<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>thevirtualhandshake - Latest Comments in Conversational Cheap Shots, or How to Strategically Manage Your Conversations</title><link>http://tvh.disqus.com/</link><description>The Virtual Handshake: Sell, Raise Capital, Look for Deals with Social Media</description><atom:link href="https://tvh.disqus.com/conversational_cheap_shots_or_how_to_strategically_manage_your_conversations/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2004 06:25:31 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Conversational Cheap Shots, or How to Strategically Manage Your Conversations</title><link>http://www.thevirtualhandshake.com/blog/2004/07/28/conversational-cheap-shots-or-how-to-strategically-manage-your-conversations#comment-8723596</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I don't understand how anyone can even be aware of what constitutes a "cheap shot" when the landscape at Ryze is littered with all measures of insults. I was shown the door there and, despite repeated attempts to learn why, was provided nothing more than their standard templates saying I "violated their terms of service." I am not sure I have seen more than a dozen people on their so-called political networks who haven't done that. Further, after asking for contact with "CEO" Adrian Scott, I was banned witrh no warning and never given that audience. That is hardly the mark of a professional outfit. I would recommend that instead of doing things on the cheap, that major business networks either leave the monitoring to their moderators, or employ sufficient resources to actually get to the bottom of most "flame wars" and see where the real trouble ORIGINATES. It would certainly not at my doorstep.&lt;br&gt;Dave Hamilton&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dave Hamilton</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2004 06:25:31 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>