<?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/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wisdom of the Chaperones</title>
	<atom:link href="http://educationaltechnology.ca/couros/798/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://educationaltechnology.ca/couros/798</link>
	<description>rants &#38; resources from an open educator</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 18:51:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wikipedia &#187; Wisdom of the Chaperones</title>
		<link>http://educationaltechnology.ca/couros/798/comment-page-1#comment-139876</link>
		<dc:creator>Wikipedia &#187; Wisdom of the Chaperones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 03:22:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educationaltechnology.ca/couros/798#comment-139876</guid>
		<description>[...] Open Thinking &amp; Digital Pedagogy wrote an interesting post today on Wisdom of the ChaperonesHere&#8217;s a quick excerpt A recent Slate article describes the reality behind user-generated content champions such as Wikipedia and Digg. Social-media sites like Wikipedia and Digg are celebrated as shining examples of Web democracy, places built by millions of Web users who all act as writers, editors, and voters. In reality, a small number of people are running the show. According to researchers in Palo Alto, 1 percent of Wikipedia users are responsible for about half of the site’s edits. The site also deploys bots— [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Open Thinking &amp;amp; Digital Pedagogy wrote an interesting post today on Wisdom of the ChaperonesHere&#8217;s a quick excerpt A recent Slate article describes the reality behind user-generated content champions such as Wikipedia and Digg. Social-media sites like Wikipedia and Digg are celebrated as shining examples of Web democracy, places built by millions of Web users who all act as writers, editors, and voters. In reality, a small number of people are running the show. According to researchers in Palo Alto, 1 percent of Wikipedia users are responsible for about half of the site’s edits. The site also deploys bots— [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

