<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The News About Weblogs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://weblogg-ed.com/2004/the-news-about-weblogs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://weblogg-ed.com/2004/the-news-about-weblogs/</link>
	<description>Learning with the Read/Write Web</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 22:26:38 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Roch Smith</title>
		<link>http://weblogg-ed.com/2004/the-news-about-weblogs/comment-page-1/#comment-1086</link>
		<dc:creator>Roch Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2004 16:34:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://weblogg-ed.com/?p=1346#comment-1086</guid>
		<description>&lt;a&gt;&lt;/a&gt;Hi Will,

Thanks for the Greensboro101.com mention. I'm tickled to know that people are finding it inspiring. It would be nothing though without the content -- the local bloggers who have something to say. They are the real stars.

There is no ability to comment on aggregated content (beyond the discussion forums) because one of the issues we've been kicking around in Greensboro is how an aggregator should balance the needs of the viewer with the desires of the blogger. Greensboro101.com is an effort to give visitors a comprehensive preview of what's going on in local blogs, but without co-opting the blog content entirely.

The bloggers want an enticement for people to click through to their blogs, and rightfully so. Duplicating the comment features of the individual blogs on Greensboro101.com would, I think, go just a little too far in diluting the bloggers' deserved ability to host a discussion on their writings. Some may legitimately see it differently, but it seems like a good balance for all involved here in Greensboro.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a></a>Hi Will,</p>
<p>Thanks for the Greensboro101.com mention. I&#8217;m tickled to know that people are finding it inspiring. It would be nothing though without the content &#8212; the local bloggers who have something to say. They are the real stars.</p>
<p>There is no ability to comment on aggregated content (beyond the discussion forums) because one of the issues we&#8217;ve been kicking around in Greensboro is how an aggregator should balance the needs of the viewer with the desires of the blogger. Greensboro101.com is an effort to give visitors a comprehensive preview of what&#8217;s going on in local blogs, but without co-opting the blog content entirely.</p>
<p>The bloggers want an enticement for people to click through to their blogs, and rightfully so. Duplicating the comment features of the individual blogs on Greensboro101.com would, I think, go just a little too far in diluting the bloggers&#8217; deserved ability to host a discussion on their writings. Some may legitimately see it differently, but it seems like a good balance for all involved here in Greensboro.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
