<?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: On blind reviews</title>
	<atom:link href="http://floatingsun.net/2006/06/22/on-blind-reviews/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://floatingsun.net/2006/06/22/on-blind-reviews/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:07:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Compromising double blind reviews &#171; Interorganisational - Supply Chain Management</title>
		<link>http://floatingsun.net/2006/06/22/on-blind-reviews/comment-page-1/#comment-15465</link>
		<dc:creator>Compromising double blind reviews &#171; Interorganisational - Supply Chain Management</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2007 05:54:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://floatingsun.net/blog/2006/06/22/640/#comment-15465</guid>
		<description>[...] problems with editors? Or, if all of this doesn&#8217;t work, we could still go back to &#8220;zero blind&#8221; reviews and let the reader judge the quality of the article. This might have the advantage [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] problems with editors? Or, if all of this doesn&#8217;t work, we could still go back to &#8220;zero blind&#8221; reviews and let the reader judge the quality of the article. This might have the advantage [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
