<?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: Quechup&#039;s Spam Tricks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/10/quechups-spam-tricks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/10/quechups-spam-tricks/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:49:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon Garfunkel</title>
		<link>http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/10/quechups-spam-tricks/comment-page-1/#comment-1942</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Garfunkel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2007 02:07:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://citmedia.org/blog/2007/09/10/quechups-spam-tricks/#comment-1942</guid>
		<description>I realize that it&#039;s rather distateful to blame the hosts when talking about biological viral outbreaks. But with a social virus, there&#039;s some deliberation involved on the part of the host bodies. Take a look at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://quechup.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;quechup&lt;/a&gt; website. For a social network, it&#039;s got zero sociability to it. There&#039;s no blogging head on the front page, no&quot;about&quot; page, no nothing. Nobody took the time to figure out who the people behind the company are. Robert X. Cringely III only did because the company&#039;s VP, Glenn Fine, sent him an email.

What happened, the super-connected folks got another invitation to a social network, and figured, why not? (Frankly, I&#039;d be happy with a Social Network where Scrabulous wasn&#039;t crashing all the time.)

It&#039;s probably an interesting power-law experiment. Can a meme still thrive if the super-connected try to stamp it out? Curious...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I realize that it&#8217;s rather distateful to blame the hosts when talking about biological viral outbreaks. But with a social virus, there&#8217;s some deliberation involved on the part of the host bodies. Take a look at the <a href="http://quechup.com/" rel="nofollow">quechup</a> website. For a social network, it&#8217;s got zero sociability to it. There&#8217;s no blogging head on the front page, no&#8221;about&#8221; page, no nothing. Nobody took the time to figure out who the people behind the company are. Robert X. Cringely III only did because the company&#8217;s VP, Glenn Fine, sent him an email.</p>
<p>What happened, the super-connected folks got another invitation to a social network, and figured, why not? (Frankly, I&#8217;d be happy with a Social Network where Scrabulous wasn&#8217;t crashing all the time.)</p>
<p>It&#8217;s probably an interesting power-law experiment. Can a meme still thrive if the super-connected try to stamp it out? Curious&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

