<?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: Rave Review for Rolling Thunder</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.crimethinc.com/blog/2008/11/02/rave-review-for-rolling-thunder/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.crimethinc.com/blog/2008/11/02/rave-review-for-rolling-thunder/</link>
	<description>This website will function as a clearinghouse for bulletins from participating cells, enabling readers to keep abreast of their activities and, more importantly, coordinate activities with them.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 20:05:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: pfm</title>
		<link>http://www.crimethinc.com/blog/2008/11/02/rave-review-for-rolling-thunder/comment-page-1/#comment-15821</link>
		<dc:creator>pfm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:56:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crimethinc.com/blog/?p=445#comment-15821</guid>
		<description>hey lobsterbeard, thanks for the feedback. 

i was surprised to hear your comments about the paper, as that is not the impression that I have. for me, the images in this issue actually seem of a higher quality than previous issues, with darker blacks, higher contrast and even less ink bleeding.

there was, in fact, a paper change, but is still the same weight (50#) and thickness, and this new paper is actually whiter and brighter than the previous paper which should make the images look better. it is also still 100% post-consumer and uses an even more environmentally responsible &#039;bleaching&#039; process.

i&#039;m really pleased with it and think it is significantly better than previously, perhaps you are experiencing the placebo effect? I think if you compare two pages from each issue side-to-side, you&#039;ll see an improvement rather than a regression.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hey lobsterbeard, thanks for the feedback. </p>
<p>i was surprised to hear your comments about the paper, as that is not the impression that I have. for me, the images in this issue actually seem of a higher quality than previous issues, with darker blacks, higher contrast and even less ink bleeding.</p>
<p>there was, in fact, a paper change, but is still the same weight (50#) and thickness, and this new paper is actually whiter and brighter than the previous paper which should make the images look better. it is also still 100% post-consumer and uses an even more environmentally responsible &#8216;bleaching&#8217; process.</p>
<p>i&#8217;m really pleased with it and think it is significantly better than previously, perhaps you are experiencing the placebo effect? I think if you compare two pages from each issue side-to-side, you&#8217;ll see an improvement rather than a regression.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lobsterbeard</title>
		<link>http://www.crimethinc.com/blog/2008/11/02/rave-review-for-rolling-thunder/comment-page-1/#comment-15807</link>
		<dc:creator>lobsterbeard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 02:19:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crimethinc.com/blog/?p=445#comment-15807</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s nice to see the Rolling Thunder team receive the accolades you all so richly deserve. This was a strong issue, well-edited and designed, especially given the circumstances.

My one criticism is of the new paper the issue was printed on. It felt a bit flimsy and the photos and illustrations didn&#039;t seem to come out as vividly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s nice to see the Rolling Thunder team receive the accolades you all so richly deserve. This was a strong issue, well-edited and designed, especially given the circumstances.</p>
<p>My one criticism is of the new paper the issue was printed on. It felt a bit flimsy and the photos and illustrations didn&#8217;t seem to come out as vividly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

