<?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: Credo: Addendum</title>
	<atom:link href="http://incisive.nu/2010/credo-addendum/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://incisive.nu/2010/credo-addendum/</link>
	<description>Content, Publishing, Editorial</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 18:56:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Cane</title>
		<link>http://incisive.nu/2010/credo-addendum/comment-page-1/#comment-379</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Cane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 16:02:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incisive.nu/?p=595#comment-379</guid>
		<description>Excellent series that I didn&#039;t get to until today because I neglected modding my blog&#039;s Comments.  You called my post 90% wrong.  Well, it was based on the misuse of &quot;curate&quot; by someone else to begin with -- and then lemmings of others.  I know the first eejit who lobbed the &quot;curate&quot; grenade into the e-publishing discussion -- and he was misusing it to begin with.  So there! -- or something.  What he really meant was filtering of a snooty kind, where he and selected self-appointed Tastemakers (who lucked into their positions, or slept into them, or conned their way into them) would avoid the long-term unemployment they deserve by collating co-dependent people around them to trill at their recommendations and TL;DR smartz.

Anyway, you&#039;ve cleared it all up for me and the next time I reach for my gun, I&#039;ll just link to this series.  Thanks much for clearing it all up with great style and laughs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent series that I didn&#8217;t get to until today because I neglected modding my blog&#8217;s Comments.  You called my post 90% wrong.  Well, it was based on the misuse of &#8220;curate&#8221; by someone else to begin with &#8212; and then lemmings of others.  I know the first eejit who lobbed the &#8220;curate&#8221; grenade into the e-publishing discussion &#8212; and he was misusing it to begin with.  So there! &#8212; or something.  What he really meant was filtering of a snooty kind, where he and selected self-appointed Tastemakers (who lucked into their positions, or slept into them, or conned their way into them) would avoid the long-term unemployment they deserve by collating co-dependent people around them to trill at their recommendations and TL;DR smartz.</p>
<p>Anyway, you&#8217;ve cleared it all up for me and the next time I reach for my gun, I&#8217;ll just link to this series.  Thanks much for clearing it all up with great style and laughs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Curation Conclusions : Incisive.nu</title>
		<link>http://incisive.nu/2010/credo-addendum/comment-page-1/#comment-331</link>
		<dc:creator>Curation Conclusions : Incisive.nu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:52:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incisive.nu/?p=595#comment-331</guid>
		<description>[...] Also relevant: Credo: Addendum. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Also relevant: Credo: Addendum. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

