<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for Sean O</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/26aa8d1b9b5e69424ab0c43d020dab27/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:15:52 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Track Short URLs Clicks from Twitter with Google Analytics</title><link>http://webupd8.disqus.com/track_short_urls_clicks_from_twitter_with_google_analytics/#comment-8208114</link><description>URLs.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sean O</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:15:52 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Was Hasbro right to kill Scrabulous?</title><link>http://mathewingram.disqus.com/was_hasbro_right_to_kill_scrabulous_07/#comment-1036857</link><description>The game was copyright infringement, plain and simple.  How it even saw the light of day to begin with is a mystery.  Forget the "positive" consequences -- people buying more Scrabble board games -- those are irrelevant, when the work at hand is _an exact clone_ of Scrabble.  There is no promotion involved when the original copyright holder's name is never mentioned.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Also, the fact that the brothers Agarwalla didn't charge for the game works against them, as now they are providing a copyrighted work that previously required compensation (board games, software apps, etc.) for free.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I think some of the recent attempts by the RIAA and MPAA have gone too far, but this is one exception of clear IP violation, and the boys should have the book thrown at them.  Maybe... a Scrabble dictionary.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;twitter.com/seanodotcom</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sean O</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:32:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter blacklists Mad Men characters (some of them)</title><link>http://venturebeat.disqus.com/twitter_blacklists_mad_men_characters_some_of_them_45/#comment-1852162</link><description>Two words: fan fiction.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sean O</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 11:34:25 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Political Poker Proclivities</title><link>http://lifeontheleft.disqus.com/political_poker_proclivities/#comment-1926256</link><description>I have a slight inclination towards poker.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Aside: how does this relate to "food"?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sean O</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 14:48:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: And Baby Makes &amp;#8230; Confusion</title><link>http://lifeontheleft.disqus.com/and_baby_makes_8230_confusion/#comment-2003484</link><description>I guess the _decision_ at stake here is whether to keep her baby after it is born, versus putting it up for adoption. Actually, a clever use of the word by the Republican spin doctors. One that could be interpreted either way.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sean O</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:08:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: And Baby Makes &amp;#8230; Confusion</title><link>http://lifeontheleft.disqus.com/and_baby_makes_8230_confusion/#comment-2023699</link><description>Mmm... well that phrase certainly refers to the abortion decision directly.  They, perhaps, want to give the impression that she _did_ have a choice -- seeing as how it's, you know, legal.  But who knows what was really said behind closed doors...</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sean O</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:56:26 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 2007/10/11/25-tutorials-web-minded/</title><link>http://mashable.disqus.com/thread_9169/#comment-5980796</link><description>Good list.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;W3Schools, WebmasterWorld and A List Apart are perma-bookmarks.  "999 Tutorials" and most of the AdSense-laden Photoshop Tutorial sites, however, are not.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sean O</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 16:55:08 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 2008/05/14/twitter-is-down-i-blame-the-democrats/</title><link>http://mashable.disqus.com/thread_83527/#comment-6003315</link><description>Ummm... vacillates?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sean O</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 20:59:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A Picture is Worth... Gasoline Consumption Per Day [Updated]</title><link>http://treehuggercomments.disqus.com/a_picture_is_worth_gasoline_consumption_per_day_updated/#comment-17512981</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Yet another use of "shock statistics."&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;p&gt;Per-capita data (as linked previously) is more telling if you're asking the implied question: "How much do we (the American gluttons) use?"&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;p&gt;Also, comparisons of the sq. mi/km of popular roads in the U.S. versus the rest of the countries featured paints a clearer picture.  It's simply a (relative to most others) large country, with a fairly large population.  Of course we're going to use more oil.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;p&gt;A picture is worth... not so much.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sean O</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2007 23:59:43 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>