<?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: O&#8217;Reilly editor hacks: Rough Cuts</title>
	<link>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060129/2891/</link>
	<description>Technology, music, video, art, news, reviews and muse on the web</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 16:53:28 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: 4 ideas how book publishers can be more relevant &#187; Make You Go Hmm</title>
		<link>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060129/2891/#comment-675531</link>
		<author>4 ideas how book publishers can be more relevant &#187; Make You Go Hmm</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:52:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060129/2891/#comment-675531</guid>
		<description>[...] need a similar promotional path that uses the web and current technologies. O&#8217;Reilly had a good idea with Rough Cuts but they charged instead of discounted people for getting involved. Big mistake. You want [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] need a similar promotional path that uses the web and current technologies. O&#8217;Reilly had a good idea with Rough Cuts but they charged instead of discounted people for getting involved. Big mistake. You want [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tom arnall</title>
		<link>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060129/2891/#comment-54190</link>
		<author>tom arnall</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Mar 2006 21:45:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060129/2891/#comment-54190</guid>
		<description>i am not impressed with o'reilly's 'rough cuts' policy. two problems which i see with it are:

1. o'reilly's safari department fails to offer books on important topics to regular safari subscribers, unless the subscribers are willing to pay extra for the material. o'reilly's coverage of introductory material on Ajax is a good example.

2. the 'rough cuts' policy invites people to make contributions to a book, and then charges them for the 'privilege' of doing so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i am not impressed with o&#8217;reilly&#8217;s &#8216;rough cuts&#8217; policy. two problems which i see with it are:</p>
<p>1. o&#8217;reilly&#8217;s safari department fails to offer books on important topics to regular safari subscribers, unless the subscribers are willing to pay extra for the material. o&#8217;reilly&#8217;s coverage of introductory material on Ajax is a good example.</p>
<p>2. the &#8216;rough cuts&#8217; policy invites people to make contributions to a book, and then charges them for the &#8216;privilege&#8217; of doing so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Make You Go Hmm: &#187; Thank you CNET for making Hmm part of your Blog 100</title>
		<link>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060129/2891/#comment-52706</link>
		<author>Make You Go Hmm: &#187; Thank you CNET for making Hmm part of your Blog 100</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 20:28:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060129/2891/#comment-52706</guid>
		<description>[...] Some of these posts I passed on simply because of timing and circumstance, or because I felt there were already too many posts out there that were too similar. Or, in some cases, some of these posts will still appear someday in the future. Perhaps on a slower or more relevant news day. This is a little bit like the Rough Cuts gig O&#8217;Reilly is trying. Rough draft material can be scary. Then again, I still consider a lot of this blog stuff rough draft material, which frankly has been one of the great allures for me. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Some of these posts I passed on simply because of timing and circumstance, or because I felt there were already too many posts out there that were too similar. Or, in some cases, some of these posts will still appear someday in the future. Perhaps on a slower or more relevant news day. This is a little bit like the Rough Cuts gig O&#8217;Reilly is trying. Rough draft material can be scary. Then again, I still consider a lot of this blog stuff rough draft material, which frankly has been one of the great allures for me. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
