<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The democracy of the Internet</title>
	<atom:link href="http://probabledistractions.wordpress.com/2007/06/08/the-democracy-of-the-internet/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://probabledistractions.wordpress.com/2007/06/08/the-democracy-of-the-internet/</link>
	<description>25% raw content, 75% probable distractions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:22:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Alexander Hayes</title>
		<link>http://probabledistractions.wordpress.com/2007/06/08/the-democracy-of-the-internet/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexander Hayes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 06:19:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://probabledistractions.wordpress.com/2007/06/08/the-democracy-of-the-internet/#comment-7</guid>
		<description>&quot;.....Having such debates and discussions can only take our understanding and appreciation of subject areas to a new and deeper level.&quot;

Too right. 

The fact is that it also takes the retention of the original source to remain stationery for at least long enough for others to listen / see / read it.

In this instance it would appear that step 3 has been implemented and that is the right of the writer to be rid of the evidence. Those familiar with such trickery will know that I&#039;m listening too it via my ipod as it was transmitted, delivered, retained and accessioned all in a blip of a second after the writer pressed &#039; publish&#039;.

The plot thickens.....and yes your absolutely correct. Having such debates and discussions can only take our understanding and appreciation of subject areas to a new and deeper level.

Let&#039;s hope the original returns. See Robyn&#039;s comment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8230;..Having such debates and discussions can only take our understanding and appreciation of subject areas to a new and deeper level.&#8221;</p>
<p>Too right. </p>
<p>The fact is that it also takes the retention of the original source to remain stationery for at least long enough for others to listen / see / read it.</p>
<p>In this instance it would appear that step 3 has been implemented and that is the right of the writer to be rid of the evidence. Those familiar with such trickery will know that I&#8217;m listening too it via my ipod as it was transmitted, delivered, retained and accessioned all in a blip of a second after the writer pressed &#8216; publish&#8217;.</p>
<p>The plot thickens&#8230;..and yes your absolutely correct. Having such debates and discussions can only take our understanding and appreciation of subject areas to a new and deeper level.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s hope the original returns. See Robyn&#8217;s comment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
