
<?phpxml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>
<channel>
<title>Sphinn / johnandrews / Hot Today</title>
<link>http://sphinn.com</link>
<description>Sphinn</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:12:47 -0700</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Seattle SEO John Andrews blogs Matt Cutts at Domain Roundtable]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/41588</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/41588</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:12:47 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/41588</guid>
<description><![CDATA[&quot;We have a deal with GoDaddy that if you sign on with GoDaddy you're automatically registered with [Google] Webmaster Tools&quot; and more from Matt Cutts, live from San Francisco.<br/><br/>46 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Google vs. Innovation]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/14358</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/14358</comments>
<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 01:15:35 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google Other</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/14358</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I want to like Google, especially as it challenges the telcos with an open mobile standard. But the more I dig into the current search results the more it becomes obvious Google is intentionally censoring the web. Where does it become anticompetitive, unethical, illegal, or just plain evil?<br/><br/>37 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[By the Time it's Front Page, it's Old News]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/3752</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/3752</comments>
<pubDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2007 20:19:42 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Sphinn Zone</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/3752</guid>
<description><![CDATA[A problem I see with Sphinn is, by the time something makes the front page it's &quot;old news&quot;. In hopeful language, not enough people are Sphinning fast enough -- yet. In less optimistic language, the design of Sphinn buries the good stuff with the unsphunn noise, while promoting the aged stuff to front and center. If it's old news, do you want to Sphinn it?<br/><br/>22 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Seattle SEO John Andrews challenges Sphinn to top 400]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/2432</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/2432</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2007 18:00:50 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Sphinn Zone</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/2432</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Seattle SEO John Andrews challenges Sphinn members to prove their mettle as marketers, by pushing Sphinn over 400 for the first time. Sites like Digg show hundreds and sometimes thousands of votes because their members participate and exercise their voting rights. Sphinn is young, but more than a year old already and yet most posts have 10, 20, or 30 Sphinns. Why not more? When this post first went &quot;hot&quot;, it challenged Sphinn's membership to &quot;prove themselves&quot; as marketers. The most number of Sphinns for any post at that time was less than 70. Since the users pushed this to 100, then 200, and now almost to 400, Sphinn has grown site wide. Many posts see almost a hundred Sphinns. More Sphinns reflects more participation, and by increasing participation we not only prove ourselves as marketers but help keep Sphinn alive as a viable community. Let's go to 400 but continue to pace of voting to Sphinn up what deserves to be Sphunn, site wide!<br/><br/>381 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
