<?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: Yet another &#8216;manufactured&#8217; website, I&#8217;ll bet &#8212; but better software</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.garyspeer.com/yet-another-manufactured-website-ill-bet-but-better-software/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.garyspeer.com/yet-another-manufactured-website-ill-bet-but-better-software/</link>
	<description>Tips for writers and musing about writing and life in general</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Nov 2011 03:43:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Leader</title>
		<link>http://www.garyspeer.com/yet-another-manufactured-website-ill-bet-but-better-software/comment-page-1/#comment-606</link>
		<dc:creator>Leader</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 03:35:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.garyspeer.com/yet-another-manufactured-website-ill-bet-but-better-software/#comment-606</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s ContentBoss&#039; work. It&#039;s a rewriter - best one out there right now.

You put whatever you want rewritten in, and it spits out a well-rewritten version. If you put in your own stuff, it comes out pretty good. Just like the articles in that blog. 

But I can think of better uses for it...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s ContentBoss&#8217; work. It&#8217;s a rewriter &#8211; best one out there right now.</p>
<p>You put whatever you want rewritten in, and it spits out a well-rewritten version. If you put in your own stuff, it comes out pretty good. Just like the articles in that blog. </p>
<p>But I can think of better uses for it&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Bailey</title>
		<link>http://www.garyspeer.com/yet-another-manufactured-website-ill-bet-but-better-software/comment-page-1/#comment-48</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Bailey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:26:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.garyspeer.com/yet-another-manufactured-website-ill-bet-but-better-software/#comment-48</guid>
		<description>It is fascinating to study these scraper sites and see how they operate. Some definitely do look better than others but, as you pointed out, most are just taking the content from other blogs and reposting it.

I follow how these sites work pretty closely and, generally, most try to be professional enough to not be easily flagged as spam, but don&#039;t really care if others can tell they are junk. They aren&#039;t made for human eyes anyway.

The question, I guess, is whether the spam blog achieved its goal. That is something we won&#039;t ever know probably. 

Anyway, if you ever have trouble with such a blog, let me know, I&#039;ll gladly see what I can do to help.

Thank you for a great article!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is fascinating to study these scraper sites and see how they operate. Some definitely do look better than others but, as you pointed out, most are just taking the content from other blogs and reposting it.</p>
<p>I follow how these sites work pretty closely and, generally, most try to be professional enough to not be easily flagged as spam, but don&#8217;t really care if others can tell they are junk. They aren&#8217;t made for human eyes anyway.</p>
<p>The question, I guess, is whether the spam blog achieved its goal. That is something we won&#8217;t ever know probably. </p>
<p>Anyway, if you ever have trouble with such a blog, let me know, I&#8217;ll gladly see what I can do to help.</p>
<p>Thank you for a great article!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

