<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wikipedia Version 2: Promise and Peril</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/09/20/wikipedia-version-2-promise-and-peril/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/09/20/wikipedia-version-2-promise-and-peril/</link>
	<description>The Business End of the Blogosphere</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 18:37:51 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: TBlumer</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/09/20/wikipedia-version-2-promise-and-peril/#comment-31202</link>
		<dc:creator>TBlumer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Sep 2006 17:03:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/09/19/wikipedia-version-2-promise-and-peril/#comment-31202</guid>
		<description>Exactamundo, Jeff.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Exactamundo, Jeff.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/09/20/wikipedia-version-2-promise-and-peril/#comment-31201</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Sep 2006 17:01:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/09/19/wikipedia-version-2-promise-and-peril/#comment-31201</guid>
		<description>What's interesting is here we are, two guys who basically agree with the article, outing its lack of objectivity. Just because it shares our biases doesn't mean we don't recognize that it IS biased. Would any two members of the MSM do the same? Would they even understand the principle at work here? 

That's why I increasingly trust bloggers more than the dinosaur media... we acknowledge our point of view from the outset.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What&#8217;s interesting is here we are, two guys who basically agree with the article, outing its lack of objectivity. Just because it shares our biases doesn&#8217;t mean we don&#8217;t recognize that it IS biased. Would any two members of the MSM do the same? Would they even understand the principle at work here? </p>
<p>That&#8217;s why I increasingly trust bloggers more than the dinosaur media&#8230; we acknowledge our point of view from the outset.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TBlumer</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/09/20/wikipedia-version-2-promise-and-peril/#comment-31199</link>
		<dc:creator>TBlumer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:40:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/09/19/wikipedia-version-2-promise-and-peril/#comment-31199</guid>
		<description>Geez, though the negative points appear to be valid (except that one about EITC, which I find VERY hard to believe), the person's not even trying to be objective.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Geez, though the negative points appear to be valid (except that one about EITC, which I find VERY hard to believe), the person&#8217;s not even trying to be objective.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/09/20/wikipedia-version-2-promise-and-peril/#comment-31197</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:29:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/09/19/wikipedia-version-2-promise-and-peril/#comment-31197</guid>
		<description>Tom, try this one on:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refund_Anticipation_Loan
I was preparing another post about Refund Anticipation Loans, which you and I both think are a terrible deal. As much as I counsel people against them, the anti-RAL bias in the wikipedia entry is astonishing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom, try this one on:<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refund_Anticipation_Loan" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refund_Anticipation_Loan</a><br />
I was preparing another post about Refund Anticipation Loans, which you and I both think are a terrible deal. As much as I counsel people against them, the anti-RAL bias in the wikipedia entry is astonishing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
