<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for caddidy</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/caddidy/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:14:17 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Capital Efficiency Finds It's Moment</title><link>http://avc.disqus.com/capital_efficiency_finds_its_moment/#comment-2969845</link><description>Thanks for the correction. I fixed it</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">fredwilson</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:14:17 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Sequoia etc. close barn door after horse</title><link>http://mathewingram.disqus.com/sequoia_etc_close_barn_door_after_horse/#comment-2964287</link><description>yes, they've been late. but it's not as if we've not known about this. Going back at least to the late summer, CNET, the WSJ and Valleywag (probably others, but i can't recall off the top) have run articles reporting the link between the financial market meltdown and web 2.0.so now that it's finally risen to the top of techmeme, the rest of the world is noticing. it's about time.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">caddidy</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 12:02:17 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Capital Efficiency Finds It's Moment</title><link>http://avc.disqus.com/capital_efficiency_finds_its_moment/#comment-2963971</link><description>sorry guy, but i go with ron's analysis. sounds like yours is more wishful thinking than a sober reflection of where we are - and, unfortunately, where we are heading.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;btw, you incorrectly used "it's" in your post. should be "its" &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;:)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">caddidy</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 11:47:26 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: So You Want To Be A Rich And Famous Blogger Eh</title><link>http://shootingatbubbles.disqus.com/so_you_want_to_be_a_rich_and_famous_blogger_eh/#comment-2878716</link><description>what's needed is better writing and more original thinking. i read lots of posts that reflect basic ignorance of the rules of grammar. at best, they are flabby and verbose.  don't take this the wrong way but your piece badly needs an edit. if you sat down one last time before publishing, i'm sure you could have found a way to chop it in half. the result, imho, would have been a more powerful mini-essay. good luck, though, in the future</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">caddidy</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 05 Oct 2008 09:56:04 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Is the link economy really broken?</title><link>http://mathewingram.disqus.com/is_the_link_economy_really_broken/#comment-2867926</link><description>Oops -- must have missed that somehow.   I think Charles Cooper threw me off by calling it a "talkback."  Thanks for letting me know.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mathewi</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2008 16:25:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Is the link economy really broken?</title><link>http://mathewingram.disqus.com/is_the_link_economy_really_broken/#comment-2838545</link><description>"And he refers to some comments made by CNET editor Dan Farber in a Talkback response to my post, but for the life of me I couldn’t find that anywhere on CNET’s site (in this case an internal link would have helped)."&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;actually matthew, farber's reply is here on your talkback board, responding to your earlier piece :)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">caddidy</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2008 09:59:17 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>