<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wikistress defcon 5</title>
	<link>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20051224/2777/</link>
	<description>Technology, music, video, art, news, reviews and muse on the web</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:16:37 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: TDavid</title>
		<link>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20051224/2777/#comment-44918</link>
		<author>TDavid</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2005 21:08:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20051224/2777/#comment-44918</guid>
		<description>Man, that sucks Sterling :( Thanks for sharing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Man, that sucks Sterling <img src='http://www.makeyougohmm.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /> Thanks for sharing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sterling Camden</title>
		<link>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20051224/2777/#comment-44913</link>
		<author>Sterling Camden</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2005 20:32:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20051224/2777/#comment-44913</guid>
		<description>defcon 4.  Worked with a customer of mine to try to create a definition of their product that was fair and informative, but kept getting labeled "too marketing-ish" by the editors until they pulled it entirely and we gave up.  Comparing our definition to those of other similar competitors' products left us scratching our heads and wondering whence came the editors' basis for that criticism.  We included a list of features and some history, but it was all in a neutral voice.  Throws up hands and swears.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>defcon 4.  Worked with a customer of mine to try to create a definition of their product that was fair and informative, but kept getting labeled &#8220;too marketing-ish&#8221; by the editors until they pulled it entirely and we gave up.  Comparing our definition to those of other similar competitors&#8217; products left us scratching our heads and wondering whence came the editors&#8217; basis for that criticism.  We included a list of features and some history, but it was all in a neutral voice.  Throws up hands and swears.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
