<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!-- RSS generated by Radio UserLand v8.0.8 on Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:53:17 GMT -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>David Berlind: Skype 1.0 Coverage</title>
		<link>http://radio.weblogs.com/0143327/categories/skype10Coverage/</link>
		<description></description>
		<copyright>Copyright 2005 David Berlind</copyright>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:53:17 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
		<generator>Radio UserLand v8.0.8</generator>
		<managingEditor>david.berlind@cnet.com</managingEditor>
		<webMaster>david.berlind@cnet.com</webMaster>
		<category domain="http://www.weblogs.com/rssUpdates/changes.xml">rssUpdates</category> 
		<skipHours>
			<hour>1</hour>
			<hour>2</hour>
			<hour>4</hour>
			<hour>19</hour>
			<hour>5</hour>
			<hour>6</hour>
			<hour>8</hour>
			<hour>23</hour>
			</skipHours>
		<cloud domain="radio.xmlstoragesystem.com" port="80" path="/RPC2" registerProcedure="xmlStorageSystem.rssPleaseNotify" protocol="xml-rpc"/>
		<ttl>60</ttl>
		<item>
			<title>First email-to-editorial-to-email transparency test completed</title>
			<link>http://radio.weblogs.com/0143327/categories/skype10Coverage/2005/02/04.html#a35</link>
			<description>As with my first test, I&apos;ve completed another test where the &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/index.php?p=1009&quot;&gt;editorial points&lt;/a&gt; to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://radio.weblogs.com/0143327/stories/2005/02/03/rawDataFullEmailThreadWithSkypesKellyLarabeeRegardingBugInNewVersionOfSkype.html&quot;&gt;raw material&lt;/a&gt;.  In the first case, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5539179.html&quot;&gt;editorial&lt;/a&gt;provided time codes that could be used to advance to certain quotes inan audio file.  In this case, the raw material is an e-mailinstead of an MP3 file and the editorial mentions that the full text ofthe e-mail is available here, in the transparency channel.  Inresponse to concerns from the PR community regarding the automaticpublication of their e-mails into my transparency channel, I adjustedmy methodology and checked with the source (Kelly Larabee of Skype) tomake sure she was OK with it.  You can see in the thread where Iasked: &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-left: 40px;&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Would you mind, if for transparency&apos;ssake, I published this contents of this thread between you and me on mytransparency channel?.....Your email address will be removed as willany phone numbers (including my conference line numbers).&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/div&gt;and she responded:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-left: 40px;&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;That would be great, no problem at all ~&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/div&gt;So, in summary, I felt pretty good about the way this worked out. By asking Larabee if she was OK with it and assuring her that hercontact information would be redacted (a laborious task, by the way),her expectations were not only properly set, she was agreeable to theidea.</description>
			<guid>http://radio.weblogs.com/0143327/categories/skype10Coverage/2005/02/04.html#a35</guid>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2005 23:33:44 GMT</pubDate>
			<comments>http://radiocomments2.userland.com/comments?u=143327&amp;amp;p=35&amp;amp;link=http%3A%2F%2Fradio.weblogs.com%2F0143327%2F2005%2F02%2F04.html%23a35</comments>
			</item>
		</channel>
	</rss>

