<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>AllFacebook - Latest Comments in Valleywag Gets it Wrong</title><link>http://allfacebook.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://allfacebook.disqus.com/valleywag_gets_it_wrong_05/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2007 06:50:18 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Valleywag Gets it Wrong</title><link>http://www.adweek.com/socialtimes/valleywag-gets-it-wrong-2/304037#comment-1638812</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Well then it's quite unfortunate :-|&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">113.com</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2007 06:50:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Valleywag Gets it Wrong</title><link>http://www.adweek.com/socialtimes/valleywag-gets-it-wrong-2/304037#comment-1638811</link><description>&lt;p&gt;113 - if the boss were managing a social enterprise, then yes. That's not the case here though.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ollie</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2007 01:09:32 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Valleywag Gets it Wrong</title><link>http://www.adweek.com/socialtimes/valleywag-gets-it-wrong-2/304037#comment-1638807</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks Dan...I have AllFacebook in my feed reader, but I wasn't sure which article referenced ValleyWag&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Matt Huggins</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 09 Dec 2007 19:51:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Valleywag Gets it Wrong</title><link>http://www.adweek.com/socialtimes/valleywag-gets-it-wrong-2/304037#comment-1638810</link><description>&lt;p&gt;True or otherwise, the act is purely reasonable, acceptable, and expected.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Boss is boss. Staff is staff. What the staff might be thinking? Do you think the boss (any boss) would &lt;b&gt;really&lt;/b&gt; care?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">113.com</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 09 Dec 2007 07:22:49 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Valleywag Gets it Wrong</title><link>http://www.adweek.com/socialtimes/valleywag-gets-it-wrong-2/304037#comment-1638806</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Matt, if you haven't been following every single word Nick has written - unlikely, I know - he was referring to his previous article:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.allfacebook.com/2007/12/zuckerberg-sells-40-million-of-stock/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.allfacebook.com/2007/12/zuckerberg-sells-40-million-of-stock/"&gt;http://www.allfacebook.com/...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It seemed perfectly believable, but did leave us wondering what the rest of the Facebook staff might be thinking...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dan Lester</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 09 Dec 2007 07:05:08 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Valleywag Gets it Wrong</title><link>http://www.adweek.com/socialtimes/valleywag-gets-it-wrong-2/304037#comment-1638808</link><description>&lt;p&gt;So what did they get wrong?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Matt Huggins</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 09 Dec 2007 00:02:42 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>