<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for alexandrosM</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/alexandrosM/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 04:36:07 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: The Editor Dillemma</title><link>http://avc.disqus.com/the_editor_dillemma/#comment-4741646</link><description>Good ideas are generally thought of by multiple people</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">fredwilson</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 04:36:07 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Editor Dillemma</title><link>http://avc.disqus.com/the_editor_dillemma/#comment-4736738</link><description>Hi Fred, &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It is intresting that you mention this, I had been thinking about the same problem for a while. As a specific category of posts in every blog is about typos, there should be a 'corrections interaction channel' seperate from the 'comments interaction channel' as corrections generally do not contribute to the conversation. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The way I was thinking about this being implemented is that the posts are essentially editable (or easy to turn to edit-mode), with anyone being able to submit small correction diffs. these would get gathered similarly to comments but in their own queue that could be public or private only to you. duplicate submissions essentially count as 'vote ups'. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The application of the diffs is a painful subject. Perhaps the MTurk approach, perhaps through high-reputation users who can OK some changes (but leave the more challenging/ambiguous ones for you), perhaps once a correction reaches a vote threshold or a combination method. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Whatever method of application is chosen though, I do think the blogger should be the final approval authority, as some times the error is not clear cut or its solution is not.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">alexandrosM</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 21:44:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Full text in RSS? (Scripting News)</title><link>http://scripting.disqus.com/full_text_in_rss_scripting_news/#comment-3287373</link><description>My issue is, I like full content feeds and wish more publishers would do it. If i understand correctly, your problem is not the full content itself but rather that the metadata for a summary is no longer available. Come to think of it, there is no reason there could not be a 'summary feed' and a 'full content feed' by each publisher, solving everyone's problem. It would be good if the feed format could make us both happy with a single feed but lacking that, a dual feed model could work.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">alexandrosM</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2008 20:30:56 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Chrome, Android, and The Cloud</title><link>http://avc.disqus.com/chrome_android_and_the_cloud/#comment-2003171</link><description>Google finally seems to be getting its focus back, or at least showing the rest of the world what it had in mind.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">alexandrosM</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 08:24:55 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>