<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for Gary Farber</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/9dc7ad45996478f1cead2bf42e28e7a4/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:43:06 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Death of a blogger: The last post</title><link>http://mathewingram.disqus.com/death_of_a_blogger_the_last_post_31/#comment-69744</link><description>Olmsted.  Not "Olmstead."</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Gary Farber</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 06:20:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Blogburst Backlash</title><link>http://plagiarismtoday.disqus.com/blogburst_backlash/#comment-1345008</link><description>"It would require that all of their partners remove Blogburst-referred content automatically after X number of years and have a system in place to deal with bloggers that change their mind. A license requiring payment would demand a financial infrastructure they do not have in place."&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;This is actually not remotely a problem, as witness the contract offered by competitors such as TexTile, which I'll get around to blogging about.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And their excuse about not having money upfront is nonsense.  The whole point of a royalty is that it isn't money upfront.  It's money that is a percentage of profits earned.  No profits into Blogburst, no outlay by them to bloggers.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Claiming otherwise is a lie.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The point of a royalty is that it calls for a percentage of &lt;i&gt;profits&lt;/i&gt;, not a percentage of income (this can cause problems and a need for audits of dishonest publishers, but I won't go into that here).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But claiming that it's a strain to not grant royalties, a grant only of a share of deserved profits, and not income, is blatantly dishonest, given that it glosses over this basic fact.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;If there's no profit to the company, in this case Blogburst, they have no outlays to make, and no problem.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What they're objecting to us sharing &lt;i&gt;profits&lt;/i&gt;, not income.  That's the Big Lie they're making.  And that makes me doubt their good faith (though possibly they're simply completely clueless).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I've updated my post to link to yours.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I'll probably get around to expanding on this in a while, though I expect to be busy and not blogging much for a couple of days.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Incidentally, recent posts on plagiarism include &lt;a href="http://amygdalagf.blogspot.com/2006/05/fournier-recapitulates-lizza.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;this&lt;/a&gt; not quite example by Ron Fournier,  &lt;a href="http://amygdalagf.blogspot.com/2006/05/plagiarism-isnt-so-bad-when-you-head.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;this about William H. Swanson, chief of Raytheon&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href="http://amygdalagf.blogspot.com/2006/03/i-only-stole-it-from-kids-also-wouldnt.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;, amongst various others in the past.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Gary Farber</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 19 May 2006 13:31:52 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why I Could Never Be an American Soldier &amp;laquo; Road Sassy</title><link>http://roadsassy.disqus.com/why_i_could_never_be_an_american_soldier_laquo_road_sassy/#comment-1358950</link><description>Olmsted.  Not "Olmstead."&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;For more on Andrew, see &lt;a href="http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/01/andy-olmsted.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/01/remembering-and.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href="http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/01/how-to-help.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Gary Farber</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:56:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Godspeed to an American soldier.</title><link>http://thesacredproject.disqus.com/godspeed_to_an_american_soldier/#comment-5724273</link><description>For more on Andrew, see &lt;a href="http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/01/remembering-and.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href="http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/01/how-to-help.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Gary Farber</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:35:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Inspiration and repetition</title><link>http://scobleizer.disqus.com/inspiration_and_repetition/#comment-9698348</link><description>Olmsted.  Not "Olmstead."</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Gary Farber</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 06:48:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Inspiration and repetition</title><link>http://scobleizer.disqus.com/inspiration_and_repetition/#comment-9698350</link><description>It's still "Andrew Olmsted" who was killed.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The old saying used to be that if someone was killed, at least get my name right.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I think Andy would appreciate it if you'd bother to get his name right.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Thanks.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Gary Farber</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:43:06 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>