<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Something fishy in the pond?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.brainwyrms.com/2008/02/20/something-fishy-in-the-pond/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.brainwyrms.com/2008/02/20/something-fishy-in-the-pond/</link>
	<description>random incoherence and infantile meanderings</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:31:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Nomad Scry</title>
		<link>http://www.brainwyrms.com/2008/02/20/something-fishy-in-the-pond/comment-page-1/#comment-16</link>
		<dc:creator>Nomad Scry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 14:20:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brainwyrms.com/2008/02/20/something-fishy-in-the-pond/#comment-16</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;... ThotMarket dude talk on my site!  &lt;/em&gt;[geek out!]

Nevertheless, I felt that the valuation system was very much &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inscrutable&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;inscrutable&lt;/a&gt;, i.e. not readily understood.  Which is absolutely what you were intending.  Unless one is a bit of a &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hari_Seldon&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Hari Seldon&lt;/a&gt;, trying to understand the market tides is an exersize in insane futility.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>&#8230; ThotMarket dude talk on my site!  </em>[geek out!]</p>
<p>Nevertheless, I felt that the valuation system was very much <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inscrutable" rel="nofollow">inscrutable</a>, i.e. not readily understood.  Which is absolutely what you were intending.  Unless one is a bit of a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hari_Seldon" rel="nofollow">Hari Seldon</a>, trying to understand the market tides is an exersize in insane futility.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rworkman</title>
		<link>http://www.brainwyrms.com/2008/02/20/something-fishy-in-the-pond/comment-page-1/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>rworkman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:24:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brainwyrms.com/2008/02/20/something-fishy-in-the-pond/#comment-12</guid>
		<description>Hey, thanks for the mention of ThotMarket. I created it and am pulling things together for the second public beta release. I&#039;m not sure that I agree that thotmarket&#039;s valuation system was/is inscrutable. In the first release, it did rely on an algorithm that tried to simulate market tides based on user feedback (buying and selling). Granted, I was never able to get the algorithm to work very well, which led to the eventual collapse of the market, but it was based on user&#039;s buying and selling. The new system, which will make a public debut in a few days, does away with the algorithm all together, and relies on a much more direct mechanism for setting trading prices, and rankings. I hope you;re able to check it out and report on whether you find it to be any more (dare I say) &#039;scrutable&#039;. BTW, I agree that Newspond sure is prrrty.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, thanks for the mention of ThotMarket. I created it and am pulling things together for the second public beta release. I&#8217;m not sure that I agree that thotmarket&#8217;s valuation system was/is inscrutable. In the first release, it did rely on an algorithm that tried to simulate market tides based on user feedback (buying and selling). Granted, I was never able to get the algorithm to work very well, which led to the eventual collapse of the market, but it was based on user&#8217;s buying and selling. The new system, which will make a public debut in a few days, does away with the algorithm all together, and relies on a much more direct mechanism for setting trading prices, and rankings. I hope you;re able to check it out and report on whether you find it to be any more (dare I say) &#8217;scrutable&#8217;. BTW, I agree that Newspond sure is prrrty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
