<?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: Twaxonomy?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://conradiator.wordpress.com/2009/03/18/twaxonomy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://conradiator.wordpress.com/2009/03/18/twaxonomy/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:50:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Józefa Fawcett</title>
		<link>http://conradiator.wordpress.com/2009/03/18/twaxonomy/#comment-89</link>
		<dc:creator>Józefa Fawcett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 07:33:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://conradiator.wordpress.com/?p=258#comment-89</guid>
		<description>Conrad, I think you have raised some very interesting issues about filtering Twitter posts.  I find myself bordering on the filter-don&#039;t filter view.  In one respect, I like the fact that I can &#039;see&#039; the human aspects of people that I choose to follow (I do not automatically follow everyone who follows me) behind their public face.  That said, I do skim over the &#039;waiting for the train&#039; posts as I cannot imagine why anyone would want to say this anyway, or more importantly, why they think anyone would be interested.

I am also watching a growing trend by marketeers to use Twitter to simply publicise, offering a mixture of re-direction to events alongside a &#039;human&#039; activity.

I remain interested and active on Twitter but refuse to become addicted (have been and weaned myself off) again.

Józefa</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Conrad, I think you have raised some very interesting issues about filtering Twitter posts.  I find myself bordering on the filter-don&#8217;t filter view.  In one respect, I like the fact that I can &#8217;see&#8217; the human aspects of people that I choose to follow (I do not automatically follow everyone who follows me) behind their public face.  That said, I do skim over the &#8216;waiting for the train&#8217; posts as I cannot imagine why anyone would want to say this anyway, or more importantly, why they think anyone would be interested.</p>
<p>I am also watching a growing trend by marketeers to use Twitter to simply publicise, offering a mixture of re-direction to events alongside a &#8216;human&#8217; activity.</p>
<p>I remain interested and active on Twitter but refuse to become addicted (have been and weaned myself off) again.</p>
<p>Józefa</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Bater</title>
		<link>http://conradiator.wordpress.com/2009/03/18/twaxonomy/#comment-76</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bater</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:00:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://conradiator.wordpress.com/?p=258#comment-76</guid>
		<description>Conrad,

Another highly stimulating post. Betrays less your familiarity with formal knowledge organization, than homo sapiens&#039; instinctual need to classify incoming information feeds according to relevance and an assessment of the response required.

In my case though, I&#039;d not filter-out the &#039;funny-shaped balls&#039; stuff; I&#039;m with Dave Snowden on that.

Keep up your analysis of Twitter. I&#039;m a recent recruit to the game, and have yet to form an opinion of its real value. Your insights will constitute a pillar of whatever my eventual judgement might be.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Conrad,</p>
<p>Another highly stimulating post. Betrays less your familiarity with formal knowledge organization, than homo sapiens&#8217; instinctual need to classify incoming information feeds according to relevance and an assessment of the response required.</p>
<p>In my case though, I&#8217;d not filter-out the &#8216;funny-shaped balls&#8217; stuff; I&#8217;m with Dave Snowden on that.</p>
<p>Keep up your analysis of Twitter. I&#8217;m a recent recruit to the game, and have yet to form an opinion of its real value. Your insights will constitute a pillar of whatever my eventual judgement might be.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Keith Underdown</title>
		<link>http://conradiator.wordpress.com/2009/03/18/twaxonomy/#comment-75</link>
		<dc:creator>Keith Underdown</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 16:11:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://conradiator.wordpress.com/?p=258#comment-75</guid>
		<description>HI Conrad

Interesting article. I&#039;ve almost decided I need two Twitter persona&#039;s. My present one (KeithUnderdown)is a mishmash of IAIDQ stuff, sponsored bike ride stuff and a certain amount of personal stuff.

I did get to be on Radio Wales this morning by boiling down my cancer/cycling story into 140 characters and Tweeting the presenters, who bit. However it has generated no responses except from the production team.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HI Conrad</p>
<p>Interesting article. I&#8217;ve almost decided I need two Twitter persona&#8217;s. My present one (KeithUnderdown)is a mishmash of IAIDQ stuff, sponsored bike ride stuff and a certain amount of personal stuff.</p>
<p>I did get to be on Radio Wales this morning by boiling down my cancer/cycling story into 140 characters and Tweeting the presenters, who bit. However it has generated no responses except from the production team.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
