<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Mathew's comments - Latest Comments in Is BlogBurst a force for good, or evil?</title><link>http://mathewingram.disqus.com/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2006 08:52:41 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Is BlogBurst a force for good, or evil?</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/21/is-blogburst-a-force-for-good-or-evil/#comment-1292748</link><description>I agree, Mark.  That's how it feels to me too.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mathew</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2006 08:52:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Is BlogBurst a force for good, or evil?</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/21/is-blogburst-a-force-for-good-or-evil/#comment-1292746</link><description>mathew,&lt;br&gt;othher than compensation, i just don't think it will drive traffic back to a blogger's "home" site because people will consume the content via blogburst and the move on. perhaps a few curious souls will check out who wrote the post but not very many. and why would you sign up otherwise if you don't know the compensation plan. it's very much web 2.0 in following the start-up model of "build it and we'll figure out a business model later".</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mark evans</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2006 08:23:30 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>