<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Sunday Times article what was written for me</title>
	<link>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/</link>
	<description>An infuriatingly infrequently updated reflection on the Internet, the US, and life in general</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 02:56:31 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Am I keeping in touch with people - or just spreading tedious ditties? at kierenmccarthy.co.uk</title>
		<link>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-89331</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2007 17:57:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-89331</guid>
					<description>[...] I just noticed that the poll on my blog is out-of-date. It&amp;#8217;s still going on about the Sunday Times article that I &amp;#8220;wrote&amp;#8221; over a month ago. I am pleased to see that 54 percent of people thought my original con-man version was the best, with just 20 percent going for the Sunday Times article that was written for me. I wonder how many people actually read them or whether they felt obliged to be nice to me. Or if they didn&amp;#8217;t really give it much thought. It was just another online poll, wasn&amp;#8217;t it? Probably the 19th they&amp;#8217;d filled in that day. You have to feel sorry for historians of this era - how on earth are they ever going to filter all this crap into something useful? [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] I just noticed that the poll on my blog is out-of-date. It&#8217;s still going on about the Sunday Times article that I &#8220;wrote&#8221; over a month ago. I am pleased to see that 54 percent of people thought my original con-man version was the best, with just 20 percent going for the Sunday Times article that was written for me. I wonder how many people actually read them or whether they felt obliged to be nice to me. Or if they didn&#8217;t really give it much thought. It was just another online poll, wasn&#8217;t it? Probably the 19th they&#8217;d filled in that day. You have to feel sorry for historians of this era - how on earth are they ever going to filter all this crap into something useful? [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Sunday Times article on Sex.com at kierenmccarthy.co.uk</title>
		<link>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-65148</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 May 2007 11:58:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-65148</guid>
					<description>[...] This is the article that appeared in The Sunday Times on Sex.com today. As I mentioned earlier, the article appears under my byline but was entirely written by a writer the Times brought in. I&amp;#8217;m interested to see what people think of the two versions I wrote and the one that&amp;#8217;s appeared. I&amp;#8217;ll do a poll, but feel free to stick comments on any of my posts. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] This is the article that appeared in The Sunday Times on Sex.com today. As I mentioned earlier, the article appears under my byline but was entirely written by a writer the Times brought in. I&#8217;m interested to see what people think of the two versions I wrote and the one that&#8217;s appeared. I&#8217;ll do a poll, but feel free to stick comments on any of my posts. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: I saw this&#8230; &#187; the billblog</title>
		<link>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-64983</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 May 2007 00:50:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-64983</guid>
					<description>[...] A Sunday Times article what was written for me at kierenmccarthy.co.uk - An exercise in transparency from Kieren, author of sex.com and an old mate  china democracy epetition google journalism kierenmccarthy microsoft politics sex.com technology tories    &amp;#160;   &amp;#171; I saw this&amp;#8230; &amp;#124;   &amp;#160; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] A Sunday Times article what was written for me at kierenmccarthy.co.uk - An exercise in transparency from Kieren, author of sex.com and an old mate  china democracy epetition google journalism kierenmccarthy microsoft politics sex.com technology tories    &nbsp;   &laquo; I saw this&#8230; |   &nbsp; [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Name Wire: The Product Naming Blog</title>
		<link>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-64831</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 May 2007 20:39:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-64831</guid>
					<description>&lt;strong&gt;Recent Sale, Book Highlight Value of Sex.Com and Porn.com Domain Names...&lt;/strong&gt;

It's a sad but true fact that seedy domain names are among the most valuable on the Internet. A recent story set to be printed in the UK Sunday Times explores about the utter skullduggery around the sex.com domain name, which was stolen by Stephen Mic...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Recent Sale, Book Highlight Value of Sex.Com and Porn.com Domain Names&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>It&#8217;s a sad but true fact that seedy domain names are among the most valuable on the Internet. A recent story set to be printed in the UK Sunday Times explores about the utter skullduggery around the sex.com domain name, which was stolen by Stephen Mic&#8230;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Sunday Times article version two at kierenmccarthy.co.uk</title>
		<link>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-64626</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 May 2007 08:14:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-64626</guid>
					<description>[...] You should read this blog post before you delve into this piece. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] You should read this blog post before you delve into this piece. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Sunday Times article version one at kierenmccarthy.co.uk</title>
		<link>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-64511</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 May 2007 00:24:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2007/05/26/a-sunday-times-article-what-was-written-for-me/#comment-64511</guid>
					<description>[...] To find out what on earth this is all about, please read this blog post. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] To find out what on earth this is all about, please read this blog post. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
