<?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: Violent Video Games and Second Life Named Again as a Real World Risk</title>
	<atom:link href="http://news.filefront.com/violent-video-games-and-second-life-named-again-as-a-real-world-risk/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://news.filefront.com/violent-video-games-and-second-life-named-again-as-a-real-world-risk/</link>
	<description>News for Gamers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:36:36 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron</title>
		<link>http://news.filefront.com/violent-video-games-and-second-life-named-again-as-a-real-world-risk/comment-page-1/#comment-10722</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2007 14:01:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://news.filefront.com/violent-video-games-and-second-life-named-again-as-a-real-world-risk/#comment-10722</guid>
		<description>Andrew, your posting is poorly titled and inaccurate. The original piece in the Taipei Times does *not* even claim that SL spawns more perverts. The author of the Taipei Times article qualifies all of the negative claims about SL (e.g. &quot;Some people think that SL might be bad&quot;) and then makes it very clear that he disagrees. 

You start by saying &quot;add another article to the list,&quot; but this article in the Taipei Times clearly does not belong on such a list as it is arguing the exact opposite. 

Aaron</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Andrew, your posting is poorly titled and inaccurate. The original piece in the Taipei Times does *not* even claim that SL spawns more perverts. The author of the Taipei Times article qualifies all of the negative claims about SL (e.g. &#8220;Some people think that SL might be bad&#8221;) and then makes it very clear that he disagrees. </p>
<p>You start by saying &#8220;add another article to the list,&#8221; but this article in the Taipei Times clearly does not belong on such a list as it is arguing the exact opposite. </p>
<p>Aaron</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
