<?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: links for 2009-3-13</title>
	<atom:link href="http://birdbrainbb.net/2009/03/13/links-for-2009-3-13/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://birdbrainbb.net/2009/03/13/links-for-2009-3-13/</link>
	<description>where imagination takes flight</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 17:06:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alyce</title>
		<link>http://birdbrainbb.net/2009/03/13/links-for-2009-3-13/#comment-338</link>
		<dc:creator>Alyce</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Mar 2009 04:21:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://birdbrainbb.wordpress.com/2009/03/13/links-for-2009-3-13/#comment-338</guid>
		<description>Great links! I do think there&#039;s a big difference between being a paid reviewer for something like a paper where the paper is paying you, not the author.  When the money is coming from an independent source the reviewer wouldn&#039;t feel an obligation to give a good review.  Being paid by an author would seem like a contract between the reviewer and the author to give a good review.  To me that seems like the author is cheating.  Because if they are paying for an advertisement (which is basically what it would be) then it should be marked as an advertisement, not a review.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great links! I do think there&#8217;s a big difference between being a paid reviewer for something like a paper where the paper is paying you, not the author.  When the money is coming from an independent source the reviewer wouldn&#8217;t feel an obligation to give a good review.  Being paid by an author would seem like a contract between the reviewer and the author to give a good review.  To me that seems like the author is cheating.  Because if they are paying for an advertisement (which is basically what it would be) then it should be marked as an advertisement, not a review.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

