<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_10_1459257</id>
	<title>Hackers Attack AU Websites To Protest Censorship</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1265816940000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"A band of cyber-attackers has taken down the Australian Parliament House website and hacked Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's website in <a href="http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20100210/hackers-attack-au-websites-protest-censorship.htm">coordinated protests</a> against government plans to filter the Internet. The group responsible, called Anonymous, is known for coordinated Internet attacks against Scientology and other groups in the past. It recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " A band of cyber-attackers has taken down the Australian Parliament House website and hacked Prime Minister Kevin Rudd 's website in coordinated protests against government plans to filter the Internet .
The group responsible , called Anonymous , is known for coordinated Internet attacks against Scientology and other groups in the past .
It recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape , drug use , bestiality and child sex abuse .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "A band of cyber-attackers has taken down the Australian Parliament House website and hacked Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's website in coordinated protests against government plans to filter the Internet.
The group responsible, called Anonymous, is known for coordinated Internet attacks against Scientology and other groups in the past.
It recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086684</id>
	<title>we are legion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265044140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are anonymous, we are legion! we do not forg...</p><p>Crap! I forgot to log out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are anonymous , we are legion !
we do not forg...Crap !
I forgot to log out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are anonymous, we are legion!
we do not forg...Crap!
I forgot to log out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087106</id>
	<title>Warning Posted on Slashdot?</title>
	<author>Conchobair</author>
	<datestamp>1265046000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1541772&amp;cid=31065460" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">It totally saw this coming.</a> [slashdot.org] Or weirdly remembered this post.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It totally saw this coming .
[ slashdot.org ] Or weirdly remembered this post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It totally saw this coming.
[slashdot.org] Or weirdly remembered this post.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086866</id>
	<title>Re:I believe the concept of Anonymous escapes you</title>
	<author>wintercolby</author>
	<datestamp>1265044980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think they messed up an acronym:

Australians Now Obligated to Nuke Your Malignant Oligarchy of Undeserved Sactions</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think they messed up an acronym : Australians Now Obligated to Nuke Your Malignant Oligarchy of Undeserved Sactions</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think they messed up an acronym:

Australians Now Obligated to Nuke Your Malignant Oligarchy of Undeserved Sactions</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086548</id>
	<title>Ambiguous headline</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't just write 'Australian'? Really? Because for a moment I thought you were talking about American University.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't just write 'Australian ' ?
Really ? Because for a moment I thought you were talking about American University .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't just write 'Australian'?
Really? Because for a moment I thought you were talking about American University.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31093064</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the so called democracy?</title>
	<author>psithurism</author>
	<datestamp>1265029860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In my opinion, the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt "little ones".</p></div><p>I always figured the result of democracy would be the majority making the rules for what everyone else can and can't do. "Tyranny of the majority" has always been a buzzword for the cautions of democracy.</p><p>Given the story we're replying to I think my hypotheses is working out better.</p><p>I think if they had maybe a bill of rights and a good "separation of powers" ensuring a clear judicial branch to enforce it. I might be biased from personal experience, but even thats not going so good here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my opinion , the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt " little ones " .I always figured the result of democracy would be the majority making the rules for what everyone else can and ca n't do .
" Tyranny of the majority " has always been a buzzword for the cautions of democracy.Given the story we 're replying to I think my hypotheses is working out better.I think if they had maybe a bill of rights and a good " separation of powers " ensuring a clear judicial branch to enforce it .
I might be biased from personal experience , but even thats not going so good here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my opinion, the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt "little ones".I always figured the result of democracy would be the majority making the rules for what everyone else can and can't do.
"Tyranny of the majority" has always been a buzzword for the cautions of democracy.Given the story we're replying to I think my hypotheses is working out better.I think if they had maybe a bill of rights and a good "separation of powers" ensuring a clear judicial branch to enforce it.
I might be biased from personal experience, but even thats not going so good here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428</id>
	<title>That'll teach 'em.</title>
	<author>darkvizier</author>
	<datestamp>1265043120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure parliament is trembling in their shoes about now.  They cannot hope to stand against anonymous.  Who can possibly save them?  Maybe... batman...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure parliament is trembling in their shoes about now .
They can not hope to stand against anonymous .
Who can possibly save them ?
Maybe... batman.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure parliament is trembling in their shoes about now.
They cannot hope to stand against anonymous.
Who can possibly save them?
Maybe... batman...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088640</id>
	<title>Re:I believe the concept of Anonymous escapes you</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1265052420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well it's really no weirder than thinking that all "terrorists" are somehow allied.  Seriously, some people seem to think that "terrorists" are all a bunch of Muslims that know each other and plan attacks together.  Like it makes sense to have a "war on terror" when it's a bunch of disparate groups who may or may not have similar ideologies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well it 's really no weirder than thinking that all " terrorists " are somehow allied .
Seriously , some people seem to think that " terrorists " are all a bunch of Muslims that know each other and plan attacks together .
Like it makes sense to have a " war on terror " when it 's a bunch of disparate groups who may or may not have similar ideologies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well it's really no weirder than thinking that all "terrorists" are somehow allied.
Seriously, some people seem to think that "terrorists" are all a bunch of Muslims that know each other and plan attacks together.
Like it makes sense to have a "war on terror" when it's a bunch of disparate groups who may or may not have similar ideologies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086622</id>
	<title>Wow this group is pretty active on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; The group responsible, called Anonymous</p><p>Wow, this group is pretty active on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., I see comments signed "anonymous" all the time on this site<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-))</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; The group responsible , called AnonymousWow , this group is pretty active on /. , I see comments signed " anonymous " all the time on this site ; - ) )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; The group responsible, called AnonymousWow, this group is pretty active on /., I see comments signed "anonymous" all the time on this site ;-))</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087546</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>pizzap</author>
	<datestamp>1265048040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Normally bans like that include not only video, but fotos, drawings, comics, written stories, computer games,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... It's really hard to say what any given government will ban once they have the infrastructure to do so in place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Normally bans like that include not only video , but fotos , drawings , comics , written stories , computer games , ... It 's really hard to say what any given government will ban once they have the infrastructure to do so in place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Normally bans like that include not only video, but fotos, drawings, comics, written stories, computer games, ... It's really hard to say what any given government will ban once they have the infrastructure to do so in place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087872</id>
	<title>A better definition</title>
	<author>Crazy Taco</author>
	<datestamp>1265049300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In my opinion, the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt "little ones".</p></div></blockquote><p>Not quite right... the true definition of freedom would be that people can do what they want as long as their actions don't infringe upon the rights of anyone else. If you do something that infringes upon the rights of some rich powerful person, does that make it ok just because you didn't hurt a "little one"? Obviously not. </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my opinion , the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt " little ones " .Not quite right... the true definition of freedom would be that people can do what they want as long as their actions do n't infringe upon the rights of anyone else .
If you do something that infringes upon the rights of some rich powerful person , does that make it ok just because you did n't hurt a " little one " ?
Obviously not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my opinion, the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt "little ones".Not quite right... the true definition of freedom would be that people can do what they want as long as their actions don't infringe upon the rights of anyone else.
If you do something that infringes upon the rights of some rich powerful person, does that make it ok just because you didn't hurt a "little one"?
Obviously not. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087690</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265048640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>because, you know, small breasted women MIGHT be under 18</p></div><p>It wasn't even that, it was that small breasted women <a href="http://idle.slashdot.org/story/10/01/29/0222239/Australia-Bans-Small-Breasts-In-Adult-Films" title="slashdot.org">LOOKED like they were under 18.</a> [slashdot.org] The logic is along the lines of banning cartoons displaying children (<a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/01/28/0112246/Man-in-Court-Over-Simpsons-Porn" title="slashdot.org">even the Simpsons</a> [slashdot.org]) participating in sex acts. Because they look like they are underage, then it is Kiddy Porn because they are targeting people who want to see young people naked.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>because , you know , small breasted women MIGHT be under 18It was n't even that , it was that small breasted women LOOKED like they were under 18 .
[ slashdot.org ] The logic is along the lines of banning cartoons displaying children ( even the Simpsons [ slashdot.org ] ) participating in sex acts .
Because they look like they are underage , then it is Kiddy Porn because they are targeting people who want to see young people naked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because, you know, small breasted women MIGHT be under 18It wasn't even that, it was that small breasted women LOOKED like they were under 18.
[slashdot.org] The logic is along the lines of banning cartoons displaying children (even the Simpsons [slashdot.org]) participating in sex acts.
Because they look like they are underage, then it is Kiddy Porn because they are targeting people who want to see young people naked.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090152</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the so called democracy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265016000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Peter Singer would say "You should be free to excercise your freedom to do whatever you want, to the extent that your excersions do not encroach upon the likewise freedoms of other people".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Peter Singer would say " You should be free to excercise your freedom to do whatever you want , to the extent that your excersions do not encroach upon the likewise freedoms of other people " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Peter Singer would say "You should be free to excercise your freedom to do whatever you want, to the extent that your excersions do not encroach upon the likewise freedoms of other people".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090970</id>
	<title>Re:Singapore proxies</title>
	<author>AHuxley</author>
	<datestamp>1265019900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cash for US data servers.<br>
Give an Australian a little back box that links with code on a server in the USA.<br>
Plug in any computer in one end, plug the other into your adsl device.<br>
To the Australian filter you are now a bank moving ~1 gb + of data a day, encrypted, using the same port as banks to one ip.<br>
Your url requests decode in the USA, you never seen on any Australian network.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cash for US data servers .
Give an Australian a little back box that links with code on a server in the USA .
Plug in any computer in one end , plug the other into your adsl device .
To the Australian filter you are now a bank moving ~ 1 gb + of data a day , encrypted , using the same port as banks to one ip .
Your url requests decode in the USA , you never seen on any Australian network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cash for US data servers.
Give an Australian a little back box that links with code on a server in the USA.
Plug in any computer in one end, plug the other into your adsl device.
To the Australian filter you are now a bank moving ~1 gb + of data a day, encrypted, using the same port as banks to one ip.
Your url requests decode in the USA, you never seen on any Australian network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087490</id>
	<title>Re:Please research what your writing about IBT</title>
	<author>MasterPatricko</author>
	<datestamp>1265047800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree, ridiculous<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and not just the article, even the summary is patronizing. Editors, it may not be what it once was, but this is still<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.<br> <br>

Calling Anonymous "a group"? WTF? This is almost as bad as that FOX news report.<br> <br>

<i>YES, editors, I just compared the quality of your journalism to FOX.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , ridiculous ... and not just the article , even the summary is patronizing .
Editors , it may not be what it once was , but this is still / .
Calling Anonymous " a group " ?
WTF ? This is almost as bad as that FOX news report .
YES , editors , I just compared the quality of your journalism to FOX .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, ridiculous ... and not just the article, even the summary is patronizing.
Editors, it may not be what it once was, but this is still /.
Calling Anonymous "a group"?
WTF? This is almost as bad as that FOX news report.
YES, editors, I just compared the quality of your journalism to FOX.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088040</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the so called democracy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265050080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree - not hurt. but r@pe sites do hurt!!!, as do chilp p0rn!!!!, so they need to be able to distinguish.  peace.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree - not hurt .
but r @ pe sites do hurt ! !
! , as do chilp p0rn ! ! !
! , so they need to be able to distinguish .
peace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree - not hurt.
but r@pe sites do hurt!!
!, as do chilp p0rn!!!
!, so they need to be able to distinguish.
peace.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090714</id>
	<title>/b/</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265018880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>THEYR CHARGIN THEY LAZER</htmltext>
<tokenext>THEYR CHARGIN THEY LAZER</tokentext>
<sentencetext>THEYR CHARGIN THEY LAZER</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086776</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb... Dumb Dumb Dumb</title>
	<author>thijsh</author>
	<datestamp>1265044560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[...] who are in favor of drug use, rape, zoo sex and child abuse [...]</p></div><p>Anyone who ever read 4chan<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/b/ can attest to that.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ ... ] who are in favor of drug use , rape , zoo sex and child abuse [ ... ] Anyone who ever read 4chan /b/ can attest to that .
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[...] who are in favor of drug use, rape, zoo sex and child abuse [...]Anyone who ever read 4chan /b/ can attest to that.
;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088230</id>
	<title>Re:Boomerang</title>
	<author>O('\_')O\_Bush</author>
	<datestamp>1265050860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This needs to be modded up, as he's right, the rationale had nothing to do with the reasons listed in the article.<br><br>Instead, legal adult sites were able to be blacklisted for the reason above, and there were cases of this happening.<br><br>That sort of BS is what sparked off the Anon vs Australia issue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This needs to be modded up , as he 's right , the rationale had nothing to do with the reasons listed in the article.Instead , legal adult sites were able to be blacklisted for the reason above , and there were cases of this happening.That sort of BS is what sparked off the Anon vs Australia issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This needs to be modded up, as he's right, the rationale had nothing to do with the reasons listed in the article.Instead, legal adult sites were able to be blacklisted for the reason above, and there were cases of this happening.That sort of BS is what sparked off the Anon vs Australia issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092958</id>
	<title>Re:That'll teach 'em.</title>
	<author>martinux</author>
	<datestamp>1265029380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Batman's come through for Oz in the past.

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John\_Batman" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John\_Batman</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Batman 's come through for Oz in the past .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John \ _Batman [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Batman's come through for Oz in the past.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John\_Batman [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088434</id>
	<title>I would support such blocking if ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265051640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... they could achieve that with <i>absolutely zero collateral damage</i>.  However, I highly doubt any government agency, especially the Australian government, could come anywhere close to achieving that.  And that is THE reason it should not even be considered, much less attempted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... they could achieve that with absolutely zero collateral damage .
However , I highly doubt any government agency , especially the Australian government , could come anywhere close to achieving that .
And that is THE reason it should not even be considered , much less attempted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... they could achieve that with absolutely zero collateral damage.
However, I highly doubt any government agency, especially the Australian government, could come anywhere close to achieving that.
And that is THE reason it should not even be considered, much less attempted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090282</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265016720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't agree in censorship, but I am so fucking tired of potheads turning EVERY SINGLE ARGUMENT into something that is pro-weed. Just look at the crime stats; the guys who beat their wives, beat their children, rob 7-11s, and generally cause mayhem in public all have priors for drug use. The drug culture produces terrible people. Who uses drugs? Trash who didn't graduate high school, own pit-bulls, have their ex-girlfriends name tattooed on their arm, and are chronically unemployed. Wow, I really want to give THAT group MORE access to drugs. Don't say it's a generalization because I've lived all over America and trash is trash is trash, whether they smoke weed, crack, do meth, or shoot up in slums or gated communities. All products of drug culture are the same: worthless beings that contribute nothing to society and are a drain on our resources.</p><p>This is where you cocksuckers hold up a handful of names as proof that drugs are great. Leary, Obama, Bush. Oh wow, you really proved your point you fucking stoned moron. Go tell that to the hundreds of thousands of people that have destroyed their lives and the lives of others due to drug addiction, the people that have lost everything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't agree in censorship , but I am so fucking tired of potheads turning EVERY SINGLE ARGUMENT into something that is pro-weed .
Just look at the crime stats ; the guys who beat their wives , beat their children , rob 7-11s , and generally cause mayhem in public all have priors for drug use .
The drug culture produces terrible people .
Who uses drugs ?
Trash who did n't graduate high school , own pit-bulls , have their ex-girlfriends name tattooed on their arm , and are chronically unemployed .
Wow , I really want to give THAT group MORE access to drugs .
Do n't say it 's a generalization because I 've lived all over America and trash is trash is trash , whether they smoke weed , crack , do meth , or shoot up in slums or gated communities .
All products of drug culture are the same : worthless beings that contribute nothing to society and are a drain on our resources.This is where you cocksuckers hold up a handful of names as proof that drugs are great .
Leary , Obama , Bush .
Oh wow , you really proved your point you fucking stoned moron .
Go tell that to the hundreds of thousands of people that have destroyed their lives and the lives of others due to drug addiction , the people that have lost everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't agree in censorship, but I am so fucking tired of potheads turning EVERY SINGLE ARGUMENT into something that is pro-weed.
Just look at the crime stats; the guys who beat their wives, beat their children, rob 7-11s, and generally cause mayhem in public all have priors for drug use.
The drug culture produces terrible people.
Who uses drugs?
Trash who didn't graduate high school, own pit-bulls, have their ex-girlfriends name tattooed on their arm, and are chronically unemployed.
Wow, I really want to give THAT group MORE access to drugs.
Don't say it's a generalization because I've lived all over America and trash is trash is trash, whether they smoke weed, crack, do meth, or shoot up in slums or gated communities.
All products of drug culture are the same: worthless beings that contribute nothing to society and are a drain on our resources.This is where you cocksuckers hold up a handful of names as proof that drugs are great.
Leary, Obama, Bush.
Oh wow, you really proved your point you fucking stoned moron.
Go tell that to the hundreds of thousands of people that have destroyed their lives and the lives of others due to drug addiction, the people that have lost everything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086584</id>
	<title>Sure, that sends the right message</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So in order to protest a government that is so paranoid about the internet that it filters out content, hackers attack the websites of that government?  [sarcasm] I'm sure they are so much less paranoid now and thinking less about the children.[/sarcasm]</htmltext>
<tokenext>So in order to protest a government that is so paranoid about the internet that it filters out content , hackers attack the websites of that government ?
[ sarcasm ] I 'm sure they are so much less paranoid now and thinking less about the children .
[ /sarcasm ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So in order to protest a government that is so paranoid about the internet that it filters out content, hackers attack the websites of that government?
[sarcasm] I'm sure they are so much less paranoid now and thinking less about the children.
[/sarcasm]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088588</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, that sends the right message</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265052300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, that wasn't the original intent.  (despite the numerous fliers they made for getting the attack to happen)</p><p>It is always "for the lulz".<br>ANY crazy reactions are always good, even if it involved blocking the various imageboards they congregated on. (4chan, 711chan, probably 888chan and more)</p><p>Even if people got arrested, they would laugh.<br>Even if those numbers hit the triple digits, they would STILL laugh.</p><p>And then someone will probably make a "tool" to help clear any potential material that linked them to the attacks on the servers.<br>But what it will really do is yet another DDoS on the servers, probably spam 4chan a little.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , that was n't the original intent .
( despite the numerous fliers they made for getting the attack to happen ) It is always " for the lulz " .ANY crazy reactions are always good , even if it involved blocking the various imageboards they congregated on .
( 4chan , 711chan , probably 888chan and more ) Even if people got arrested , they would laugh.Even if those numbers hit the triple digits , they would STILL laugh.And then someone will probably make a " tool " to help clear any potential material that linked them to the attacks on the servers.But what it will really do is yet another DDoS on the servers , probably spam 4chan a little .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, that wasn't the original intent.
(despite the numerous fliers they made for getting the attack to happen)It is always "for the lulz".ANY crazy reactions are always good, even if it involved blocking the various imageboards they congregated on.
(4chan, 711chan, probably 888chan and more)Even if people got arrested, they would laugh.Even if those numbers hit the triple digits, they would STILL laugh.And then someone will probably make a "tool" to help clear any potential material that linked them to the attacks on the servers.But what it will really do is yet another DDoS on the servers, probably spam 4chan a little.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086532</id>
	<title>Obviously we need filtering.  Look what they did..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stupid ass anonymous.  Way to make sure these plans get completed.</p><p>Thats like having the KKK back your cause..  Guaranteed to make it fail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stupid ass anonymous .
Way to make sure these plans get completed.Thats like having the KKK back your cause.. Guaranteed to make it fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stupid ass anonymous.
Way to make sure these plans get completed.Thats like having the KKK back your cause..  Guaranteed to make it fail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560</id>
	<title>I believe the concept of Anonymous escapes you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The group responsible, called Anonymous, is known for coordinated Internet attacks against Scientology and other groups in the past."</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Right. Because anyone calling themselves anonymous are the "same group". Specifically because "Anonymous" means "of unknown name". Heck, we have a bunch of Anonymous Cowards here on slashdot too! Let's track down their IP's and throw them in jail like the terrorists they are! After all, they've been seen on TV to blow up yellow vans, so they must be evil, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The group responsible , called Anonymous , is known for coordinated Internet attacks against Scientology and other groups in the past .
"       Right .
Because anyone calling themselves anonymous are the " same group " .
Specifically because " Anonymous " means " of unknown name " .
Heck , we have a bunch of Anonymous Cowards here on slashdot too !
Let 's track down their IP 's and throw them in jail like the terrorists they are !
After all , they 've been seen on TV to blow up yellow vans , so they must be evil , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The group responsible, called Anonymous, is known for coordinated Internet attacks against Scientology and other groups in the past.
"
      Right.
Because anyone calling themselves anonymous are the "same group".
Specifically because "Anonymous" means "of unknown name".
Heck, we have a bunch of Anonymous Cowards here on slashdot too!
Let's track down their IP's and throw them in jail like the terrorists they are!
After all, they've been seen on TV to blow up yellow vans, so they must be evil, right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089368</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the so called democracy?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.</p><blockquote><div><p>Democracy: 1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections</p></div></blockquote><p>I think you mean liberty.</p><blockquote><div><p>1 : the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice</p></div> </blockquote><p>The result of democracy is rule by majority, which can be, but does not have to be, liberty and freedom. In fact, majority rule will always result in liberty and freedom being limited to what the majority finds acceptable. If the majority finds slavery acceptable, then a democratic state can have slavery. If the majority finds that a religious group has unacceptable practices (child sex, human sacrifice, animal sacrifice,etc), then that religion or practice may be outlawed in a democratic society.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You keep using that word .
I do not think it means what you think it means.Democracy : 1 a : government by the people ; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free electionsI think you mean liberty.1 : the quality or state of being free : a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social , political , or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice The result of democracy is rule by majority , which can be , but does not have to be , liberty and freedom .
In fact , majority rule will always result in liberty and freedom being limited to what the majority finds acceptable .
If the majority finds slavery acceptable , then a democratic state can have slavery .
If the majority finds that a religious group has unacceptable practices ( child sex , human sacrifice , animal sacrifice,etc ) , then that religion or practice may be outlawed in a democratic society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You keep using that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.Democracy: 1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free electionsI think you mean liberty.1 : the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice The result of democracy is rule by majority, which can be, but does not have to be, liberty and freedom.
In fact, majority rule will always result in liberty and freedom being limited to what the majority finds acceptable.
If the majority finds slavery acceptable, then a democratic state can have slavery.
If the majority finds that a religious group has unacceptable practices (child sex, human sacrifice, animal sacrifice,etc), then that religion or practice may be outlawed in a democratic society.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086644</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>HungryHobo</author>
	<datestamp>1265044020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh it's easy to pick out a few things and say "these, these are ok to put on the blacklist"</p><p>The problem being of course that once there *is* a blacklist, esspecially one which nobody is allowed to see or even talk about then pretty soon other things start getting added to the backlist and after a while you might as well just move to china.</p><p>Lets look at it from the fundamentalist crazy point of view....<br>"Abortion = murder and well murder is worse than rape and murdering children is worse than raping them"... them so pro abortion sites quickly end up on the list.</p><p>and so on and so on.</p><p>Given the real world examples of exactly this kind of situation is anyone here going to try to argue that this isn't a *real* slipppery slope?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh it 's easy to pick out a few things and say " these , these are ok to put on the blacklist " The problem being of course that once there * is * a blacklist , esspecially one which nobody is allowed to see or even talk about then pretty soon other things start getting added to the backlist and after a while you might as well just move to china.Lets look at it from the fundamentalist crazy point of view.... " Abortion = murder and well murder is worse than rape and murdering children is worse than raping them " ... them so pro abortion sites quickly end up on the list.and so on and so on.Given the real world examples of exactly this kind of situation is anyone here going to try to argue that this is n't a * real * slipppery slope ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh it's easy to pick out a few things and say "these, these are ok to put on the blacklist"The problem being of course that once there *is* a blacklist, esspecially one which nobody is allowed to see or even talk about then pretty soon other things start getting added to the backlist and after a while you might as well just move to china.Lets look at it from the fundamentalist crazy point of view...."Abortion = murder and well murder is worse than rape and murdering children is worse than raping them"... them so pro abortion sites quickly end up on the list.and so on and so on.Given the real world examples of exactly this kind of situation is anyone here going to try to argue that this isn't a *real* slipppery slope?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086522</id>
	<title>Of course</title>
	<author>HungryHobo</author>
	<datestamp>1265043480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They'll just swat ineffectually at anonymous, like a man being swarmed by bees.<br>They might even arrest one or 2 people.<br>And the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/b/tards will laugh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'll just swat ineffectually at anonymous , like a man being swarmed by bees.They might even arrest one or 2 people.And the /b/tards will laugh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'll just swat ineffectually at anonymous, like a man being swarmed by bees.They might even arrest one or 2 people.And the /b/tards will laugh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086936</id>
	<title>Re:Wow this group is pretty active on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265045340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And besides -- I'm being oppressed! I start at zero mod points whereas the others start at one!<br>Waah!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And besides -- I 'm being oppressed !
I start at zero mod points whereas the others start at one ! Waah !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And besides -- I'm being oppressed!
I start at zero mod points whereas the others start at one!Waah!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31095006</id>
	<title>They did it again</title>
	<author>GoochOwnsYou</author>
	<datestamp>1265040180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/11/2816658.htm" title="abc.net.au" rel="nofollow">http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/11/2816658.htm</a> [abc.net.au] <p><div class="quote"><p> The website and another linked to the Department of Broadband and Communications were shut down for long periods yesterday after their servers were overloaded.

Both websites were offline again this morning.

A group of hackers calling itself Anonymous has claimed responsibility for the interruptions, which it has called Operation Titstorm.

Anonymous claims the attacks are also to highlight moves by the Government to ban the import of pornograhy featuring female ejaculation as well small-breasted women, over fears such films were simulating child pornography.

Critics say the Government's internet filter amounts to censorship and will slow down internet speeds.

The Government says the filter is necessary to block websites containing child pornography and other criminal activity.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/11/2816658.htm [ abc.net.au ] The website and another linked to the Department of Broadband and Communications were shut down for long periods yesterday after their servers were overloaded .
Both websites were offline again this morning .
A group of hackers calling itself Anonymous has claimed responsibility for the interruptions , which it has called Operation Titstorm .
Anonymous claims the attacks are also to highlight moves by the Government to ban the import of pornograhy featuring female ejaculation as well small-breasted women , over fears such films were simulating child pornography .
Critics say the Government 's internet filter amounts to censorship and will slow down internet speeds .
The Government says the filter is necessary to block websites containing child pornography and other criminal activity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/11/2816658.htm [abc.net.au]  The website and another linked to the Department of Broadband and Communications were shut down for long periods yesterday after their servers were overloaded.
Both websites were offline again this morning.
A group of hackers calling itself Anonymous has claimed responsibility for the interruptions, which it has called Operation Titstorm.
Anonymous claims the attacks are also to highlight moves by the Government to ban the import of pornograhy featuring female ejaculation as well small-breasted women, over fears such films were simulating child pornography.
Critics say the Government's internet filter amounts to censorship and will slow down internet speeds.
The Government says the filter is necessary to block websites containing child pornography and other criminal activity.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658</id>
	<title>Dumb... Dumb Dumb Dumb</title>
	<author>bsDaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1265044020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, if I were a normal person and just read this summary, I would conclude that the group are "cyber-terrorists" who are in favor of drug use, rape, zoo sex and child abuse.  In addition, by calling themselves Anonymous they're spoiling the concept of anonymity.  I really don't think that this action was the best press possible either for the group or for those who are against censorship in general.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if I were a normal person and just read this summary , I would conclude that the group are " cyber-terrorists " who are in favor of drug use , rape , zoo sex and child abuse .
In addition , by calling themselves Anonymous they 're spoiling the concept of anonymity .
I really do n't think that this action was the best press possible either for the group or for those who are against censorship in general .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if I were a normal person and just read this summary, I would conclude that the group are "cyber-terrorists" who are in favor of drug use, rape, zoo sex and child abuse.
In addition, by calling themselves Anonymous they're spoiling the concept of anonymity.
I really don't think that this action was the best press possible either for the group or for those who are against censorship in general.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086620</id>
	<title>This seems unfairly biased</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[QUOTE]</p><p>
&nbsp; "It recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse."</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p><p>I believe this interpretation unfairly portrays Anonymous as a bunch of sadistical, criminalalistic bottom-feeders. While Anonymous is a giant group that contains many criminals it also consists of regular people that do not want what they believe are fundamental freedoms restricted.</p><p>What the OP does not realize is that internet censorship is a slippery slope phenomenon that includes the blockage of many other types of unnecessarily censored content blocked by this filter.</p><p>I hope this clears something up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ QUOTE ]   " It recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape , drug use , bestiality and child sex abuse .
" [ /QUOTE ] I believe this interpretation unfairly portrays Anonymous as a bunch of sadistical , criminalalistic bottom-feeders .
While Anonymous is a giant group that contains many criminals it also consists of regular people that do not want what they believe are fundamental freedoms restricted.What the OP does not realize is that internet censorship is a slippery slope phenomenon that includes the blockage of many other types of unnecessarily censored content blocked by this filter.I hope this clears something up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[QUOTE]
  "It recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.
"[/QUOTE]I believe this interpretation unfairly portrays Anonymous as a bunch of sadistical, criminalalistic bottom-feeders.
While Anonymous is a giant group that contains many criminals it also consists of regular people that do not want what they believe are fundamental freedoms restricted.What the OP does not realize is that internet censorship is a slippery slope phenomenon that includes the blockage of many other types of unnecessarily censored content blocked by this filter.I hope this clears something up.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091546</id>
	<title>Re:Boomerang</title>
	<author>bug1</author>
	<datestamp>1265022180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Instead of blocking banned material maybe they should let it through so they can prosecute people for possession of it...</p><p>Also, thats just the political argument for imposing the filter, when its been implemented they will block a lot more, the filter they tested last year even blocked some dentists website, and they wont have the manpower to maintain an accurate banned list.</p><p>Once a filter is in, its a very small step to start censoring political material.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of blocking banned material maybe they should let it through so they can prosecute people for possession of it...Also , thats just the political argument for imposing the filter , when its been implemented they will block a lot more , the filter they tested last year even blocked some dentists website , and they wont have the manpower to maintain an accurate banned list.Once a filter is in , its a very small step to start censoring political material .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of blocking banned material maybe they should let it through so they can prosecute people for possession of it...Also, thats just the political argument for imposing the filter, when its been implemented they will block a lot more, the filter they tested last year even blocked some dentists website, and they wont have the manpower to maintain an accurate banned list.Once a filter is in, its a very small step to start censoring political material.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088356</id>
	<title>Re:That'll teach 'em.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265051400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Posted back in august 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEe7qhlFNs4 </p><p>Down with Kevin Rudd and Stephen Conroy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Posted back in august 2009 http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = CEe7qhlFNs4 Down with Kevin Rudd and Stephen Conroy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Posted back in august 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEe7qhlFNs4 Down with Kevin Rudd and Stephen Conroy!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086634</id>
	<title>Re:I believe the concept of Anonymous escapes you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>cough 4chan</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>cough 4chan</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cough 4chan</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088442</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb... Dumb Dumb Dumb</title>
	<author>NeoSkandranon</author>
	<datestamp>1265051760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They do like their drug use and zoo sex</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They do like their drug use and zoo sex</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They do like their drug use and zoo sex</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091686</id>
	<title>Oh - is this the banned list?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265022660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:SXGOYSruZvMJ:wikileaks.org/leak/acma-secret-blacklist-aug-2008.txt+site:wikileaks.org+acma-secret-blacklist-aug-2008.txt&amp;hl=en&amp;strip=1" title="74.125.153.132" rel="nofollow">http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:SXGOYSruZvMJ:wikileaks.org/leak/acma-secret-blacklist-aug-2008.txt+site:wikileaks.org+acma-secret-blacklist-aug-2008.txt&amp;hl=en&amp;strip=1</a> [74.125.153.132] <p>Pass laws against bad weather and sharp corners on furniture while your at it. If the sites break laws - shut 'em down. Otherwise shut the firetruck up (please).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //74.125.153.132/search ? q = cache : SXGOYSruZvMJ : wikileaks.org/leak/acma-secret-blacklist-aug-2008.txt + site : wikileaks.org + acma-secret-blacklist-aug-2008.txt&amp;hl = en&amp;strip = 1 [ 74.125.153.132 ] Pass laws against bad weather and sharp corners on furniture while your at it .
If the sites break laws - shut 'em down .
Otherwise shut the firetruck up ( please ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:SXGOYSruZvMJ:wikileaks.org/leak/acma-secret-blacklist-aug-2008.txt+site:wikileaks.org+acma-secret-blacklist-aug-2008.txt&amp;hl=en&amp;strip=1 [74.125.153.132] Pass laws against bad weather and sharp corners on furniture while your at it.
If the sites break laws - shut 'em down.
Otherwise shut the firetruck up (please).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092582</id>
	<title>Re:That'll teach 'em.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265027340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I did it for the lulz</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did it for the lulz</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did it for the lulz</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091654</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265022540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly I didn't expect more.</p><p>About as much "quality" journalism here in the summary as in the article itself, which had none to begin with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly I did n't expect more.About as much " quality " journalism here in the summary as in the article itself , which had none to begin with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly I didn't expect more.About as much "quality" journalism here in the summary as in the article itself, which had none to begin with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087122</id>
	<title>Thinking of the children?</title>
	<author>Sperbels</author>
	<datestamp>1265046060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't be fooled.  They say they're doing it to protect the children.  Once the mechanism is in place to do this they'll keep a low profile and only censor blatant violations.  Then...they tighten the noose little bits at a time until eventually it is used to limit politically undesirable speech.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't be fooled .
They say they 're doing it to protect the children .
Once the mechanism is in place to do this they 'll keep a low profile and only censor blatant violations .
Then...they tighten the noose little bits at a time until eventually it is used to limit politically undesirable speech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't be fooled.
They say they're doing it to protect the children.
Once the mechanism is in place to do this they'll keep a low profile and only censor blatant violations.
Then...they tighten the noose little bits at a time until eventually it is used to limit politically undesirable speech.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087940</id>
	<title>.. right here, apparently :-(</title>
	<author>kestasjk</author>
	<datestamp>1265049660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/10/2815232.htm" title="abc.net.au">80pc back web filter: poll</a> [abc.net.au] <br>
Unfortunately this isn't so much a failure of democracy as a failure of education. A failure of the media, and those of us who understand why it's such a dangerous waste of money, to get the message out to everyone.<br> <br>

Seeing that article knocked my confidence a bit, I just hope that the 1000 calls made were an unrepresentative sample..</htmltext>
<tokenext>80pc back web filter : poll [ abc.net.au ] Unfortunately this is n't so much a failure of democracy as a failure of education .
A failure of the media , and those of us who understand why it 's such a dangerous waste of money , to get the message out to everyone .
Seeing that article knocked my confidence a bit , I just hope that the 1000 calls made were an unrepresentative sample. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>80pc back web filter: poll [abc.net.au] 
Unfortunately this isn't so much a failure of democracy as a failure of education.
A failure of the media, and those of us who understand why it's such a dangerous waste of money, to get the message out to everyone.
Seeing that article knocked my confidence a bit, I just hope that the 1000 calls made were an unrepresentative sample..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087682</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the so called democracy?</title>
	<author>manicb</author>
	<datestamp>1265048580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Democracy should logically result in applying the will of the majority. If something only hurts a minority, it is entirely possible the majority will simply ignore it, however unjust. e.g. <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/berkshire/7851346.stm" title="bbc.co.uk" rel="nofollow">uk extreme porn legislation</a> [bbc.co.uk]. In this case, the government could pass a clearly discriminating law for the sake of a few good headlines. That's not an 'implementation' issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Democracy should logically result in applying the will of the majority .
If something only hurts a minority , it is entirely possible the majority will simply ignore it , however unjust .
e.g. uk extreme porn legislation [ bbc.co.uk ] .
In this case , the government could pass a clearly discriminating law for the sake of a few good headlines .
That 's not an 'implementation ' issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Democracy should logically result in applying the will of the majority.
If something only hurts a minority, it is entirely possible the majority will simply ignore it, however unjust.
e.g. uk extreme porn legislation [bbc.co.uk].
In this case, the government could pass a clearly discriminating law for the sake of a few good headlines.
That's not an 'implementation' issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086740</id>
	<title>Re:That'll teach 'em.</title>
	<author>Ukab the Great</author>
	<datestamp>1265044440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Batman's a shady character with a troubled past, lots of toys, and teenage boy partner who he dresses in tights. The cry for help would never make it past the filter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Batman 's a shady character with a troubled past , lots of toys , and teenage boy partner who he dresses in tights .
The cry for help would never make it past the filter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Batman's a shady character with a troubled past, lots of toys, and teenage boy partner who he dresses in tights.
The cry for help would never make it past the filter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31093920</id>
	<title>Not what the filter blocks</title>
	<author>atomicstrawberry</author>
	<datestamp>1265034000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem that Australians have with the extremely unpopular internet filtering proposed is that it doesn't block access to "sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse." It blocks access to "unwanted content." The definition of that is completely left up to the government. There is no judicial oversight. There is no process for appealing a listing. The blacklist is completely secret and leaked copies have shown that its content is in no way limited to the above. It might be that the content initially may be deplorable, but the way the whole system has been put forward will easily allow them to escalate what is 'unacceptable'.</p><p>A secretive, government-mandated, government-run censorship system is a very, very bad thing.</p><p>However Anonymous has essentially shot those protesting the proposal in the kneecaps with this move. Now, in addition to claiming that anyone who protests the filtering system must be a pervert and a kiddy fiddler, the proponents can accuse us of being 'internet terrorists' or something as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem that Australians have with the extremely unpopular internet filtering proposed is that it does n't block access to " sites featuring material such as rape , drug use , bestiality and child sex abuse .
" It blocks access to " unwanted content .
" The definition of that is completely left up to the government .
There is no judicial oversight .
There is no process for appealing a listing .
The blacklist is completely secret and leaked copies have shown that its content is in no way limited to the above .
It might be that the content initially may be deplorable , but the way the whole system has been put forward will easily allow them to escalate what is 'unacceptable'.A secretive , government-mandated , government-run censorship system is a very , very bad thing.However Anonymous has essentially shot those protesting the proposal in the kneecaps with this move .
Now , in addition to claiming that anyone who protests the filtering system must be a pervert and a kiddy fiddler , the proponents can accuse us of being 'internet terrorists ' or something as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem that Australians have with the extremely unpopular internet filtering proposed is that it doesn't block access to "sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.
" It blocks access to "unwanted content.
" The definition of that is completely left up to the government.
There is no judicial oversight.
There is no process for appealing a listing.
The blacklist is completely secret and leaked copies have shown that its content is in no way limited to the above.
It might be that the content initially may be deplorable, but the way the whole system has been put forward will easily allow them to escalate what is 'unacceptable'.A secretive, government-mandated, government-run censorship system is a very, very bad thing.However Anonymous has essentially shot those protesting the proposal in the kneecaps with this move.
Now, in addition to claiming that anyone who protests the filtering system must be a pervert and a kiddy fiddler, the proponents can accuse us of being 'internet terrorists' or something as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087930</id>
	<title>Re:Sure, that sends the right message</title>
	<author>Gat0r30y</author>
	<datestamp>1265049600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, however they may have to consider the actual cost (in actual dollars) of implementing their idiotic plan.  What do you think the actual cost of one day of these shenanigans is to the government?  Also, while I do not like to feed the b/east they were rather effective at humiliating the government by making them appear completely ineffectual.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , however they may have to consider the actual cost ( in actual dollars ) of implementing their idiotic plan .
What do you think the actual cost of one day of these shenanigans is to the government ?
Also , while I do not like to feed the b/east they were rather effective at humiliating the government by making them appear completely ineffectual .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, however they may have to consider the actual cost (in actual dollars) of implementing their idiotic plan.
What do you think the actual cost of one day of these shenanigans is to the government?
Also, while I do not like to feed the b/east they were rather effective at humiliating the government by making them appear completely ineffectual.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087238</id>
	<title>Re:I believe the concept of Anonymous escapes you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265046540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seeing agencies and the media fail to grasp the concept of Anonymous and the Internet culture in general is part of the lulz<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seeing agencies and the media fail to grasp the concept of Anonymous and the Internet culture in general is part of the lulz ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seeing agencies and the media fail to grasp the concept of Anonymous and the Internet culture in general is part of the lulz ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520</id>
	<title>Where is the so called democracy?</title>
	<author>bogaboga</author>
	<datestamp>1265043480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my opinion, the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt "little ones".</p><p>That's why the west's implementation of democracy leaves a lot to be desired. Why? Because governments only practice "democracy" when the practice suits their [selfish] ends.</p><p>I know there is a way round all this nonsense so let's inform our colleagues down there about ways of circumventing this rubbish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my opinion , the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt " little ones " .That 's why the west 's implementation of democracy leaves a lot to be desired .
Why ? Because governments only practice " democracy " when the practice suits their [ selfish ] ends.I know there is a way round all this nonsense so let 's inform our colleagues down there about ways of circumventing this rubbish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my opinion, the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt "little ones".That's why the west's implementation of democracy leaves a lot to be desired.
Why? Because governments only practice "democracy" when the practice suits their [selfish] ends.I know there is a way round all this nonsense so let's inform our colleagues down there about ways of circumventing this rubbish.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088450</id>
	<title>AU government are jerks</title>
	<author>jsepeta</author>
	<datestamp>1265051760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>access to bestiality and child porn probably should be blocked. but the australian government also wants to ban sites that show small-breasted women, because they might be confused for kids. ummm, i'm not buying it. sounds like people in the AU government are a bunch of sickos.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>access to bestiality and child porn probably should be blocked .
but the australian government also wants to ban sites that show small-breasted women , because they might be confused for kids .
ummm , i 'm not buying it .
sounds like people in the AU government are a bunch of sickos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>access to bestiality and child porn probably should be blocked.
but the australian government also wants to ban sites that show small-breasted women, because they might be confused for kids.
ummm, i'm not buying it.
sounds like people in the AU government are a bunch of sickos.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090990</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265020020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget non-sex and -drug and -crime related stuff like euthanasia websites. The leaked blacklist from last year included several euthanasia sites and even a dentist's website (!?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget non-sex and -drug and -crime related stuff like euthanasia websites .
The leaked blacklist from last year included several euthanasia sites and even a dentist 's website ( ! ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget non-sex and -drug and -crime related stuff like euthanasia websites.
The leaked blacklist from last year included several euthanasia sites and even a dentist's website (!?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090058</id>
	<title>LOL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265015340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Anonymous could not immediately be reached for further comment." Haha</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Anonymous could not immediately be reached for further comment .
" Haha</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Anonymous could not immediately be reached for further comment.
" Haha</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086796</id>
	<title>Re:That'll teach 'em.</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1265044680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Batman?  NOT.  Batman would be chewed up and eaten by Anonymous.   They are made up of Predators and aliens.  together they would chew up Batman and eat him, using his bones as toothpicks.....</p><p>P.S. Dont kill one of the Anonymous predators.   they will explode wiping out a 10 city block area...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Batman ?
NOT. Batman would be chewed up and eaten by Anonymous .
They are made up of Predators and aliens .
together they would chew up Batman and eat him , using his bones as toothpicks.....P.S .
Dont kill one of the Anonymous predators .
they will explode wiping out a 10 city block area.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Batman?
NOT.  Batman would be chewed up and eaten by Anonymous.
They are made up of Predators and aliens.
together they would chew up Batman and eat him, using his bones as toothpicks.....P.S.
Dont kill one of the Anonymous predators.
they will explode wiping out a 10 city block area...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086632</id>
	<title>This is Sparta!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Keep up the good work, pals. It was fun last night.</p><p>Internet is for porn. Don't fuck with us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Keep up the good work , pals .
It was fun last night.Internet is for porn .
Do n't fuck with us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Keep up the good work, pals.
It was fun last night.Internet is for porn.
Don't fuck with us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087056</id>
	<title>Since when..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265045760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since when was<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. taken over by NANOG faggots?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when was / .
taken over by NANOG faggots ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when was /.
taken over by NANOG faggots?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31094306</id>
	<title>Re:Further corruption of the principle</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265035740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know I was a C cup at age 14... The practical non-existence on commercial internet in the'80s didn't stop guys who were significantly old than me hitting on me then. Censoring pictures of small busted women won't stop people from being perverts now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know I was a C cup at age 14... The practical non-existence on commercial internet in the'80s did n't stop guys who were significantly old than me hitting on me then .
Censoring pictures of small busted women wo n't stop people from being perverts now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know I was a C cup at age 14... The practical non-existence on commercial internet in the'80s didn't stop guys who were significantly old than me hitting on me then.
Censoring pictures of small busted women won't stop people from being perverts now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31100306</id>
	<title>Re:Boomerang</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1265907120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>The summary omitted a few things. For one, the proposed blacklist would target otherwise legal adult sites featuring small-breasted women, with the apparent rationale that anyone who doesn't love giant plastic D-cups must be a pedophile.</i>
Citation needed.<p>
Is it sites that feature "small breasted" women that are being targeted - or sites that pose small breasted women as minors?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary omitted a few things .
For one , the proposed blacklist would target otherwise legal adult sites featuring small-breasted women , with the apparent rationale that anyone who does n't love giant plastic D-cups must be a pedophile .
Citation needed .
Is it sites that feature " small breasted " women that are being targeted - or sites that pose small breasted women as minors ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary omitted a few things.
For one, the proposed blacklist would target otherwise legal adult sites featuring small-breasted women, with the apparent rationale that anyone who doesn't love giant plastic D-cups must be a pedophile.
Citation needed.
Is it sites that feature "small breasted" women that are being targeted - or sites that pose small breasted women as minors?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088158</id>
	<title>Re:Boomerang</title>
	<author>stonewallred</author>
	<datestamp>1265050560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's wrong with Captain Piccard?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's wrong with Captain Piccard ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's wrong with Captain Piccard?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092420</id>
	<title>Yay, human swarms!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265026140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm excited to see how this goes, because in my eyes it's the first time something "real"* is protested without any leader. Also, as could be seen in Project Chanology, the mob turned out to be more intelligent than some of it's component individuals. To throw some buzzwords / catchphrases at it, if this works out, we'll have seen enough quantitative change in how the internet is used (and what all that communication is doing to us) for it to have become a qualitative change; it will have become<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/real/, so to speak.</p><p>*Not to trivialize the damages done to people by Scientology, but, well, it's not something most people had opinions on. Government censorship<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/is/.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm excited to see how this goes , because in my eyes it 's the first time something " real " * is protested without any leader .
Also , as could be seen in Project Chanology , the mob turned out to be more intelligent than some of it 's component individuals .
To throw some buzzwords / catchphrases at it , if this works out , we 'll have seen enough quantitative change in how the internet is used ( and what all that communication is doing to us ) for it to have become a qualitative change ; it will have become /real/ , so to speak .
* Not to trivialize the damages done to people by Scientology , but , well , it 's not something most people had opinions on .
Government censorship /is/ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm excited to see how this goes, because in my eyes it's the first time something "real"* is protested without any leader.
Also, as could be seen in Project Chanology, the mob turned out to be more intelligent than some of it's component individuals.
To throw some buzzwords / catchphrases at it, if this works out, we'll have seen enough quantitative change in how the internet is used (and what all that communication is doing to us) for it to have become a qualitative change; it will have become /real/, so to speak.
*Not to trivialize the damages done to people by Scientology, but, well, it's not something most people had opinions on.
Government censorship /is/.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091208</id>
	<title>Re:That'll teach 'em.</title>
	<author>Demonoid-Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1265020860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Who can possibly save them? Maybe... batman...</p></div><p>Clearly, you don't know our history. Batman "discovered" Victoria (while the French were trying to find water in Westernport). Bought it from the locals for beads and mirrors.</p><p> Bit like Manhattan really. The natives got the better end of the deal.</p><p>Yeah, I know how could he discover an occupied land? Go figure - didn't Christopher Columbus discover America - oh wait, was it Eric The Red, no, um, wasn't it already occupied</p><p>Back on thread - <b>In Canberra today....</b> </p><p>Volante and CSG onsite techs at Parliament House and Group Eight sites are flat out dealing with complaints about lack of access to youtube, Google Earth, youporn....<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-p</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who can possibly save them ?
Maybe... batman...Clearly , you do n't know our history .
Batman " discovered " Victoria ( while the French were trying to find water in Westernport ) .
Bought it from the locals for beads and mirrors .
Bit like Manhattan really .
The natives got the better end of the deal.Yeah , I know how could he discover an occupied land ?
Go figure - did n't Christopher Columbus discover America - oh wait , was it Eric The Red , no , um , was n't it already occupiedBack on thread - In Canberra today.... Volante and CSG onsite techs at Parliament House and Group Eight sites are flat out dealing with complaints about lack of access to youtube , Google Earth , youporn.... ; -p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who can possibly save them?
Maybe... batman...Clearly, you don't know our history.
Batman "discovered" Victoria (while the French were trying to find water in Westernport).
Bought it from the locals for beads and mirrors.
Bit like Manhattan really.
The natives got the better end of the deal.Yeah, I know how could he discover an occupied land?
Go figure - didn't Christopher Columbus discover America - oh wait, was it Eric The Red, no, um, wasn't it already occupiedBack on thread - In Canberra today.... Volante and CSG onsite techs at Parliament House and Group Eight sites are flat out dealing with complaints about lack of access to youtube, Google Earth, youporn.... ;-p
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088806</id>
	<title>Thankk Them</title>
	<author>b4upoo</author>
	<datestamp>1265052960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>      A salute to any hacker who fights to maintain freedom on the net. Thank you guys. I hope you annoy the censorship nuts until they jump of a bridge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A salute to any hacker who fights to maintain freedom on the net .
Thank you guys .
I hope you annoy the censorship nuts until they jump of a bridge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>      A salute to any hacker who fights to maintain freedom on the net.
Thank you guys.
I hope you annoy the censorship nuts until they jump of a bridge.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087032</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree? NOOOOO</title>
	<author>Smegly</author>
	<datestamp>1265045640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <tt>I don't agree about censoring drug-related sites, but about the other contents...</tt></p> </div><p>Sure, whatever you pick there will be some material that is offensive to downright sick and completely illegal.
Censoring the Internet is:<br>
A) A band aid solution that does not compare to tracking down and prosecuting the culprits, and <br>
B) A powerful tool for political control.<br>
<br>
Governments choose it because point A) means it is cheaper than actually solving crimes and point B) is all gravy for controlling an unruly population.
<br>
Censorship on the internet has nothing to do with stopping [insert favorite bogyman here]. For example: If Governments of the world <b>really</b> <i>really</i> cared about Child porn, there is no way in hell they would subscribe to TRIPS, GATS and other trade agreements that push so fervently for expansion of intellectual property (IP) rights worldwide. The majority of Child porn comes from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human\_trafficking#Destination.2C\_transit\_and\_source\_countries" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">poor developing countries</a> [wikipedia.org] - called "Source Country" exploitation. Truly unbiased research and commissions inquires have overwhelmingly [References below] found these trade agreements severely disadvantage developing countries. Basically they keep poor countries poor.  Do you see your government moving to solve this major worldwide source of child porn? No of course not: they don't really care it is just a bogyman to push through controls on the internet - your going to get worse IP restriction AND internet censorship == the complete opposite of actually solving the child porn problem (and the closly related human trafficking, and poverty, starvation, death, and...).
<br> <br>
References (of many) you can find on the internet linking IP laws and trade agreements to continuing poverty of the developing world:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The GATS and  TRIPS are both examples of rich countries investing their
most vigorous negotiating efforts on agendas where the gains  will accrue
overwhelmingly to companies located in rich countries. They are examples of
a one-size-fits-all approach  being imposed and,  most strikingly, of rich
countries now pulling  up the  ladder, trying to deny developing countries the
very policy options that rich countries  used to manage their own economic
development.</p> </div><p> <a href="http://www.cid.org.nz/advocacy/Phil\_Twyford\_-\_CID\_Trade\_Forum.pdf" title="cid.org.nz" rel="nofollow">http://www.cid.org.nz/advocacy/Phil\_Twyford\_-\_CID\_Trade\_Forum.pdf</a> [cid.org.nz] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Commission on Intellectual Property Rights declared the internationally-mandated expansion of intellectual property (IP) rights unlikely to generate significant benefits for most developing countries and likely to impose costs, such as higher priced medicines or seeds. This makes poverty reduction more difficult.
The intensively researched, 180-page report is entitled Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy. It is the culmination of much study and follows on more than a dozen meetings and workshops, 17 working papers, an exhaustive literature review of the field, visits to several developed and developing nations and a major conference. The report makes some 50 recommendations aimed at aligning IP protection with the goal of reducing poverty in developing nations. Topics include IP and health; agriculture; traditional knowledge; copyrights, software and the Internet; and the role of WTO and WIPO in advancing developing country interests. The Commission is an independent international body made up of Commissioners from both developed and developing countries with expertise in science, law, ethics and economics. The Commissioners come from industry, government and academia* (see list of Commissioners below).

"Developed countries often proceed on the assumption that what is good for them is likely to be good for developing countries," said Professor John Barton, Commission Chair and George E. Osborne Professor of Law, Stanford University. "But, in the case of developing countries, more and stronger protection is not necessarily better. Developing countries should not be encouraged or coerced into adopting stronger IP rights without regard to the impact this has on their development and poor people. They should be allowed to adopt appropriate rights regimes, not necessarily the most protective ones."</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.biotech-info.net/independent\_commission.html" title="biotech-info.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.biotech-info.net/independent\_commission.html</a> [biotech-info.net]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't agree about censoring drug-related sites , but about the other contents... Sure , whatever you pick there will be some material that is offensive to downright sick and completely illegal .
Censoring the Internet is : A ) A band aid solution that does not compare to tracking down and prosecuting the culprits , and B ) A powerful tool for political control .
Governments choose it because point A ) means it is cheaper than actually solving crimes and point B ) is all gravy for controlling an unruly population .
Censorship on the internet has nothing to do with stopping [ insert favorite bogyman here ] .
For example : If Governments of the world really really cared about Child porn , there is no way in hell they would subscribe to TRIPS , GATS and other trade agreements that push so fervently for expansion of intellectual property ( IP ) rights worldwide .
The majority of Child porn comes from poor developing countries [ wikipedia.org ] - called " Source Country " exploitation .
Truly unbiased research and commissions inquires have overwhelmingly [ References below ] found these trade agreements severely disadvantage developing countries .
Basically they keep poor countries poor .
Do you see your government moving to solve this major worldwide source of child porn ?
No of course not : they do n't really care it is just a bogyman to push through controls on the internet - your going to get worse IP restriction AND internet censorship = = the complete opposite of actually solving the child porn problem ( and the closly related human trafficking , and poverty , starvation , death , and... ) .
References ( of many ) you can find on the internet linking IP laws and trade agreements to continuing poverty of the developing world : The GATS and TRIPS are both examples of rich countries investing their most vigorous negotiating efforts on agendas where the gains will accrue overwhelmingly to companies located in rich countries .
They are examples of a one-size-fits-all approach being imposed and , most strikingly , of rich countries now pulling up the ladder , trying to deny developing countries the very policy options that rich countries used to manage their own economic development .
http : //www.cid.org.nz/advocacy/Phil \ _Twyford \ _- \ _CID \ _Trade \ _Forum.pdf [ cid.org.nz ] Commission on Intellectual Property Rights declared the internationally-mandated expansion of intellectual property ( IP ) rights unlikely to generate significant benefits for most developing countries and likely to impose costs , such as higher priced medicines or seeds .
This makes poverty reduction more difficult .
The intensively researched , 180-page report is entitled Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy .
It is the culmination of much study and follows on more than a dozen meetings and workshops , 17 working papers , an exhaustive literature review of the field , visits to several developed and developing nations and a major conference .
The report makes some 50 recommendations aimed at aligning IP protection with the goal of reducing poverty in developing nations .
Topics include IP and health ; agriculture ; traditional knowledge ; copyrights , software and the Internet ; and the role of WTO and WIPO in advancing developing country interests .
The Commission is an independent international body made up of Commissioners from both developed and developing countries with expertise in science , law , ethics and economics .
The Commissioners come from industry , government and academia * ( see list of Commissioners below ) .
" Developed countries often proceed on the assumption that what is good for them is likely to be good for developing countries , " said Professor John Barton , Commission Chair and George E. Osborne Professor of Law , Stanford University .
" But , in the case of developing countries , more and stronger protection is not necessarily better .
Developing countries should not be encouraged or coerced into adopting stronger IP rights without regard to the impact this has on their development and poor people .
They should be allowed to adopt appropriate rights regimes , not necessarily the most protective ones .
" http : //www.biotech-info.net/independent \ _commission.html [ biotech-info.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I don't agree about censoring drug-related sites, but about the other contents... Sure, whatever you pick there will be some material that is offensive to downright sick and completely illegal.
Censoring the Internet is:
A) A band aid solution that does not compare to tracking down and prosecuting the culprits, and 
B) A powerful tool for political control.
Governments choose it because point A) means it is cheaper than actually solving crimes and point B) is all gravy for controlling an unruly population.
Censorship on the internet has nothing to do with stopping [insert favorite bogyman here].
For example: If Governments of the world really really cared about Child porn, there is no way in hell they would subscribe to TRIPS, GATS and other trade agreements that push so fervently for expansion of intellectual property (IP) rights worldwide.
The majority of Child porn comes from poor developing countries [wikipedia.org] - called "Source Country" exploitation.
Truly unbiased research and commissions inquires have overwhelmingly [References below] found these trade agreements severely disadvantage developing countries.
Basically they keep poor countries poor.
Do you see your government moving to solve this major worldwide source of child porn?
No of course not: they don't really care it is just a bogyman to push through controls on the internet - your going to get worse IP restriction AND internet censorship == the complete opposite of actually solving the child porn problem (and the closly related human trafficking, and poverty, starvation, death, and...).
References (of many) you can find on the internet linking IP laws and trade agreements to continuing poverty of the developing world:The GATS and  TRIPS are both examples of rich countries investing their
most vigorous negotiating efforts on agendas where the gains  will accrue
overwhelmingly to companies located in rich countries.
They are examples of
a one-size-fits-all approach  being imposed and,  most strikingly, of rich
countries now pulling  up the  ladder, trying to deny developing countries the
very policy options that rich countries  used to manage their own economic
development.
http://www.cid.org.nz/advocacy/Phil\_Twyford\_-\_CID\_Trade\_Forum.pdf [cid.org.nz] Commission on Intellectual Property Rights declared the internationally-mandated expansion of intellectual property (IP) rights unlikely to generate significant benefits for most developing countries and likely to impose costs, such as higher priced medicines or seeds.
This makes poverty reduction more difficult.
The intensively researched, 180-page report is entitled Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy.
It is the culmination of much study and follows on more than a dozen meetings and workshops, 17 working papers, an exhaustive literature review of the field, visits to several developed and developing nations and a major conference.
The report makes some 50 recommendations aimed at aligning IP protection with the goal of reducing poverty in developing nations.
Topics include IP and health; agriculture; traditional knowledge; copyrights, software and the Internet; and the role of WTO and WIPO in advancing developing country interests.
The Commission is an independent international body made up of Commissioners from both developed and developing countries with expertise in science, law, ethics and economics.
The Commissioners come from industry, government and academia* (see list of Commissioners below).
"Developed countries often proceed on the assumption that what is good for them is likely to be good for developing countries," said Professor John Barton, Commission Chair and George E. Osborne Professor of Law, Stanford University.
"But, in the case of developing countries, more and stronger protection is not necessarily better.
Developing countries should not be encouraged or coerced into adopting stronger IP rights without regard to the impact this has on their development and poor people.
They should be allowed to adopt appropriate rights regimes, not necessarily the most protective ones.
" http://www.biotech-info.net/independent\_commission.html [biotech-info.net]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088600</id>
	<title>Wait for it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265052300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Soviet Australia, Internet censors you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet Australia , Internet censors you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet Australia, Internet censors you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091530</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>GumphMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1265022120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Minister concerned, Stephen Conroy, was interviewed by the satirical "current affairs" programme Hungry Beast (aired 10 Feb).   When asked about how the blacklist could possibly deal with something like YouTube where thousands of things \_someone\_ will find offensive can pop up in instant his response was enlightening.  He stated that they (the Govt.) were in negotiations with Google about how this could be achieved.  He went on to say that Google already filter substantial content for the Govt. of China, and that all we are saying is "these are our laws", please help enforce them.  I think he completely missed the obvious problems with using China as an example.</p><p>I expect that, in the fullness of time, average Joe will be unable to find information on how Australia treats asylum seekers, the dark underside of European treatment of the indigenous inhabitants of the country, any information on how to circumvent the filter, and anything else that's politically unpalatable.  Not because the current Govt. <i>intends to</i>, but ultimately because <i>they can</i>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Minister concerned , Stephen Conroy , was interviewed by the satirical " current affairs " programme Hungry Beast ( aired 10 Feb ) .
When asked about how the blacklist could possibly deal with something like YouTube where thousands of things \ _someone \ _ will find offensive can pop up in instant his response was enlightening .
He stated that they ( the Govt .
) were in negotiations with Google about how this could be achieved .
He went on to say that Google already filter substantial content for the Govt .
of China , and that all we are saying is " these are our laws " , please help enforce them .
I think he completely missed the obvious problems with using China as an example.I expect that , in the fullness of time , average Joe will be unable to find information on how Australia treats asylum seekers , the dark underside of European treatment of the indigenous inhabitants of the country , any information on how to circumvent the filter , and anything else that 's politically unpalatable .
Not because the current Govt .
intends to , but ultimately because they can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Minister concerned, Stephen Conroy, was interviewed by the satirical "current affairs" programme Hungry Beast (aired 10 Feb).
When asked about how the blacklist could possibly deal with something like YouTube where thousands of things \_someone\_ will find offensive can pop up in instant his response was enlightening.
He stated that they (the Govt.
) were in negotiations with Google about how this could be achieved.
He went on to say that Google already filter substantial content for the Govt.
of China, and that all we are saying is "these are our laws", please help enforce them.
I think he completely missed the obvious problems with using China as an example.I expect that, in the fullness of time, average Joe will be unable to find information on how Australia treats asylum seekers, the dark underside of European treatment of the indigenous inhabitants of the country, any information on how to circumvent the filter, and anything else that's politically unpalatable.
Not because the current Govt.
intends to, but ultimately because they can.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091576</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265022240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I fully agree. Whoever wrote this article either didn't do their research or is purposely misrepresenting the basis for the attacks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I fully agree .
Whoever wrote this article either did n't do their research or is purposely misrepresenting the basis for the attacks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fully agree.
Whoever wrote this article either didn't do their research or is purposely misrepresenting the basis for the attacks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092546</id>
	<title>Re:Boomerang</title>
	<author>twostix</author>
	<datestamp>1265027040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I can't think of anything more likely to validate the government's actions in the eyes of its socially conservative constituents."</p><p>I hate to shatter your world view like this but our current government who are trying to implement this are progressive, pro-union, pro-abortion,  spend like drunken sailors metro left wing.</p><p>Otherwise known as the Australian Labour Party.</p><p>The "social conservatives" just spent 12 years in power and the closest they ever came to implementing something like this was telling ISPs they had to offer Net Nanny as a download to their customers who wanted it.  In the (gasp) conservative belief that mass censorship is wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I ca n't think of anything more likely to validate the government 's actions in the eyes of its socially conservative constituents .
" I hate to shatter your world view like this but our current government who are trying to implement this are progressive , pro-union , pro-abortion , spend like drunken sailors metro left wing.Otherwise known as the Australian Labour Party.The " social conservatives " just spent 12 years in power and the closest they ever came to implementing something like this was telling ISPs they had to offer Net Nanny as a download to their customers who wanted it .
In the ( gasp ) conservative belief that mass censorship is wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I can't think of anything more likely to validate the government's actions in the eyes of its socially conservative constituents.
"I hate to shatter your world view like this but our current government who are trying to implement this are progressive, pro-union, pro-abortion,  spend like drunken sailors metro left wing.Otherwise known as the Australian Labour Party.The "social conservatives" just spent 12 years in power and the closest they ever came to implementing something like this was telling ISPs they had to offer Net Nanny as a download to their customers who wanted it.
In the (gasp) conservative belief that mass censorship is wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086692</id>
	<title>Please research what your writing about IBT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265044140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>How does a story like this even make it past editors?

"Anonymous could not immediately be reached for further comment."

Seriously?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does a story like this even make it past editors ?
" Anonymous could not immediately be reached for further comment .
" Seriously ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does a story like this even make it past editors?
"Anonymous could not immediately be reached for further comment.
"

Seriously?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092284</id>
	<title>Censor dentists!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265025180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the rather amusing/horrifying anecdotes from the trial of this censorship idiocy was the discovery that the filter was blocking access to a dentist's website.</p><p>If the blacklist is secret, then we can't know what they are blocking - perfect recipe for a police state. I don't want that (yes, I'm in Australia).</p><p>Can't we export our religious bigots to the US? You'd never notice the extra few...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the rather amusing/horrifying anecdotes from the trial of this censorship idiocy was the discovery that the filter was blocking access to a dentist 's website.If the blacklist is secret , then we ca n't know what they are blocking - perfect recipe for a police state .
I do n't want that ( yes , I 'm in Australia ) .Ca n't we export our religious bigots to the US ?
You 'd never notice the extra few.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the rather amusing/horrifying anecdotes from the trial of this censorship idiocy was the discovery that the filter was blocking access to a dentist's website.If the blacklist is secret, then we can't know what they are blocking - perfect recipe for a police state.
I don't want that (yes, I'm in Australia).Can't we export our religious bigots to the US?
You'd never notice the extra few...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31096112</id>
	<title>Re:Further corruption of the principle</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265048700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>pix or it didn't happen!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>pix or it did n't happen !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pix or it didn't happen!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31094306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31094604</id>
	<title>Hungry Beast... an interview with Stephen Conroy</title>
	<author>Dexter Herbivore</author>
	<datestamp>1265037540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://hungrybeast.abc.net.au/" title="abc.net.au" rel="nofollow">Hungry Beast</a> [abc.net.au] last night covered this DDoS (Operation Titstorm) and the question of the Great Internet Wall of Australia. They commissioned an
<a href="http://hungrybeast.abc.net.au/sites/default/files/documents/Internet\%20Regulation\%20Survey\%20-\%20Report\_FINAL.pdf" title="abc.net.au" rel="nofollow">independent survey</a> [abc.net.au] on the thoughts of the Australian public on the internet filter.

On the site is also an interview with Stephen Conroy, the closet case that wants to ban anything that might inappropriately stimulate him.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hungry Beast [ abc.net.au ] last night covered this DDoS ( Operation Titstorm ) and the question of the Great Internet Wall of Australia .
They commissioned an independent survey [ abc.net.au ] on the thoughts of the Australian public on the internet filter .
On the site is also an interview with Stephen Conroy , the closet case that wants to ban anything that might inappropriately stimulate him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hungry Beast [abc.net.au] last night covered this DDoS (Operation Titstorm) and the question of the Great Internet Wall of Australia.
They commissioned an
independent survey [abc.net.au] on the thoughts of the Australian public on the internet filter.
On the site is also an interview with Stephen Conroy, the closet case that wants to ban anything that might inappropriately stimulate him.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086496</id>
	<title>"Cyber-Attackers" !!!  Oooh, Scary!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The Man" better look out!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The Man " better look out !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The Man" better look out!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086932</id>
	<title>Anonymous also responsible for Reichstag fire</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265045340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some 'anonymous terrorists' burned the Reichstag, justifying Hitler's seizure of power.<br>A group called Anonymous has hacked the Australian parliament website, with the purpose of... ?</p><p>Either Anonymous is a group of idiotic teenagers who have never opened a history book, either they are organized manipulators who think most people in modern society don't know anything about history.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some 'anonymous terrorists ' burned the Reichstag , justifying Hitler 's seizure of power.A group called Anonymous has hacked the Australian parliament website , with the purpose of... ? Either Anonymous is a group of idiotic teenagers who have never opened a history book , either they are organized manipulators who think most people in modern society do n't know anything about history .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some 'anonymous terrorists' burned the Reichstag, justifying Hitler's seizure of power.A group called Anonymous has hacked the Australian parliament website, with the purpose of... ?Either Anonymous is a group of idiotic teenagers who have never opened a history book, either they are organized manipulators who think most people in modern society don't know anything about history.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31093536</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265032440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand why they don't allow the blacklist to be seen. Surely hiding the blacklist is simply security through obscurity? I can't see any good reason for them to hide the blacklist, and I can see many bad reasons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand why they do n't allow the blacklist to be seen .
Surely hiding the blacklist is simply security through obscurity ?
I ca n't see any good reason for them to hide the blacklist , and I can see many bad reasons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand why they don't allow the blacklist to be seen.
Surely hiding the blacklist is simply security through obscurity?
I can't see any good reason for them to hide the blacklist, and I can see many bad reasons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088672</id>
	<title>hackers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265052600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>explain</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>explain</tokentext>
<sentencetext>explain</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436</id>
	<title>Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>I don't agree about censoring drug-related sites, but about the other contents...</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't agree about censoring drug-related sites , but about the other contents.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't agree about censoring drug-related sites, but about the other contents...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086552</id>
	<title>s/[er|re]\/r/g</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The government's recently-commissioned Cyber Security Operations <b>Centr</b> discovered Wednesday's attack was coming on February 5 but still couldn't stop it entirely.</p></div><p>This article has almost Slashdot-worthy copy editing. Also see:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>[...] said the email sent by Anonymous IBTimes.</p></div><p>Either there's a missing conjunction, or there's a 4chan cell working in the news outlet itself. Wouldn't they call themselves I/b/Times?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : The government 's recently-commissioned Cyber Security Operations Centr discovered Wednesday 's attack was coming on February 5 but still could n't stop it entirely.This article has almost Slashdot-worthy copy editing .
Also see : [ ... ] said the email sent by Anonymous IBTimes.Either there 's a missing conjunction , or there 's a 4chan cell working in the news outlet itself .
Would n't they call themselves I/b/Times ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:The government's recently-commissioned Cyber Security Operations Centr discovered Wednesday's attack was coming on February 5 but still couldn't stop it entirely.This article has almost Slashdot-worthy copy editing.
Also see:[...] said the email sent by Anonymous IBTimes.Either there's a missing conjunction, or there's a 4chan cell working in the news outlet itself.
Wouldn't they call themselves I/b/Times?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086702</id>
	<title>Re:I believe the concept of Anonymous escapes you</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1265044200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well according to the Church of Scientology, they are the greatest threat to mankind since Genghis Khan--an organized hate group aimed at overthrowing America and burning all our churches. Also, Tom Cruise is not gay.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well according to the Church of Scientology , they are the greatest threat to mankind since Genghis Khan--an organized hate group aimed at overthrowing America and burning all our churches .
Also , Tom Cruise is not gay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well according to the Church of Scientology, they are the greatest threat to mankind since Genghis Khan--an organized hate group aimed at overthrowing America and burning all our churches.
Also, Tom Cruise is not gay.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087576</id>
	<title>screw the aussie govt!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265048160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>of course the article fails to mention the levels of censorship  we're talking about here. the  AU govt is talking that pornography featuring women of legal age with small breasts be considered the same as underage girls. Think of the children!</p><p>http://www.theweek.com/article/index/105766/Australias\_small\_breast\_ban</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>of course the article fails to mention the levels of censorship we 're talking about here .
the AU govt is talking that pornography featuring women of legal age with small breasts be considered the same as underage girls .
Think of the children ! http : //www.theweek.com/article/index/105766/Australias \ _small \ _breast \ _ban</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of course the article fails to mention the levels of censorship  we're talking about here.
the  AU govt is talking that pornography featuring women of legal age with small breasts be considered the same as underage girls.
Think of the children!http://www.theweek.com/article/index/105766/Australias\_small\_breast\_ban</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31095900</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>mogness</author>
	<datestamp>1265047140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>sounds like you need to smoke a bowl, homie.</htmltext>
<tokenext>sounds like you need to smoke a bowl , homie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sounds like you need to smoke a bowl, homie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089760</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Khyber</author>
	<datestamp>1265056920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I expect better from Slashdot editors than greenlighting a load of sensationalist horseshit about a technical issue."</p><p>I was going to say 'You must be new here' but considering your UID I'll just assume you're brain-dead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I expect better from Slashdot editors than greenlighting a load of sensationalist horseshit about a technical issue .
" I was going to say 'You must be new here ' but considering your UID I 'll just assume you 're brain-dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I expect better from Slashdot editors than greenlighting a load of sensationalist horseshit about a technical issue.
"I was going to say 'You must be new here' but considering your UID I'll just assume you're brain-dead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089728</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the so called democracy?</title>
	<author>smaddox</author>
	<datestamp>1265056740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Democracy is defined as a system of government carried out by the people directly (direct democracy), or through elected representatives of the people (representative democracy). Either one leads inevitably to majority rule. Luckily, the US is not a democracy. The US is a democratic republic with (supposedly) finite, expressly defined powers. Unfortunately, the call for "national security" and "protecting the children" (etc.) leads inevitably to more and more power being amassed in the hands of the representatives. Power corrupts - not only directly, but indirectly. Power attracts the corrupt, and power turns well intentioned individuals into corrupt individuals.</p><p>The best leaders are the people who have no desire to lead. Take George Washington, for instance. With the tremendous support he had after "winning" the American Revolutionary War (In actuality, the British just decided to ignore us. They didn't grant us independence.), he could have easily turned the 13 colonies into a dictatorship, but he had no desire to rule.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Democracy is defined as a system of government carried out by the people directly ( direct democracy ) , or through elected representatives of the people ( representative democracy ) .
Either one leads inevitably to majority rule .
Luckily , the US is not a democracy .
The US is a democratic republic with ( supposedly ) finite , expressly defined powers .
Unfortunately , the call for " national security " and " protecting the children " ( etc .
) leads inevitably to more and more power being amassed in the hands of the representatives .
Power corrupts - not only directly , but indirectly .
Power attracts the corrupt , and power turns well intentioned individuals into corrupt individuals.The best leaders are the people who have no desire to lead .
Take George Washington , for instance .
With the tremendous support he had after " winning " the American Revolutionary War ( In actuality , the British just decided to ignore us .
They did n't grant us independence .
) , he could have easily turned the 13 colonies into a dictatorship , but he had no desire to rule .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Democracy is defined as a system of government carried out by the people directly (direct democracy), or through elected representatives of the people (representative democracy).
Either one leads inevitably to majority rule.
Luckily, the US is not a democracy.
The US is a democratic republic with (supposedly) finite, expressly defined powers.
Unfortunately, the call for "national security" and "protecting the children" (etc.
) leads inevitably to more and more power being amassed in the hands of the representatives.
Power corrupts - not only directly, but indirectly.
Power attracts the corrupt, and power turns well intentioned individuals into corrupt individuals.The best leaders are the people who have no desire to lead.
Take George Washington, for instance.
With the tremendous support he had after "winning" the American Revolutionary War (In actuality, the British just decided to ignore us.
They didn't grant us independence.
), he could have easily turned the 13 colonies into a dictatorship, but he had no desire to rule.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31093104</id>
	<title>Re:Of course</title>
	<author>psithurism</author>
	<datestamp>1265030040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They might even arrest one or 2 people.</p></div><p>Or maybe they'll censor sites where the computer literate can gather and talk about how oppressive Australian censorship is.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They might even arrest one or 2 people.Or maybe they 'll censor sites where the computer literate can gather and talk about how oppressive Australian censorship is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They might even arrest one or 2 people.Or maybe they'll censor sites where the computer literate can gather and talk about how oppressive Australian censorship is.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086838</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb... Dumb Dumb Dumb</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1265044920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which proves that normal people are incredibly stupid.</p><p>And we allow these retards to make laws...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which proves that normal people are incredibly stupid.And we allow these retards to make laws.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which proves that normal people are incredibly stupid.And we allow these retards to make laws...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087030</id>
	<title>Singapore proxies</title>
	<author>Ltap</author>
	<datestamp>1265045640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm envisioning a half-dozen new datacenters for VPS hosting being built in Singapore the day that this law actually passes...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm envisioning a half-dozen new datacenters for VPS hosting being built in Singapore the day that this law actually passes.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm envisioning a half-dozen new datacenters for VPS hosting being built in Singapore the day that this law actually passes...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814</id>
	<title>Boomerang</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265044740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Anonymous recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.</i> <p>
I can't think of anything more likely to validate the government's actions in the eyes of its socially conservative constituents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anonymous recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape , drug use , bestiality and child sex abuse .
I ca n't think of anything more likely to validate the government 's actions in the eyes of its socially conservative constituents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anonymous recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.
I can't think of anything more likely to validate the government's actions in the eyes of its socially conservative constituents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086896</id>
	<title>batman is dead</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265045160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this hacker saw too it and its why they should be scared<br>lil birdy say we got superman working on the peoples side now<br>and wonder woman shes a pron star now</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this hacker saw too it and its why they should be scaredlil birdy say we got superman working on the peoples side nowand wonder woman shes a pron star now</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this hacker saw too it and its why they should be scaredlil birdy say we got superman working on the peoples side nowand wonder woman shes a pron star now</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091588</id>
	<title>Re:I believe the concept of Anonymous escapes you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265022240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the same reason every random MAM with a rifle who fights ISAF or the Afghan federal forces is called "Taliban".</p><p>Like an Inbred Hate Machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the same reason every random MAM with a rifle who fights ISAF or the Afghan federal forces is called " Taliban " .Like an Inbred Hate Machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the same reason every random MAM with a rifle who fights ISAF or the Afghan federal forces is called "Taliban".Like an Inbred Hate Machine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088986</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb... Dumb Dumb Dumb</title>
	<author>aflag</author>
	<datestamp>1265053500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well, if I were a normal person and just read this summary, I would conclude that the group are "cyber-terrorists" who are in favor of drug use, rape, zoo sex and child abuse. In addition, by calling themselves Anonymous they're spoiling the concept of anonymity. I really don't think that this action was the best press possible either for the group or for those who are against censorship in general.</p></div><p>The group doesn't care. They do it for the lulz.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if I were a normal person and just read this summary , I would conclude that the group are " cyber-terrorists " who are in favor of drug use , rape , zoo sex and child abuse .
In addition , by calling themselves Anonymous they 're spoiling the concept of anonymity .
I really do n't think that this action was the best press possible either for the group or for those who are against censorship in general.The group does n't care .
They do it for the lulz .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if I were a normal person and just read this summary, I would conclude that the group are "cyber-terrorists" who are in favor of drug use, rape, zoo sex and child abuse.
In addition, by calling themselves Anonymous they're spoiling the concept of anonymity.
I really don't think that this action was the best press possible either for the group or for those who are against censorship in general.The group doesn't care.
They do it for the lulz.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31094284</id>
	<title>Opinion of 1 opposition senator != AU government.</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1265035680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>but the australian government also wants to ban sites that show small-breasted women,</p></div></blockquote><p>

This is the opinion of oposition senator Barnaby Joyce, not the AU government as a whole. Joyce is an extremist nutbar, leader of the national (as in nationalism) party. Remember that despite popular (incorrect) yank sentiment, the filtering in Australia has not been implemented despite Conroy's insistance, it has been voted down once in parliment and Conroy is trying to put it through again before the next federal election. I fully expect this to be voted down a second time.<br> <br>

Last nights episode of Hungy Beast covered this subject, worth watching if you can get iview.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but the australian government also wants to ban sites that show small-breasted women , This is the opinion of oposition senator Barnaby Joyce , not the AU government as a whole .
Joyce is an extremist nutbar , leader of the national ( as in nationalism ) party .
Remember that despite popular ( incorrect ) yank sentiment , the filtering in Australia has not been implemented despite Conroy 's insistance , it has been voted down once in parliment and Conroy is trying to put it through again before the next federal election .
I fully expect this to be voted down a second time .
Last nights episode of Hungy Beast covered this subject , worth watching if you can get iview .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but the australian government also wants to ban sites that show small-breasted women,

This is the opinion of oposition senator Barnaby Joyce, not the AU government as a whole.
Joyce is an extremist nutbar, leader of the national (as in nationalism) party.
Remember that despite popular (incorrect) yank sentiment, the filtering in Australia has not been implemented despite Conroy's insistance, it has been voted down once in parliment and Conroy is trying to put it through again before the next federal election.
I fully expect this to be voted down a second time.
Last nights episode of Hungy Beast covered this subject, worth watching if you can get iview.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086598</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>3.5 stripes</author>
	<datestamp>1265043780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depends in what context, especially when it comes down to who defines the context (are photos of naked children in the bath CP?), bestiality was legal in the netherlands until recently.. I won't even get into the cartoons or fictional stories questions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends in what context , especially when it comes down to who defines the context ( are photos of naked children in the bath CP ?
) , bestiality was legal in the netherlands until recently.. I wo n't even get into the cartoons or fictional stories questions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends in what context, especially when it comes down to who defines the context (are photos of naked children in the bath CP?
), bestiality was legal in the netherlands until recently.. I won't even get into the cartoons or fictional stories questions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092442</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>twostix</author>
	<datestamp>1265026320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nice try at painting this as a right wing failure but it's actually *anti-abortion* sites that are already on the blacklist <a href="http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/acma-anti-abortion-prohibited/" title="somebodyth...ildren.com">http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/acma-anti-abortion-prohibited/</a> [somebodyth...ildren.com] .</p><p>The last government we had which was deeply conservative refused to implement a system like this, instead pointing people to the multitude of private solutions that they could implement on their own machines.</p><p>The current government - Labour - is left wing, pro-abortion, pro-union and now pro-censorship and have already censored anti-abortion websites.</p><p>I'm sorry if object reality is the exact opposite of what you and the individuals who modded you up wish that it were but this is not being implemented and abused by the mythical whipping boy of the internet the conservative right wing.  No, the biggest censorship push in our history is being implemented and abused by the allegedly cool, metro, technocrat left wing.</p><p>So where are you going to look at it from now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice try at painting this as a right wing failure but it 's actually * anti-abortion * sites that are already on the blacklist http : //www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/acma-anti-abortion-prohibited/ [ somebodyth...ildren.com ] .The last government we had which was deeply conservative refused to implement a system like this , instead pointing people to the multitude of private solutions that they could implement on their own machines.The current government - Labour - is left wing , pro-abortion , pro-union and now pro-censorship and have already censored anti-abortion websites.I 'm sorry if object reality is the exact opposite of what you and the individuals who modded you up wish that it were but this is not being implemented and abused by the mythical whipping boy of the internet the conservative right wing .
No , the biggest censorship push in our history is being implemented and abused by the allegedly cool , metro , technocrat left wing.So where are you going to look at it from now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice try at painting this as a right wing failure but it's actually *anti-abortion* sites that are already on the blacklist http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/acma-anti-abortion-prohibited/ [somebodyth...ildren.com] .The last government we had which was deeply conservative refused to implement a system like this, instead pointing people to the multitude of private solutions that they could implement on their own machines.The current government - Labour - is left wing, pro-abortion, pro-union and now pro-censorship and have already censored anti-abortion websites.I'm sorry if object reality is the exact opposite of what you and the individuals who modded you up wish that it were but this is not being implemented and abused by the mythical whipping boy of the internet the conservative right wing.
No, the biggest censorship push in our history is being implemented and abused by the allegedly cool, metro, technocrat left wing.So where are you going to look at it from now?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086792</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the so called democracy?</title>
	<author>JackDW</author>
	<datestamp>1265044620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>In my opinion, the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt "little ones".</i>

</p><p>Many would agree with you. But they would quibble over the definition of "hurt". A government could ban almost anything on the grounds that it might "hurt the children".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my opinion , the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt " little ones " .
Many would agree with you .
But they would quibble over the definition of " hurt " .
A government could ban almost anything on the grounds that it might " hurt the children " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> In my opinion, the result of democracy should be that everyone can do as they please as long as their actions do not hurt "little ones".
Many would agree with you.
But they would quibble over the definition of "hurt".
A government could ban almost anything on the grounds that it might "hurt the children".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086574</id>
	<title>we are legion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>we do not forget.  we do not forgive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>we do not forget .
we do not forgive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we do not forget.
we do not forgive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092782</id>
	<title>Re:Boomerang</title>
	<author>Dracophile</author>
	<datestamp>1265028540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><blockquote><div><p>Anonymous recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.</p></div></blockquote><p>I can't think of anything more likely to validate the government's actions in the eyes of its socially conservative constituents.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I can't think of anything that would change the mind of this government or its socially conservative constituents about their hare-brained idea to put a fishnet condom on the internets, either, so a bit of civil disobedience may very well be in order.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anonymous recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape , drug use , bestiality and child sex abuse.I ca n't think of anything more likely to validate the government 's actions in the eyes of its socially conservative constituents .
I ca n't think of anything that would change the mind of this government or its socially conservative constituents about their hare-brained idea to put a fishnet condom on the internets , either , so a bit of civil disobedience may very well be in order .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anonymous recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.I can't think of anything more likely to validate the government's actions in the eyes of its socially conservative constituents.
I can't think of anything that would change the mind of this government or its socially conservative constituents about their hare-brained idea to put a fishnet condom on the internets, either, so a bit of civil disobedience may very well be in order.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088828</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265053020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Heh. only took me 30 seconds and one page refresh to get a statement from anon....</p><p>Open letter concerning Australian Internet Censorship.<br>To whom it may concern, and for the unaware public.</p><p>Do not be confused about the intentions behind our attacks on various Australian government websites. Various media have falsely reported that our efforts are in defence of pornography. This is not about pornography. This is about freedom. The fact remains that under this proposed Internet censorship scheme over time the freedoms of Australians will continue to be eroded, all in the name of saving us from a threat that exists only in the minds of a vocal and very uninformed minority who wish to impose their morals and values on the public at large. We are in no way encouraging child pornography; however other courses of action should be encouraged, for Australia's "Cyber Safety Plan" creates problems in itself.</p><p>The fact is that "banned" content can be posted on ANY website, at any time; introducing these tools is only a way to silence the selected few. Once the tools are put into place, they can and will be abused, as it has happened throughout history. Costs to taxpayers are estimated to be $44.2 million. This money could be put to far better use. Furthermore, the creation of such an announced filter is in direct violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Charter of 1948, Article 19; which states: "Everyone has the right of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Heh .
only took me 30 seconds and one page refresh to get a statement from anon....Open letter concerning Australian Internet Censorship.To whom it may concern , and for the unaware public.Do not be confused about the intentions behind our attacks on various Australian government websites .
Various media have falsely reported that our efforts are in defence of pornography .
This is not about pornography .
This is about freedom .
The fact remains that under this proposed Internet censorship scheme over time the freedoms of Australians will continue to be eroded , all in the name of saving us from a threat that exists only in the minds of a vocal and very uninformed minority who wish to impose their morals and values on the public at large .
We are in no way encouraging child pornography ; however other courses of action should be encouraged , for Australia 's " Cyber Safety Plan " creates problems in itself.The fact is that " banned " content can be posted on ANY website , at any time ; introducing these tools is only a way to silence the selected few .
Once the tools are put into place , they can and will be abused , as it has happened throughout history .
Costs to taxpayers are estimated to be $ 44.2 million .
This money could be put to far better use .
Furthermore , the creation of such an announced filter is in direct violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Charter of 1948 , Article 19 ; which states : " Everyone has the right of opinion and expression ; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek , receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heh.
only took me 30 seconds and one page refresh to get a statement from anon....Open letter concerning Australian Internet Censorship.To whom it may concern, and for the unaware public.Do not be confused about the intentions behind our attacks on various Australian government websites.
Various media have falsely reported that our efforts are in defence of pornography.
This is not about pornography.
This is about freedom.
The fact remains that under this proposed Internet censorship scheme over time the freedoms of Australians will continue to be eroded, all in the name of saving us from a threat that exists only in the minds of a vocal and very uninformed minority who wish to impose their morals and values on the public at large.
We are in no way encouraging child pornography; however other courses of action should be encouraged, for Australia's "Cyber Safety Plan" creates problems in itself.The fact is that "banned" content can be posted on ANY website, at any time; introducing these tools is only a way to silence the selected few.
Once the tools are put into place, they can and will be abused, as it has happened throughout history.
Costs to taxpayers are estimated to be $44.2 million.
This money could be put to far better use.
Furthermore, the creation of such an announced filter is in direct violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Charter of 1948, Article 19; which states: "Everyone has the right of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091828</id>
	<title>Further corruption of the principle</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265023140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is not "You don't know how old this small-breasted woman is, so you can't look".<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Remember all the totalitarian laws the USA enacted to fight the 'war on terror'! They were quickly corrupted to fight the 'war on drugs'.  While John Howard and 'Be alert, not alarmed' didn't work, a 'think of the children' mantra excuses any law.</p><p>By the way: What sort of school-girls are protected by people not seeing small-breasted women?  Me thinks not the large-breasted school-girls.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is not " You do n't know how old this small-breasted woman is , so you ca n't look " .
    Remember all the totalitarian laws the USA enacted to fight the 'war on terror ' !
They were quickly corrupted to fight the 'war on drugs' .
While John Howard and 'Be alert , not alarmed ' did n't work , a 'think of the children ' mantra excuses any law.By the way : What sort of school-girls are protected by people not seeing small-breasted women ?
Me thinks not the large-breasted school-girls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is not "You don't know how old this small-breasted woman is, so you can't look".
    Remember all the totalitarian laws the USA enacted to fight the 'war on terror'!
They were quickly corrupted to fight the 'war on drugs'.
While John Howard and 'Be alert, not alarmed' didn't work, a 'think of the children' mantra excuses any law.By the way: What sort of school-girls are protected by people not seeing small-breasted women?
Me thinks not the large-breasted school-girls.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089446</id>
	<title>Re:That'll teach 'em.</title>
	<author>C0vardeAn0nim0</author>
	<datestamp>1265055420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the politicians just have to wait. anonymous does it "for the lulz". as soon as they get their fix, the kids will get bored and go back to the chans and fap to pictures of dead women or diseased breasts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the politicians just have to wait .
anonymous does it " for the lulz " .
as soon as they get their fix , the kids will get bored and go back to the chans and fap to pictures of dead women or diseased breasts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the politicians just have to wait.
anonymous does it "for the lulz".
as soon as they get their fix, the kids will get bored and go back to the chans and fap to pictures of dead women or diseased breasts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086846</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1265044920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't agree censoring any of them. Someone viewing these videos does no harm to any individuals (except for perhaps themselves) - and the less you try and force those kinds of industries out of the public eye the less they will try to hide their activities, making them easier to stop, if its illegal in your country.</p><p>Sweeping it under the rug does nothing to help anybody.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't agree censoring any of them .
Someone viewing these videos does no harm to any individuals ( except for perhaps themselves ) - and the less you try and force those kinds of industries out of the public eye the less they will try to hide their activities , making them easier to stop , if its illegal in your country.Sweeping it under the rug does nothing to help anybody .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't agree censoring any of them.
Someone viewing these videos does no harm to any individuals (except for perhaps themselves) - and the less you try and force those kinds of industries out of the public eye the less they will try to hide their activities, making them easier to stop, if its illegal in your country.Sweeping it under the rug does nothing to help anybody.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087378</id>
	<title>Re:Boomerang</title>
	<author>ShaunC</author>
	<datestamp>1265047200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Anonymous recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.</p></div><p>The summary omitted a few things. For one, the proposed blacklist would target otherwise legal adult sites featuring small-breasted women, with the apparent rationale that anyone who doesn't love giant plastic D-cups must be a pedophile.</p><p>Of course, it's a lot easier to vilify Anonymous by saying they're trying to defend CP and donkey porn...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anonymous recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape , drug use , bestiality and child sex abuse.The summary omitted a few things .
For one , the proposed blacklist would target otherwise legal adult sites featuring small-breasted women , with the apparent rationale that anyone who does n't love giant plastic D-cups must be a pedophile.Of course , it 's a lot easier to vilify Anonymous by saying they 're trying to defend CP and donkey porn.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anonymous recently turned its attention against the AU government after it said in December that it would block access to sites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.The summary omitted a few things.
For one, the proposed blacklist would target otherwise legal adult sites featuring small-breasted women, with the apparent rationale that anyone who doesn't love giant plastic D-cups must be a pedophile.Of course, it's a lot easier to vilify Anonymous by saying they're trying to defend CP and donkey porn...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090044</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265015220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've seen (in real life, no less) girls in their mid-teens (think 14-16, back when I was in high school) with <em>significantly</em> sized breasts (though I cannot assert that they're not 'small breasts' by Australian standards, as there don't seem to be any official examples of said 'small breasts'). It's not that uncommon these days -- kinda disturbing from some perspectives, but it does make being a teenager, uh, more <em>interesting</em>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen ( in real life , no less ) girls in their mid-teens ( think 14-16 , back when I was in high school ) with significantly sized breasts ( though I can not assert that they 're not 'small breasts ' by Australian standards , as there do n't seem to be any official examples of said 'small breasts ' ) .
It 's not that uncommon these days -- kinda disturbing from some perspectives , but it does make being a teenager , uh , more interesting.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen (in real life, no less) girls in their mid-teens (think 14-16, back when I was in high school) with significantly sized breasts (though I cannot assert that they're not 'small breasts' by Australian standards, as there don't seem to be any official examples of said 'small breasts').
It's not that uncommon these days -- kinda disturbing from some perspectives, but it does make being a teenager, uh, more interesting...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086868</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb... Dumb Dumb Dumb</title>
	<author>icebraining</author>
	<datestamp>1265044980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>by calling themselves Anonymous they're spoiling the concept of anonymity.</p></div></blockquote><p>Why? It's not like there's any kind of formal organization or hierarchy. The fact is, <i>anyone</i> can call himself Anonymous. There's no leaders, no secret place, no kind of affiliation. They don't even know each other. Knowing that Anonymous did it gives you no particular information.</p><p>As said by Chris Landers and quoted in Wikipedia, "Anonymous is a group, in the sense that a flock of birds is a group. How do you know they're a group? Because they're travelling in the same direction. At any given moment, more birds could join, leave, peel off in another direction entirely."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>by calling themselves Anonymous they 're spoiling the concept of anonymity.Why ?
It 's not like there 's any kind of formal organization or hierarchy .
The fact is , anyone can call himself Anonymous .
There 's no leaders , no secret place , no kind of affiliation .
They do n't even know each other .
Knowing that Anonymous did it gives you no particular information.As said by Chris Landers and quoted in Wikipedia , " Anonymous is a group , in the sense that a flock of birds is a group .
How do you know they 're a group ?
Because they 're travelling in the same direction .
At any given moment , more birds could join , leave , peel off in another direction entirely .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>by calling themselves Anonymous they're spoiling the concept of anonymity.Why?
It's not like there's any kind of formal organization or hierarchy.
The fact is, anyone can call himself Anonymous.
There's no leaders, no secret place, no kind of affiliation.
They don't even know each other.
Knowing that Anonymous did it gives you no particular information.As said by Chris Landers and quoted in Wikipedia, "Anonymous is a group, in the sense that a flock of birds is a group.
How do you know they're a group?
Because they're travelling in the same direction.
At any given moment, more birds could join, leave, peel off in another direction entirely.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31095098</id>
	<title>Re:I believe the concept of Anonymous escapes you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265040960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well according to the Church of Scientology, they are the greatest threat to mankind since Genghis Khan--an organized hate group aimed at overthrowing America and burning all our churches. Also, Tom Cruise is not gay.</p></div><p>You're damn right he's not gay. He's one of the angriest homosexuals I've ever seen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well according to the Church of Scientology , they are the greatest threat to mankind since Genghis Khan--an organized hate group aimed at overthrowing America and burning all our churches .
Also , Tom Cruise is not gay.You 're damn right he 's not gay .
He 's one of the angriest homosexuals I 've ever seen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well according to the Church of Scientology, they are the greatest threat to mankind since Genghis Khan--an organized hate group aimed at overthrowing America and burning all our churches.
Also, Tom Cruise is not gay.You're damn right he's not gay.
He's one of the angriest homosexuals I've ever seen.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092370</id>
	<title>Ya ya ya</title>
	<author>YankDownUnder</author>
	<datestamp>1265025780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure Parliment is going to call in every single "Microsoft Certified" security company to deal with this...oh wowsers...and then they're going to justify using "Microsoft Certified" consultants and companies to protect them in the future...ya...right...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure Parliment is going to call in every single " Microsoft Certified " security company to deal with this...oh wowsers...and then they 're going to justify using " Microsoft Certified " consultants and companies to protect them in the future...ya...right.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure Parliment is going to call in every single "Microsoft Certified" security company to deal with this...oh wowsers...and then they're going to justify using "Microsoft Certified" consultants and companies to protect them in the future...ya...right...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>NitroWolf</author>
	<datestamp>1265046720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <tt>I don't agree about censoring drug-related sites, but about the other contents...</tt></p> </div><p>The submitter of this article is a cock for including that summary, as is the editor who greenlit it.</p><p>Anonymous is not protesting this because the AU government is proposing censorship of "rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse." They are doing it because they are proposing censoring "small breasted women" (because, you know, small breasted women MIGHT be under 18), among other things.</p><p>They are lashing out at the &ldquo;ambiguity&rdquo; of the often-used term &ldquo;unwanted content&rdquo;, the Australian Government is trying to crack down on pornography featuring female ejaculation and women with small breasts... yes, those things that are a threat to modern society.  I mean, if females start ejaculating, we are all doomed!</p><p>So the entire article is a load of shit.  I expect better from Slashdot editors than greenlighting a load of sensationalist horseshit about a technical issue.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't agree about censoring drug-related sites , but about the other contents... The submitter of this article is a cock for including that summary , as is the editor who greenlit it.Anonymous is not protesting this because the AU government is proposing censorship of " rape , drug use , bestiality and child sex abuse .
" They are doing it because they are proposing censoring " small breasted women " ( because , you know , small breasted women MIGHT be under 18 ) , among other things.They are lashing out at the    ambiguity    of the often-used term    unwanted content    , the Australian Government is trying to crack down on pornography featuring female ejaculation and women with small breasts... yes , those things that are a threat to modern society .
I mean , if females start ejaculating , we are all doomed ! So the entire article is a load of shit .
I expect better from Slashdot editors than greenlighting a load of sensationalist horseshit about a technical issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I don't agree about censoring drug-related sites, but about the other contents... The submitter of this article is a cock for including that summary, as is the editor who greenlit it.Anonymous is not protesting this because the AU government is proposing censorship of "rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.
" They are doing it because they are proposing censoring "small breasted women" (because, you know, small breasted women MIGHT be under 18), among other things.They are lashing out at the “ambiguity” of the often-used term “unwanted content”, the Australian Government is trying to crack down on pornography featuring female ejaculation and women with small breasts... yes, those things that are a threat to modern society.
I mean, if females start ejaculating, we are all doomed!So the entire article is a load of shit.
I expect better from Slashdot editors than greenlighting a load of sensationalist horseshit about a technical issue.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087256</id>
	<title>Re:I believe the concept of Anonymous escapes you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265046600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Right. Because anyone calling themselves anonymous are the "same group". Specifically because "Anonymous" means "of unknown name". Heck, we have a bunch of Anonymous Cowards here on slashdot too! Let's track down their IP's and throw them in jail like the terrorists they are! After all, they've been seen on TV to blow up yellow vans, so they must be evil, right?"</p><p>Well, the media seem to be pretty happy to consider al Qaeda to be a singular organisation, albeit an organisation made up of "autonomous cells". In reality, al-Qaeda is no more cohesive than Anonymous - just a bunch of people and groups with similar aims adopting a recognisable aim/identity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Right .
Because anyone calling themselves anonymous are the " same group " .
Specifically because " Anonymous " means " of unknown name " .
Heck , we have a bunch of Anonymous Cowards here on slashdot too !
Let 's track down their IP 's and throw them in jail like the terrorists they are !
After all , they 've been seen on TV to blow up yellow vans , so they must be evil , right ?
" Well , the media seem to be pretty happy to consider al Qaeda to be a singular organisation , albeit an organisation made up of " autonomous cells " .
In reality , al-Qaeda is no more cohesive than Anonymous - just a bunch of people and groups with similar aims adopting a recognisable aim/identity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Right.
Because anyone calling themselves anonymous are the "same group".
Specifically because "Anonymous" means "of unknown name".
Heck, we have a bunch of Anonymous Cowards here on slashdot too!
Let's track down their IP's and throw them in jail like the terrorists they are!
After all, they've been seen on TV to blow up yellow vans, so they must be evil, right?
"Well, the media seem to be pretty happy to consider al Qaeda to be a singular organisation, albeit an organisation made up of "autonomous cells".
In reality, al-Qaeda is no more cohesive than Anonymous - just a bunch of people and groups with similar aims adopting a recognisable aim/identity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086442</id>
	<title>lulz</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is yet another warning shot, the shit will really hit the fan once the mandatory internet censorship actually begins.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is yet another warning shot , the shit will really hit the fan once the mandatory internet censorship actually begins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is yet another warning shot, the shit will really hit the fan once the mandatory internet censorship actually begins.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092586</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Demonoid-Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1265027340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some people smoke pot and are morons. Some people are just morons. Like you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some people smoke pot and are morons .
Some people are just morons .
Like you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some people smoke pot and are morons.
Some people are just morons.
Like you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091620</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265022360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I expect better from Slashdot editors than greenlighting a load of sensationalist horseshit about a technical issue.</p></div><p>Absolutely, it'll never happen again. You know I just hurt you because I love you, right baby?</p><p>-- CmdrTaco</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I expect better from Slashdot editors than greenlighting a load of sensationalist horseshit about a technical issue.Absolutely , it 'll never happen again .
You know I just hurt you because I love you , right baby ? -- CmdrTaco</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I expect better from Slashdot editors than greenlighting a load of sensationalist horseshit about a technical issue.Absolutely, it'll never happen again.
You know I just hurt you because I love you, right baby?-- CmdrTaco
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089440</id>
	<title>"The group responsible..."</title>
	<author>Marful</author>
	<datestamp>1265055420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why is it that the media can't mentally grasp the concept that <i>Anonymous</i> isn't actually a "group" and really just a bunch of individuals who have decided to take similar actions?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it that the media ca n't mentally grasp the concept that Anonymous is n't actually a " group " and really just a bunch of individuals who have decided to take similar actions ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it that the media can't mentally grasp the concept that Anonymous isn't actually a "group" and really just a bunch of individuals who have decided to take similar actions?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087326</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>StillNeedMoreCoffee</author>
	<datestamp>1265046900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shades of the 50's when organizations got books banned from libraries. Same group different era.  Oh and yes we need to ban any reference to the Bible because of the references in the book to incest (Lot and his daughters), Ban it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shades of the 50 's when organizations got books banned from libraries .
Same group different era .
Oh and yes we need to ban any reference to the Bible because of the references in the book to incest ( Lot and his daughters ) , Ban it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shades of the 50's when organizations got books banned from libraries.
Same group different era.
Oh and yes we need to ban any reference to the Bible because of the references in the book to incest (Lot and his daughters), Ban it!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086572</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1265043660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you should see why it&rsquo;s a bad idea...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you should see why it    s a bad idea.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you should see why it’s a bad idea...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31094348</id>
	<title>Re:"The group responsible..."</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1265035920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>that Anonymous isn't actually a "group" and really just a bunch of individuals who have decided to take similar actions?</p></div></blockquote><p>

A <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/group" title="reference.com">group</a> [reference.com] is a bunch of individuals.</p><blockquote><div><p>group<br>
-noun<br>
1. 	any collection or assemblage of persons or things; cluster; aggregation: a group of protesters; a remarkable group of paintings.</p></div> </blockquote><p>

The medias usage is correct, what Anonymous is not is an organisation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>that Anonymous is n't actually a " group " and really just a bunch of individuals who have decided to take similar actions ?
A group [ reference.com ] is a bunch of individuals.group -noun 1. any collection or assemblage of persons or things ; cluster ; aggregation : a group of protesters ; a remarkable group of paintings .
The medias usage is correct , what Anonymous is not is an organisation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that Anonymous isn't actually a "group" and really just a bunch of individuals who have decided to take similar actions?
A group [reference.com] is a bunch of individuals.group
-noun
1. 	any collection or assemblage of persons or things; cluster; aggregation: a group of protesters; a remarkable group of paintings.
The medias usage is correct, what Anonymous is not is an organisation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31099650</id>
	<title>Re:I believe the concept of Anonymous escapes you</title>
	<author>Anne\_Nonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265904300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt; Let's track down their IP's and throw them in jail like the terrorists they are!</p><p>You'll never take me alive coppers!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; Let 's track down their IP 's and throw them in jail like the terrorists they are ! You 'll never take me alive coppers !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; Let's track down their IP's and throw them in jail like the terrorists they are!You'll never take me alive coppers!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31095184</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265041740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>because, you know, small breasted women MIGHT be under 18</p></div><p>It wasn't even that, it was that small breasted women <a href="http://idle.slashdot.org/story/10/01/29/0222239/Australia-Bans-Small-Breasts-In-Adult-Films" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">LOOKED like they were under 18.</a> [slashdot.org] The logic is along the lines of banning cartoons displaying children (<a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/01/28/0112246/Man-in-Court-Over-Simpsons-Porn" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">even the Simpsons</a> [slashdot.org]) participating in sex acts. Because they look like they are underage, then it is Kiddy Porn because they are targeting people who want to see young people naked.</p></div><p>Essentially what the AU government are saying, is that if you are married to an Asian woman you're a pedophile in the closet, since small tits equals a secret lust for children.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>because , you know , small breasted women MIGHT be under 18It was n't even that , it was that small breasted women LOOKED like they were under 18 .
[ slashdot.org ] The logic is along the lines of banning cartoons displaying children ( even the Simpsons [ slashdot.org ] ) participating in sex acts .
Because they look like they are underage , then it is Kiddy Porn because they are targeting people who want to see young people naked.Essentially what the AU government are saying , is that if you are married to an Asian woman you 're a pedophile in the closet , since small tits equals a secret lust for children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because, you know, small breasted women MIGHT be under 18It wasn't even that, it was that small breasted women LOOKED like they were under 18.
[slashdot.org] The logic is along the lines of banning cartoons displaying children (even the Simpsons [slashdot.org]) participating in sex acts.
Because they look like they are underage, then it is Kiddy Porn because they are targeting people who want to see young people naked.Essentially what the AU government are saying, is that if you are married to an Asian woman you're a pedophile in the closet, since small tits equals a secret lust for children.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091040</id>
	<title>Re:Do you agree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265020260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>if females start ejaculating, we are all doomed!</p><p>Holy crap, he's right!  There's a red in my bed!</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>if females start ejaculating , we are all doomed ! Holy crap , he 's right !
There 's a red in my bed !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if females start ejaculating, we are all doomed!Holy crap, he's right!
There's a red in my bed!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31095900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31100306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086932
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31099650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31094306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31096112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31094284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31093064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31095184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31093104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089446
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31094348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31093536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31095098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_10_1459257_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087682
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088588
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086532
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31093104
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089440
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31094348
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086574
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089728
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087682
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31093064
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086792
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086838
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086776
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087292
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091040
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091654
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091576
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090990
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087690
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31095184
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090044
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091620
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086846
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090282
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092586
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31095900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086644
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091530
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087326
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092442
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31093536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086572
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086684
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31094306
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31096112
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086936
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086496
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31094284
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092284
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31090970
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086692
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087490
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088230
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31100306
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091546
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091588
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088640
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086702
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31095098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31099650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31087238
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_10_1459257.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31091208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31092958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31089446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31086740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_10_1459257.31088356
</commentlist>
</conversation>
