<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: BattleScripts!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.brainonfire.net/2006/06/13/battle-scripts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.brainonfire.net/2006/06/13/battle-scripts/</link>
	<description>Tim McCormack, distilled.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:24:21 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tim McCormack</title>
		<link>http://www.brainonfire.net/2006/06/13/battle-scripts/#comment-67</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim McCormack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 23:47:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brainonfire.net/2006/06/13/battle-scripts/#comment-67</guid>
		<description>Sounds like a reasonable compromise.

I know that Gmail was having a problem with one or another Greasemonkey scripts making too many requests on the server, and that they were trying to block the scripts, but that has since been worked out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds like a reasonable compromise.</p>
<p>I know that Gmail was having a problem with one or another Greasemonkey scripts making too many requests on the server, and that they were trying to block the scripts, but that has since been worked out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: viperteq</title>
		<link>http://www.brainonfire.net/2006/06/13/battle-scripts/#comment-66</link>
		<dc:creator>viperteq</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 14:33:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brainonfire.net/2006/06/13/battle-scripts/#comment-66</guid>
		<description>I think it would be messed up for Google, or any website for that matter, to do something like that. I think developers should design their sites how they want, with Standards and Accessibility in mind, but they should have some type of message acknowledging that visitors will likely do something that might hinder the viewing experience of the site. The message should say that while they respect the users rights to view a website in whatever fashion they please, users should understand that by doing so they may miss out on some functionality or other that is built into the site.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it would be messed up for Google, or any website for that matter, to do something like that. I think developers should design their sites how they want, with Standards and Accessibility in mind, but they should have some type of message acknowledging that visitors will likely do something that might hinder the viewing experience of the site. The message should say that while they respect the users rights to view a website in whatever fashion they please, users should understand that by doing so they may miss out on some functionality or other that is built into the site.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
