<?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: Wikipedia and the Spin Doctors</title>
	<atom:link href="http://marketingconversation.com/2007/08/15/wikipedia-and-the-spin-doctors/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://marketingconversation.com/2007/08/15/wikipedia-and-the-spin-doctors/</link>
	<description>Digital PR and Social Media Marketing by Abraham Harrison LLC</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 16:57:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: creation site photo</title>
		<link>http://marketingconversation.com/2007/08/15/wikipedia-and-the-spin-doctors/comment-page-1/#comment-13981</link>
		<dc:creator>creation site photo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 20:55:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2007/08/15/wikipedia-and-the-spin-doctors/#comment-13981</guid>
		<description>Is it really that erroneous to put Jobs in the same category as Napoleon? If anybody deserves a comparability to Napoleon-it&#039;s Jobs. Analysethis quote by Stanley Kubrick (on Napoleon): &quot;He was one of those rare personnel who move history and mold the destiny of their own times and of generations to come.&quot; The reason Jobs is honorable so tearing is because he&#039;s not merely a great inventor or businessman or even artist, but a man of action-the likes to which we haven&#039;t seen since the days of Caesar and Napoleon. This may appear as facile, but think about the virtues of the great men in history and then compare them to what Jobs does in his life. Rather possibly the greatest tool builder of all time. No small feat even in the pantheon of mankind.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it really that erroneous to put Jobs in the same category as Napoleon? If anybody deserves a comparability to Napoleon-it&#8217;s Jobs. Analysethis quote by Stanley Kubrick (on Napoleon): &#8220;He was one of those rare personnel who move history and mold the destiny of their own times and of generations to come.&#8221; The reason Jobs is honorable so tearing is because he&#8217;s not merely a great inventor or businessman or even artist, but a man of action-the likes to which we haven&#8217;t seen since the days of Caesar and Napoleon. This may appear as facile, but think about the virtues of the great men in history and then compare them to what Jobs does in his life. Rather possibly the greatest tool builder of all time. No small feat even in the pantheon of mankind.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathan Ketsdever</title>
		<link>http://marketingconversation.com/2007/08/15/wikipedia-and-the-spin-doctors/comment-page-1/#comment-728</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathan Ketsdever</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:29:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2007/08/15/wikipedia-and-the-spin-doctors/#comment-728</guid>
		<description>In  a worst case scenario this seems raise the risk of blackballing and witch hunts, but I believe the wikipedia-rati (if thats the correct word) will be able to check such behaviour.  Ultimately accountability and openness should win out, perhaps will minor bumps at the start as the wiki culture adjusts.

This seems to boil down to three core questions:
1) will this increase accountability and the overall truth value of the wiki?
2) will folks still post in the same numbers as before?
3) how will this effect the readership?

I think it will dramatically improve one and three, while giving a small net bump to three.  Anyone else have a different take?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In  a worst case scenario this seems raise the risk of blackballing and witch hunts, but I believe the wikipedia-rati (if thats the correct word) will be able to check such behaviour.  Ultimately accountability and openness should win out, perhaps will minor bumps at the start as the wiki culture adjusts.</p>
<p>This seems to boil down to three core questions:<br />
1) will this increase accountability and the overall truth value of the wiki?<br />
2) will folks still post in the same numbers as before?<br />
3) how will this effect the readership?</p>
<p>I think it will dramatically improve one and three, while giving a small net bump to three.  Anyone else have a different take?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 2/8 queries in 0.007 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 421/422 objects using disk: basic

Served from: marketingconversation.com @ 2012-02-12 13:32:35 -->
