look into Arcane Legions.
It's a new game from the former guys who though up BattleTech and Shadowrun years ago.
Kinda like Warhammer, with lots and lots of pieces, but it's "formation" based, not unit based, so it;s quick to play (kill a few hundred units in 2 hours).
The pieces are cheap, a tiny fraction of WarHammer's costs.
(to get the complete set for 1 army, it's about $120).It's nice as the "random" army packs are actually sold in a set of 8, and if you buy the set, you;re guaranteed the whole set.
Also, commons are sold SEPERATELY, so you can bulk up on gernal units cheap, or buy special packs.Looks like there's opportunity for lots of expansions.
Play style is nice too, lots of options in combat.You naturally get to paint your own pieces too.
For about 3x the price, they're available direct from the manufacturer pre-painted if you're not into that.Check out arcanelegions.com</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985404</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>badboy\_tw2002</author>
	<datestamp>1265057040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not all nerds are anti-social basement dwellers.  Not all nerds fit into the same narrow stereotypes.  Some of us are into radios, computers, rocketry, table top gaming, etc. Some of us (gasp) even like "normal" gatherings and activities like sports.  Super Bowl parties happen to be one of these things, and the story wasn't even close to "what are you doing for the Super Bowl" but a conversation about IP and copyrights, which are certainly on-topic around these parts.  Stop perpetuating a stereotype and broaden your mind a little.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not all nerds are anti-social basement dwellers .
Not all nerds fit into the same narrow stereotypes .
Some of us are into radios , computers , rocketry , table top gaming , etc .
Some of us ( gasp ) even like " normal " gatherings and activities like sports .
Super Bowl parties happen to be one of these things , and the story was n't even close to " what are you doing for the Super Bowl " but a conversation about IP and copyrights , which are certainly on-topic around these parts .
Stop perpetuating a stereotype and broaden your mind a little .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not all nerds are anti-social basement dwellers.
Not all nerds fit into the same narrow stereotypes.
Some of us are into radios, computers, rocketry, table top gaming, etc.
Some of us (gasp) even like "normal" gatherings and activities like sports.
Super Bowl parties happen to be one of these things, and the story wasn't even close to "what are you doing for the Super Bowl" but a conversation about IP and copyrights, which are certainly on-topic around these parts.
Stop perpetuating a stereotype and broaden your mind a little.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984940</id>
	<title>Trademark</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Just don't charge for food, or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is <strong>copyright</strong>.</p></div><p>You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just do n't charge for food , or call it a 'Super Bowl ' party , since the term itself is copyright.You keep using that word , I do not think it means what you think it means .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Just don't charge for food, or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985270</id>
	<title>YES: I'll Upload The Torrent File Of The Game</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265056560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to <a href="http://www.slashdot.org/" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.slashdot.org/SuperBowl44.tor</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>Fuck The DMCA AND the NFL.</p><p>Yours In Rostov-On-Don,<br>K. Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to http : //www.slashdot.org/SuperBowl44.tor [ slashdot.org ] Fuck The DMCA AND the NFL.Yours In Rostov-On-Don,K .
Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to http://www.slashdot.org/SuperBowl44.tor [slashdot.org]Fuck The DMCA AND the NFL.Yours In Rostov-On-Don,K.
Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986954</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Tekfactory</author>
	<datestamp>1265018820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, the mainstream is trying to take things (formerly pejorative things) away from you. Maybe you're one of those guys who still holds onto Hacker/Cracker as a meaningful distinction.</p><p>I played Football in Little League and High School, played D&amp;D on the weekends with a some of my teammates, and later went on to throw telephone poles with men in plaid skirts.</p><p>These 'childish' games CAN be fun, your body is wired for many types of stimulation, not just deeply cerebral activties.</p><p>We're also not all social misfits living in our Mom's basements. Once you break one stereotype, you realize how bogus the other are too.</p><p>Back to the topic of the article though, my team got knocked out in week two of the playoffs, so I'll probably be playing WoW/Dragon Age/ME2 on Sunday.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , the mainstream is trying to take things ( formerly pejorative things ) away from you .
Maybe you 're one of those guys who still holds onto Hacker/Cracker as a meaningful distinction.I played Football in Little League and High School , played D&amp;D on the weekends with a some of my teammates , and later went on to throw telephone poles with men in plaid skirts.These 'childish ' games CAN be fun , your body is wired for many types of stimulation , not just deeply cerebral activties.We 're also not all social misfits living in our Mom 's basements .
Once you break one stereotype , you realize how bogus the other are too.Back to the topic of the article though , my team got knocked out in week two of the playoffs , so I 'll probably be playing WoW/Dragon Age/ME2 on Sunday .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, the mainstream is trying to take things (formerly pejorative things) away from you.
Maybe you're one of those guys who still holds onto Hacker/Cracker as a meaningful distinction.I played Football in Little League and High School, played D&amp;D on the weekends with a some of my teammates, and later went on to throw telephone poles with men in plaid skirts.These 'childish' games CAN be fun, your body is wired for many types of stimulation, not just deeply cerebral activties.We're also not all social misfits living in our Mom's basements.
Once you break one stereotype, you realize how bogus the other are too.Back to the topic of the article though, my team got knocked out in week two of the playoffs, so I'll probably be playing WoW/Dragon Age/ME2 on Sunday.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986696</id>
	<title>Re:The term itself...?</title>
	<author>spire3661</author>
	<datestamp>1265017980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The game is broadcast FREE OF CHARGE over the air, all claims to who/what/when/where/how it can be viewed should be moot. ANYONE with the capable hardware can watch it, for free. For the NFL to say we can restrict what you do with it regarding receiving the LIVE signal and displaying it is utterly retarded (in the context we are referring to). You broadcast it in the clear, you should lose ALL claims of control during the live broadcast itself. Timeshifting etc are other arguments, lets stay focused on the live 'party' context.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The game is broadcast FREE OF CHARGE over the air , all claims to who/what/when/where/how it can be viewed should be moot .
ANYONE with the capable hardware can watch it , for free .
For the NFL to say we can restrict what you do with it regarding receiving the LIVE signal and displaying it is utterly retarded ( in the context we are referring to ) .
You broadcast it in the clear , you should lose ALL claims of control during the live broadcast itself .
Timeshifting etc are other arguments , lets stay focused on the live 'party ' context .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The game is broadcast FREE OF CHARGE over the air, all claims to who/what/when/where/how it can be viewed should be moot.
ANYONE with the capable hardware can watch it, for free.
For the NFL to say we can restrict what you do with it regarding receiving the LIVE signal and displaying it is utterly retarded (in the context we are referring to).
You broadcast it in the clear, you should lose ALL claims of control during the live broadcast itself.
Timeshifting etc are other arguments, lets stay focused on the live 'party' context.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985552</id>
	<title>The atheist view</title>
	<author>Quiet\_Desperation</author>
	<datestamp>1265057460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Will Your Super Bowl Party Anger the Copyright Gods?</p></div><p>No gods. Just little men in suits trying to justify their petty, venal little existences as leeches on civilization's bum.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Will Your Super Bowl Party Anger the Copyright Gods ? No gods .
Just little men in suits trying to justify their petty , venal little existences as leeches on civilization 's bum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will Your Super Bowl Party Anger the Copyright Gods?No gods.
Just little men in suits trying to justify their petty, venal little existences as leeches on civilization's bum.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30993124</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Inda</author>
	<datestamp>1265111700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You lie.<br><br>I every interest in sport. I love the cheer my team. I love to shout at the players when they make mistakes.<br><br>I also have a fasination with gambling on sports. The odds the bookies advertise are a tease and I do very well when the bookies tout the wrong odds. The mathmatition in me pulls the numbers apart for an hour a week. I am a nerd!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You lie.I every interest in sport .
I love the cheer my team .
I love to shout at the players when they make mistakes.I also have a fasination with gambling on sports .
The odds the bookies advertise are a tease and I do very well when the bookies tout the wrong odds .
The mathmatition in me pulls the numbers apart for an hour a week .
I am a nerd !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You lie.I every interest in sport.
I love the cheer my team.
I love to shout at the players when they make mistakes.I also have a fasination with gambling on sports.
The odds the bookies advertise are a tease and I do very well when the bookies tout the wrong odds.
The mathmatition in me pulls the numbers apart for an hour a week.
I am a nerd!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985212</id>
	<title>Re:The term itself...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265056320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>My Bowl Party is going to be Super.
so I'm having a Super "Bowl Party" not a "Super Bowl" Party.

Entertainment Lawyers can go-for-a-Coffee as far as I'm concerned.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My Bowl Party is going to be Super .
so I 'm having a Super " Bowl Party " not a " Super Bowl " Party .
Entertainment Lawyers can go-for-a-Coffee as far as I 'm concerned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Bowl Party is going to be Super.
so I'm having a Super "Bowl Party" not a "Super Bowl" Party.
Entertainment Lawyers can go-for-a-Coffee as far as I'm concerned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990006</id>
	<title>Not so fast "big game" fans.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265032260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm so happy we let our elected officials take bribes in return for re-election funds and a fucked up nonsensical IP regime.</p><p>If your TV has a refresh rate exceeding 120hz, a dot pitch less than<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.10mm, contrast ratio exceeding 10000:1 or screen resolution higher than 1920&#215;1080 you need to negotiate an expensive contract with me to watch commercials during the superbowl.</p><p>Failure to pay will result in DMCA physical takedown action against your electrical utility pole.  We can't have utility companies aiding and abedding the infringement of copyrights by providing power to your illegal television now can we?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm so happy we let our elected officials take bribes in return for re-election funds and a fucked up nonsensical IP regime.If your TV has a refresh rate exceeding 120hz , a dot pitch less than .10mm , contrast ratio exceeding 10000 : 1 or screen resolution higher than 1920   1080 you need to negotiate an expensive contract with me to watch commercials during the superbowl.Failure to pay will result in DMCA physical takedown action against your electrical utility pole .
We ca n't have utility companies aiding and abedding the infringement of copyrights by providing power to your illegal television now can we ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm so happy we let our elected officials take bribes in return for re-election funds and a fucked up nonsensical IP regime.If your TV has a refresh rate exceeding 120hz, a dot pitch less than .10mm, contrast ratio exceeding 10000:1 or screen resolution higher than 1920×1080 you need to negotiate an expensive contract with me to watch commercials during the superbowl.Failure to pay will result in DMCA physical takedown action against your electrical utility pole.
We can't have utility companies aiding and abedding the infringement of copyrights by providing power to your illegal television now can we?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30991026</id>
	<title>Trademark!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265039760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>'SUPER BOWL' IS NOT A COPYRIGHT. IT IS A TRADEMARK.<br> <br>

You ignorant idiots make all of us<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.ers trying to change IP law for the better look bad.<br> <br>

Seriously.</htmltext>
<tokenext>'SUPER BOWL ' IS NOT A COPYRIGHT .
IT IS A TRADEMARK .
You ignorant idiots make all of us /.ers trying to change IP law for the better look bad .
Seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'SUPER BOWL' IS NOT A COPYRIGHT.
IT IS A TRADEMARK.
You ignorant idiots make all of us /.ers trying to change IP law for the better look bad.
Seriously.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986818</id>
	<title>What's the deal with 'football' anyway?</title>
	<author>CohibaVancouver</author>
	<datestamp>1265018340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just don't get the appeal of American football... Everyone lines up, crashes into each other, play stops.  Then they line up again, and crash again, and play stops again.  Repeat over and over.<br> <br>

I bet if I edited all the stops out of a recorded game and just played it the thing would run for like 15 minutes?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just do n't get the appeal of American football... Everyone lines up , crashes into each other , play stops .
Then they line up again , and crash again , and play stops again .
Repeat over and over .
I bet if I edited all the stops out of a recorded game and just played it the thing would run for like 15 minutes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just don't get the appeal of American football... Everyone lines up, crashes into each other, play stops.
Then they line up again, and crash again, and play stops again.
Repeat over and over.
I bet if I edited all the stops out of a recorded game and just played it the thing would run for like 15 minutes?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989308</id>
	<title>Re:NFL sued a church last year</title>
	<author>SirWhoopass</author>
	<datestamp>1265028360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>you can't disseminate or report on the game without their written, express consent</p></div></blockquote><p>They claim that, but I'm almost certain it is not true. Does anyone think that thousands of sports reporters are getting written permission?
</p><p>One of the reasons that that professional wrestling (WWF/WWE) admitted their event is fake was due to copyright. They could not stop writers from reporting on a "real" event, just as the NFL/MLB/etc cannot stop writers from reporting on their events. As theater, however, pro wrestling has much greater copyright control over how much can be written about their event.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>you ca n't disseminate or report on the game without their written , express consentThey claim that , but I 'm almost certain it is not true .
Does anyone think that thousands of sports reporters are getting written permission ?
One of the reasons that that professional wrestling ( WWF/WWE ) admitted their event is fake was due to copyright .
They could not stop writers from reporting on a " real " event , just as the NFL/MLB/etc can not stop writers from reporting on their events .
As theater , however , pro wrestling has much greater copyright control over how much can be written about their event .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you can't disseminate or report on the game without their written, express consentThey claim that, but I'm almost certain it is not true.
Does anyone think that thousands of sports reporters are getting written permission?
One of the reasons that that professional wrestling (WWF/WWE) admitted their event is fake was due to copyright.
They could not stop writers from reporting on a "real" event, just as the NFL/MLB/etc cannot stop writers from reporting on their events.
As theater, however, pro wrestling has much greater copyright control over how much can be written about their event.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985078</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>shoehornjob</author>
	<datestamp>1265055780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Meh the nfl sucks. Since we seem to be locked in an endless debate about copyright, trademarks etc I can see why it would be posted here but they still suck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Meh the nfl sucks .
Since we seem to be locked in an endless debate about copyright , trademarks etc I can see why it would be posted here but they still suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meh the nfl sucks.
Since we seem to be locked in an endless debate about copyright, trademarks etc I can see why it would be posted here but they still suck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985676</id>
	<title>I don't even watch baseball</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1265057880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And still record all the games just because I'm doing it without the express written consent of Major League Baseball. I'll have to add the NFL to the roster. I just imagine every time the tapes spin while a game's on the lawyers hiss and fume in their cages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And still record all the games just because I 'm doing it without the express written consent of Major League Baseball .
I 'll have to add the NFL to the roster .
I just imagine every time the tapes spin while a game 's on the lawyers hiss and fume in their cages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And still record all the games just because I'm doing it without the express written consent of Major League Baseball.
I'll have to add the NFL to the roster.
I just imagine every time the tapes spin while a game's on the lawyers hiss and fume in their cages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985516</id>
	<title>That deserves punishment</title>
	<author>presidenteloco</author>
	<datestamp>1265057340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes well, I found a feather from a Great Snowy Owl<br>in my Canadian back yard, so invited some friends<br>over to look at it.<br>email subject:</p><p>"Superb owl part, eh!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes well , I found a feather from a Great Snowy Owlin my Canadian back yard , so invited some friendsover to look at it.email subject : " Superb owl part , eh !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes well, I found a feather from a Great Snowy Owlin my Canadian back yard, so invited some friendsover to look at it.email subject:"Superb owl part, eh!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986918</id>
	<title>Re:The atheist view</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1265018760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you mean "tapeworms in" not "leeches on".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you mean " tapeworms in " not " leeches on " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you mean "tapeworms in" not "leeches on".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985338</id>
	<title>Minority Sports Don't Matter</title>
	<author>Killeri</author>
	<datestamp>1265056800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who cares about Super Bowl, it is no longer the single most watched sports event<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p><a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/3280912/Champions-League-final-tops-Super-Bowl-in-TV" title="stuff.co.nz" rel="nofollow">http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/3280912/Champions-League-final-tops-Super-Bowl-in-TV</a> [stuff.co.nz]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares about Super Bowl , it is no longer the single most watched sports event : ) http : //www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/3280912/Champions-League-final-tops-Super-Bowl-in-TV [ stuff.co.nz ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares about Super Bowl, it is no longer the single most watched sports event :)http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/3280912/Champions-League-final-tops-Super-Bowl-in-TV [stuff.co.nz]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984880</id>
	<title>Old news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We talked about this <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/02/2032250" title="slashdot.org">two years ago</a> [slashdot.org]. Copyright still sucks, nothing new here.</p><p>P.S.: Amazingly, that was on February, 2nd 2008. I wonder if we will be talking about <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/04/0130235" title="slashdot.org">Yahoo considering an alliance with Google</a> [slashdot.org] tomorrow!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We talked about this two years ago [ slashdot.org ] .
Copyright still sucks , nothing new here.P.S .
: Amazingly , that was on February , 2nd 2008 .
I wonder if we will be talking about Yahoo considering an alliance with Google [ slashdot.org ] tomorrow !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We talked about this two years ago [slashdot.org].
Copyright still sucks, nothing new here.P.S.
: Amazingly, that was on February, 2nd 2008.
I wonder if we will be talking about Yahoo considering an alliance with Google [slashdot.org] tomorrow!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987806</id>
	<title>pffft</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1265022060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They can bite my shiny metal ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They can bite my shiny metal ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They can bite my shiny metal ass.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986928</id>
	<title>In Soviet Russia....</title>
	<author>tekrat</author>
	<datestamp>1265018820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>YOU sue NFL.</p><p>Wait a minute...</p><p>That joke doesn't work because it makes Soviet Russia sound more free than the United States.</p><p>Oh, now I get it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>YOU sue NFL.Wait a minute...That joke does n't work because it makes Soviet Russia sound more free than the United States.Oh , now I get it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>YOU sue NFL.Wait a minute...That joke doesn't work because it makes Soviet Russia sound more free than the United States.Oh, now I get it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985166</id>
	<title>Oh well.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265056080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The screen will be 9 ft diagonal. So technically, yes we will be in violation. Oh well. I don't feel too bad. I'm not losing any sleep. Its an unenforceable stupid, greedy rule.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The screen will be 9 ft diagonal .
So technically , yes we will be in violation .
Oh well .
I do n't feel too bad .
I 'm not losing any sleep .
Its an unenforceable stupid , greedy rule .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The screen will be 9 ft diagonal.
So technically, yes we will be in violation.
Oh well.
I don't feel too bad.
I'm not losing any sleep.
Its an unenforceable stupid, greedy rule.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30992342</id>
	<title>Tiling?</title>
	<author>rkinch</author>
	<datestamp>1265142240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So a sports bar can use up to 4 screens up to 55 inches.  Can't you then use the 4 to do a 2 x 2 tile to get to 110 inches?  Yowza!  9 feet!</htmltext>
<tokenext>So a sports bar can use up to 4 screens up to 55 inches .
Ca n't you then use the 4 to do a 2 x 2 tile to get to 110 inches ?
Yowza ! 9 feet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So a sports bar can use up to 4 screens up to 55 inches.
Can't you then use the 4 to do a 2 x 2 tile to get to 110 inches?
Yowza!  9 feet!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988324</id>
	<title>Re:I've gotten around this...</title>
	<author>xactuary</author>
	<datestamp>1265024340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds like a super Bowl Party. Have fun.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like a super Bowl Party .
Have fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like a super Bowl Party.
Have fun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985184</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986394</id>
	<title>The term is what?</title>
	<author>nsayer</author>
	<datestamp>1265016960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.</p></div><p>No it isn't. It's <i>trademarked</i>. Different thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>or call it a 'Super Bowl ' party , since the term itself is copyright.No it is n't .
It 's trademarked .
Different thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.No it isn't.
It's trademarked.
Different thing.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987026</id>
	<title>This story...</title>
	<author>changa</author>
	<datestamp>1265019060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>This story makes me want to start thowing Super "Bowl parites."</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>This story makes me want to start thowing Super " Bowl parites .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story makes me want to start thowing Super "Bowl parites.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985990</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265015520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>&lt;blockquote&gt;Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason.&lt;/blockquote&gt;<br><br>What are the good reasons for being able to:<br><br>recite scenes from Monty Python movies/episodes verbatim,<br>name 5 or more droids from Star Wars (original trilogy) not counting R2-D2 or C-3PO,<br>recite monster stats for an edition of D&amp;D,<br>tell you his favorite XKCD comics by number,<br>etc.<br><br>Yes, nerds hate trivia. That's why they prowl the Internet all day long. There's no trivia there.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason.What are the good reasons for being able to : recite scenes from Monty Python movies/episodes verbatim,name 5 or more droids from Star Wars ( original trilogy ) not counting R2-D2 or C-3PO,recite monster stats for an edition of D&amp;D,tell you his favorite XKCD comics by number,etc.Yes , nerds hate trivia .
That 's why they prowl the Internet all day long .
There 's no trivia there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason.What are the good reasons for being able to:recite scenes from Monty Python movies/episodes verbatim,name 5 or more droids from Star Wars (original trilogy) not counting R2-D2 or C-3PO,recite monster stats for an edition of D&amp;D,tell you his favorite XKCD comics by number,etc.Yes, nerds hate trivia.
That's why they prowl the Internet all day long.
There's no trivia there.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986268</id>
	<title>I'm having a large SUPER-BOWL PARTY.  60" Plasma+</title>
	<author>gavron</author>
	<datestamp>1265016540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There will be a 60" Vizio plasma, a XVGA 3-M projector TV with a 3M screen, 5.1 surround off the Onkyo, and plenty of food.</p><p>*** I WILL BE CHARGING *** But only to watch the game.  The burgers, brats, dogs, and fixin's are all free.</p><p>Some details:<br>The burgers will be Coleman natural.<br>The brats will be Emerill.<br>The dogs will be Hebrew National 100\% beef.</p><p>THERE WILL BE BEER (Free, as in FREE BEER) and WINE and SCOTCH (single-malt only).<br>Right now I'm thinking Heineken mini-kegs, but this could change if the weather allows large chest of microbrews.</p><p>Attendance to anyone 21 years of age or older is open with ticket.  Tickets buy you the right to view The SuperBowl in my house.</p><p>E<br>P.S. Authorized legal representatives of the NFL can contact my attorney.  Martindale Hubbell 60189.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There will be a 60 " Vizio plasma , a XVGA 3-M projector TV with a 3M screen , 5.1 surround off the Onkyo , and plenty of food .
* * * I WILL BE CHARGING * * * But only to watch the game .
The burgers , brats , dogs , and fixin 's are all free.Some details : The burgers will be Coleman natural.The brats will be Emerill.The dogs will be Hebrew National 100 \ % beef.THERE WILL BE BEER ( Free , as in FREE BEER ) and WINE and SCOTCH ( single-malt only ) .Right now I 'm thinking Heineken mini-kegs , but this could change if the weather allows large chest of microbrews.Attendance to anyone 21 years of age or older is open with ticket .
Tickets buy you the right to view The SuperBowl in my house.EP.S .
Authorized legal representatives of the NFL can contact my attorney .
Martindale Hubbell 60189 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There will be a 60" Vizio plasma, a XVGA 3-M projector TV with a 3M screen, 5.1 surround off the Onkyo, and plenty of food.
*** I WILL BE CHARGING *** But only to watch the game.
The burgers, brats, dogs, and fixin's are all free.Some details:The burgers will be Coleman natural.The brats will be Emerill.The dogs will be Hebrew National 100\% beef.THERE WILL BE BEER (Free, as in FREE BEER) and WINE and SCOTCH (single-malt only).Right now I'm thinking Heineken mini-kegs, but this could change if the weather allows large chest of microbrews.Attendance to anyone 21 years of age or older is open with ticket.
Tickets buy you the right to view The SuperBowl in my house.EP.S.
Authorized legal representatives of the NFL can contact my attorney.
Martindale Hubbell 60189.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985548</id>
	<title>Commercials?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265057460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't they make their money off commercials? Why should someone have to pay for having people over to watch those commercials? I think sports bars are much less likely to change channels during commercials to catch 3 minutes of Family Guy, so their advertisements will be more effective than in many private homes.</p><p>I think a reasonable arrangement would be if you had to report it to the NFL, saying "I'll be having an NFL party in a bar that can have 80 people inside", so the NFL can use those numbers to get more money from their advertisers. If anything, they should be paying YOU.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't they make their money off commercials ?
Why should someone have to pay for having people over to watch those commercials ?
I think sports bars are much less likely to change channels during commercials to catch 3 minutes of Family Guy , so their advertisements will be more effective than in many private homes.I think a reasonable arrangement would be if you had to report it to the NFL , saying " I 'll be having an NFL party in a bar that can have 80 people inside " , so the NFL can use those numbers to get more money from their advertisers .
If anything , they should be paying YOU .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't they make their money off commercials?
Why should someone have to pay for having people over to watch those commercials?
I think sports bars are much less likely to change channels during commercials to catch 3 minutes of Family Guy, so their advertisements will be more effective than in many private homes.I think a reasonable arrangement would be if you had to report it to the NFL, saying "I'll be having an NFL party in a bar that can have 80 people inside", so the NFL can use those numbers to get more money from their advertisers.
If anything, they should be paying YOU.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986844</id>
	<title>EXACTLY, WHO CARES??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265018460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Instead of throwing your life away living vicariously throw some commercial saturated medium, filling the coffers of industry whores, disengage, disconnect and dispose of this idiocy by-</p><p>1) having more sex<br>2) having even more sex<br>3) getting some excercise and having more sex<br>4) read a book, write some music or code</p><p>Fuck them ALL!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of throwing your life away living vicariously throw some commercial saturated medium , filling the coffers of industry whores , disengage , disconnect and dispose of this idiocy by-1 ) having more sex2 ) having even more sex3 ) getting some excercise and having more sex4 ) read a book , write some music or codeFuck them ALL !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of throwing your life away living vicariously throw some commercial saturated medium, filling the coffers of industry whores, disengage, disconnect and dispose of this idiocy by-1) having more sex2) having even more sex3) getting some excercise and having more sex4) read a book, write some music or codeFuck them ALL!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985442</id>
	<title>Not if the owl is over 52 inches</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1265057160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All your owls are belong to us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All your owls are belong to us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All your owls are belong to us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988726</id>
	<title>Re:Madness of the corporation</title>
	<author>FelixNZ</author>
	<datestamp>1265025900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Madness? THIS. IS. NFL!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Madness ?
THIS. IS .
NFL ! ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Madness?
THIS. IS.
NFL!!!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985520</id>
	<title>Re:Can't copyright a term</title>
	<author>hedwards</author>
	<datestamp>1265057400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Which is completely unenforceable, since you're allowed to use trademarks for the purpose of referring to the item. Meaning that they might get upset about you calling it a "Super Bowl party" but if you have a party where you watch the "Super Bowl" there isn't really anything they can do about it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is completely unenforceable , since you 're allowed to use trademarks for the purpose of referring to the item .
Meaning that they might get upset about you calling it a " Super Bowl party " but if you have a party where you watch the " Super Bowl " there is n't really anything they can do about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is completely unenforceable, since you're allowed to use trademarks for the purpose of referring to the item.
Meaning that they might get upset about you calling it a "Super Bowl party" but if you have a party where you watch the "Super Bowl" there isn't really anything they can do about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989050</id>
	<title>How can a Puppy Bowl party anger the NFL?</title>
	<author>WillAffleckUW</author>
	<datestamp>1265027220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cause that's what all my party invites say.</p><p>Besides, other than halftime for the show, we plan to watch Puppy Bowl, or maybe a real sport like Soccer or Snowboarding.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cause that 's what all my party invites say.Besides , other than halftime for the show , we plan to watch Puppy Bowl , or maybe a real sport like Soccer or Snowboarding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cause that's what all my party invites say.Besides, other than halftime for the show, we plan to watch Puppy Bowl, or maybe a real sport like Soccer or Snowboarding.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262</id>
	<title>Re:Old news</title>
	<author>Kpau</author>
	<datestamp>1265056500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sometimes I think it will be the NFL that finally breaks the camel's back of copyright mutation rather than the MPAA/RIAA idiots.  The NFL takes the farce of "intellectual property" to such absurd levels that even congressmen might be able to see the lack of clothing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes I think it will be the NFL that finally breaks the camel 's back of copyright mutation rather than the MPAA/RIAA idiots .
The NFL takes the farce of " intellectual property " to such absurd levels that even congressmen might be able to see the lack of clothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes I think it will be the NFL that finally breaks the camel's back of copyright mutation rather than the MPAA/RIAA idiots.
The NFL takes the farce of "intellectual property" to such absurd levels that even congressmen might be able to see the lack of clothing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985218</id>
	<title>At this rate</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1265056320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Watching television may become illegal completely some day. Is that a bad thing?</p><p>That's debatable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Watching television may become illegal completely some day .
Is that a bad thing ? That 's debatable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Watching television may become illegal completely some day.
Is that a bad thing?That's debatable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987836</id>
	<title>There is more to music than notes.</title>
	<author>ClayJar</author>
	<datestamp>1265022120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Much the same as a Beethoven symphony is just a collection of notes and rests, American football is a collection of plays and time between plays.  You could, of course, play all the notes in a symphony in one unfettered cacophony, but you would be rather missing the music.</p><p>The time between the tackle on one play and the snap which begins the subsequent play is anything but empty.  For one obvious example, there are substitutions to attempt to take advantage of the particular circumstances of each play.  Other times, the team on offense chooses not to substitute in order to take advantage of the particular defense on the field, and they may even forgo the huddle (in which the plan for the next snap is customarily presented), trading what may have been a better plan for a better opportunity to catch the defense unprepared.  The formations used on offense and defense are elaborate set pieces, full of point and counterpoint.  Explaining everything that happens between plays would take far more time than we have here, but if you happen to be in Baton Rouge next Sunday, I would be honored to have you over for my small football-viewing event.</p><p>A forest is mostly empty space.  The trees define it, but that which is between the trees is not insignificant.</p><p>It strikes me that the same mentality that drives the "football is boring" whine is just as prevalent in many other situations.  I cannot tell you how many times I've heard scuba divers complaining there was "nothing to see" on the very same dive where I found myself utterly fascinated by the quantity and variety of marine life.  Unfortunately for this discussion, it is somewhat easier to convince a diver they have overlooked something when you pull up photos of arrow crabs and nudibranchs and so on than it will probably be to convince a "football is boring" person of their misbelief --  for one thing, there are no big fluffy gills sticking out of offensive alignments, even in the red zone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Much the same as a Beethoven symphony is just a collection of notes and rests , American football is a collection of plays and time between plays .
You could , of course , play all the notes in a symphony in one unfettered cacophony , but you would be rather missing the music.The time between the tackle on one play and the snap which begins the subsequent play is anything but empty .
For one obvious example , there are substitutions to attempt to take advantage of the particular circumstances of each play .
Other times , the team on offense chooses not to substitute in order to take advantage of the particular defense on the field , and they may even forgo the huddle ( in which the plan for the next snap is customarily presented ) , trading what may have been a better plan for a better opportunity to catch the defense unprepared .
The formations used on offense and defense are elaborate set pieces , full of point and counterpoint .
Explaining everything that happens between plays would take far more time than we have here , but if you happen to be in Baton Rouge next Sunday , I would be honored to have you over for my small football-viewing event.A forest is mostly empty space .
The trees define it , but that which is between the trees is not insignificant.It strikes me that the same mentality that drives the " football is boring " whine is just as prevalent in many other situations .
I can not tell you how many times I 've heard scuba divers complaining there was " nothing to see " on the very same dive where I found myself utterly fascinated by the quantity and variety of marine life .
Unfortunately for this discussion , it is somewhat easier to convince a diver they have overlooked something when you pull up photos of arrow crabs and nudibranchs and so on than it will probably be to convince a " football is boring " person of their misbelief -- for one thing , there are no big fluffy gills sticking out of offensive alignments , even in the red zone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Much the same as a Beethoven symphony is just a collection of notes and rests, American football is a collection of plays and time between plays.
You could, of course, play all the notes in a symphony in one unfettered cacophony, but you would be rather missing the music.The time between the tackle on one play and the snap which begins the subsequent play is anything but empty.
For one obvious example, there are substitutions to attempt to take advantage of the particular circumstances of each play.
Other times, the team on offense chooses not to substitute in order to take advantage of the particular defense on the field, and they may even forgo the huddle (in which the plan for the next snap is customarily presented), trading what may have been a better plan for a better opportunity to catch the defense unprepared.
The formations used on offense and defense are elaborate set pieces, full of point and counterpoint.
Explaining everything that happens between plays would take far more time than we have here, but if you happen to be in Baton Rouge next Sunday, I would be honored to have you over for my small football-viewing event.A forest is mostly empty space.
The trees define it, but that which is between the trees is not insignificant.It strikes me that the same mentality that drives the "football is boring" whine is just as prevalent in many other situations.
I cannot tell you how many times I've heard scuba divers complaining there was "nothing to see" on the very same dive where I found myself utterly fascinated by the quantity and variety of marine life.
Unfortunately for this discussion, it is somewhat easier to convince a diver they have overlooked something when you pull up photos of arrow crabs and nudibranchs and so on than it will probably be to convince a "football is boring" person of their misbelief --  for one thing, there are no big fluffy gills sticking out of offensive alignments, even in the red zone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985286</id>
	<title>Doubtful...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265056560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...my Super Bowl party is going to involve games of Chez Geek, Hero Quest, and a Civ 4 LAN.</p><p>Anything remotely related to Football is banned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...my Super Bowl party is going to involve games of Chez Geek , Hero Quest , and a Civ 4 LAN.Anything remotely related to Football is banned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...my Super Bowl party is going to involve games of Chez Geek, Hero Quest, and a Civ 4 LAN.Anything remotely related to Football is banned.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986514</id>
	<title>Rule #1</title>
	<author>Anti\_Climax</author>
	<datestamp>1265017320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first rule of the Super Bowl*: You do not talk about the Super Bowl</p><p>*Super Bowl is a registered trademark of the National Football League and is used here solely for academic and satirical purposes. The use of the term 'Super Bowl' in no way constitutes an attempt by me to misrepresent it as the property of any entity but the National Football League. Your mileage may vary. Void where prohibited. Must be 18 years of age or older to play. Offer not vaild outside the United States and it's territorial holdings. If redness or itching develop, discontinue use and consult a Physician. Aim away from face when opening. Objects in this mirror are closer than they appear. Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first rule of the Super Bowl * : You do not talk about the Super Bowl * Super Bowl is a registered trademark of the National Football League and is used here solely for academic and satirical purposes .
The use of the term 'Super Bowl ' in no way constitutes an attempt by me to misrepresent it as the property of any entity but the National Football League .
Your mileage may vary .
Void where prohibited .
Must be 18 years of age or older to play .
Offer not vaild outside the United States and it 's territorial holdings .
If redness or itching develop , discontinue use and consult a Physician .
Aim away from face when opening .
Objects in this mirror are closer than they appear .
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first rule of the Super Bowl*: You do not talk about the Super Bowl*Super Bowl is a registered trademark of the National Football League and is used here solely for academic and satirical purposes.
The use of the term 'Super Bowl' in no way constitutes an attempt by me to misrepresent it as the property of any entity but the National Football League.
Your mileage may vary.
Void where prohibited.
Must be 18 years of age or older to play.
Offer not vaild outside the United States and it's territorial holdings.
If redness or itching develop, discontinue use and consult a Physician.
Aim away from face when opening.
Objects in this mirror are closer than they appear.
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985180</id>
	<title>Re:The term itself...?</title>
	<author>JNSL</author>
	<datestamp>1265056140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, the big thing here is that nobody is going to be confused.<br> <br>

I'm also trying to figure out how viewing on that size of a screen could possibly be a copyright violation. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any exemptions like this. Not that it'd surprise me, since there are all sorts of special interest exemptions. Hell, maybe the NFL got one specially placed! The tax code [501(c)(6)] has one carved out for professional football leagues. Not that any exemption would matter anyway. It'd totally be against the NFL's best interests to litigate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , the big thing here is that nobody is going to be confused .
I 'm also trying to figure out how viewing on that size of a screen could possibly be a copyright violation .
Off the top of my head , I ca n't think of any exemptions like this .
Not that it 'd surprise me , since there are all sorts of special interest exemptions .
Hell , maybe the NFL got one specially placed !
The tax code [ 501 ( c ) ( 6 ) ] has one carved out for professional football leagues .
Not that any exemption would matter anyway .
It 'd totally be against the NFL 's best interests to litigate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, the big thing here is that nobody is going to be confused.
I'm also trying to figure out how viewing on that size of a screen could possibly be a copyright violation.
Off the top of my head, I can't think of any exemptions like this.
Not that it'd surprise me, since there are all sorts of special interest exemptions.
Hell, maybe the NFL got one specially placed!
The tax code [501(c)(6)] has one carved out for professional football leagues.
Not that any exemption would matter anyway.
It'd totally be against the NFL's best interests to litigate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30991612</id>
	<title>Bruce Springsteen's Half-time show</title>
	<author>JakartaDean</author>
	<datestamp>1265046120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was looking online for videos of Bruce's show from last year.  They've all been taken down as far as I can see, which saddened an old fan like me.  Copyright is supposed to be a balance between the rights of content providers and consumers such that society's benefit is maximized, right?  Well, Bruce is famous for going all out for his fans, and I think he'd love it if today's kids liked his show and went looking for copies of it online -- perhaps they'd be tempted to pick up an album or two (kids, I recommend starting with 'Born to Run').  The NFL isn't, as far as I know, selling half-time videos, and although I imagine they're selling videos of the whole game, I doubt anyone would buy that for the half-time show.  So I lose, other fans might be disappointed, Bruce might be disappointed and nobody wins.<p>

What am I missing here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was looking online for videos of Bruce 's show from last year .
They 've all been taken down as far as I can see , which saddened an old fan like me .
Copyright is supposed to be a balance between the rights of content providers and consumers such that society 's benefit is maximized , right ?
Well , Bruce is famous for going all out for his fans , and I think he 'd love it if today 's kids liked his show and went looking for copies of it online -- perhaps they 'd be tempted to pick up an album or two ( kids , I recommend starting with 'Born to Run ' ) .
The NFL is n't , as far as I know , selling half-time videos , and although I imagine they 're selling videos of the whole game , I doubt anyone would buy that for the half-time show .
So I lose , other fans might be disappointed , Bruce might be disappointed and nobody wins .
What am I missing here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was looking online for videos of Bruce's show from last year.
They've all been taken down as far as I can see, which saddened an old fan like me.
Copyright is supposed to be a balance between the rights of content providers and consumers such that society's benefit is maximized, right?
Well, Bruce is famous for going all out for his fans, and I think he'd love it if today's kids liked his show and went looking for copies of it online -- perhaps they'd be tempted to pick up an album or two (kids, I recommend starting with 'Born to Run').
The NFL isn't, as far as I know, selling half-time videos, and although I imagine they're selling videos of the whole game, I doubt anyone would buy that for the half-time show.
So I lose, other fans might be disappointed, Bruce might be disappointed and nobody wins.
What am I missing here?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985952</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>RawJoe</author>
	<datestamp>1265015400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The rise of fantasy sports has allowed the stat geek to rise as well.
<br> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabermetrics" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Sabermetrics</a> [wikipedia.org] (created by a stat geek) is often used in baseball to fill out rosters.
<br>Let's not forget the nerdy side of gambling, which often comes along with the Super Bowl.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The rise of fantasy sports has allowed the stat geek to rise as well .
Sabermetrics [ wikipedia.org ] ( created by a stat geek ) is often used in baseball to fill out rosters .
Let 's not forget the nerdy side of gambling , which often comes along with the Super Bowl .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The rise of fantasy sports has allowed the stat geek to rise as well.
Sabermetrics [wikipedia.org] (created by a stat geek) is often used in baseball to fill out rosters.
Let's not forget the nerdy side of gambling, which often comes along with the Super Bowl.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987490</id>
	<title>Re:who dat</title>
	<author>commodoresloat</author>
	<datestamp>1265020740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WHO DAT thinks they can own Who Dat??!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WHO DAT thinks they can own Who Dat ? ? !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WHO DAT thinks they can own Who Dat??!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988916</id>
	<title>What can I do with my 100" projector?</title>
	<author>amigabill</author>
	<datestamp>1265026620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So... Am I allowed to watch the SuperBowl? Or any TV shows? I have FIOS cable service... Or do I have to leave home to find a legal TV set?</p><p>Is my wife allowed to join me?</p><p>Can a few friends come watch too? Can they bring snacks, or does that count as a form of entry payment?</p><p>Oh, wait. I don't like football, so I'm not watching anyway. And we recently got married, are combining our houses, and my otherwise small living room is a large pile of everything we both own and we can't sit anywhere or see the giant screen anyway.</p><p>I'll look up the commercials on my laptop later.</p><p>But, what about the TV I do watch when things are cleared out? Caprica? Lost?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So... Am I allowed to watch the SuperBowl ?
Or any TV shows ?
I have FIOS cable service... Or do I have to leave home to find a legal TV set ? Is my wife allowed to join me ? Can a few friends come watch too ?
Can they bring snacks , or does that count as a form of entry payment ? Oh , wait .
I do n't like football , so I 'm not watching anyway .
And we recently got married , are combining our houses , and my otherwise small living room is a large pile of everything we both own and we ca n't sit anywhere or see the giant screen anyway.I 'll look up the commercials on my laptop later.But , what about the TV I do watch when things are cleared out ?
Caprica ? Lost ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So... Am I allowed to watch the SuperBowl?
Or any TV shows?
I have FIOS cable service... Or do I have to leave home to find a legal TV set?Is my wife allowed to join me?Can a few friends come watch too?
Can they bring snacks, or does that count as a form of entry payment?Oh, wait.
I don't like football, so I'm not watching anyway.
And we recently got married, are combining our houses, and my otherwise small living room is a large pile of everything we both own and we can't sit anywhere or see the giant screen anyway.I'll look up the commercials on my laptop later.But, what about the TV I do watch when things are cleared out?
Caprica? Lost?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30999452</id>
	<title>Re:Its not the Super Bowl, it's "The Big Game"</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1265140860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>heh, no. the NFL claims you need a license, and network lawyer are notorious for just giving in to the easier way, even if the long term effect is financial harmful.</p><p>It has been shown many time that referring to something by it's trade marked name is't a crime. In fact, it's the expected way to refer to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>heh , no .
the NFL claims you need a license , and network lawyer are notorious for just giving in to the easier way , even if the long term effect is financial harmful.It has been shown many time that referring to something by it 's trade marked name is't a crime .
In fact , it 's the expected way to refer to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>heh, no.
the NFL claims you need a license, and network lawyer are notorious for just giving in to the easier way, even if the long term effect is financial harmful.It has been shown many time that referring to something by it's trade marked name is't a crime.
In fact, it's the expected way to refer to it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988364</id>
	<title>"Big Game"</title>
	<author>cvtan</author>
	<datestamp>1265024520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If slashdot is having a discussion of the Superbowl that enhances their business, then mentioning it probably violates something.  One of our local radio stations used to sponsor a Superbowl Party and would rent buses to send people to the game.  They were told they were no longer allowed to mention "Superbowl".  They started referring to it as "The Big Game".  Sad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If slashdot is having a discussion of the Superbowl that enhances their business , then mentioning it probably violates something .
One of our local radio stations used to sponsor a Superbowl Party and would rent buses to send people to the game .
They were told they were no longer allowed to mention " Superbowl " .
They started referring to it as " The Big Game " .
Sad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If slashdot is having a discussion of the Superbowl that enhances their business, then mentioning it probably violates something.
One of our local radio stations used to sponsor a Superbowl Party and would rent buses to send people to the game.
They were told they were no longer allowed to mention "Superbowl".
They started referring to it as "The Big Game".
Sad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986048</id>
	<title>Meh</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1265015760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suppose I could drag myself to a friends house to watch an unsually large number of overweight black males and a few healthy black males in an American sporting event which for some reason is 3/4th black but over half of the quarterbacks are white and most of the team owners are white.</p><p>With few asians and very few hispanics I just find it hard to sit and start at a screen of fat black men lead by white quarterbacks as they run up and down a 100 yard field for no apparent reason other then the spectators amusement. I might as well watch fat people fight over a donut, it's just as absurd but substantally more entertaining. Especially if it were to the death.</p><p>But seriosuly does no one see the parelells here? You might as well call it the cotton bowl with the QB as Taskmaster and the team owners... oh wait....</p><p>Given that description does anything the NFL does make sense? Seriously how can you have so many black guys playing and so few of them quarterbacks? It's insulting. The NFL has been ass backwards for decades and I am sure decades to come...</p><p>So mod FLAMEBAIT, FUNNY, OFFTOPIC, or just plain sad....?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suppose I could drag myself to a friends house to watch an unsually large number of overweight black males and a few healthy black males in an American sporting event which for some reason is 3/4th black but over half of the quarterbacks are white and most of the team owners are white.With few asians and very few hispanics I just find it hard to sit and start at a screen of fat black men lead by white quarterbacks as they run up and down a 100 yard field for no apparent reason other then the spectators amusement .
I might as well watch fat people fight over a donut , it 's just as absurd but substantally more entertaining .
Especially if it were to the death.But seriosuly does no one see the parelells here ?
You might as well call it the cotton bowl with the QB as Taskmaster and the team owners... oh wait....Given that description does anything the NFL does make sense ?
Seriously how can you have so many black guys playing and so few of them quarterbacks ?
It 's insulting .
The NFL has been ass backwards for decades and I am sure decades to come...So mod FLAMEBAIT , FUNNY , OFFTOPIC , or just plain sad.... ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suppose I could drag myself to a friends house to watch an unsually large number of overweight black males and a few healthy black males in an American sporting event which for some reason is 3/4th black but over half of the quarterbacks are white and most of the team owners are white.With few asians and very few hispanics I just find it hard to sit and start at a screen of fat black men lead by white quarterbacks as they run up and down a 100 yard field for no apparent reason other then the spectators amusement.
I might as well watch fat people fight over a donut, it's just as absurd but substantally more entertaining.
Especially if it were to the death.But seriosuly does no one see the parelells here?
You might as well call it the cotton bowl with the QB as Taskmaster and the team owners... oh wait....Given that description does anything the NFL does make sense?
Seriously how can you have so many black guys playing and so few of them quarterbacks?
It's insulting.
The NFL has been ass backwards for decades and I am sure decades to come...So mod FLAMEBAIT, FUNNY, OFFTOPIC, or just plain sad....?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986862</id>
	<title>No, it's not a Super Bowl party</title>
	<author>Cro Magnon</author>
	<datestamp>1265018580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a Super BULL party.  Matadors, wild bulls, etc.  NFL lawyers not invited.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a Super BULL party .
Matadors , wild bulls , etc .
NFL lawyers not invited .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a Super BULL party.
Matadors, wild bulls, etc.
NFL lawyers not invited.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989150</id>
	<title>Re:Who Cares?</title>
	<author>Blackknight</author>
	<datestamp>1265027640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yup.  Perhaps it's time to start a more fan friendly league.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup .
Perhaps it 's time to start a more fan friendly league .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup.
Perhaps it's time to start a more fan friendly league.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987512</id>
	<title>either that</title>
	<author>commodoresloat</author>
	<datestamp>1265020860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>or you're a lousy friend</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>or you 're a lousy friend</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or you're a lousy friend</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987592</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>night\_flyer</author>
	<datestamp>1265021160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.</p></div><p>I guess that means you don't waste your time with things like movies, books, plays, concerts...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.I guess that means you do n't waste your time with things like movies , books , plays , concerts.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.I guess that means you don't waste your time with things like movies, books, plays, concerts...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985134</id>
	<title>The NFL at its best</title>
	<author>CorporateSuit</author>
	<datestamp>1265056020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Face it, the NFL are brilliant.  They are not about football.  They are about revenue.  They had two goals in mind when setting out on their broadcasting endeavor:<br> <br>
a) Sell high-cost adspace<br>
b) Get people to care about the adspace<br> <br>
Now you hear people always saying "I watch the superbowl for the commercials!"  Mission A-Ccomplished NFL.  Was that enough?  It's never enough.  So the last 10 years have been their attempt to make more money by becoming some of the biggest douchebags in the IP industry.<br> <br>
"That's the thing about greed, Arch, it's blind. And it doesn't know when to stop" -- Lenny Cole</htmltext>
<tokenext>Face it , the NFL are brilliant .
They are not about football .
They are about revenue .
They had two goals in mind when setting out on their broadcasting endeavor : a ) Sell high-cost adspace b ) Get people to care about the adspace Now you hear people always saying " I watch the superbowl for the commercials !
" Mission A-Ccomplished NFL .
Was that enough ?
It 's never enough .
So the last 10 years have been their attempt to make more money by becoming some of the biggest douchebags in the IP industry .
" That 's the thing about greed , Arch , it 's blind .
And it does n't know when to stop " -- Lenny Cole</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Face it, the NFL are brilliant.
They are not about football.
They are about revenue.
They had two goals in mind when setting out on their broadcasting endeavor: 
a) Sell high-cost adspace
b) Get people to care about the adspace 
Now you hear people always saying "I watch the superbowl for the commercials!
"  Mission A-Ccomplished NFL.
Was that enough?
It's never enough.
So the last 10 years have been their attempt to make more money by becoming some of the biggest douchebags in the IP industry.
"That's the thing about greed, Arch, it's blind.
And it doesn't know when to stop" -- Lenny Cole</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989548</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>anaesthetica</author>
	<datestamp>1265029560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As usual, <i>The Onion</i> <a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/node/38664" title="theonion.com">nails it</a> [theonion.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>As usual , The Onion nails it [ theonion.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As usual, The Onion nails it [theonion.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985482</id>
	<title>Who Cares?</title>
	<author>bkr1\_2k</author>
	<datestamp>1265057220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Honestly, who gives a shit?  The simple solution is stop supporting some industry that will try to sue you for being a patron.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , who gives a shit ?
The simple solution is stop supporting some industry that will try to sue you for being a patron .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, who gives a shit?
The simple solution is stop supporting some industry that will try to sue you for being a patron.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986812</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265018340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Supa Bowel Partay</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Supa Bowel Partay</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Supa Bowel Partay</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985606</id>
	<title>Re:NFL soft on churches</title>
	<author>c0d3g33k</author>
	<datestamp>1265057640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As for sports bars, they're a business <b>encouraging a large number of willing viewers to watch</b> someone else's <b>advertising revenue supported</b> content.  Of course they should <b>be compensated</b>.</p></div><p>There.  Fixed that for ya.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As for sports bars , they 're a business encouraging a large number of willing viewers to watch someone else 's advertising revenue supported content .
Of course they should be compensated.There .
Fixed that for ya .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As for sports bars, they're a business encouraging a large number of willing viewers to watch someone else's advertising revenue supported content.
Of course they should be compensated.There.
Fixed that for ya.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985448</id>
	<title>Re:The term itself...?</title>
	<author>Grond</author>
	<datestamp>1265057160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, it's definitely trademarked, but the issue isn't really food; it's the game itself and the viewing thereof.  Registered trademark #0882283 from 1969 is for "Entertainment services in the nature of football exhibitions." Arguably a game watching party is a football exhibition, particularly where there's a cover fee of some kind or where the party is purely a commercial venture.</p><p>If that's not close enough there's registered trademark #3343714 from 2007, which is for "Television broadcasting services; television transmission services; distribution of television programming to cable and satellite television systems; distribution of television programs for others..." etc, etc.  Arguably a Super Bowl Watching Party would fall under "distribution of television programs for others."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , it 's definitely trademarked , but the issue is n't really food ; it 's the game itself and the viewing thereof .
Registered trademark # 0882283 from 1969 is for " Entertainment services in the nature of football exhibitions .
" Arguably a game watching party is a football exhibition , particularly where there 's a cover fee of some kind or where the party is purely a commercial venture.If that 's not close enough there 's registered trademark # 3343714 from 2007 , which is for " Television broadcasting services ; television transmission services ; distribution of television programming to cable and satellite television systems ; distribution of television programs for others... " etc , etc .
Arguably a Super Bowl Watching Party would fall under " distribution of television programs for others .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, it's definitely trademarked, but the issue isn't really food; it's the game itself and the viewing thereof.
Registered trademark #0882283 from 1969 is for "Entertainment services in the nature of football exhibitions.
" Arguably a game watching party is a football exhibition, particularly where there's a cover fee of some kind or where the party is purely a commercial venture.If that's not close enough there's registered trademark #3343714 from 2007, which is for "Television broadcasting services; television transmission services; distribution of television programming to cable and satellite television systems; distribution of television programs for others..." etc, etc.
Arguably a Super Bowl Watching Party would fall under "distribution of television programs for others.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985310</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>XPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1265056680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh please, Mark Sanchez and Rex Ryan smacked that ass<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh please , Mark Sanchez and Rex Ryan smacked that ass ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh please, Mark Sanchez and Rex Ryan smacked that ass ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986554</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1265017440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>OK, I'll tell you what, I really like watching the athleticism of those players.  It's not about who wins, it's about how well they can do what they do.  When you see Drew Brees make a sharp 20 yard pass on the run that hits a moving target exactly in his arms, it is so sweet.<br> <br>
NFL level players have hit an excellence in ability that few people achieve in any area.  Can you program as well as a quarterback throws the ball?  They are working constantly to improve their skills, and even a small mistake in something like ball placement can lose a game.  I enjoy watching near-perfection, and use it as an inspiration to improve myself in areas that I am good at.  It also inspires me to get in shape, which is an extra benefit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , I 'll tell you what , I really like watching the athleticism of those players .
It 's not about who wins , it 's about how well they can do what they do .
When you see Drew Brees make a sharp 20 yard pass on the run that hits a moving target exactly in his arms , it is so sweet .
NFL level players have hit an excellence in ability that few people achieve in any area .
Can you program as well as a quarterback throws the ball ?
They are working constantly to improve their skills , and even a small mistake in something like ball placement can lose a game .
I enjoy watching near-perfection , and use it as an inspiration to improve myself in areas that I am good at .
It also inspires me to get in shape , which is an extra benefit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, I'll tell you what, I really like watching the athleticism of those players.
It's not about who wins, it's about how well they can do what they do.
When you see Drew Brees make a sharp 20 yard pass on the run that hits a moving target exactly in his arms, it is so sweet.
NFL level players have hit an excellence in ability that few people achieve in any area.
Can you program as well as a quarterback throws the ball?
They are working constantly to improve their skills, and even a small mistake in something like ball placement can lose a game.
I enjoy watching near-perfection, and use it as an inspiration to improve myself in areas that I am good at.
It also inspires me to get in shape, which is an extra benefit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988864</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>ignavus</author>
	<datestamp>1265026380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[rant]<br>Instead of passively witnessing multimillionaire drug addicts chase a ball to sell ad space... do something.  Take the people who were going to show up for "da big game" outside to play tag football.  Have a foosball championship.  Play card games.  Have a LAN party.  Play DnD.  Do something.</p></div><p>Just don't run a Windows 7 party. Some things are worse than watching professional football.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.</p></div><p>Well, the quarterback had better watch the game when he is on the field.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ rant ] Instead of passively witnessing multimillionaire drug addicts chase a ball to sell ad space... do something .
Take the people who were going to show up for " da big game " outside to play tag football .
Have a foosball championship .
Play card games .
Have a LAN party .
Play DnD .
Do something.Just do n't run a Windows 7 party .
Some things are worse than watching professional football.The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.Well , the quarterback had better watch the game when he is on the field .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[rant]Instead of passively witnessing multimillionaire drug addicts chase a ball to sell ad space... do something.
Take the people who were going to show up for "da big game" outside to play tag football.
Have a foosball championship.
Play card games.
Have a LAN party.
Play DnD.
Do something.Just don't run a Windows 7 party.
Some things are worse than watching professional football.The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.Well, the quarterback had better watch the game when he is on the field.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986722</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265018040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sweet! So we are having the party at Hooters then?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sweet !
So we are having the party at Hooters then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sweet!
So we are having the party at Hooters then?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990218</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>Strange Ranger</author>
	<datestamp>1265033700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>THANK YOU!<br> <br>

[sympathetic addendum rant]<br> <br>I've been saying the exact same thing for years.
<br>And to respond to the "I like to watch the amazing athletes" crowd...<br> <br>You take a hundred million or so possible humans (maybe, it's bad guesswork math but it'll do here), choose the most physically suitable 1\% at an early age, train them for years and keep filtering them until you have the top 1\% of the original 1\% based on skill and physical prowess, and you toss them a football on Sunday.  They SHOULD perform exactly as they do.  There's nothing amazing about it.  Using statistics from 2006 the NFL Roster comprised<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.0005 percent of the population of the United States.  Lets conveniently zero out other factors like age, foreign players, etc as too pedantic.  Anyway, being obsessed with the top<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.000Whatever percent of something isn't interesting.  It's like watching somebody drool over their exotic car collection.  Congratulations, you're wealthy.  The engineering and craftsmanship is impressive. So what?    That's nice but let not waste hours being drooling fanboys ok?   Congratulations you're a highly trained physical aberration of a human being.  Nothing wrong with that.  But it's not interesting enough to talk about regularly, spend hours and hours watching and debating, and it MOST CERTAINLY doesn't deserve its own news section every freaking week.  Something so entirely irrelevant isn't news. <br> <br>
[/sympathetic addendum rant]<br> <br>Obviously this view won't make anyone very popular.</htmltext>
<tokenext>THANK YOU !
[ sympathetic addendum rant ] I 've been saying the exact same thing for years .
And to respond to the " I like to watch the amazing athletes " crowd... You take a hundred million or so possible humans ( maybe , it 's bad guesswork math but it 'll do here ) , choose the most physically suitable 1 \ % at an early age , train them for years and keep filtering them until you have the top 1 \ % of the original 1 \ % based on skill and physical prowess , and you toss them a football on Sunday .
They SHOULD perform exactly as they do .
There 's nothing amazing about it .
Using statistics from 2006 the NFL Roster comprised .0005 percent of the population of the United States .
Lets conveniently zero out other factors like age , foreign players , etc as too pedantic .
Anyway , being obsessed with the top .000Whatever percent of something is n't interesting .
It 's like watching somebody drool over their exotic car collection .
Congratulations , you 're wealthy .
The engineering and craftsmanship is impressive .
So what ?
That 's nice but let not waste hours being drooling fanboys ok ?
Congratulations you 're a highly trained physical aberration of a human being .
Nothing wrong with that .
But it 's not interesting enough to talk about regularly , spend hours and hours watching and debating , and it MOST CERTAINLY does n't deserve its own news section every freaking week .
Something so entirely irrelevant is n't news .
[ /sympathetic addendum rant ] Obviously this view wo n't make anyone very popular .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>THANK YOU!
[sympathetic addendum rant] I've been saying the exact same thing for years.
And to respond to the "I like to watch the amazing athletes" crowd... You take a hundred million or so possible humans (maybe, it's bad guesswork math but it'll do here), choose the most physically suitable 1\% at an early age, train them for years and keep filtering them until you have the top 1\% of the original 1\% based on skill and physical prowess, and you toss them a football on Sunday.
They SHOULD perform exactly as they do.
There's nothing amazing about it.
Using statistics from 2006 the NFL Roster comprised .0005 percent of the population of the United States.
Lets conveniently zero out other factors like age, foreign players, etc as too pedantic.
Anyway, being obsessed with the top .000Whatever percent of something isn't interesting.
It's like watching somebody drool over their exotic car collection.
Congratulations, you're wealthy.
The engineering and craftsmanship is impressive.
So what?
That's nice but let not waste hours being drooling fanboys ok?
Congratulations you're a highly trained physical aberration of a human being.
Nothing wrong with that.
But it's not interesting enough to talk about regularly, spend hours and hours watching and debating, and it MOST CERTAINLY doesn't deserve its own news section every freaking week.
Something so entirely irrelevant isn't news.
[/sympathetic addendum rant] Obviously this view won't make anyone very popular.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986006</id>
	<title>Copy? Right!</title>
	<author>flahwho</author>
	<datestamp>1265015580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your Heading for this article is a copyright infringement, and so is each time<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./ poters refers to it!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your Heading for this article is a copyright infringement , and so is each time ./ poters refers to it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your Heading for this article is a copyright infringement, and so is each time ./ poters refers to it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985368</id>
	<title>Its not the Super Bowl, it's "The Big Game"</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1265056860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you need a license from the NFL to call it the Super Bowl. If you haven't noticed most of the TV commercials call it The Big Game because they don't want to pay royalties to the NFL</p><p>since<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. takes advertising i'm going to report this evil website so the NFL can sue you out of existance. you just cost them eleventy billion $$$$ in lost sales</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you need a license from the NFL to call it the Super Bowl .
If you have n't noticed most of the TV commercials call it The Big Game because they do n't want to pay royalties to the NFLsince / .
takes advertising i 'm going to report this evil website so the NFL can sue you out of existance .
you just cost them eleventy billion $ $ $ $ in lost sales</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you need a license from the NFL to call it the Super Bowl.
If you haven't noticed most of the TV commercials call it The Big Game because they don't want to pay royalties to the NFLsince /.
takes advertising i'm going to report this evil website so the NFL can sue you out of existance.
you just cost them eleventy billion $$$$ in lost sales</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30991132</id>
	<title>Is my very speech a crime?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265040780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>don't call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright</i></p><p>Oh dear! Does that mean I'm committing a crime when I use the phrase "taking the Browns to the Super Bowl" as a euphemism for defecation?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>do n't call it a 'Super Bowl ' party , since the term itself is copyrightOh dear !
Does that mean I 'm committing a crime when I use the phrase " taking the Browns to the Super Bowl " as a euphemism for defecation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>don't call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyrightOh dear!
Does that mean I'm committing a crime when I use the phrase "taking the Browns to the Super Bowl" as a euphemism for defecation?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986564</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>Ironchew</author>
	<datestamp>1265017560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.</p></div><p>Don't bring quantum entanglement into this!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.Do n't bring quantum entanglement into this !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.Don't bring quantum entanglement into this!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985176</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265056140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Watching the Super Bowl is pointless because the San Diego Chargers aren't playing in it. If you recall, their "pro-bowl" kicker took bribes from Indianapolis and missed 3 kicks in a row during the previous game against the New York Jets - kicks that would have won that game. If the Chargers won that game they would have played the Indianapolis Colts and won because they have a flawless record against Peyton manning.<br> <br>

But yeah, fuck the NFL. It's only fun if my team wins<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Watching the Super Bowl is pointless because the San Diego Chargers are n't playing in it .
If you recall , their " pro-bowl " kicker took bribes from Indianapolis and missed 3 kicks in a row during the previous game against the New York Jets - kicks that would have won that game .
If the Chargers won that game they would have played the Indianapolis Colts and won because they have a flawless record against Peyton manning .
But yeah , fuck the NFL .
It 's only fun if my team wins ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Watching the Super Bowl is pointless because the San Diego Chargers aren't playing in it.
If you recall, their "pro-bowl" kicker took bribes from Indianapolis and missed 3 kicks in a row during the previous game against the New York Jets - kicks that would have won that game.
If the Chargers won that game they would have played the Indianapolis Colts and won because they have a flawless record against Peyton manning.
But yeah, fuck the NFL.
It's only fun if my team wins ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984912</id>
	<title>Can't copyright a term</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.</p></div><p>Summary fail. Perhaps you mean trademark?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...call it a 'Super Bowl ' party , since the term itself is copyright.Summary fail .
Perhaps you mean trademark ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.Summary fail.
Perhaps you mean trademark?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986150</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>Chaset</author>
	<datestamp>1265016120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As in,<br>"The salad and soup were mediocre, but the owl was superb!"</p><p>"What do you mean it's endangered?"</p><p>"Meh... it probably tasted like chicken anyways."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As in , " The salad and soup were mediocre , but the owl was superb !
" " What do you mean it 's endangered ? " " Meh.. .
it probably tasted like chicken anyways .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As in,"The salad and soup were mediocre, but the owl was superb!
""What do you mean it's endangered?""Meh...
it probably tasted like chicken anyways.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985760</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>MobileTatsu-NJG</author>
	<datestamp>1265014860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is news for nerds, remember?</p></div><p>Right, and which group of people is going to scour the interwebs looking for Super Bo... Big Game commercials?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is news for nerds , remember ? Right , and which group of people is going to scour the interwebs looking for Super Bo... Big Game commercials ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is news for nerds, remember?Right, and which group of people is going to scour the interwebs looking for Super Bo... Big Game commercials?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987780</id>
	<title>Re:Old news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265021940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you implying that people who go to church for religious reasons deserve to be exempt from those laws, but other people don't?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you implying that people who go to church for religious reasons deserve to be exempt from those laws , but other people do n't ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you implying that people who go to church for religious reasons deserve to be exempt from those laws, but other people don't?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986496</id>
	<title>Re:NFL soft on churches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265017260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I liked the first version better...<br>If it ain't broke, don't fix it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I liked the first version better...If it ai n't broke , do n't fix it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I liked the first version better...If it ain't broke, don't fix it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985636</id>
	<title>And also Your Honor...</title>
	<author>KneelBeforeZod</author>
	<datestamp>1265057760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It was also totally my fault that the NFL broadcasted in Hi Def for some strange reason."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It was also totally my fault that the NFL broadcasted in Hi Def for some strange reason .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It was also totally my fault that the NFL broadcasted in Hi Def for some strange reason.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987324</id>
	<title>Re:Ok NFL, I can take a hint</title>
	<author>ramzafl</author>
	<datestamp>1265020140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of my favorite parts of this Superbowl (heck, any game he plays in) is watching Peyton Manning dissect and outsmart the entire defense with audibles and calling out the mike backer... all of which happens before the ball is even snapped. Any true football fan would agree.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of my favorite parts of this Superbowl ( heck , any game he plays in ) is watching Peyton Manning dissect and outsmart the entire defense with audibles and calling out the mike backer... all of which happens before the ball is even snapped .
Any true football fan would agree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of my favorite parts of this Superbowl (heck, any game he plays in) is watching Peyton Manning dissect and outsmart the entire defense with audibles and calling out the mike backer... all of which happens before the ball is even snapped.
Any true football fan would agree.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984922</id>
	<title>God</title>
	<author>killmenow</author>
	<datestamp>1265055240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986688</id>
	<title>Re:stop spamming 'idiocracy' tag.</title>
	<author>c0d3g33k</author>
	<datestamp>1265017980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're using 'government' rather selectively (maybe you mean the capitalized version of Government, which more typically refers to the political machinery of nations).  A group of people governed by idiocy (or idiots) doesn't have to be a country or non-related to corporations to be called idiocracy.  One could argue that this term describes the relationship between the NFL and sports fans quite accurately, even if they themselves don't think so.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're using 'government ' rather selectively ( maybe you mean the capitalized version of Government , which more typically refers to the political machinery of nations ) .
A group of people governed by idiocy ( or idiots ) does n't have to be a country or non-related to corporations to be called idiocracy .
One could argue that this term describes the relationship between the NFL and sports fans quite accurately , even if they themselves do n't think so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're using 'government' rather selectively (maybe you mean the capitalized version of Government, which more typically refers to the political machinery of nations).
A group of people governed by idiocy (or idiots) doesn't have to be a country or non-related to corporations to be called idiocracy.
One could argue that this term describes the relationship between the NFL and sports fans quite accurately, even if they themselves don't think so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986754</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265018220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not being insightful, this is just being a pompous asshat.</p><p>I enjoy watching the games in the same way that I get satisfaction out of watching anything skillful be done.  If you get great satisfaction out of doing everything possible in life yourself, good for you.  That doesn't mean others can't appreciate things we ourselves might not be inclined to do at that level.</p><p>Comparing selling hotdogs to a skilled sport is not valid, even for Slashdot...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not being insightful , this is just being a pompous asshat.I enjoy watching the games in the same way that I get satisfaction out of watching anything skillful be done .
If you get great satisfaction out of doing everything possible in life yourself , good for you .
That does n't mean others ca n't appreciate things we ourselves might not be inclined to do at that level.Comparing selling hotdogs to a skilled sport is not valid , even for Slashdot.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not being insightful, this is just being a pompous asshat.I enjoy watching the games in the same way that I get satisfaction out of watching anything skillful be done.
If you get great satisfaction out of doing everything possible in life yourself, good for you.
That doesn't mean others can't appreciate things we ourselves might not be inclined to do at that level.Comparing selling hotdogs to a skilled sport is not valid, even for Slashdot...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986104</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265016000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so that's what they call the party at Hooters</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so that 's what they call the party at Hooters</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so that's what they call the party at Hooters</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989846</id>
	<title>They will advertise themselves out of business</title>
	<author>AthleteMusicianNerd</author>
	<datestamp>1265031300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>NFL games have become so painful to watch.  30 seconds of football and then 3 minutes of advertising.  I have to DVR these things now.  If not for the DVR, I might never watch another NFL game.</htmltext>
<tokenext>NFL games have become so painful to watch .
30 seconds of football and then 3 minutes of advertising .
I have to DVR these things now .
If not for the DVR , I might never watch another NFL game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NFL games have become so painful to watch.
30 seconds of football and then 3 minutes of advertising.
I have to DVR these things now.
If not for the DVR, I might never watch another NFL game.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985476</id>
	<title>Yes.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265057220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, and I don't give a rat's ass. Satisfied?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , and I do n't give a rat 's ass .
Satisfied ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, and I don't give a rat's ass.
Satisfied?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990370</id>
	<title>So here's the thing...</title>
	<author>FrozenGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1265034960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bars get the game via cable, for which they pay money.  The cable companies know who their clients are and what their clients' businesses entail.  If some of the content is not for general use, while some of the content is for general use, shouldn't it be up to the service deliverer (i.e. the cable company) to determine what service the customer receives and how much the customer should pay?  Why is it up to the end customer, the bar, to determine what programs received legally over the valid cable connection they can (or cannot) show on their TV?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bars get the game via cable , for which they pay money .
The cable companies know who their clients are and what their clients ' businesses entail .
If some of the content is not for general use , while some of the content is for general use , should n't it be up to the service deliverer ( i.e .
the cable company ) to determine what service the customer receives and how much the customer should pay ?
Why is it up to the end customer , the bar , to determine what programs received legally over the valid cable connection they can ( or can not ) show on their TV ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bars get the game via cable, for which they pay money.
The cable companies know who their clients are and what their clients' businesses entail.
If some of the content is not for general use, while some of the content is for general use, shouldn't it be up to the service deliverer (i.e.
the cable company) to determine what service the customer receives and how much the customer should pay?
Why is it up to the end customer, the bar, to determine what programs received legally over the valid cable connection they can (or cannot) show on their TV?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985306</id>
	<title>Not copyrighted but trademarked</title>
	<author>Grond</author>
	<datestamp>1265056680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em>Just don't...call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.</em></p><p>The term is not copyrighted.  The term is trademarked.</p><p>The trademark status has advantages and disadvantages.  Since it's been registered and in use for at least 5 years (since 1969 in fact), the trademark is much harder to invalidate, per <a href="http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/15/usc\_sec\_15\_00001065----000-.html" title="cornell.edu">15 USC 1065</a> [cornell.edu].  Unlike copyrights, trademarks really do last forever, given proper maintenance (yes, I realize that copyrights practically last forever too, but there are trademarks that are centuries old).</p><p>Some of the disadvantages of a trademark are that the remedies are weaker (no statutory damages) and the trademark holder must police the mark.  You can't license it to just anybody.  You have to maintain some control over the licensed good or service, typically in the form of quality standards.  You also have to go after potential infringers.  Failure to do so can lead to losing the mark.</p><p>It's that last requirement that is driving the NFL's actions here (well, that and the money to be made).  Whether the law in fact requires them to be as strict about it as they are is another question, one that very few people on Slashdot are really competent to answer.  Whether the law <em>should</em> require them to be so strict, however, is a different question and one that most of us probably agree on the answer to.</p><p>As a side note, footage of individual games <em>is</em> copyrighted.  The NFL argues that footage of the game is licensed only for private viewing and not for commercial viewing, which is how they go after sports bars and the like.  I would argue that if you put your game on the public airwaves, it should be fair game for live viewing.  If they want to enter into a more restrictive license with the viewer they should put the game on pay per view, a premium channel, or a cable channel at the very least.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just do n't...call it a 'Super Bowl ' party , since the term itself is copyright.The term is not copyrighted .
The term is trademarked.The trademark status has advantages and disadvantages .
Since it 's been registered and in use for at least 5 years ( since 1969 in fact ) , the trademark is much harder to invalidate , per 15 USC 1065 [ cornell.edu ] .
Unlike copyrights , trademarks really do last forever , given proper maintenance ( yes , I realize that copyrights practically last forever too , but there are trademarks that are centuries old ) .Some of the disadvantages of a trademark are that the remedies are weaker ( no statutory damages ) and the trademark holder must police the mark .
You ca n't license it to just anybody .
You have to maintain some control over the licensed good or service , typically in the form of quality standards .
You also have to go after potential infringers .
Failure to do so can lead to losing the mark.It 's that last requirement that is driving the NFL 's actions here ( well , that and the money to be made ) .
Whether the law in fact requires them to be as strict about it as they are is another question , one that very few people on Slashdot are really competent to answer .
Whether the law should require them to be so strict , however , is a different question and one that most of us probably agree on the answer to.As a side note , footage of individual games is copyrighted .
The NFL argues that footage of the game is licensed only for private viewing and not for commercial viewing , which is how they go after sports bars and the like .
I would argue that if you put your game on the public airwaves , it should be fair game for live viewing .
If they want to enter into a more restrictive license with the viewer they should put the game on pay per view , a premium channel , or a cable channel at the very least .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just don't...call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.The term is not copyrighted.
The term is trademarked.The trademark status has advantages and disadvantages.
Since it's been registered and in use for at least 5 years (since 1969 in fact), the trademark is much harder to invalidate, per 15 USC 1065 [cornell.edu].
Unlike copyrights, trademarks really do last forever, given proper maintenance (yes, I realize that copyrights practically last forever too, but there are trademarks that are centuries old).Some of the disadvantages of a trademark are that the remedies are weaker (no statutory damages) and the trademark holder must police the mark.
You can't license it to just anybody.
You have to maintain some control over the licensed good or service, typically in the form of quality standards.
You also have to go after potential infringers.
Failure to do so can lead to losing the mark.It's that last requirement that is driving the NFL's actions here (well, that and the money to be made).
Whether the law in fact requires them to be as strict about it as they are is another question, one that very few people on Slashdot are really competent to answer.
Whether the law should require them to be so strict, however, is a different question and one that most of us probably agree on the answer to.As a side note, footage of individual games is copyrighted.
The NFL argues that footage of the game is licensed only for private viewing and not for commercial viewing, which is how they go after sports bars and the like.
I would argue that if you put your game on the public airwaves, it should be fair game for live viewing.
If they want to enter into a more restrictive license with the viewer they should put the game on pay per view, a premium channel, or a cable channel at the very least.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986368</id>
	<title>wiki rules</title>
	<author>ubergeek65536</author>
	<datestamp>1265016840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought I'd never figure out what this thread was about.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super\_Bowl" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super\_Bowl</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought I 'd never figure out what this thread was about.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super \ _Bowl [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought I'd never figure out what this thread was about.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super\_Bowl [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30992140</id>
	<title>Re:Trademark</title>
	<author>se7en11</author>
	<datestamp>1265052660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It means I can't copy it, right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It means I ca n't copy it , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It means I can't copy it, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985578</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>fyoder</author>
	<datestamp>1265057520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can I call it a Superb Owl party?</p></div><p>Bloody brilliant, though there is a small risk that someone might be disappointed if they attended expecting to see a superb owl.  And possibly embarrassed if they came dressed as one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I call it a Superb Owl party ? Bloody brilliant , though there is a small risk that someone might be disappointed if they attended expecting to see a superb owl .
And possibly embarrassed if they came dressed as one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I call it a Superb Owl party?Bloody brilliant, though there is a small risk that someone might be disappointed if they attended expecting to see a superb owl.
And possibly embarrassed if they came dressed as one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987066</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265019240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's also a term for people who craft their own personal definition of words and them bitch at people for using them differently.  It's "asshole".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's also a term for people who craft their own personal definition of words and them bitch at people for using them differently .
It 's " asshole " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's also a term for people who craft their own personal definition of words and them bitch at people for using them differently.
It's "asshole".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988120</id>
	<title>Re:Old news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265023440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In particular, the reason the NFL comes down so hard on the Super Bowl is that it is the highest rated show of the year, allowing them to charge hefty premiums for ads, and creating the super bowl ad debut trend.  If half of the viewers are watching it elsewhere, Nielsen et al will underestimate viewership and hurt their revenues the following year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In particular , the reason the NFL comes down so hard on the Super Bowl is that it is the highest rated show of the year , allowing them to charge hefty premiums for ads , and creating the super bowl ad debut trend .
If half of the viewers are watching it elsewhere , Nielsen et al will underestimate viewership and hurt their revenues the following year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In particular, the reason the NFL comes down so hard on the Super Bowl is that it is the highest rated show of the year, allowing them to charge hefty premiums for ads, and creating the super bowl ad debut trend.
If half of the viewers are watching it elsewhere, Nielsen et al will underestimate viewership and hurt their revenues the following year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986430</id>
	<title>Re:Old news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265017080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you buy a $30 Blu-Ray, you are buying a single license to view it, not the information itself.</p><p>The Network has a License to Broadcast The NFL to everyone, everyone is legally allowed to view it no matter what the Venue.  And I should Legally be allowed to show it during its original broadcast no matter the circumstances.</p><p>These are two completely different arguments.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you buy a $ 30 Blu-Ray , you are buying a single license to view it , not the information itself.The Network has a License to Broadcast The NFL to everyone , everyone is legally allowed to view it no matter what the Venue .
And I should Legally be allowed to show it during its original broadcast no matter the circumstances.These are two completely different arguments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you buy a $30 Blu-Ray, you are buying a single license to view it, not the information itself.The Network has a License to Broadcast The NFL to everyone, everyone is legally allowed to view it no matter what the Venue.
And I should Legally be allowed to show it during its original broadcast no matter the circumstances.These are two completely different arguments.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985382</id>
	<title>Superbowl? Football?</title>
	<author>Jawn98685</author>
	<datestamp>1265056920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh, that slow-moving American game, with the sissy padding and helmets. [Yawn...]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , that slow-moving American game , with the sissy padding and helmets .
[ Yawn... ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, that slow-moving American game, with the sissy padding and helmets.
[Yawn...]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987444</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>lennier</author>
	<datestamp>1265020620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do you care which 7-11 sold the most hotdogs?  Or if the Pepsi bottling plant on the east coast produced more soda than the west coast plant?</p>  </div><p>Consolidated Eastern Seaboard Amalgamated Bottling Jersey Plant B Shift! Consolidated Eastern Seaboard Amalgamated Bottling  Jersey  Plant Plant B Shift! Rah rah rah! Gimmie a C! Gimmie a O! Gimmie an N! Move those bottles stamp those lids! Gonna put the West Coast on the skids! We ain't no A Shift we ain't no C! We're No 1 cause we're the B! Rah rah rah! Consolidated Eastern Seaboard Amalgamated Bottling Jersey Plant B Shift!!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you care which 7-11 sold the most hotdogs ?
Or if the Pepsi bottling plant on the east coast produced more soda than the west coast plant ?
Consolidated Eastern Seaboard Amalgamated Bottling Jersey Plant B Shift !
Consolidated Eastern Seaboard Amalgamated Bottling Jersey Plant Plant B Shift !
Rah rah rah !
Gimmie a C !
Gimmie a O !
Gimmie an N !
Move those bottles stamp those lids !
Gon na put the West Coast on the skids !
We ai n't no A Shift we ai n't no C !
We 're No 1 cause we 're the B !
Rah rah rah !
Consolidated Eastern Seaboard Amalgamated Bottling Jersey Plant B Shift ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you care which 7-11 sold the most hotdogs?
Or if the Pepsi bottling plant on the east coast produced more soda than the west coast plant?
Consolidated Eastern Seaboard Amalgamated Bottling Jersey Plant B Shift!
Consolidated Eastern Seaboard Amalgamated Bottling  Jersey  Plant Plant B Shift!
Rah rah rah!
Gimmie a C!
Gimmie a O!
Gimmie an N!
Move those bottles stamp those lids!
Gonna put the West Coast on the skids!
We ain't no A Shift we ain't no C!
We're No 1 cause we're the B!
Rah rah rah!
Consolidated Eastern Seaboard Amalgamated Bottling Jersey Plant B Shift!!
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988158</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>ArbitraryDescriptor</author>
	<datestamp>1265023620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Bus Per Owl</p></div><p>Are you working on the MTAC too?  Bus/Owl is a unit of measure for the multiple token Avian Carrier network architecture we're developing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bus Per OwlAre you working on the MTAC too ?
Bus/Owl is a unit of measure for the multiple token Avian Carrier network architecture we 're developing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bus Per OwlAre you working on the MTAC too?
Bus/Owl is a unit of measure for the multiple token Avian Carrier network architecture we're developing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989692</id>
	<title>Who Dat? More like Fuck Dat...</title>
	<author>the saltydog</author>
	<datestamp>1265030520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Screw the NFL, and the Saints - who proved through their head-hunting for Favre that they are nothing like Saints at all. If the Colts don't beat the Saints by AT LEAST 17 points, the fix is in. Besides, the NFL has hated Minnesota for decades anyway, and I was already resigned to the fact that, even if we had won, Peyton Manning would have carved us up like a huge rack of ribs - so I won't mind all that much seeing him do the same thing to the thugs from the Chocolate City.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Screw the NFL , and the Saints - who proved through their head-hunting for Favre that they are nothing like Saints at all .
If the Colts do n't beat the Saints by AT LEAST 17 points , the fix is in .
Besides , the NFL has hated Minnesota for decades anyway , and I was already resigned to the fact that , even if we had won , Peyton Manning would have carved us up like a huge rack of ribs - so I wo n't mind all that much seeing him do the same thing to the thugs from the Chocolate City .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Screw the NFL, and the Saints - who proved through their head-hunting for Favre that they are nothing like Saints at all.
If the Colts don't beat the Saints by AT LEAST 17 points, the fix is in.
Besides, the NFL has hated Minnesota for decades anyway, and I was already resigned to the fact that, even if we had won, Peyton Manning would have carved us up like a huge rack of ribs - so I won't mind all that much seeing him do the same thing to the thugs from the Chocolate City.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</id>
	<title>What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1265055480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is news for nerds, remember?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is news for nerds , remember ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is news for nerds, remember?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985664</id>
	<title>Copyrights and Trademarks lol</title>
	<author>theghost</author>
	<datestamp>1265057820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sometimes it seems as though common sense is incompatible with capitalism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes it seems as though common sense is incompatible with capitalism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes it seems as though common sense is incompatible with capitalism.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989114</id>
	<title>Re:The term itself...?</title>
	<author>Blackknight</author>
	<datestamp>1265027460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We're having a "Souper Bowl" Sunday at my church next week and we take donations for food.  Wonder if we should watch out for the copyright police.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're having a " Souper Bowl " Sunday at my church next week and we take donations for food .
Wonder if we should watch out for the copyright police .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're having a "Souper Bowl" Sunday at my church next week and we take donations for food.
Wonder if we should watch out for the copyright police.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986906</id>
	<title>Article is Super Epic Fail!</title>
	<author>dwiget001</author>
	<datestamp>1265018700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The term "Super Bowl" is protected by **trademark** not by copyright.</p><p>The broadcast, events, etc. of the trademarked "Super Bowl" are protected by copyright.</p><p>(Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor to I play one on Slashdot.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The term " Super Bowl " is protected by * * trademark * * not by copyright.The broadcast , events , etc .
of the trademarked " Super Bowl " are protected by copyright .
( Disclaimer : I am not a lawyer , nor to I play one on Slashdot .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The term "Super Bowl" is protected by **trademark** not by copyright.The broadcast, events, etc.
of the trademarked "Super Bowl" are protected by copyright.
(Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor to I play one on Slashdot.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062</id>
	<title>Re:The term itself...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>when you start charging for food, you move from being a collection of friends to a sport bar, and sports bars don't get fair use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>when you start charging for food , you move from being a collection of friends to a sport bar , and sports bars do n't get fair use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when you start charging for food, you move from being a collection of friends to a sport bar, and sports bars don't get fair use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987762</id>
	<title>NBC did something in Pittsburgh last year....</title>
	<author>sugapablo</author>
	<datestamp>1265021820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Pittsburgh Penguins started showing away playoff games on a jumbo-tron outside Mellon Arena for fans to sit in the parklet and watch.  They did it for a couple of years and neither the NHL, FSN (local sports channel) or Versus objected.  It was a fun time for all.

But as soon as the Pens made the Stanley Cup Finals on NBC, NBC shut it down.  They gave some excuse about it diminishing their individual household Nielson ratings.

And they call a shitty game too!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Pittsburgh Penguins started showing away playoff games on a jumbo-tron outside Mellon Arena for fans to sit in the parklet and watch .
They did it for a couple of years and neither the NHL , FSN ( local sports channel ) or Versus objected .
It was a fun time for all .
But as soon as the Pens made the Stanley Cup Finals on NBC , NBC shut it down .
They gave some excuse about it diminishing their individual household Nielson ratings .
And they call a shitty game too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Pittsburgh Penguins started showing away playoff games on a jumbo-tron outside Mellon Arena for fans to sit in the parklet and watch.
They did it for a couple of years and neither the NHL, FSN (local sports channel) or Versus objected.
It was a fun time for all.
But as soon as the Pens made the Stanley Cup Finals on NBC, NBC shut it down.
They gave some excuse about it diminishing their individual household Nielson ratings.
And they call a shitty game too!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30996842</id>
	<title>I don't like bowling</title>
	<author>lupinstel</author>
	<datestamp>1265131680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't even watch bowling; so this doesn't impact me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't even watch bowling ; so this does n't impact me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't even watch bowling; so this doesn't impact me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</id>
	<title>Can I call it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can I call it a Superb Owl party?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I call it a Superb Owl party ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I call it a Superb Owl party?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986064</id>
	<title>Re:the Superbowl's achilles heel</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1265015820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the Superbowl has a simple yet fatal weakness when it comes to the common human nipple.</p></div><p>I haven't watched a football game since 2004, but back then, it seemed mandatory at the start or end of at least one commercial break to have a camera zoomed in on a fat topless man spray painted with one teams colors holding a beer in each hand and bellowing.  The, uh, man on tv I mean, not myself.  So I'll correct your statement:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>the SuprBowel has a simple yet fatal weakness when it comes to the common human FEMALE nipple</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the Superbowl has a simple yet fatal weakness when it comes to the common human nipple.I have n't watched a football game since 2004 , but back then , it seemed mandatory at the start or end of at least one commercial break to have a camera zoomed in on a fat topless man spray painted with one teams colors holding a beer in each hand and bellowing .
The , uh , man on tv I mean , not myself .
So I 'll correct your statement : the SuprBowel has a simple yet fatal weakness when it comes to the common human FEMALE nipple</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the Superbowl has a simple yet fatal weakness when it comes to the common human nipple.I haven't watched a football game since 2004, but back then, it seemed mandatory at the start or end of at least one commercial break to have a camera zoomed in on a fat topless man spray painted with one teams colors holding a beer in each hand and bellowing.
The, uh, man on tv I mean, not myself.
So I'll correct your statement:the SuprBowel has a simple yet fatal weakness when it comes to the common human FEMALE nipple
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are sports nerds. The guys who memorize every stat for everyone on all thirty-something teams. I may not partake in that, but I will recognize it as something nerd.

Of course, we are both going to be sued by the NFL for using the words in the comment title, so who cares? See you in court, co-defendant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are sports nerds .
The guys who memorize every stat for everyone on all thirty-something teams .
I may not partake in that , but I will recognize it as something nerd .
Of course , we are both going to be sued by the NFL for using the words in the comment title , so who cares ?
See you in court , co-defendant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are sports nerds.
The guys who memorize every stat for everyone on all thirty-something teams.
I may not partake in that, but I will recognize it as something nerd.
Of course, we are both going to be sued by the NFL for using the words in the comment title, so who cares?
See you in court, co-defendant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30992400</id>
	<title>Re:Old news</title>
	<author>JackieBrown</author>
	<datestamp>1265143020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought the superbowl makes it's money on advertising.</p><p>Unless the bar/club is muting the commercials when they come on, I really don't see the similarity.</p><p>This is simply everyone going to a single place to watch a game with advertisements.  These people would just stay at home and watch it themselves otherwise.</p><p>I guess maybe it throws off the ratings if everyone watches it at one place.  I would bet most people that would actually go to a bar to watch a game would go to a friends barbecue instead and watch the game there if the bar wasn't an option.</p><p>That said, just buy a 54in TV and save yourself the headache</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the superbowl makes it 's money on advertising.Unless the bar/club is muting the commercials when they come on , I really do n't see the similarity.This is simply everyone going to a single place to watch a game with advertisements .
These people would just stay at home and watch it themselves otherwise.I guess maybe it throws off the ratings if everyone watches it at one place .
I would bet most people that would actually go to a bar to watch a game would go to a friends barbecue instead and watch the game there if the bar was n't an option.That said , just buy a 54in TV and save yourself the headache</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the superbowl makes it's money on advertising.Unless the bar/club is muting the commercials when they come on, I really don't see the similarity.This is simply everyone going to a single place to watch a game with advertisements.
These people would just stay at home and watch it themselves otherwise.I guess maybe it throws off the ratings if everyone watches it at one place.
I would bet most people that would actually go to a bar to watch a game would go to a friends barbecue instead and watch the game there if the bar wasn't an option.That said, just buy a 54in TV and save yourself the headache</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985168</id>
	<title>No 7.1 sound?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265056080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While this is really moot in the home, its funny how they pretty much make it wrong to watch the Superbowl in 6.1, 7.1 or 9.1 home theater systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While this is really moot in the home , its funny how they pretty much make it wrong to watch the Superbowl in 6.1 , 7.1 or 9.1 home theater systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While this is really moot in the home, its funny how they pretty much make it wrong to watch the Superbowl in 6.1, 7.1 or 9.1 home theater systems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985982</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D</author>
	<datestamp>1265015460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good news, everyone! If you recognized this as Professor Farnsworth's voice, you're not a nerd!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good news , everyone !
If you recognized this as Professor Farnsworth 's voice , you 're not a nerd !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good news, everyone!
If you recognized this as Professor Farnsworth's voice, you're not a nerd!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989918</id>
	<title>Hate</title>
	<author>acalltoreason</author>
	<datestamp>1265031720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously, you have to pay to watch thurs night football now, Super Bowl adds cost millions of dollars for a 30 second slot. What more do they want?! Where the hell do they get off trying squeeze even more money out of people who are already hurting? Just shut up and let us watch football.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , you have to pay to watch thurs night football now , Super Bowl adds cost millions of dollars for a 30 second slot .
What more do they want ? !
Where the hell do they get off trying squeeze even more money out of people who are already hurting ?
Just shut up and let us watch football .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, you have to pay to watch thurs night football now, Super Bowl adds cost millions of dollars for a 30 second slot.
What more do they want?!
Where the hell do they get off trying squeeze even more money out of people who are already hurting?
Just shut up and let us watch football.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985536</id>
	<title>Good Luck suing my Captain Marvel Bowl Party!</title>
	<author>JoshDM</author>
	<datestamp>1265057460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not as popular, but it's more magical.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not as popular , but it 's more magical .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not as popular, but it's more magical.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989814</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265031180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What are the good reasons for being able to:</p><p>recite scenes from Monty Python movies/episodes verbatim,<br>name 5 or more droids from Star Wars (original trilogy) not counting R2-D2 or C-3PO,<br>recite monster stats for an edition of D&amp;D,<br>tell you his favorite XKCD comics by number,<br>etc.</p></div><p>These things are actually fun.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What are the good reasons for being able to : recite scenes from Monty Python movies/episodes verbatim,name 5 or more droids from Star Wars ( original trilogy ) not counting R2-D2 or C-3PO,recite monster stats for an edition of D&amp;D,tell you his favorite XKCD comics by number,etc.These things are actually fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are the good reasons for being able to:recite scenes from Monty Python movies/episodes verbatim,name 5 or more droids from Star Wars (original trilogy) not counting R2-D2 or C-3PO,recite monster stats for an edition of D&amp;D,tell you his favorite XKCD comics by number,etc.These things are actually fun.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985910</id>
	<title>Rice Owls</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265015280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't care what kind of football-playing super engineers Rice University can churn out, they're never gonna make the Super Bowl.</p><p>So that it's not entirely random: their stadium hosted Super Bowl 8.  Where the Vikings lost per usual.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care what kind of football-playing super engineers Rice University can churn out , they 're never gon na make the Super Bowl.So that it 's not entirely random : their stadium hosted Super Bowl 8 .
Where the Vikings lost per usual .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care what kind of football-playing super engineers Rice University can churn out, they're never gonna make the Super Bowl.So that it's not entirely random: their stadium hosted Super Bowl 8.
Where the Vikings lost per usual.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987642</id>
	<title>Re:Trademark</title>
	<author>Mackeul</author>
	<datestamp>1265021340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Inconceivable!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Inconceivable !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inconceivable!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985444</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>tsstahl</author>
	<datestamp>1265057160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Be prepared for a Harry Potter flash mob at your house.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Be prepared for a Harry Potter flash mob at your house .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be prepared for a Harry Potter flash mob at your house.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990714</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Tiro</author>
	<datestamp>1265037420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A friend of mine was high school math team captain, uses Mathematica at work every day, and owns a slide rule.</p><p>He also loves pro football.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A friend of mine was high school math team captain , uses Mathematica at work every day , and owns a slide rule.He also loves pro football .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A friend of mine was high school math team captain, uses Mathematica at work every day, and owns a slide rule.He also loves pro football.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985522</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265057400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>This is news for nerds, remember?</i></p><p>Of course. We're going to judge the cheerleaders and the commercials.</p><p>And since New Orleans is involved, we're expecting a lot of beads &amp; boobies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is news for nerds , remember ? Of course .
We 're going to judge the cheerleaders and the commercials.And since New Orleans is involved , we 're expecting a lot of beads &amp; boobies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is news for nerds, remember?Of course.
We're going to judge the cheerleaders and the commercials.And since New Orleans is involved, we're expecting a lot of beads &amp; boobies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989506</id>
	<title>Re:Old news</title>
	<author>adolf</author>
	<datestamp>1265029320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While everyone else spews bullshit, please allow me to attempt to help you with your problem with facts, logic, and (of course) anecdotes.</p><p>1.  HDMI is not just a wire -- it's a specific type of wire, laid out in a certain way, with certain predetermined characteristics.  It's no more "just a wire" than Cat5e or RG-6 is.  But there's nothing particularly special about an HDMI cable that makes it support HDCP (which also works just fine over DVI, incidentally).</p><p>2.  It's not a "works or doesn't" thing, at least, not always.  It's possible to have an HDMI connection mostly work.</p><p>3.  Nevertheless, cheap cables should be fine, just as cheap Cat5 should be fine.  Is it <i>always</i> fine?  Who knows?  I, for one, don't have the lab gear needed to test this stuff properly, but I've got no particularly good reason to believe that cheap cables are worse, on average, than expensive ones.</p><p>Now, on with the anecdotes:</p><p>First, when I got a new TV and had cable, I bought some Monoprice HDMI cables.  They worked fine with the Playstation, but I never could get them to work with the cable company's DVR, at all.  Swapping cables and using different monitors proved inconclusive because all possible permutations worked fine with the DVR, except the precise combination of any of the Monoprice cables along with the cable DVR, and Samsung TV.</p><p>Replacing the Monoprice cable with a ratty-looking one that came free with a $40 DVD player worked fine.  The difference?  Who knows.  The Monoprice cables were fairly heavy, and had ferrites on each end.  The freebie cable was smaller in diameter, and lacked ferrites.</p><p>I've read of people removing ferrites (apparently a sharp using knife to get the outer casing off and a hammer to shatter the ferrite does the trick neatly), which they've said has solved similar problems.  This lends some credence to the possibility that the added inductance of the ferrites, alone, was causing my problem, but I didn't try removing them.</p><p>Nowadays, I don't have cable (using AT&amp;T Uverse instead) and the Monoprice cables work just fine.</p><p>Second: just the other day, I was goofing around behind the TV.  Several hours later, the Uverse box decided it didn't like my TV anymore, with a screen explaining that it wasn't HDCP compliant.  I rebooted things and fidgeted around, and the best I could get was HDMI video, but <i>with no sound</i>.  Eventually, I unplugged the HDMI cable at both ends and plugged it back in, and things turned happy straight away.  I guess it must've been just partially connected at one end or the other (which in itself is bizarre, as HDMI uses the same data lines for both audio and video).</p><p>So, in conclusion:  Apparently, HDMI can break in strange ways.  Try a different wire, of different construction and/or perceived quality.</p><p>As little as your local cable provider goofs around with their digital feed (which, for the most part, they don't at all -- most of horribleness happens far upstream at a regional facility), if such audio problems were endemic to that DVR, there'd be thousands of folks complaining over a broad area...but I don't see 'em.</p><p>And if all that fails, just use component video.  I recognize that it's a lot like admitting defeat, but there's very little qualitative difference between a proper cheap component video feed, and a functional HDMI feed.  The bits doing the DAC -&gt; ADC conversions in modern video gear work well enough these days that you'll probably see nothing different even if you try.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While everyone else spews bullshit , please allow me to attempt to help you with your problem with facts , logic , and ( of course ) anecdotes.1 .
HDMI is not just a wire -- it 's a specific type of wire , laid out in a certain way , with certain predetermined characteristics .
It 's no more " just a wire " than Cat5e or RG-6 is .
But there 's nothing particularly special about an HDMI cable that makes it support HDCP ( which also works just fine over DVI , incidentally ) .2 .
It 's not a " works or does n't " thing , at least , not always .
It 's possible to have an HDMI connection mostly work.3 .
Nevertheless , cheap cables should be fine , just as cheap Cat5 should be fine .
Is it always fine ?
Who knows ?
I , for one , do n't have the lab gear needed to test this stuff properly , but I 've got no particularly good reason to believe that cheap cables are worse , on average , than expensive ones.Now , on with the anecdotes : First , when I got a new TV and had cable , I bought some Monoprice HDMI cables .
They worked fine with the Playstation , but I never could get them to work with the cable company 's DVR , at all .
Swapping cables and using different monitors proved inconclusive because all possible permutations worked fine with the DVR , except the precise combination of any of the Monoprice cables along with the cable DVR , and Samsung TV.Replacing the Monoprice cable with a ratty-looking one that came free with a $ 40 DVD player worked fine .
The difference ?
Who knows .
The Monoprice cables were fairly heavy , and had ferrites on each end .
The freebie cable was smaller in diameter , and lacked ferrites.I 've read of people removing ferrites ( apparently a sharp using knife to get the outer casing off and a hammer to shatter the ferrite does the trick neatly ) , which they 've said has solved similar problems .
This lends some credence to the possibility that the added inductance of the ferrites , alone , was causing my problem , but I did n't try removing them.Nowadays , I do n't have cable ( using AT&amp;T Uverse instead ) and the Monoprice cables work just fine.Second : just the other day , I was goofing around behind the TV .
Several hours later , the Uverse box decided it did n't like my TV anymore , with a screen explaining that it was n't HDCP compliant .
I rebooted things and fidgeted around , and the best I could get was HDMI video , but with no sound .
Eventually , I unplugged the HDMI cable at both ends and plugged it back in , and things turned happy straight away .
I guess it must 've been just partially connected at one end or the other ( which in itself is bizarre , as HDMI uses the same data lines for both audio and video ) .So , in conclusion : Apparently , HDMI can break in strange ways .
Try a different wire , of different construction and/or perceived quality.As little as your local cable provider goofs around with their digital feed ( which , for the most part , they do n't at all -- most of horribleness happens far upstream at a regional facility ) , if such audio problems were endemic to that DVR , there 'd be thousands of folks complaining over a broad area...but I do n't see 'em.And if all that fails , just use component video .
I recognize that it 's a lot like admitting defeat , but there 's very little qualitative difference between a proper cheap component video feed , and a functional HDMI feed .
The bits doing the DAC - &gt; ADC conversions in modern video gear work well enough these days that you 'll probably see nothing different even if you try .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While everyone else spews bullshit, please allow me to attempt to help you with your problem with facts, logic, and (of course) anecdotes.1.
HDMI is not just a wire -- it's a specific type of wire, laid out in a certain way, with certain predetermined characteristics.
It's no more "just a wire" than Cat5e or RG-6 is.
But there's nothing particularly special about an HDMI cable that makes it support HDCP (which also works just fine over DVI, incidentally).2.
It's not a "works or doesn't" thing, at least, not always.
It's possible to have an HDMI connection mostly work.3.
Nevertheless, cheap cables should be fine, just as cheap Cat5 should be fine.
Is it always fine?
Who knows?
I, for one, don't have the lab gear needed to test this stuff properly, but I've got no particularly good reason to believe that cheap cables are worse, on average, than expensive ones.Now, on with the anecdotes:First, when I got a new TV and had cable, I bought some Monoprice HDMI cables.
They worked fine with the Playstation, but I never could get them to work with the cable company's DVR, at all.
Swapping cables and using different monitors proved inconclusive because all possible permutations worked fine with the DVR, except the precise combination of any of the Monoprice cables along with the cable DVR, and Samsung TV.Replacing the Monoprice cable with a ratty-looking one that came free with a $40 DVD player worked fine.
The difference?
Who knows.
The Monoprice cables were fairly heavy, and had ferrites on each end.
The freebie cable was smaller in diameter, and lacked ferrites.I've read of people removing ferrites (apparently a sharp using knife to get the outer casing off and a hammer to shatter the ferrite does the trick neatly), which they've said has solved similar problems.
This lends some credence to the possibility that the added inductance of the ferrites, alone, was causing my problem, but I didn't try removing them.Nowadays, I don't have cable (using AT&amp;T Uverse instead) and the Monoprice cables work just fine.Second: just the other day, I was goofing around behind the TV.
Several hours later, the Uverse box decided it didn't like my TV anymore, with a screen explaining that it wasn't HDCP compliant.
I rebooted things and fidgeted around, and the best I could get was HDMI video, but with no sound.
Eventually, I unplugged the HDMI cable at both ends and plugged it back in, and things turned happy straight away.
I guess it must've been just partially connected at one end or the other (which in itself is bizarre, as HDMI uses the same data lines for both audio and video).So, in conclusion:  Apparently, HDMI can break in strange ways.
Try a different wire, of different construction and/or perceived quality.As little as your local cable provider goofs around with their digital feed (which, for the most part, they don't at all -- most of horribleness happens far upstream at a regional facility), if such audio problems were endemic to that DVR, there'd be thousands of folks complaining over a broad area...but I don't see 'em.And if all that fails, just use component video.
I recognize that it's a lot like admitting defeat, but there's very little qualitative difference between a proper cheap component video feed, and a functional HDMI feed.
The bits doing the DAC -&gt; ADC conversions in modern video gear work well enough these days that you'll probably see nothing different even if you try.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986426</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265017020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except of course, exceptions for common sense.</p><p>Nerd, Geek, Sports are not mutually exclusive terms, and those who see it that way only perpetuate the sigma against being smart, enjoying the learning process, careers in science and/or engineering, &amp;c.</p><p>I played every sport I could growing up, and played 2 seasons of college tennis before graduating as an aero engineer. I work for a large defense contractor and obsess over things like Naviar-Stokes equations.  I still enjoy playing softball, watching football and generally destroying my friends, family and coworkers at "friendly" games of tennis.  I also really enjoy playing my ogre shaman in Everquest (Halas must burn!), but my wife doesn't care for anything but her Wii Fit (she's a tech doc writer, so probably not good enough to be considered a nerd or geek by GP's standards).  I am somewhat socially awkward, maybe a touch of agoraphobia or social anxiety, but it goes away if I focus on what I have to do and say long enough to get to know some of the people there. I always leave way early from any event if it is possible, since I fear I may have to help clearn up and don't I really do not like touching things other people have ate or drank from, even tablecloths are tough - yes, I know it's odd, but it seems... soiled.</p><p>Are you saying I'm not qualified to 'smart' like a nerd, or a geek, or what?  I don't know what label I am or might be, but given the number of people I work with, I would say besides playing at the collegiate level I am far from the exception: most of my coworkers are very bright, inquisitive people with varied interests.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except of course , exceptions for common sense.Nerd , Geek , Sports are not mutually exclusive terms , and those who see it that way only perpetuate the sigma against being smart , enjoying the learning process , careers in science and/or engineering , &amp;c.I played every sport I could growing up , and played 2 seasons of college tennis before graduating as an aero engineer .
I work for a large defense contractor and obsess over things like Naviar-Stokes equations .
I still enjoy playing softball , watching football and generally destroying my friends , family and coworkers at " friendly " games of tennis .
I also really enjoy playing my ogre shaman in Everquest ( Halas must burn !
) , but my wife does n't care for anything but her Wii Fit ( she 's a tech doc writer , so probably not good enough to be considered a nerd or geek by GP 's standards ) .
I am somewhat socially awkward , maybe a touch of agoraphobia or social anxiety , but it goes away if I focus on what I have to do and say long enough to get to know some of the people there .
I always leave way early from any event if it is possible , since I fear I may have to help clearn up and do n't I really do not like touching things other people have ate or drank from , even tablecloths are tough - yes , I know it 's odd , but it seems... soiled.Are you saying I 'm not qualified to 'smart ' like a nerd , or a geek , or what ?
I do n't know what label I am or might be , but given the number of people I work with , I would say besides playing at the collegiate level I am far from the exception : most of my coworkers are very bright , inquisitive people with varied interests .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except of course, exceptions for common sense.Nerd, Geek, Sports are not mutually exclusive terms, and those who see it that way only perpetuate the sigma against being smart, enjoying the learning process, careers in science and/or engineering, &amp;c.I played every sport I could growing up, and played 2 seasons of college tennis before graduating as an aero engineer.
I work for a large defense contractor and obsess over things like Naviar-Stokes equations.
I still enjoy playing softball, watching football and generally destroying my friends, family and coworkers at "friendly" games of tennis.
I also really enjoy playing my ogre shaman in Everquest (Halas must burn!
), but my wife doesn't care for anything but her Wii Fit (she's a tech doc writer, so probably not good enough to be considered a nerd or geek by GP's standards).
I am somewhat socially awkward, maybe a touch of agoraphobia or social anxiety, but it goes away if I focus on what I have to do and say long enough to get to know some of the people there.
I always leave way early from any event if it is possible, since I fear I may have to help clearn up and don't I really do not like touching things other people have ate or drank from, even tablecloths are tough - yes, I know it's odd, but it seems... soiled.Are you saying I'm not qualified to 'smart' like a nerd, or a geek, or what?
I don't know what label I am or might be, but given the number of people I work with, I would say besides playing at the collegiate level I am far from the exception: most of my coworkers are very bright, inquisitive people with varied interests.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985930</id>
	<title>I hope it does.</title>
	<author>jitterman</author>
	<datestamp>1265015340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>How absurd, selfish, and blind are these people?<br> <br> NFL Fan: "Hey, Joe's Pub has a 60" TV, and they're going to have the Big Game on. Sweet! Ten friends and I are gonna have a great time there!"<br> <br>NFL Management: "Alert! Fans watching our games in public without our express written consent. We've clearly just lost MILLIONS in revenue because of this. If only our viewers understood the logic of... uh, ummm, ah... Hey, why DO we prohibit this? It brings people together to enjoy our product, stimulates the economy by bringing patrons to bars and casual dining restaurants, and generally helps promote what we do without costing us anything in advertising expenses."<br> <br>NFL Lawyer: "So I can have a job."</htmltext>
<tokenext>How absurd , selfish , and blind are these people ?
NFL Fan : " Hey , Joe 's Pub has a 60 " TV , and they 're going to have the Big Game on .
Sweet ! Ten friends and I are gon na have a great time there !
" NFL Management : " Alert !
Fans watching our games in public without our express written consent .
We 've clearly just lost MILLIONS in revenue because of this .
If only our viewers understood the logic of... uh , ummm , ah... Hey , why DO we prohibit this ?
It brings people together to enjoy our product , stimulates the economy by bringing patrons to bars and casual dining restaurants , and generally helps promote what we do without costing us anything in advertising expenses .
" NFL Lawyer : " So I can have a job .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How absurd, selfish, and blind are these people?
NFL Fan: "Hey, Joe's Pub has a 60" TV, and they're going to have the Big Game on.
Sweet! Ten friends and I are gonna have a great time there!
" NFL Management: "Alert!
Fans watching our games in public without our express written consent.
We've clearly just lost MILLIONS in revenue because of this.
If only our viewers understood the logic of... uh, ummm, ah... Hey, why DO we prohibit this?
It brings people together to enjoy our product, stimulates the economy by bringing patrons to bars and casual dining restaurants, and generally helps promote what we do without costing us anything in advertising expenses.
" NFL Lawyer: "So I can have a job.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987272</id>
	<title>Dolby 7.1 setup illegal?</title>
	<author>davygrvy</author>
	<datestamp>1265020020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the article: "and any audio portion of the performance or display is communicated by means of a total of not more than 6 loudspeakers."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article : " and any audio portion of the performance or display is communicated by means of a total of not more than 6 loudspeakers .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article: "and any audio portion of the performance or display is communicated by means of a total of not more than 6 loudspeakers.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990030</id>
	<title>What happens is this...</title>
	<author>yoshi\_mon</author>
	<datestamp>1265032380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a room with all of the guys who are responsible for making the NFLs money, and this is not unique to the NFL, they are talking about how they can increase their profits.  Someone brings up that small bars and such are profiting off their games and in particular the Super Bowl and so they push some legislation/trademark/copyright bullshit though.</p><p>And the kicker is that the Republican party as it stands will all vote for such a measure even thou they 'hate government regulation' and all that.  (Oh and the Dems that vote for this kinda crap are just as slimey, but at least we can call them on it.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a room with all of the guys who are responsible for making the NFLs money , and this is not unique to the NFL , they are talking about how they can increase their profits .
Someone brings up that small bars and such are profiting off their games and in particular the Super Bowl and so they push some legislation/trademark/copyright bullshit though.And the kicker is that the Republican party as it stands will all vote for such a measure even thou they 'hate government regulation ' and all that .
( Oh and the Dems that vote for this kinda crap are just as slimey , but at least we can call them on it .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a room with all of the guys who are responsible for making the NFLs money, and this is not unique to the NFL, they are talking about how they can increase their profits.
Someone brings up that small bars and such are profiting off their games and in particular the Super Bowl and so they push some legislation/trademark/copyright bullshit though.And the kicker is that the Republican party as it stands will all vote for such a measure even thou they 'hate government regulation' and all that.
(Oh and the Dems that vote for this kinda crap are just as slimey, but at least we can call them on it.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985090</id>
	<title>Go look at the NFL versus Louisiana over  Who dat</title>
	<author>Shivetya</author>
	<datestamp>1265055840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2010/02/halftime-who-dat-whos-greedy-the-nfl/1" title="usatoday.com">http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2010/02/halftime-who-dat-whos-greedy-the-nfl/1</a> [usatoday.com]</p><p>You missed the one important part, anywhere there is money involved there will be claims.  The NFL is claiming ownership of a fan derived saying, let alone one where most of it has been part of the dialect</p><p>Never under estimate money, lawyers, and stupidity, combined.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2010/02/halftime-who-dat-whos-greedy-the-nfl/1 [ usatoday.com ] You missed the one important part , anywhere there is money involved there will be claims .
The NFL is claiming ownership of a fan derived saying , let alone one where most of it has been part of the dialectNever under estimate money , lawyers , and stupidity , combined .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2010/02/halftime-who-dat-whos-greedy-the-nfl/1 [usatoday.com]You missed the one important part, anywhere there is money involved there will be claims.
The NFL is claiming ownership of a fan derived saying, let alone one where most of it has been part of the dialectNever under estimate money, lawyers, and stupidity, combined.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990838</id>
	<title>An Open Letter..</title>
	<author>dos4who</author>
	<datestamp>1265038260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dear Super Bowl lawyers,<br>
        Blow me.<br>

Signed,<br>
        The internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear Super Bowl lawyers , Blow me .
Signed , The internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear Super Bowl lawyers,
        Blow me.
Signed,
        The internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986012</id>
	<title>Re:NFL soft on churches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265015580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>As for sports bars, they're a business mooching off someone else's content. Of course they should pay.<br></i><br>They're already paying. They have higher cable/satellite bills than home subscribers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As for sports bars , they 're a business mooching off someone else 's content .
Of course they should pay.They 're already paying .
They have higher cable/satellite bills than home subscribers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As for sports bars, they're a business mooching off someone else's content.
Of course they should pay.They're already paying.
They have higher cable/satellite bills than home subscribers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985794</id>
	<title>Re:The NFL at its best</title>
	<author>cayenne8</author>
	<datestamp>1265014980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"Face it, the NFL are brilliant. They are not about football. They are about revenue. "</i> <p>

Yep, there's been a big flap of there trying to say they have the copyright over <b> <a href="http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2010/01/who\_dat\_nation\_1\_nfl\_0.html" title="nola.com">Who Dat?</a> [nola.com] </b> and doing cease and desist letters to small dress and tshirt shops here for printing this and the fleur-dis-lis.</p><p>
Apparently the NFL has backed off this  a little bit...but, sure has pissed off a bunch of people down here...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Face it , the NFL are brilliant .
They are not about football .
They are about revenue .
" Yep , there 's been a big flap of there trying to say they have the copyright over Who Dat ?
[ nola.com ] and doing cease and desist letters to small dress and tshirt shops here for printing this and the fleur-dis-lis .
Apparently the NFL has backed off this a little bit...but , sure has pissed off a bunch of people down here.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Face it, the NFL are brilliant.
They are not about football.
They are about revenue.
" 

Yep, there's been a big flap of there trying to say they have the copyright over  Who Dat?
[nola.com]  and doing cease and desist letters to small dress and tshirt shops here for printing this and the fleur-dis-lis.
Apparently the NFL has backed off this  a little bit...but, sure has pissed off a bunch of people down here...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987436</id>
	<title>thank god for youtube</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1265020560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I no longer have to watch the boring stuff that happens between the commercials then.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I no longer have to watch the boring stuff that happens between the commercials then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I no longer have to watch the boring stuff that happens between the commercials then.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990554</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>Al Al Cool J</author>
	<datestamp>1265036280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I get the feeling you really don't understand fandom.</p><p>People have natural tribal impulses, not to mention competitiveness.  Belonging to a fan culture helps meet those primal needs.  It doesn't matter if you are a fan of a sports team, a sci-fi show, a music act, or a political party. It's enjoyable to gather with fellow fans, and share a sense of pride, accomplishment, and belonging. Fans become emotionally invested, and it can become a huge part of their lives, and in my experience, almost always for the better.</p><p>And it's ridiculous to try and write off fans as being irrelevent spectators.  If fans didn't exist and people didn't care about professional sports or entertainment or the democratic process, then those things wouldn't even exist.  We only have them, because people do care, and watch, and pay money, and participate. And for that I am thankful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I get the feeling you really do n't understand fandom.People have natural tribal impulses , not to mention competitiveness .
Belonging to a fan culture helps meet those primal needs .
It does n't matter if you are a fan of a sports team , a sci-fi show , a music act , or a political party .
It 's enjoyable to gather with fellow fans , and share a sense of pride , accomplishment , and belonging .
Fans become emotionally invested , and it can become a huge part of their lives , and in my experience , almost always for the better.And it 's ridiculous to try and write off fans as being irrelevent spectators .
If fans did n't exist and people did n't care about professional sports or entertainment or the democratic process , then those things would n't even exist .
We only have them , because people do care , and watch , and pay money , and participate .
And for that I am thankful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get the feeling you really don't understand fandom.People have natural tribal impulses, not to mention competitiveness.
Belonging to a fan culture helps meet those primal needs.
It doesn't matter if you are a fan of a sports team, a sci-fi show, a music act, or a political party.
It's enjoyable to gather with fellow fans, and share a sense of pride, accomplishment, and belonging.
Fans become emotionally invested, and it can become a huge part of their lives, and in my experience, almost always for the better.And it's ridiculous to try and write off fans as being irrelevent spectators.
If fans didn't exist and people didn't care about professional sports or entertainment or the democratic process, then those things wouldn't even exist.
We only have them, because people do care, and watch, and pay money, and participate.
And for that I am thankful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30999610</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1265141460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously? man, what as stretch.</p><p>The fact that you broke it down into race just shows how racist you see everything.</p><p>Football is all about performance. No one cares about the race of the person.<br>Those days are gone, but I'm sure you miss them.</p><p>maybe you should look up JaMarcus Russell, David Garrard or Mark Sanchez. There may be more QBs that aren't 'white', I just don't know the roster that well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously ?
man , what as stretch.The fact that you broke it down into race just shows how racist you see everything.Football is all about performance .
No one cares about the race of the person.Those days are gone , but I 'm sure you miss them.maybe you should look up JaMarcus Russell , David Garrard or Mark Sanchez .
There may be more QBs that are n't 'white ' , I just do n't know the roster that well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously?
man, what as stretch.The fact that you broke it down into race just shows how racist you see everything.Football is all about performance.
No one cares about the race of the person.Those days are gone, but I'm sure you miss them.maybe you should look up JaMarcus Russell, David Garrard or Mark Sanchez.
There may be more QBs that aren't 'white', I just don't know the roster that well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985540</id>
	<title>Re:Ok NFL, I can take a hint</title>
	<author>mister\_playboy</author>
	<datestamp>1265057460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704281204575002852055561406.html" title="wsj.com">Only 11 minutes of a 185 minute NFL broadcast include actual play</a> [wsj.com]</p><p>So you're not missing out on any action, trust me.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only 11 minutes of a 185 minute NFL broadcast include actual play [ wsj.com ] So you 're not missing out on any action , trust me .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only 11 minutes of a 185 minute NFL broadcast include actual play [wsj.com]So you're not missing out on any action, trust me.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985136</id>
	<title>BYOSBL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265056020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bring Your Own Super Bowl License.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bring Your Own Super Bowl License .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bring Your Own Super Bowl License.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986750</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Sir\_Lewk</author>
	<datestamp>1265018220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey!  That stuff will get me laid some day!  That's how this works right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey !
That stuff will get me laid some day !
That 's how this works right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey!
That stuff will get me laid some day!
That's how this works right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985402</id>
	<title>NFL sued a church last year</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265057040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A church advertised a Super Bowl party, in which they weren't charging a dime to attend. It didn't stop the NFL lawyers from descending.</p><p>All major leagues also have the statement that not only can you not rebroadcast, but you can't disseminate or report on the game without their written, express consent.</p><p>You apparently don't have the right to talk about the game. Way to be fan-friendly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A church advertised a Super Bowl party , in which they were n't charging a dime to attend .
It did n't stop the NFL lawyers from descending.All major leagues also have the statement that not only can you not rebroadcast , but you ca n't disseminate or report on the game without their written , express consent.You apparently do n't have the right to talk about the game .
Way to be fan-friendly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A church advertised a Super Bowl party, in which they weren't charging a dime to attend.
It didn't stop the NFL lawyers from descending.All major leagues also have the statement that not only can you not rebroadcast, but you can't disseminate or report on the game without their written, express consent.You apparently don't have the right to talk about the game.
Way to be fan-friendly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985564</id>
	<title>Re:Old news</title>
	<author>Beardo the Bearded</author>
	<datestamp>1265057520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope so.</p><p>The HDMI handshaking makes the audio drop intermittently on my new TV when combined with my new HD PVR from my cable company. Pirated content plays flawlessly over the same HDMI connections.</p><p>On the upside, it is going to save me a ton of cash, since all I'll have to buy is a bigger HDD for my Linux box and a media player.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope so.The HDMI handshaking makes the audio drop intermittently on my new TV when combined with my new HD PVR from my cable company .
Pirated content plays flawlessly over the same HDMI connections.On the upside , it is going to save me a ton of cash , since all I 'll have to buy is a bigger HDD for my Linux box and a media player .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope so.The HDMI handshaking makes the audio drop intermittently on my new TV when combined with my new HD PVR from my cable company.
Pirated content plays flawlessly over the same HDMI connections.On the upside, it is going to save me a ton of cash, since all I'll have to buy is a bigger HDD for my Linux box and a media player.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985918</id>
	<title>Nothing to see here, move along</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1265015280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bars and taverns have been living with performance rights since the nickelodeon days.</p><p>Way back then, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes summed it up this way: "If music did not pay, it would be given up. Whether it pays or not, the purpose of employing it is profit and that is enough."</p><p>The fund raiser is a headache in its own right - most people will take the trademarked logo or slogan as proof of corporate sponsorship or endorsement of the event - and when the organizers blow the proceeds on a trip to Vegas, their victims will be out looking for someone to blame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bars and taverns have been living with performance rights since the nickelodeon days.Way back then , Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes summed it up this way : " If music did not pay , it would be given up .
Whether it pays or not , the purpose of employing it is profit and that is enough .
" The fund raiser is a headache in its own right - most people will take the trademarked logo or slogan as proof of corporate sponsorship or endorsement of the event - and when the organizers blow the proceeds on a trip to Vegas , their victims will be out looking for someone to blame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bars and taverns have been living with performance rights since the nickelodeon days.Way back then, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes summed it up this way: "If music did not pay, it would be given up.
Whether it pays or not, the purpose of employing it is profit and that is enough.
"The fund raiser is a headache in its own right - most people will take the trademarked logo or slogan as proof of corporate sponsorship or endorsement of the event - and when the organizers blow the proceeds on a trip to Vegas, their victims will be out looking for someone to blame.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986814</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>Brian\_Ellenberger</author>
	<datestamp>1265018340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[rant]
Instead of passively witnessing multimillionaire drug addicts chase a ball to sell ad space... do something.  Take the people who were going to show up for "da big game" outside to play tag football.  Have a foosball championship.
[/rant]</p></div><p>What, wasting your valuable time playing a meaningless trivial thing like foosball instead of doing something productive with your time like reading and discussing Joyce's Ulysses?</p><p>Believe or not, I love computer programming AND sports.  And you are ignorant if you think sports is just a passive mindless activity.  Sports works on multiple levels.  First it is a social activity--an excuse for people to get together to enjoy each others company---not really that different from a foosball tournament or a card game or going to a movie.  Most of the enjoyment of a card game is not the card game itself--it is socializing with others.  Same with sports.</p><p>Second, for a true sports fan the sport is more than just a passive activity.  Fans analyze and appreciate the nuances of tactics, strategy, and individual skill throughout the game.  The reason that sports people are unfamiliar with are "boring" is they don't see and are not aware of the details.  Baseball is a very boring sport, unless you understand the pitcher/batter matchup.  Then it is very exciting.  Knowing what pitches the pitcher throws, how well they throw them, what the batters strengths and weakness are.  The situation with who is on base, what the score is, how tired the pitcher is, etc.  Same with football (ie soccer) or American football or any sport.  The defensive alignment of an American football team, the offensive execution of a basketball team, the trap play of a hockey team.  For a fan, much of the fun is trying to predict what will happen and watching it play out.</p><p>Then, much like the Olympics, there is the sheer amazing in watching what the human body can do.  To perform an athletic feat that is seemingly impossible.</p><p>Finally, with things like fantasy football, there is a sort of meta-level game that you are apart of.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ rant ] Instead of passively witnessing multimillionaire drug addicts chase a ball to sell ad space... do something .
Take the people who were going to show up for " da big game " outside to play tag football .
Have a foosball championship .
[ /rant ] What , wasting your valuable time playing a meaningless trivial thing like foosball instead of doing something productive with your time like reading and discussing Joyce 's Ulysses ? Believe or not , I love computer programming AND sports .
And you are ignorant if you think sports is just a passive mindless activity .
Sports works on multiple levels .
First it is a social activity--an excuse for people to get together to enjoy each others company---not really that different from a foosball tournament or a card game or going to a movie .
Most of the enjoyment of a card game is not the card game itself--it is socializing with others .
Same with sports.Second , for a true sports fan the sport is more than just a passive activity .
Fans analyze and appreciate the nuances of tactics , strategy , and individual skill throughout the game .
The reason that sports people are unfamiliar with are " boring " is they do n't see and are not aware of the details .
Baseball is a very boring sport , unless you understand the pitcher/batter matchup .
Then it is very exciting .
Knowing what pitches the pitcher throws , how well they throw them , what the batters strengths and weakness are .
The situation with who is on base , what the score is , how tired the pitcher is , etc .
Same with football ( ie soccer ) or American football or any sport .
The defensive alignment of an American football team , the offensive execution of a basketball team , the trap play of a hockey team .
For a fan , much of the fun is trying to predict what will happen and watching it play out.Then , much like the Olympics , there is the sheer amazing in watching what the human body can do .
To perform an athletic feat that is seemingly impossible.Finally , with things like fantasy football , there is a sort of meta-level game that you are apart of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[rant]
Instead of passively witnessing multimillionaire drug addicts chase a ball to sell ad space... do something.
Take the people who were going to show up for "da big game" outside to play tag football.
Have a foosball championship.
[/rant]What, wasting your valuable time playing a meaningless trivial thing like foosball instead of doing something productive with your time like reading and discussing Joyce's Ulysses?Believe or not, I love computer programming AND sports.
And you are ignorant if you think sports is just a passive mindless activity.
Sports works on multiple levels.
First it is a social activity--an excuse for people to get together to enjoy each others company---not really that different from a foosball tournament or a card game or going to a movie.
Most of the enjoyment of a card game is not the card game itself--it is socializing with others.
Same with sports.Second, for a true sports fan the sport is more than just a passive activity.
Fans analyze and appreciate the nuances of tactics, strategy, and individual skill throughout the game.
The reason that sports people are unfamiliar with are "boring" is they don't see and are not aware of the details.
Baseball is a very boring sport, unless you understand the pitcher/batter matchup.
Then it is very exciting.
Knowing what pitches the pitcher throws, how well they throw them, what the batters strengths and weakness are.
The situation with who is on base, what the score is, how tired the pitcher is, etc.
Same with football (ie soccer) or American football or any sport.
The defensive alignment of an American football team, the offensive execution of a basketball team, the trap play of a hockey team.
For a fan, much of the fun is trying to predict what will happen and watching it play out.Then, much like the Olympics, there is the sheer amazing in watching what the human body can do.
To perform an athletic feat that is seemingly impossible.Finally, with things like fantasy football, there is a sort of meta-level game that you are apart of.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30998776</id>
	<title>Re:Old news</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1265138220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A) it should be legal, and it IS an injustice that it is not.</p><p>B) What logic would make churches exempt but not apply to everyone else?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A ) it should be legal , and it IS an injustice that it is not.B ) What logic would make churches exempt but not apply to everyone else ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A) it should be legal, and it IS an injustice that it is not.B) What logic would make churches exempt but not apply to everyone else?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985810</id>
	<title>Ask Mike Rowe...</title>
	<author>Overzeetop</author>
	<datestamp>1265015040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, not the Dirty Jobs guy, the one who got MikeRoweSoft.com taken away from him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , not the Dirty Jobs guy , the one who got MikeRoweSoft.com taken away from him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, not the Dirty Jobs guy, the one who got MikeRoweSoft.com taken away from him.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986798</id>
	<title>Re:Doubtful...</title>
	<author>Joucifer</author>
	<datestamp>1265018280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I never cared for watching professional sports until I got a job after college.  Sports are 100X better when you have money on them.  NASCAR and baseball still suck though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I never cared for watching professional sports until I got a job after college .
Sports are 100X better when you have money on them .
NASCAR and baseball still suck though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never cared for watching professional sports until I got a job after college.
Sports are 100X better when you have money on them.
NASCAR and baseball still suck though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987680</id>
	<title>Re:The term itself...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265021460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Incorrect.  The charging of food doesn't require a liquor license or filing of business taxes.  Because I own and lend out books does not make me a pubic library.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Incorrect .
The charging of food does n't require a liquor license or filing of business taxes .
Because I own and lend out books does not make me a pubic library .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Incorrect.
The charging of food doesn't require a liquor license or filing of business taxes.
Because I own and lend out books does not make me a pubic library.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988866</id>
	<title>I forgot...</title>
	<author>malp</author>
	<datestamp>1265026380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is the NFL hockey or football?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is the NFL hockey or football ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is the NFL hockey or football?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984902</id>
	<title>Your Honor...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>They are being idiots, please restore some sanity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They are being idiots , please restore some sanity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are being idiots, please restore some sanity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30998940</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Dread\_ed</author>
	<datestamp>1265138880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"<i>Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason."</i></p><p>I thought all nerds memorized meaningless trivia.  Then again, maybe its just me.  It has always been a trait I expressed, even before I actively fed it by reading encyclopedias, dictionaries, and anything else I could get my hands on.  Howerver, my nerdy friends are similar.  This behevior could be because:</p><p>a) they are good at memorization<br>b) they crave knowledge<br>c) they see the potential to correlate (previously) unrealted fields of knowledge<br>d) they like to spread knowledge to others<br>e) its fun at parties.  Ok, like we go to parties...its fun when you gather with other geeks to play DnD and stuff.</p><p>As an aside, I have noticed resentment and even outright derision from colleagues that do not posess my level of vocabulary and broad trivia knowledge.  That I can handle, being on the outside of the cliques and groups is something I dealt with during gradeshcool and high school.  What I see as even worse, though, is a marked lack of curiosity about the world in general in most 20-somethings (even those in college!).  Maybe lack of curiosity is not stong enough.  I see them actively ignoring avenues of self enrichment, asking questions and then turning away from the answers, limiting their academic performance to the bare minimum necessary to pass, and relying on memorization rather than understanding and internalizing the knowledge.</p><p>Again maybe this is just the people in my preiphery, but I can't help feeling like most of the young people I see stigmatize above average intelligence and look at people funny when they read wikipedia instead of watching youtube.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason .
" I thought all nerds memorized meaningless trivia .
Then again , maybe its just me .
It has always been a trait I expressed , even before I actively fed it by reading encyclopedias , dictionaries , and anything else I could get my hands on .
Howerver , my nerdy friends are similar .
This behevior could be because : a ) they are good at memorizationb ) they crave knowledgec ) they see the potential to correlate ( previously ) unrealted fields of knowledged ) they like to spread knowledge to otherse ) its fun at parties .
Ok , like we go to parties...its fun when you gather with other geeks to play DnD and stuff.As an aside , I have noticed resentment and even outright derision from colleagues that do not posess my level of vocabulary and broad trivia knowledge .
That I can handle , being on the outside of the cliques and groups is something I dealt with during gradeshcool and high school .
What I see as even worse , though , is a marked lack of curiosity about the world in general in most 20-somethings ( even those in college ! ) .
Maybe lack of curiosity is not stong enough .
I see them actively ignoring avenues of self enrichment , asking questions and then turning away from the answers , limiting their academic performance to the bare minimum necessary to pass , and relying on memorization rather than understanding and internalizing the knowledge.Again maybe this is just the people in my preiphery , but I ca n't help feeling like most of the young people I see stigmatize above average intelligence and look at people funny when they read wikipedia instead of watching youtube .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason.
"I thought all nerds memorized meaningless trivia.
Then again, maybe its just me.
It has always been a trait I expressed, even before I actively fed it by reading encyclopedias, dictionaries, and anything else I could get my hands on.
Howerver, my nerdy friends are similar.
This behevior could be because:a) they are good at memorizationb) they crave knowledgec) they see the potential to correlate (previously) unrealted fields of knowledged) they like to spread knowledge to otherse) its fun at parties.
Ok, like we go to parties...its fun when you gather with other geeks to play DnD and stuff.As an aside, I have noticed resentment and even outright derision from colleagues that do not posess my level of vocabulary and broad trivia knowledge.
That I can handle, being on the outside of the cliques and groups is something I dealt with during gradeshcool and high school.
What I see as even worse, though, is a marked lack of curiosity about the world in general in most 20-somethings (even those in college!).
Maybe lack of curiosity is not stong enough.
I see them actively ignoring avenues of self enrichment, asking questions and then turning away from the answers, limiting their academic performance to the bare minimum necessary to pass, and relying on memorization rather than understanding and internalizing the knowledge.Again maybe this is just the people in my preiphery, but I can't help feeling like most of the young people I see stigmatize above average intelligence and look at people funny when they read wikipedia instead of watching youtube.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30997212</id>
	<title>Just have a Superb Owl Party.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265132880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My sister is having a Superb Owl party that just happens to coincide with that sports game thing...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My sister is having a Superb Owl party that just happens to coincide with that sports game thing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My sister is having a Superb Owl party that just happens to coincide with that sports game thing...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985002</id>
	<title>Ok NFL, I can take a hint</title>
	<author>cstec</author>
	<datestamp>1265055600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>We won't be watching.  On any TV.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We wo n't be watching .
On any TV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We won't be watching.
On any TV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986994</id>
	<title>Re:NFL sued a church last year</title>
	<author>abigsmurf</author>
	<datestamp>1265019000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They didn't charge a dime. However there's a donation tray right there by the entrance and they have let you watch the superbowl free of charge and they really need the money and everyone else seems to have donated and they're all looking at you...</htmltext>
<tokenext>They did n't charge a dime .
However there 's a donation tray right there by the entrance and they have let you watch the superbowl free of charge and they really need the money and everyone else seems to have donated and they 're all looking at you.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They didn't charge a dime.
However there's a donation tray right there by the entrance and they have let you watch the superbowl free of charge and they really need the money and everyone else seems to have donated and they're all looking at you...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986392</id>
	<title>Re:Can't copyright a term</title>
	<author>studpuppy</author>
	<datestamp>1265016960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Just don't charge for food, or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright."
<p>
SO.... calling it a "20-girl Go-go-rama. Free buffet" would be perfectly legal?
</p><p>
--
</p><p>
<i>Not that the slashdot crowd would be in to either football or go-go-rama's. Or even know 20 girls to begin with. </i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Just do n't charge for food , or call it a 'Super Bowl ' party , since the term itself is copyright .
" SO.... calling it a " 20-girl Go-go-rama .
Free buffet " would be perfectly legal ?
-- Not that the slashdot crowd would be in to either football or go-go-rama 's .
Or even know 20 girls to begin with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Just don't charge for food, or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.
"

SO.... calling it a "20-girl Go-go-rama.
Free buffet" would be perfectly legal?
--

Not that the slashdot crowd would be in to either football or go-go-rama's.
Or even know 20 girls to begin with. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986640</id>
	<title>Who cares?</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1265017800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After that great 2004 half time show, there's really nothing about it worth watching anymore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After that great 2004 half time show , there 's really nothing about it worth watching anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After that great 2004 half time show, there's really nothing about it worth watching anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985430</id>
	<title>I can't wait....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265057100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>until a NFL lawyer goes crazy and starts suing people with 60"+ TVs in their room, its the best thing that could possibly happen. A nation wide freak out by "Joe the Plumber" would most likely force congress to make needed changes a broken law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>until a NFL lawyer goes crazy and starts suing people with 60 " + TVs in their room , its the best thing that could possibly happen .
A nation wide freak out by " Joe the Plumber " would most likely force congress to make needed changes a broken law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>until a NFL lawyer goes crazy and starts suing people with 60"+ TVs in their room, its the best thing that could possibly happen.
A nation wide freak out by "Joe the Plumber" would most likely force congress to make needed changes a broken law.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987326</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1265020200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't watch to see who wins, I watch because it truly is entertaining to see people perform feats i can not, to feel the tension in the players, and to see guys get SMEARED, and to see some truly great plays.</p><p>I read books from beginning to end to see HOW it got the the end, though it would be equally easy to just skip to it.  Heck, lots of books I read I know the end before I begin.  Same with watching movies.</p><p>With a "big" game, it;s not only the excitement of the game itself, but the other people you;re capable of bringing together to watch it with, and its even more entertaining when there's a good split of people rooting for different sides.  There's also the pre and post game conversation and mingling to be had.</p><p>i do enough most of the days of the year, it's completely OK to pick a few nights on occasion to enjoy someone ELSE doing something, especially when you can appreciate the effort it takes for them to do it so well.</p><p>If you think sports is about "watching" something, you truly do not understand either sports or society at all.  (then again, you are reading<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. so maybe that should have been assumed, my bad...)  Also, without watching some football, how do you expect to have a clue about how to play it yourself outside?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and there's a lot of us that are either incapable of doing so, or who lack the scope of friends to pull off a game, and we can live vicariously through the players when necessary.</p><p>I've been to a lot of big game parties, and hosted several.  I can say in all my years, no one has ever said "we" won.  I hear a lot of "way to go Giants!" and "nice job SC!" and "Dallas sucks!"  but no one I know considers themselves any more a part of the team then the towel or water guy.  no one thinks their cheering had anything to do with the victory (aside a few superstitious folks).  That said, by SUPPORTING a team, you are actually making it possible for them to exist, and thus to win at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't watch to see who wins , I watch because it truly is entertaining to see people perform feats i can not , to feel the tension in the players , and to see guys get SMEARED , and to see some truly great plays.I read books from beginning to end to see HOW it got the the end , though it would be equally easy to just skip to it .
Heck , lots of books I read I know the end before I begin .
Same with watching movies.With a " big " game , it ; s not only the excitement of the game itself , but the other people you ; re capable of bringing together to watch it with , and its even more entertaining when there 's a good split of people rooting for different sides .
There 's also the pre and post game conversation and mingling to be had.i do enough most of the days of the year , it 's completely OK to pick a few nights on occasion to enjoy someone ELSE doing something , especially when you can appreciate the effort it takes for them to do it so well.If you think sports is about " watching " something , you truly do not understand either sports or society at all .
( then again , you are reading / .
so maybe that should have been assumed , my bad... ) Also , without watching some football , how do you expect to have a clue about how to play it yourself outside ?
...and there 's a lot of us that are either incapable of doing so , or who lack the scope of friends to pull off a game , and we can live vicariously through the players when necessary.I 've been to a lot of big game parties , and hosted several .
I can say in all my years , no one has ever said " we " won .
I hear a lot of " way to go Giants !
" and " nice job SC !
" and " Dallas sucks !
" but no one I know considers themselves any more a part of the team then the towel or water guy .
no one thinks their cheering had anything to do with the victory ( aside a few superstitious folks ) .
That said , by SUPPORTING a team , you are actually making it possible for them to exist , and thus to win at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't watch to see who wins, I watch because it truly is entertaining to see people perform feats i can not, to feel the tension in the players, and to see guys get SMEARED, and to see some truly great plays.I read books from beginning to end to see HOW it got the the end, though it would be equally easy to just skip to it.
Heck, lots of books I read I know the end before I begin.
Same with watching movies.With a "big" game, it;s not only the excitement of the game itself, but the other people you;re capable of bringing together to watch it with, and its even more entertaining when there's a good split of people rooting for different sides.
There's also the pre and post game conversation and mingling to be had.i do enough most of the days of the year, it's completely OK to pick a few nights on occasion to enjoy someone ELSE doing something, especially when you can appreciate the effort it takes for them to do it so well.If you think sports is about "watching" something, you truly do not understand either sports or society at all.
(then again, you are reading /.
so maybe that should have been assumed, my bad...)  Also, without watching some football, how do you expect to have a clue about how to play it yourself outside?
...and there's a lot of us that are either incapable of doing so, or who lack the scope of friends to pull off a game, and we can live vicariously through the players when necessary.I've been to a lot of big game parties, and hosted several.
I can say in all my years, no one has ever said "we" won.
I hear a lot of "way to go Giants!
" and "nice job SC!
" and "Dallas sucks!
"  but no one I know considers themselves any more a part of the team then the towel or water guy.
no one thinks their cheering had anything to do with the victory (aside a few superstitious folks).
That said, by SUPPORTING a team, you are actually making it possible for them to exist, and thus to win at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985840</id>
	<title>$r3w the NFL</title>
	<author>ATestR</author>
	<datestamp>1265015100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I couldn't care less about the Superbowl.  Generally, the only part that's worth watching is the commercials... and you can watch them online now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I could n't care less about the Superbowl .
Generally , the only part that 's worth watching is the commercials... and you can watch them online now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I couldn't care less about the Superbowl.
Generally, the only part that's worth watching is the commercials... and you can watch them online now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985786</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>KGBear</author>
	<datestamp>1265014920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, there are not. This is part of the mainstream trying to take the terms geek and nerd from us, after we made them cool. Geeks and nerds have no interest in sports whatsoever. They view them as the childish games they are. If you are interested in sports, you are certainly not a geek. Probably not even a nerd. No exceptions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , there are not .
This is part of the mainstream trying to take the terms geek and nerd from us , after we made them cool .
Geeks and nerds have no interest in sports whatsoever .
They view them as the childish games they are .
If you are interested in sports , you are certainly not a geek .
Probably not even a nerd .
No exceptions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, there are not.
This is part of the mainstream trying to take the terms geek and nerd from us, after we made them cool.
Geeks and nerds have no interest in sports whatsoever.
They view them as the childish games they are.
If you are interested in sports, you are certainly not a geek.
Probably not even a nerd.
No exceptions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985878</id>
	<title>Re:Can't copyright a term</title>
	<author>xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D</author>
	<datestamp>1265015220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps they even meant trademark<i>ed</i>?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps they even meant trademarked ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps they even meant trademarked?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988274</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>david\_thornley</author>
	<datestamp>1265024160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
As all nerds know, the Super Bowl is a great time to go shopping.  You avoid a lot of crowds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As all nerds know , the Super Bowl is a great time to go shopping .
You avoid a lot of crowds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
As all nerds know, the Super Bowl is a great time to go shopping.
You avoid a lot of crowds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987792</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>TrekkieGod</author>
	<datestamp>1265021940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason.</p></div><p>::ahem::</p><p>"173467321476-Charlie-32789777643-Tango-732-Victor-73117888732476789764376-Lock"</p><p>That was the password Data used in the episode "Brothers" to lock all command functions when he took over the ship, and I just typed it from memory.  Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason .
: : ahem : : " 173467321476-Charlie-32789777643-Tango-732-Victor-73117888732476789764376-Lock " That was the password Data used in the episode " Brothers " to lock all command functions when he took over the ship , and I just typed it from memory .
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury , I rest my case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nerds do not memorize meaningless trivia without good reason.
::ahem::"173467321476-Charlie-32789777643-Tango-732-Victor-73117888732476789764376-Lock"That was the password Data used in the episode "Brothers" to lock all command functions when he took over the ship, and I just typed it from memory.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989810</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265031120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Surely you meant to include Pus Blower?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Surely you meant to include Pus Blower ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surely you meant to include Pus Blower?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988048</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>ArbitraryDescriptor</author>
	<datestamp>1265023140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The reason, quite obviously, is that those things are awesome.
<br> <br>
<em>IG-88, Gonk, R2-D5</em>, that one in cloud city.. and um.... damn.  Geek-fail</htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason , quite obviously , is that those things are awesome .
IG-88 , Gonk , R2-D5 , that one in cloud city.. and um.... damn. Geek-fail</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason, quite obviously, is that those things are awesome.
IG-88, Gonk, R2-D5, that one in cloud city.. and um.... damn.  Geek-fail</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985532</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Waffle Iron</author>
	<datestamp>1265057460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is news for nerds, remember?</p></div><p>Well, I'm going to be recording the Superbowl on my Linux-hosted Mythtv box. Then I'll use the automatic commercial flagging feature to skip over the game so I can see the ads.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is news for nerds , remember ? Well , I 'm going to be recording the Superbowl on my Linux-hosted Mythtv box .
Then I 'll use the automatic commercial flagging feature to skip over the game so I can see the ads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is news for nerds, remember?Well, I'm going to be recording the Superbowl on my Linux-hosted Mythtv box.
Then I'll use the automatic commercial flagging feature to skip over the game so I can see the ads.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</id>
	<title>An Alternative</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265016000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[rant]<br>Instead of passively witnessing multimillionaire drug addicts chase a ball to sell ad space... do something.  Take the people who were going to show up for "da big game" outside to play tag football.  Have a foosball championship.  Play card games.  Have a LAN party.  Play DnD.  Do something.</p><p>The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.</p><p>Whatever teams are playing this year are branches of a company.  Do you care which 7-11 sold the most hotdogs?  Or if the Pepsi bottling plant on the east coast produced more soda than the west coast plant?  Even if it is your home team, the players aren't from your town.  They're employees shuffled around or chasing contracts.  At least the local high school games have some attachment to you.</p><p>Go ahead and mod me troll or flambait if i've hurt your feelings and doing something to me will make you feel better about how you've spent your Sundays.  Just take a moment to consider *doing* something instead of watching others.  And if the team you cheered for won... don't say "we won".  If you didn't leave a drop of blood or sweat on the field... you were not a part of that victory.  You're a witness, that's it.  Watching something someone else did is not an accomplishment and no reason to be proud.  The team won.  You watched.<br>[/rant]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>[ rant ] Instead of passively witnessing multimillionaire drug addicts chase a ball to sell ad space... do something .
Take the people who were going to show up for " da big game " outside to play tag football .
Have a foosball championship .
Play card games .
Have a LAN party .
Play DnD .
Do something.The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.Whatever teams are playing this year are branches of a company .
Do you care which 7-11 sold the most hotdogs ?
Or if the Pepsi bottling plant on the east coast produced more soda than the west coast plant ?
Even if it is your home team , the players are n't from your town .
They 're employees shuffled around or chasing contracts .
At least the local high school games have some attachment to you.Go ahead and mod me troll or flambait if i 've hurt your feelings and doing something to me will make you feel better about how you 've spent your Sundays .
Just take a moment to consider * doing * something instead of watching others .
And if the team you cheered for won... do n't say " we won " .
If you did n't leave a drop of blood or sweat on the field... you were not a part of that victory .
You 're a witness , that 's it .
Watching something someone else did is not an accomplishment and no reason to be proud .
The team won .
You watched .
[ /rant ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[rant]Instead of passively witnessing multimillionaire drug addicts chase a ball to sell ad space... do something.
Take the people who were going to show up for "da big game" outside to play tag football.
Have a foosball championship.
Play card games.
Have a LAN party.
Play DnD.
Do something.The outcome of the game will be the same whether you watch it or not.Whatever teams are playing this year are branches of a company.
Do you care which 7-11 sold the most hotdogs?
Or if the Pepsi bottling plant on the east coast produced more soda than the west coast plant?
Even if it is your home team, the players aren't from your town.
They're employees shuffled around or chasing contracts.
At least the local high school games have some attachment to you.Go ahead and mod me troll or flambait if i've hurt your feelings and doing something to me will make you feel better about how you've spent your Sundays.
Just take a moment to consider *doing* something instead of watching others.
And if the team you cheered for won... don't say "we won".
If you didn't leave a drop of blood or sweat on the field... you were not a part of that victory.
You're a witness, that's it.
Watching something someone else did is not an accomplishment and no reason to be proud.
The team won.
You watched.
[/rant]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985440</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>thestudio\_bob</author>
	<datestamp>1265057100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Awesome! How about some more anagrams....</p><p>Blowers Up<br>
Bowlers Up<br>
Below Spur<br>
Bowel Spur<br>
Elbow Spur<br>
Ruble Swop<br>
Blew Pours<br>
Superb Low<br>
Rubes Plow<br>
Blowup Res<br>
Blows Pure<br>
Bowls Pure<br>
Blow Super<br>
Pub Slower<br>
Bro We Plus<br>
Bus Per Owl<br>
Super Blow (Awesome)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Awesome !
How about some more anagrams....Blowers Up Bowlers Up Below Spur Bowel Spur Elbow Spur Ruble Swop Blew Pours Superb Low Rubes Plow Blowup Res Blows Pure Bowls Pure Blow Super Pub Slower Bro We Plus Bus Per Owl Super Blow ( Awesome )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Awesome!
How about some more anagrams....Blowers Up
Bowlers Up
Below Spur
Bowel Spur
Elbow Spur
Ruble Swop
Blew Pours
Superb Low
Rubes Plow
Blowup Res
Blows Pure
Bowls Pure
Blow Super
Pub Slower
Bro We Plus
Bus Per Owl
Super Blow (Awesome)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988116</id>
	<title>Re:No 7.1 sound?</title>
	<author>omnichad</author>
	<datestamp>1265023440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just make sure you don't have any walls.  Those reverberations cost extra.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just make sure you do n't have any walls .
Those reverberations cost extra .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just make sure you don't have any walls.
Those reverberations cost extra.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987182</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>Tekfactory</author>
	<datestamp>1265019660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Watching/Witnessing YOUR team Win, beats the alternative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Watching/Witnessing YOUR team Win , beats the alternative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Watching/Witnessing YOUR team Win, beats the alternative.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30991434</id>
	<title>"Super Bowl" copyrighted? Try "super Bowl" instead</title>
	<author>kmoser</author>
	<datestamp>1265043900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Super Bowl" may be copyrighted but "super Bowl" isn't. I'm having a super Bowl party.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Super Bowl " may be copyrighted but " super Bowl " is n't .
I 'm having a super Bowl party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Super Bowl" may be copyrighted but "super Bowl" isn't.
I'm having a super Bowl party.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988446</id>
	<title>Re:An Alternative</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265024880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are MY team because I PAY for them.  Ever take a look at how much a modern stadium costs?  Ever notice the amount of public money going to build that stadium?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are MY team because I PAY for them .
Ever take a look at how much a modern stadium costs ?
Ever notice the amount of public money going to build that stadium ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are MY team because I PAY for them.
Ever take a look at how much a modern stadium costs?
Ever notice the amount of public money going to build that stadium?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985940</id>
	<title>Re:Not copyrighted but trademarked</title>
	<author>SecurityGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1265015340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The NFL argues that footage of the game is licensed onlyThe NFL argues that footage of the game is licensed only</p></div></blockquote><p>Aye, there's the rub.  I haven't licensed a darned thing from the NFL, ever.  We need to entirely do away with BS "licensing" like "by viewing this web site...".  No, sorry, I agree to your terms by signing a contract, period.  I don't agree to your terms by viewing a web site, watching a TV, rubbing my nose, or yelling Yabba Dabba Do.  The very notion that I agreed to 34 pages of legalese by doing something no sane person would construe as a positive affirmation of agreement is ridiculous.</p><p>Can we please get law back in line with common sense now?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The NFL argues that footage of the game is licensed onlyThe NFL argues that footage of the game is licensed onlyAye , there 's the rub .
I have n't licensed a darned thing from the NFL , ever .
We need to entirely do away with BS " licensing " like " by viewing this web site... " .
No , sorry , I agree to your terms by signing a contract , period .
I do n't agree to your terms by viewing a web site , watching a TV , rubbing my nose , or yelling Yabba Dabba Do .
The very notion that I agreed to 34 pages of legalese by doing something no sane person would construe as a positive affirmation of agreement is ridiculous.Can we please get law back in line with common sense now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The NFL argues that footage of the game is licensed onlyThe NFL argues that footage of the game is licensed onlyAye, there's the rub.
I haven't licensed a darned thing from the NFL, ever.
We need to entirely do away with BS "licensing" like "by viewing this web site...".
No, sorry, I agree to your terms by signing a contract, period.
I don't agree to your terms by viewing a web site, watching a TV, rubbing my nose, or yelling Yabba Dabba Do.
The very notion that I agreed to 34 pages of legalese by doing something no sane person would construe as a positive affirmation of agreement is ridiculous.Can we please get law back in line with common sense now?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985216</id>
	<title>Re: The term itself...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265056320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You missed the point. The argument is irrelevant because the NFL can sue any random sports bar or pub into oblivion. Therefore the term "Super Bowl" in any application is solely owned by the NFL. So it is ruled by the most powerful court in the US, money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You missed the point .
The argument is irrelevant because the NFL can sue any random sports bar or pub into oblivion .
Therefore the term " Super Bowl " in any application is solely owned by the NFL .
So it is ruled by the most powerful court in the US , money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You missed the point.
The argument is irrelevant because the NFL can sue any random sports bar or pub into oblivion.
Therefore the term "Super Bowl" in any application is solely owned by the NFL.
So it is ruled by the most powerful court in the US, money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985298</id>
	<title>Or say</title>
	<author>JumpDrive</author>
	<datestamp>1265056620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who dat screwing with my big TV?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who dat screwing with my big TV ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who dat screwing with my big TV?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986272</id>
	<title>Re:stop spamming 'idiocracy' tag.</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1265016540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Idiocracy" is "idiotic bureaucracy". Government has no monopoly on bureaucracy; I posit that your phone or insurance company is likely more bureaucratic than your state government. I know that AT&amp;T's red tape is far worse than Illinois' DMV is (which is one reason I no longer use AT&amp;T, the idiots).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Idiocracy " is " idiotic bureaucracy " .
Government has no monopoly on bureaucracy ; I posit that your phone or insurance company is likely more bureaucratic than your state government .
I know that AT&amp;T 's red tape is far worse than Illinois ' DMV is ( which is one reason I no longer use AT&amp;T , the idiots ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Idiocracy" is "idiotic bureaucracy".
Government has no monopoly on bureaucracy; I posit that your phone or insurance company is likely more bureaucratic than your state government.
I know that AT&amp;T's red tape is far worse than Illinois' DMV is (which is one reason I no longer use AT&amp;T, the idiots).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985284</id>
	<title>Re:Can I call it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265056560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can I call it a Superb Owl party?</p></div><p>Does Borland still hold a trademark on OWL?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I call it a Superb Owl party ? Does Borland still hold a trademark on OWL ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I call it a Superb Owl party?Does Borland still hold a trademark on OWL?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987500</id>
	<title>Re:The term itself...?</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1265020800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>when you start charging for food, you move from being a collection of friends to a sport bar, and sports bars don't get fair use.</p></div></blockquote><p>Certainly not.  The relevant definition of performing or displaying a work "publicly" is given in 17 USC 101:</p><p>"to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered;"</p><p>So if you open up your house to all comers, then the performance is public.  If you only invite your "social acquaintances", it's not public, even if you charge those acquaintances for food.  It's a "public" performance right, not a "commercial" performance right.</p><p>The nonsense about TV size only applies once it's already established that a public performance is taking place.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>when you start charging for food , you move from being a collection of friends to a sport bar , and sports bars do n't get fair use.Certainly not .
The relevant definition of performing or displaying a work " publicly " is given in 17 USC 101 : " to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered ; " So if you open up your house to all comers , then the performance is public .
If you only invite your " social acquaintances " , it 's not public , even if you charge those acquaintances for food .
It 's a " public " performance right , not a " commercial " performance right.The nonsense about TV size only applies once it 's already established that a public performance is taking place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when you start charging for food, you move from being a collection of friends to a sport bar, and sports bars don't get fair use.Certainly not.
The relevant definition of performing or displaying a work "publicly" is given in 17 USC 101:"to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered;"So if you open up your house to all comers, then the performance is public.
If you only invite your "social acquaintances", it's not public, even if you charge those acquaintances for food.
It's a "public" performance right, not a "commercial" performance right.The nonsense about TV size only applies once it's already established that a public performance is taking place.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942</id>
	<title>The term itself...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Just don't charge for food, or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright."</p></div><p>I'd like to hear a lawyer stand up and say that with a straight face. Trademarked? Possibly. Copyright? Not likely. And even it was a registered mark, I fail to see what food has to do with anything, or how it would be actionable unless the rightsholder is organising similar events that might be confused with whatever private viewing we're talking about here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just do n't charge for food , or call it a 'Super Bowl ' party , since the term itself is copyright .
" I 'd like to hear a lawyer stand up and say that with a straight face .
Trademarked ? Possibly .
Copyright ? Not likely .
And even it was a registered mark , I fail to see what food has to do with anything , or how it would be actionable unless the rightsholder is organising similar events that might be confused with whatever private viewing we 're talking about here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just don't charge for food, or call it a 'Super Bowl' party, since the term itself is copyright.
"I'd like to hear a lawyer stand up and say that with a straight face.
Trademarked? Possibly.
Copyright? Not likely.
And even it was a registered mark, I fail to see what food has to do with anything, or how it would be actionable unless the rightsholder is organising similar events that might be confused with whatever private viewing we're talking about here.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985950</id>
	<title>Re:Can't copyright a term</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1265015400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only it were that clear-cut.</p><p>Suppose I printed out "super-bowl tickets" to grant admission to my party.  Ignore the copyright implications of that for a moment - yes there would be some.</p><p>Is my use of the Super Bowl mark on those tickets a trademark violation?  Probably so.  My ticket does not, in fact, grant access to the <i>event</i> that is the Super Bowl, even if it does grant access to an event at which we will viewing parts of the event that is the Super Bowl.</p><p>So where's the line?  You might think it's the line between commercial and non-commercial use, but you'd be wrong; non-commercial use of a trademark can still be a violation.</p><p>Argubaly an event like the Super Bowl isn't like a shrink-wrapped product that you can point to and say "see, I have one here, and that's what I was referring to".</p><p>I'm not saying the NFL is right in all of their claims; I think all of the sports leagues have been taking far too many liberties with their claims of IP rights.  But when it comes to events that are not the Super Bowl using the Super Bowl name, I think they have an arguable case even if the event in question is bulit around watching the same game that is at the center of the event that is the Super Bowl.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only it were that clear-cut.Suppose I printed out " super-bowl tickets " to grant admission to my party .
Ignore the copyright implications of that for a moment - yes there would be some.Is my use of the Super Bowl mark on those tickets a trademark violation ?
Probably so .
My ticket does not , in fact , grant access to the event that is the Super Bowl , even if it does grant access to an event at which we will viewing parts of the event that is the Super Bowl.So where 's the line ?
You might think it 's the line between commercial and non-commercial use , but you 'd be wrong ; non-commercial use of a trademark can still be a violation.Argubaly an event like the Super Bowl is n't like a shrink-wrapped product that you can point to and say " see , I have one here , and that 's what I was referring to " .I 'm not saying the NFL is right in all of their claims ; I think all of the sports leagues have been taking far too many liberties with their claims of IP rights .
But when it comes to events that are not the Super Bowl using the Super Bowl name , I think they have an arguable case even if the event in question is bulit around watching the same game that is at the center of the event that is the Super Bowl .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only it were that clear-cut.Suppose I printed out "super-bowl tickets" to grant admission to my party.
Ignore the copyright implications of that for a moment - yes there would be some.Is my use of the Super Bowl mark on those tickets a trademark violation?
Probably so.
My ticket does not, in fact, grant access to the event that is the Super Bowl, even if it does grant access to an event at which we will viewing parts of the event that is the Super Bowl.So where's the line?
You might think it's the line between commercial and non-commercial use, but you'd be wrong; non-commercial use of a trademark can still be a violation.Argubaly an event like the Super Bowl isn't like a shrink-wrapped product that you can point to and say "see, I have one here, and that's what I was referring to".I'm not saying the NFL is right in all of their claims; I think all of the sports leagues have been taking far too many liberties with their claims of IP rights.
But when it comes to events that are not the Super Bowl using the Super Bowl name, I think they have an arguable case even if the event in question is bulit around watching the same game that is at the center of the event that is the Super Bowl.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987292</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265020020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Disagree.   There is actually a lot in common between a nerd and a sports nerd, but a sports nerds isn't the 40 year old with a beer belly who remembers every sports stat--it's the player or coach on the field who remembers every sports stat, who works out every day to be in peak condition, who picks their diet with mathematical precision to be at their peak, who experiments with the best way to spin a ball while making a 30 yard throw in 10 mile per hour head winds.  In short, they've dedicated themselves to *doing* something and using their *brain* to be the best at it, just like pocket protector nerds. This doesn't happen watching sports.  Watching sports involves being a passive observer watching and criticizing those who are out on the field, but we'd rather being *doing* something. That's why nerds like things like video games (they're interactive), engineering, science, and programming.  In a way, both type of nerds are the ones who put themselves out on the playing field of life, while the rest are just spectators (i.e. the masses).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Disagree .
There is actually a lot in common between a nerd and a sports nerd , but a sports nerds is n't the 40 year old with a beer belly who remembers every sports stat--it 's the player or coach on the field who remembers every sports stat , who works out every day to be in peak condition , who picks their diet with mathematical precision to be at their peak , who experiments with the best way to spin a ball while making a 30 yard throw in 10 mile per hour head winds .
In short , they 've dedicated themselves to * doing * something and using their * brain * to be the best at it , just like pocket protector nerds .
This does n't happen watching sports .
Watching sports involves being a passive observer watching and criticizing those who are out on the field , but we 'd rather being * doing * something .
That 's why nerds like things like video games ( they 're interactive ) , engineering , science , and programming .
In a way , both type of nerds are the ones who put themselves out on the playing field of life , while the rest are just spectators ( i.e .
the masses ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Disagree.
There is actually a lot in common between a nerd and a sports nerd, but a sports nerds isn't the 40 year old with a beer belly who remembers every sports stat--it's the player or coach on the field who remembers every sports stat, who works out every day to be in peak condition, who picks their diet with mathematical precision to be at their peak, who experiments with the best way to spin a ball while making a 30 yard throw in 10 mile per hour head winds.
In short, they've dedicated themselves to *doing* something and using their *brain* to be the best at it, just like pocket protector nerds.
This doesn't happen watching sports.
Watching sports involves being a passive observer watching and criticizing those who are out on the field, but we'd rather being *doing* something.
That's why nerds like things like video games (they're interactive), engineering, science, and programming.
In a way, both type of nerds are the ones who put themselves out on the playing field of life, while the rest are just spectators (i.e.
the masses).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989000</id>
	<title>There's an easy solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265027100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This perennial problem has been solved <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29qOT4JozSw" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">many times before</a> [youtube.com].  It's not a "Super Bowl" party, it's merely an ordinary party held in honor of the final game of the U.S. professional football season.  A "S***r B**l" party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This perennial problem has been solved many times before [ youtube.com ] .
It 's not a " Super Bowl " party , it 's merely an ordinary party held in honor of the final game of the U.S. professional football season .
A " S * * * r B * * l " party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This perennial problem has been solved many times before [youtube.com].
It's not a "Super Bowl" party, it's merely an ordinary party held in honor of the final game of the U.S. professional football season.
A "S***r B**l" party.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985720</id>
	<title>stop spamming 'idiocracy' tag.</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1265057940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for this has nothing to do with government, or bureaucracy. they both are empty machinery that works according to the wishes of the people manning them and how the gears set up.</p><p>and in america, those who set up its gears and man its operators are corporations. they buy the laws they need with the monetary power they have, and the thing just runs according to that.</p><p>the tag should have been corporatism, instead of idiocracy. for, it is corporatism that allows minority to trample majority's rights in our age's democracies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for this has nothing to do with government , or bureaucracy .
they both are empty machinery that works according to the wishes of the people manning them and how the gears set up.and in america , those who set up its gears and man its operators are corporations .
they buy the laws they need with the monetary power they have , and the thing just runs according to that.the tag should have been corporatism , instead of idiocracy .
for , it is corporatism that allows minority to trample majority 's rights in our age 's democracies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for this has nothing to do with government, or bureaucracy.
they both are empty machinery that works according to the wishes of the people manning them and how the gears set up.and in america, those who set up its gears and man its operators are corporations.
they buy the laws they need with the monetary power they have, and the thing just runs according to that.the tag should have been corporatism, instead of idiocracy.
for, it is corporatism that allows minority to trample majority's rights in our age's democracies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986138</id>
	<title>Re:What super bowl party?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265016120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you recall, their "pro-bowl" kicker took bribes from Indianapolis and missed 3 kicks in a row.</p></div><p>Maybe they should have punched it in. He wasn't missing extra points.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you recall , their " pro-bowl " kicker took bribes from Indianapolis and missed 3 kicks in a row.Maybe they should have punched it in .
He was n't missing extra points .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you recall, their "pro-bowl" kicker took bribes from Indianapolis and missed 3 kicks in a row.Maybe they should have punched it in.
He wasn't missing extra points.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986032</id>
	<title>Super Bowl? Old hat</title>
	<author>horza</author>
	<datestamp>1265015700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Champions League football final is now the most watched annual sports even in the world (109M last year compared to 106M for the Super Bowl). Maybe this means you will soon be able watch something more exciting whilst waiting for those much hyped half-time adverts?</p><p>Phillip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Champions League football final is now the most watched annual sports even in the world ( 109M last year compared to 106M for the Super Bowl ) .
Maybe this means you will soon be able watch something more exciting whilst waiting for those much hyped half-time adverts ? Phillip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Champions League football final is now the most watched annual sports even in the world (109M last year compared to 106M for the Super Bowl).
Maybe this means you will soon be able watch something more exciting whilst waiting for those much hyped half-time adverts?Phillip.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989172</id>
	<title>Of course!</title>
	<author>BCW2</author>
	<datestamp>1265027760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It will if it's done right!</htmltext>
<tokenext>It will if it 's done right !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It will if it's done right!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30992140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30993124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988048
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985910
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990218
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986696
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988446
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30998940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30995212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30999452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985180
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985516
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30998776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985404
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30992400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30999668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30999610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_01_1457205_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989548
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985086
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987292
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985786
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986954
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990714
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986426
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30993124
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985584
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985990
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986750
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989814
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988048
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30998940
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985982
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987792
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985176
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986138
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985532
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986738
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986928
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985840
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985548
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985218
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985540
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30999452
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985232
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985520
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986392
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985950
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985062
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989114
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987500
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987512
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986696
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985332
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987680
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985606
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986012
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30992140
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985134
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985794
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986688
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986064
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986894
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987836
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988726
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985940
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987490
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985270
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985184
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985516
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988116
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985352
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985262
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985618
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987780
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988120
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30992400
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986430
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30998776
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985564
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989506
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30984998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986812
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988158
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30989810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30985284
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30999610
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_01_1457205.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30990218
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30999668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30988864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30987592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30986754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_01_1457205.30995212
</commentlist>
</conversation>
