<?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: Mega-Self-serving Anniversary Jib Jab</title>
	<atom:link href="http://danielprimed.com/2009/05/mega-self-serving-anniversary-jib-jab/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://danielprimed.com/2009/05/mega-self-serving-anniversary-jib-jab/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 02:31:10 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Daniel</title>
		<link>http://danielprimed.com/2009/05/mega-self-serving-anniversary-jib-jab/comment-page-1/#comment-16864</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 02:15:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danielprimed.com/?p=1391#comment-16864</guid>
		<description>Your writing is really great too, Simon. I only just realized that you have an RSS feed and since then I haven&#039;t had the time to sit and read through the latest stuff.

It pains me reading some of the older articles with their atrocious spelling and grammatical errors. My arguments too were often pretty retarded. They&#039;re probably not so bad though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your writing is really great too, Simon. I only just realized that you have an RSS feed and since then I haven&#8217;t had the time to sit and read through the latest stuff.</p>
<p>It pains me reading some of the older articles with their atrocious spelling and grammatical errors. My arguments too were often pretty retarded. They&#8217;re probably not so bad though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simon Ferrari</title>
		<link>http://danielprimed.com/2009/05/mega-self-serving-anniversary-jib-jab/comment-page-1/#comment-16858</link>
		<dc:creator>Simon Ferrari</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 15:49:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danielprimed.com/?p=1391#comment-16858</guid>
		<description>Hey man, really glad you popped up an explanation of how you get your prose so crisp. I wish I had this kind of structure; the weird thing thing is that although I&#039;ve done &quot;media studies&quot; for awhile, videogames weren&#039;t something I realized I could study and write about. I&#039;m constantly striving to figure out my &quot;party line&quot; or philosophy, writing style, analytical methodology, etc. In short, it&#039;s good to see somebody who&#039;s gotten it all straightened out. 

I share your distaste for the word &quot;criticism,&quot; not because it&#039;s snobbish but because, as a philosophy and cultural studies person, &quot;critique&quot; has a very specific meaning: to reveal, examine, or invalidate the underlying assumptions of an artifact, system, or statement... instead of analyzing the thing on its own merits. *Usually* (not by any means always) what we do as games bloggers is analysis, and even great analysis isn&#039;t critique (it&#039;s not a question of degree, but method). I think you recognize this, because you separate the two in your blog&#039;s subtitle... but most people don&#039;t.

And props on being able to decide which of your posts are your favorite. I&#039;m slowly making my way through them. Got stuck on the Morgan Webb one. The weird thing for me about that whole explanation she gives of the three gamer archetypes is that she fawns over people who like shooting games and RPGs, yet denigrates sports game fans specifically as people who chase false digital dreams of a life they&#039;ll never have. I really don&#039;t know if I agree that her insult can be generalized to gamers as a whole (though of course your breakdown of Tyra&#039;s attitudes was perfect).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey man, really glad you popped up an explanation of how you get your prose so crisp. I wish I had this kind of structure; the weird thing thing is that although I&#8217;ve done &#8220;media studies&#8221; for awhile, videogames weren&#8217;t something I realized I could study and write about. I&#8217;m constantly striving to figure out my &#8220;party line&#8221; or philosophy, writing style, analytical methodology, etc. In short, it&#8217;s good to see somebody who&#8217;s gotten it all straightened out. </p>
<p>I share your distaste for the word &#8220;criticism,&#8221; not because it&#8217;s snobbish but because, as a philosophy and cultural studies person, &#8220;critique&#8221; has a very specific meaning: to reveal, examine, or invalidate the underlying assumptions of an artifact, system, or statement&#8230; instead of analyzing the thing on its own merits. *Usually* (not by any means always) what we do as games bloggers is analysis, and even great analysis isn&#8217;t critique (it&#8217;s not a question of degree, but method). I think you recognize this, because you separate the two in your blog&#8217;s subtitle&#8230; but most people don&#8217;t.</p>
<p>And props on being able to decide which of your posts are your favorite. I&#8217;m slowly making my way through them. Got stuck on the Morgan Webb one. The weird thing for me about that whole explanation she gives of the three gamer archetypes is that she fawns over people who like shooting games and RPGs, yet denigrates sports game fans specifically as people who chase false digital dreams of a life they&#8217;ll never have. I really don&#8217;t know if I agree that her insult can be generalized to gamers as a whole (though of course your breakdown of Tyra&#8217;s attitudes was perfect).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
