<?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: Transparency, Authenticity and Trust</title>
	<atom:link href="http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/transparency-authenticity-and-trust/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/transparency-authenticity-and-trust/</link>
	<description>innovate. integrate. ignite.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 26 Dec 2010 00:26:01 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Wildfire Strategic Marketing &#124; (3i) &#187; Roll with it: life&#8217;s a journey, so is the Internet</title>
		<link>http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/transparency-authenticity-and-trust/comment-page-1/#comment-86770</link>
		<dc:creator>Wildfire Strategic Marketing &#124; (3i) &#187; Roll with it: life&#8217;s a journey, so is the Internet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:59:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/14/transparency-authenticity-and-trust/#comment-86770</guid>
		<description>[...] Which also leads into practicing what we preach and setting a good example for the juniors amongst us to follow if we decide there must be guidelines within this particular niche online. I find it difficult to fault Chris for his post when those directly in his circle have set the example for &#8216;calling outs&#8217;. I&#8217;ve done it. So has Joe (with follow ups and a Facebook group), David (including some echo chamber in the comments), Doug (another Jaffe sighting), and Michael (who lived to tell the tale) to name a few of the more recent ones. Do I think any of those posts were out of bounds? Perhaps and if I felt strongly one way or the other I may have participated in the ensuing lively discussions&#8230; the foundation for expressing and communicating online. Do I feel differently about any of the people because of what they wrote? No, because even if I didn&#8217;t know each of them in real life and judge them by the sum of their contributions both online and off, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and means of expressing it as long as it isn&#8217;t abusive. However, I do think that each of the above examples are in line (in different ways) with what Chris posted in his piece. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Which also leads into practicing what we preach and setting a good example for the juniors amongst us to follow if we decide there must be guidelines within this particular niche online. I find it difficult to fault Chris for his post when those directly in his circle have set the example for &#8216;calling outs&#8217;. I&#8217;ve done it. So has Joe (with follow ups and a Facebook group), David (including some echo chamber in the comments), Doug (another Jaffe sighting), and Michael (who lived to tell the tale) to name a few of the more recent ones. Do I think any of those posts were out of bounds? Perhaps and if I felt strongly one way or the other I may have participated in the ensuing lively discussions&#8230; the foundation for expressing and communicating online. Do I feel differently about any of the people because of what they wrote? No, because even if I didn&#8217;t know each of them in real life and judge them by the sum of their contributions both online and off, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and means of expressing it as long as it isn&#8217;t abusive. However, I do think that each of the above examples are in line (in different ways) with what Chris posted in his piece. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tamera</title>
		<link>http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/transparency-authenticity-and-trust/comment-page-1/#comment-20404</link>
		<dc:creator>tamera</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2006 22:06:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/14/transparency-authenticity-and-trust/#comment-20404</guid>
		<description>Brandy,

Thank you for commenting. My intention was certainly not to start a bitter battle with iStudio, and I have been trying my best to raise what I believe are valuable, important points about the claims your company is making in a constructive way. I can totally relate to the perils of learning new technology as we go along, but that&#039;s tangential to the main issue. This is social, interactive media, and not responding or correcting the record for a week doesn&#039;t cut it. Frankly, the way I have been treated leaves me unimpressed.

While Ed, Neil and now you have all commented on the issue to an extent, I have not seen an explanation to satisfy me that the claims you are making are legitimate: what good is an optimized page when it&#039;s hidden inside a frame? How will the optimization measures you&#039;ve taken impact the traffic to the URL being promoted? If you were forced to use framesets then why did you promote the release as being up to standard? While you certainly have no obligation to explain these things to me, I personally think you owe it to your customers, and to the blogosphere you promoted the SNR to.

I look forward to reading your &#039;lessons learned&#039;. I hope that among those lessons is the fact that inviting discussion means your work will be scrutinized by people with expertise in a variety of fields, that those experts need to be engaged in an honest and forthright way, and that claims will be tested to see if they are indeed valid.

So, I remain concerned, but I see no reason to belabour the point. Ultimately, the internet will decide what works and what doesn‚Äôt.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brandy,</p>
<p>Thank you for commenting. My intention was certainly not to start a bitter battle with iStudio, and I have been trying my best to raise what I believe are valuable, important points about the claims your company is making in a constructive way. I can totally relate to the perils of learning new technology as we go along, but that&#8217;s tangential to the main issue. This is social, interactive media, and not responding or correcting the record for a week doesn&#8217;t cut it. Frankly, the way I have been treated leaves me unimpressed.</p>
<p>While Ed, Neil and now you have all commented on the issue to an extent, I have not seen an explanation to satisfy me that the claims you are making are legitimate: what good is an optimized page when it&#8217;s hidden inside a frame? How will the optimization measures you&#8217;ve taken impact the traffic to the URL being promoted? If you were forced to use framesets then why did you promote the release as being up to standard? While you certainly have no obligation to explain these things to me, I personally think you owe it to your customers, and to the blogosphere you promoted the SNR to.</p>
<p>I look forward to reading your &#8216;lessons learned&#8217;. I hope that among those lessons is the fact that inviting discussion means your work will be scrutinized by people with expertise in a variety of fields, that those experts need to be engaged in an honest and forthright way, and that claims will be tested to see if they are indeed valid.</p>
<p>So, I remain concerned, but I see no reason to belabour the point. Ultimately, the internet will decide what works and what doesn‚Äôt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brandy Fleming</title>
		<link>http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/transparency-authenticity-and-trust/comment-page-1/#comment-20397</link>
		<dc:creator>Brandy Fleming</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2006 20:32:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/14/transparency-authenticity-and-trust/#comment-20397</guid>
		<description>Hi Tamera,
I have corrected my &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.istudio.ca/index.php/archives/114&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;original post&lt;/a&gt; to clarify the findability of the release.

While the news release itself is optimized for search, the frameset is not.  You have made a valid point, but as we&#039;ve addressed previously (on &lt;a href=&quot;http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/07/what-pr-can-learn-from-interactive-agencies/#comments&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;your blog post comments&lt;/a&gt;, on a &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.istudio.ca/index.php/archives/117&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;post in our blog&lt;/a&gt; and in &lt;a href=&quot;http://bloggingmebloggingyou.wordpress.com/2006/12/09/technology-ispeanut-butter/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Ed&#039;s blog&lt;/a&gt;) it was not our preference to use a frameset.

I&#039;ve been meaning to put together a &quot;lessons-learned&quot; post on our first release (e.g. it would have been great to use RSS, next time we&#039;d ideally use the hRelease standard, etc.), but the pre-holiday craziness at the studio has had me bogged down.

I&#039;m not completely familiar with WordPress comment moderation, but it looks as if your comment left yesterday was automatically moderated due to the number of links it contained. We just moved our blog to WordPress, so it&#039;s possible a team member viewed your comment in moderation and considered the view akin to approval. That&#039;s our mistake, but there was NO intention to suppress your comment or censor you in any any way.  I thnk we&#039;ve been transparent - as evidenced in the number of times we have addressed you and this issue, in your blog and ours.

Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Tamera,<br />
I have corrected my <a href="http://blog.istudio.ca/index.php/archives/114" rel="nofollow">original post</a> to clarify the findability of the release.</p>
<p>While the news release itself is optimized for search, the frameset is not.  You have made a valid point, but as we&#8217;ve addressed previously (on <a href="http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/07/what-pr-can-learn-from-interactive-agencies/#comments" rel="nofollow">your blog post comments</a>, on a <a href="http://blog.istudio.ca/index.php/archives/117" rel="nofollow">post in our blog</a> and in <a href="http://bloggingmebloggingyou.wordpress.com/2006/12/09/technology-ispeanut-butter/" rel="nofollow">Ed&#8217;s blog</a>) it was not our preference to use a frameset.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been meaning to put together a &#8220;lessons-learned&#8221; post on our first release (e.g. it would have been great to use RSS, next time we&#8217;d ideally use the hRelease standard, etc.), but the pre-holiday craziness at the studio has had me bogged down.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not completely familiar with WordPress comment moderation, but it looks as if your comment left yesterday was automatically moderated due to the number of links it contained. We just moved our blog to WordPress, so it&#8217;s possible a team member viewed your comment in moderation and considered the view akin to approval. That&#8217;s our mistake, but there was NO intention to suppress your comment or censor you in any any way.  I thnk we&#8217;ve been transparent &#8211; as evidenced in the number of times we have addressed you and this issue, in your blog and ours.</p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: social media group corporate blogging &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Flog Apology Service</title>
		<link>http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/transparency-authenticity-and-trust/comment-page-1/#comment-17286</link>
		<dc:creator>social media group corporate blogging &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Flog Apology Service</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 2006 23:54:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/14/transparency-authenticity-and-trust/#comment-17286</guid>
		<description>[...] Hat tip to Tamera Kramer.   gently placed by Maggie Fox in Flogs @ 6:53 pm [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Hat tip to Tamera Kramer.   gently placed by Maggie Fox in Flogs @ 6:53 pm [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

