<?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: Twitter Waffles About Why @Replies Were Dumbed Down</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/</link>
	<description>Startup and Technology News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:46:41 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ha Ha I was right. &#124; FAIR OAKS DESIGN</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2987524</link>
		<dc:creator>Ha Ha I was right. &#124; FAIR OAKS DESIGN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 05:08:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2987524</guid>
		<description>[...] Ha I was right.  http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/ AKPC_IDS += &quot;107357956,&quot;;   Tell a [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Ha I was right.  <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/" rel="nofollow"></a><a href='http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/'>http://www.tech...re-dumbed-down/</a> AKPC_IDS += &quot;107357956,&quot;;   Tell a [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Discovery vs. exclusivity: the emerging tragedies of the digital commons &#171; preparsed</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2760820</link>
		<dc:creator>Discovery vs. exclusivity: the emerging tragedies of the digital commons &#171; preparsed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 06:20:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2760820</guid>
		<description>[...] and an impending crash of exclusivity.  It&#8217;s this ominous threat that pushed Twitter to hastily limit @replies last week and has driven Facebook to refocus on filters and friend lists.  And it&#8217;s this [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] and an impending crash of exclusivity.  It&#8217;s this ominous threat that pushed Twitter to hastily limit @replies last week and has driven Facebook to refocus on filters and friend lists.  And it&#8217;s this [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Nixon</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2750120</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Nixon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 12:06:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2750120</guid>
		<description>Couldn&#039;t agree more about this being a PR blunder of the highest order. These Johnny-Come-Lately companies, no matter how popular they are, seem to think they are immune to the physics of business. See: Facebook.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Couldn&#8217;t agree more about this being a PR blunder of the highest order. These Johnny-Come-Lately companies, no matter how popular they are, seem to think they are immune to the physics of business. See: Facebook.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Synack</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2749222</link>
		<dc:creator>Synack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 22:36:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2749222</guid>
		<description>Accurate, but since twitter is just a toy, only dorks even care.

More interesting aspect of the post is Kincaids obvious lack of technical acumen. His statement that they could have just left the feature for some users only shows that he really has no idea of how the technology works. And to call bad PR on twitter is rediculous, they have oprah comming out of their ass for gods sake.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Accurate, but since twitter is just a toy, only dorks even care.</p>
<p>More interesting aspect of the post is Kincaids obvious lack of technical acumen. His statement that they could have just left the feature for some users only shows that he really has no idea of how the technology works. And to call bad PR on twitter is rediculous, they have oprah comming out of their ass for gods sake.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Facebook Twitter Young Obama &#124; World News</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2748751</link>
		<dc:creator>Facebook Twitter Young Obama &#124; World News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 18:51:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2748751</guid>
		<description>[...] will probably be negative(like they are about Facebook. Poor Facebook, always hated on by TC.) [...]   Alumni Look to Erase Search Results from College Papers ...  The growing number of requests shows [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] will probably be negative(like they are about Facebook. Poor Facebook, always hated on by TC.) [...]   Alumni Look to Erase Search Results from College Papers &#8230;  The growing number of requests shows [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Recommended Reading For May 14th, 2009 &#171; Legends of Aerocles</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2748454</link>
		<dc:creator>Recommended Reading For May 14th, 2009 &#171; Legends of Aerocles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 15:33:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2748454</guid>
		<description>[...] Twitter Waffles About Why @Replies Were Dumbed Down &#8211; Techcrunch [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Twitter Waffles About Why @Replies Were Dumbed Down &#8211; Techcrunch [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Danny Brown</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2748409</link>
		<dc:creator>Danny Brown</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 14:49:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2748409</guid>
		<description>Typical of the &quot;elite squad&quot; complaining about a platform making it easier to use for everyone.

The platform doesn&#039;t belong to anyone but Twitter - sooner the &quot;power players&quot; that think it does realize this, the better.

Or, just follow Scoble to Friendfeed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Typical of the &#8220;elite squad&#8221; complaining about a platform making it easier to use for everyone.</p>
<p>The platform doesn&#8217;t belong to anyone but Twitter &#8211; sooner the &#8220;power players&#8221; that think it does realize this, the better.</p>
<p>Or, just follow Scoble to Friendfeed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Themenblog &#187; Blog Archiv &#187; Twitter-PR: Im Social Web haben Lügen kurze Beine</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2748297</link>
		<dc:creator>Themenblog &#187; Blog Archiv &#187; Twitter-PR: Im Social Web haben Lügen kurze Beine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 13:21:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2748297</guid>
		<description>[...] einfach in den &#8220;Advanced Options&#8221; für diese verfügbar machen, das jedenfalls schlägt Jason Kincaid auf TechCrunch vor. Unter der Rubrik &#8220;Social Hell&#8221; schreibt MG Siegler heute noch [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] einfach in den &#8220;Advanced Options&#8221; für diese verfügbar machen, das jedenfalls schlägt Jason Kincaid auf TechCrunch vor. Unter der Rubrik &#8220;Social Hell&#8221; schreibt MG Siegler heute noch [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Kimsal</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2748271</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Kimsal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 13:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2748271</guid>
		<description>@somedummy

Agreed.  I realize they&#039;re not a google-sized company, but they do own the microblogging space, with millions of active users.  They&#039;re still being treating this (and referred to) as a &#039;start up&#039;.  When do companies &#039;stop&#039; being &#039;start ups&#039;?  $10 million in funding?  $50 million?  $150 million?  500 employees?  I still hear some people refer to facebook as a &#039;start up&#039;, presumably because it&#039;s not IPOd or been bought out yet.

I think it was pretty easy to figure out this was an engineering/scaling issue.  Now that Twitter have &#039;succeeded&#039; in having hundreds of accounts with tens (hundreds?) of millions of &#039;follow&#039; relationships going on, even a handful of big name people turning this option on could probably bring the system to its virtual knees.  But to lie about it at the beginning (&quot;it&#039;s confusing, yet we&#039;ve had it for 3 years until now&quot;) is intellectually insulting and also somewhat of a slap in the face to the millions of pro-Oprah early adopters who helped give Twitter critical mass in the first place.  &quot;Those features that you used?  New people don&#039;t understand it, so we&#039;re taking it away from you as well.&quot;  

Unbelievable.  The only &#039;good&#039; thing I&#039;ve gotten out of this is that they at least backtracked a bit and admitted the real reason (technical/engineering) sooner rather than waiting a few more weeks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@somedummy</p>
<p>Agreed.  I realize they&#8217;re not a google-sized company, but they do own the microblogging space, with millions of active users.  They&#8217;re still being treating this (and referred to) as a &#8217;start up&#8217;.  When do companies &#8217;stop&#8217; being &#8217;start ups&#8217;?  $10 million in funding?  $50 million?  $150 million?  500 employees?  I still hear some people refer to facebook as a &#8217;start up&#8217;, presumably because it&#8217;s not IPOd or been bought out yet.</p>
<p>I think it was pretty easy to figure out this was an engineering/scaling issue.  Now that Twitter have &#8217;succeeded&#8217; in having hundreds of accounts with tens (hundreds?) of millions of &#8216;follow&#8217; relationships going on, even a handful of big name people turning this option on could probably bring the system to its virtual knees.  But to lie about it at the beginning (&#8221;it&#8217;s confusing, yet we&#8217;ve had it for 3 years until now&#8221;) is intellectually insulting and also somewhat of a slap in the face to the millions of pro-Oprah early adopters who helped give Twitter critical mass in the first place.  &#8220;Those features that you used?  New people don&#8217;t understand it, so we&#8217;re taking it away from you as well.&#8221;  </p>
<p>Unbelievable.  The only &#8216;good&#8217; thing I&#8217;ve gotten out of this is that they at least backtracked a bit and admitted the real reason (technical/engineering) sooner rather than waiting a few more weeks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pages tagged "engineering"</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2748146</link>
		<dc:creator>Pages tagged "engineering"</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 10:52:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2748146</guid>
		<description>[...] bookmarks tagged engineering Twitter Waffles About Why @Replies Were Dumbed Dow...&#160;saved by 4 others  &#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;oliviawantz bookmarked on 05/14/09 &#124; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] bookmarks tagged engineering Twitter Waffles About Why @Replies Were Dumbed Dow&#8230;&nbsp;saved by 4 others  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;oliviawantz bookmarked on 05/14/09 | [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Twitter&#8217;s Spectacularly Awful 24 Hours</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2748115</link>
		<dc:creator>Twitter&#8217;s Spectacularly Awful 24 Hours</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 10:22:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2748115</guid>
		<description>[...] have been the key subject of the first post. Now it just seems like Twitter was being purposefully misleading about the reason it removed the option. I was at dinner the previous night discussing this change. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] have been the key subject of the first post. Now it just seems like Twitter was being purposefully misleading about the reason it removed the option. I was at dinner the previous night discussing this change. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: <fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="685627120">Ryan Edward</fb:name></title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2747819</link>
		<dc:creator><fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="685627120">Ryan Edward</fb:name></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 04:39:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747819</guid>
		<description>The feature was the best. now I can&#039;t see a friends tweet if they do not tweet to someone who I am not following. If I follow someone I wanna know when they wipe their ass!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The feature was the best. now I can&#8217;t see a friends tweet if they do not tweet to someone who I am not following. If I follow someone I wanna know when they wipe their ass!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: HatingTwitter</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2747796</link>
		<dc:creator>HatingTwitter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 04:13:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747796</guid>
		<description>wayne shut thee hell up. it doesnt matter if we dont pay..we pay with time! if we are all using it, OBVIOUSLY theyre getting SOMETHING out of it! nothing is completely free! we pay them with our time and they pay us by providing a good service. too bad we are getting the raw end of the deal right now.

since its so free, lets see how they feel when everyone leaves and starts using something else? im sure the loss of users will come out of their pockets in SOME FORM! so dont give us that BS. theyre not doing us this big favor by making twitter! obviously theres something in it for them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>wayne shut thee hell up. it doesnt matter if we dont pay..we pay with time! if we are all using it, OBVIOUSLY theyre getting SOMETHING out of it! nothing is completely free! we pay them with our time and they pay us by providing a good service. too bad we are getting the raw end of the deal right now.</p>
<p>since its so free, lets see how they feel when everyone leaves and starts using something else? im sure the loss of users will come out of their pockets in SOME FORM! so dont give us that BS. theyre not doing us this big favor by making twitter! obviously theres something in it for them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2747760</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 03:37:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747760</guid>
		<description>Evan--Good point. Better than just confused, now you (and I) are METAconfused.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Evan&#8211;Good point. Better than just confused, now you (and I) are METAconfused.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2747758</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 03:33:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747758</guid>
		<description>Twitter said they had to remove a feature cuz it was &quot;confusing?&quot; Oh, sure. True or not, that reads like a headline from &quot;The Onion.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Twitter said they had to remove a feature cuz it was &#8220;confusing?&#8221; Oh, sure. True or not, that reads like a headline from &#8220;The Onion.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-2/#comment-2747508</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 00:14:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747508</guid>
		<description>Twitter is gay.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Twitter is gay.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mahjong</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2747370</link>
		<dc:creator>mahjong</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 22:31:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747370</guid>
		<description>Doesn&#039;t sound like they handled it very well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Doesn&#8217;t sound like they handled it very well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FP</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2747339</link>
		<dc:creator>FP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 22:08:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747339</guid>
		<description>Delete this. The lamers hoping for any publicity via TC comments get really boring. Blatant spam like this should put them on a blacklist meaning they never get covered on TC in the future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Delete this. The lamers hoping for any publicity via TC comments get really boring. Blatant spam like this should put them on a blacklist meaning they never get covered on TC in the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Evan</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2747330</link>
		<dc:creator>Evan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 22:01:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747330</guid>
		<description>You realize you don&#039;t explain, in this entire post, what this feature actually did.

Still confused...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You realize you don&#8217;t explain, in this entire post, what this feature actually did.</p>
<p>Still confused&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CNN</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2747317</link>
		<dc:creator>CNN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 21:47:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747317</guid>
		<description>wow, who cares?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>wow, who cares?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: brandon</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2747295</link>
		<dc:creator>brandon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 21:35:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747295</guid>
		<description>The @ feature is such a great feature, this is pretty sad news indeed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The @ feature is such a great feature, this is pretty sad news indeed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Liz</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2747243</link>
		<dc:creator>Liz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 21:06:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747243</guid>
		<description>Latest blog entry about it from Twitter: http://blog.twitter.com/2009/05/we-learned-lot.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Latest blog entry about it from Twitter: <a href="http://blog.twitter.com/2009/05/we-learned-lot.html" rel="nofollow"></a><a href='http://blog.twitter.com/2009/05/we-learned-lot.html'>http://blog.twi...earned-lot.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doctor Twitter</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2747205</link>
		<dc:creator>Doctor Twitter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 20:52:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747205</guid>
		<description>These little things with twitter have grown so tiresome, but at the same time we are not going anywhere. I do however hope that twitter gets there stuff together. And if they don&#039;t have a pr firm they need to get on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These little things with twitter have grown so tiresome, but at the same time we are not going anywhere. I do however hope that twitter gets there stuff together. And if they don&#8217;t have a pr firm they need to get on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Did Twitter just jump the credibility shark with#twitterlied? &#124; Heal Your Church WebSite</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2747201</link>
		<dc:creator>Did Twitter just jump the credibility shark with#twitterlied? &#124; Heal Your Church WebSite</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 20:51:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747201</guid>
		<description>[...] Twitter Waffles About Why @Replies Were Dumbed Down [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Twitter Waffles About Why @Replies Were Dumbed Down [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KISS FAIL. You Can Now See Replies Sometimes, Except When You Can&#8217;t.</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/13/pr-fail-twitter-lied-about-why-replies-were-dumbed-down/comment-page-1/#comment-2747194</link>
		<dc:creator>KISS FAIL. You Can Now See Replies Sometimes, Except When You Can&#8217;t.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 20:49:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=64576#comment-2747194</guid>
		<description>[...] few people used, but if it really believed that, it should have stuck with it. Instead, it admitted that the move was done with help with scaling [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] few people used, but if it really believed that, it should have stuck with it. Instead, it admitted that the move was done with help with scaling [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
