<?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: The trouble with memes&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://walt.lishost.org/2006/11/the-trouble-with-memes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2006/11/the-trouble-with-memes/</link>
	<description>The library voice of the radical middle.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Jun 2013 04:23:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: walt</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2006/11/the-trouble-with-memes/comment-page-1/#comment-23546</link>
		<dc:creator>walt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2006 15:35:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=428#comment-23546</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jessamyn, it was cryptic for the reasons provided in the third paragraph. If the rest of the post was cryptic, well, I thought I had something to say about the difficulty of social science research (where the observer effect puts quantum mechanics to shame), and specifically the fact that you can&#039;t study the speed of propagation of a content-bearing mechanism by using a mechanism with no content.

CW&#039;s suggestion is actually quite good: The researcher would have had a more valid meme test by asking bloggers to write about why they like memes. 

As I believe I said in another context, there just are going to be occasional blind items here, and they always come with the proviso that--as with all other posts--you&#039;re perfectly free to treat them as vacuous. Won&#039;t hurt my feelings.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jessamyn, it was cryptic for the reasons provided in the third paragraph. If the rest of the post was cryptic, well, I thought I had something to say about the difficulty of social science research (where the observer effect puts quantum mechanics to shame), and specifically the fact that you can&#8217;t study the speed of propagation of a content-bearing mechanism by using a mechanism with no content.</p>
<p>CW&#8217;s suggestion is actually quite good: The researcher would have had a more valid meme test by asking bloggers to write about why they like memes. </p>
<p>As I believe I said in another context, there just are going to be occasional blind items here, and they always come with the proviso that&#8211;as with all other posts&#8211;you&#8217;re perfectly free to treat them as vacuous. Won&#8217;t hurt my feelings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CW</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2006/11/the-trouble-with-memes/comment-page-1/#comment-23519</link>
		<dc:creator>CW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2006 04:04:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=428#comment-23519</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Walt didn&#039;t link to the meme itself: it&#039;s at &lt;a href=&quot;http://acephalous.typepad.com/acephalous/2006/11/measuring_the_s.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this blog&lt;/a&gt;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Walt didn&#8217;t link to the meme itself: it&#8217;s at <a href="http://acephalous.typepad.com/acephalous/2006/11/measuring_the_s.html" rel="nofollow">this blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jessamyn</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2006/11/the-trouble-with-memes/comment-page-1/#comment-23518</link>
		<dc:creator>jessamyn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2006 03:30:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=428#comment-23518</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[well that was cryptic. Is there a link someplace that I missed?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>well that was cryptic. Is there a link someplace that I missed?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CW</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2006/11/the-trouble-with-memes/comment-page-1/#comment-23517</link>
		<dc:creator>CW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2006 02:59:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=428#comment-23517</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fair enough, Walt - I did think about the effectiveness of this study when I considered when I actually posted my response - I saw the meme at work but didn&#039;t want to post during work hours, so I only ended up posting it several hours later. Which would of course have skewed it. (And it doesn&#039;t take into account bloggers answering memes days, weeks, or months after they first saw the meme, because they saved it up for when they don&#039;t have anything better to write about that day.) He could have made the meme more meme-like by asking bloggers to write about why they like memes, for instance ;)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fair enough, Walt &#8211; I did think about the effectiveness of this study when I considered when I actually posted my response &#8211; I saw the meme at work but didn&#8217;t want to post during work hours, so I only ended up posting it several hours later. Which would of course have skewed it. (And it doesn&#8217;t take into account bloggers answering memes days, weeks, or months after they first saw the meme, because they saved it up for when they don&#8217;t have anything better to write about that day.) He could have made the meme more meme-like by asking bloggers to write about why they like memes, for instance <img src='http://walt.lishost.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
