<?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: Flickr Blog:  Fence Friday</title>
	<atom:link href="http://laughingmeme.org/2010/01/29/flickr-blog-fence-friday/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://laughingmeme.org/2010/01/29/flickr-blog-fence-friday/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:28:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Eric Kim</title>
		<link>http://laughingmeme.org/2010/01/29/flickr-blog-fence-friday/comment-page-1/#comment-809814</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Eric Kim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 20:24:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://laughingmeme.org/?p=4447#comment-809814</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Are you saying you would do away with Groups as their own kind of entity, possibly building a Groups-like feature using tags?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Interestingly, Status.net chose to do the exact opposite of this. They added a &quot;!&quot; syntax for groups, rather than build a group-like functionality around the already existing &quot;#&quot; norm.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you saying you would do away with Groups as their own kind of entity, possibly building a Groups-like feature using tags?</p>

<p>Interestingly, Status.net chose to do the exact opposite of this. They added a &#8220;!&#8221; syntax for groups, rather than build a group-like functionality around the already existing &#8220;#&#8221; norm.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

