<?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: What do we mean by &#8216;ubiquity&#8217;?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://test.org.uk/2003/04/24/what-do-we-mean-by-ubiquity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://test.org.uk/2003/04/24/what-do-we-mean-by-ubiquity/</link>
	<description>Looking for a cure for inertia since 1972</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:28:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: AKMA</title>
		<link>http://test.org.uk/2003/04/24/what-do-we-mean-by-ubiquity/#comment-17</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[AKMA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2003 23:41:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattlocke.wordpress.com/2003/04/24/what-do-we-mean-by-ubiquity/#comment-17</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for noting &#8220;the atypical behaviours of MOOs and MUDs&#8221; &#8212; too much research on online phenomena take MOOs and MUDs as normative, perhaps because they yield results that lend themselves to sociological observation and colorful reporting. In order to understand what&#8217;s happening around us, though, we need to treat these specific areas as distinct spheres of involvement, allowing for the possibility (the likelihood, so far as I can tell) that the vast preponderance of people who don&#8217;t participate in MOO-like or MUD-like activities interact in ways for which MOOs and MUDs aren&#8217;t reliable predictors.
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for noting &#8220;the atypical behaviours of MOOs and MUDs&#8221; &#8212; too much research on online phenomena take MOOs and MUDs as normative, perhaps because they yield results that lend themselves to sociological observation and colorful reporting. In order to understand what&#8217;s happening around us, though, we need to treat these specific areas as distinct spheres of involvement, allowing for the possibility (the likelihood, so far as I can tell) that the vast preponderance of people who don&#8217;t participate in MOO-like or MUD-like activities interact in ways for which MOOs and MUDs aren&#8217;t reliable predictors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

