<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>Boxes and Arrows: Comments by Bryce Glass</title>
    <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/person/2519</link>
    <pubDate>Sun, 30 Nov 2008 18:54:26 GMT</pubDate>
    <description>Comments by Bryce Glass</description>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks Bernie! Part 2 of the interview does indeed get into specifics a little more deeply and touches on some of the methods and deliverables that Colm employed during the H3 development process. So, tune in again&#8230;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/flowmaps-and-frag#content_31215</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/flowmaps-and-frag#content_31215</guid>
      <pubDate>Sun, 30 Nov 2008 18:54:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Bryce Glass</author>
    </item>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;L long &#8212;&#160;I just wrote the thing, I don&amp;#8217;t decide how it&amp;#8217;s apportioned and doled out to you. Take it up with the fine folks at Boxes and Arrows. (Tho&amp;#8217; I suspect that their reasons are less manipulative and Machiavellian than you seem to think&amp;#8212;the reason I was given is that they try to keep articles to a reasonable length and this one goes longer than that average.)&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;And I, too, regret your decision to submit to Digg if your brand of &amp;#8216;crap&amp;#8217; is typical of the quality of insight and analysis that appearing over there will bring over here. Don&amp;#8217;t blame me for your hair-trigger Digg finger. (Since when is &amp;#8216;reading the damn article&amp;#8217; considered &amp;#8216;due diligence&amp;#8217; anyway?)&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/flowmaps-and-frag#content_31218</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/flowmaps-and-frag#content_31218</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:34:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Bryce Glass</author>
    </item>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;And now, by&#8230; er&#8230; &amp;#8216;popular&amp;#8217; demand, &lt;a href="http://boxesandarrows.com/view/flowmaps-and-frag8" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow"&gt;Part 2 of this interview&lt;/a&gt; is now up and available for comment.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/flowmaps-and-frag#content_31399</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/flowmaps-and-frag#content_31399</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:40:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Bryce Glass</author>
    </item>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Hi Andrew&amp;#8212;great question! I feel compelled to clarify that it was Colm&amp;#8217;s response to my question, so I will forward this on to him for clarification. But it&amp;#8217;s my understanding that the interviewer, Max, freely offered up the direct feedback as a wrapup to the phone call.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;So&#8212;you&amp;#8217;re right&#8212;honest and unsolicited feedback during a phone interview is all-too-rare, and wonderful when its given (and, as you can see, gave Colm the chance to &amp;#8216;set things right&amp;#8217; and impress with his ambition and drive.) Perhaps, as interviewees, we should all get into the practice of -asking- for feedback as the last point of a first phone-interview. Perhaps something like&#8230; &amp;#8220;May I ask&#8230; how do you feel today&amp;#8217;s interview has gone? Do you have any concerns or questions that I can answer right now, or perhaps work to deliver an answer within [timeframe of our choosing]?&amp;#8221;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/flowmaps-and-frag#content_39328</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/flowmaps-and-frag#content_39328</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:46:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Bryce Glass</author>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

