<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: View; Chestnuts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://earthatwork.com/2009/09/06/view/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://earthatwork.com/2009/09/06/view/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Apr 2012 17:15:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vivienne</title>
		<link>http://earthatwork.com/2009/09/06/view/#comment-31</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vivienne]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2009 21:54:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earthatwork.com/?p=72#comment-31</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You&#039;ve caught me out, James.  You, I presume, have never cheated at conkers, have you?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;ve caught me out, James.  You, I presume, have never cheated at conkers, have you?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JamesA-S</title>
		<link>http://earthatwork.com/2009/09/06/view/#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JamesA-S]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:00:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earthatwork.com/?p=72#comment-24</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hang on one minute, I must step in here.
Two things:
Firstly: It is an absolute scandal that you should be suggesting that people cheat at conkers. Not only that, your beastly ruse will not work: a year old conker is a mean and shrivelled thing. The inside may be harder but will have shrunk a bit leaving the outer shell vulnerable.
Secondly: A conker (whether in training or not) should be a thing of beauty: deep brown and shiny. Your old conker will be dull coloured and crinkly.
It is like comparing WHAuden with a baby&#039;s bottom.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hang on one minute, I must step in here.<br />
Two things:<br />
Firstly: It is an absolute scandal that you should be suggesting that people cheat at conkers. Not only that, your beastly ruse will not work: a year old conker is a mean and shrivelled thing. The inside may be harder but will have shrunk a bit leaving the outer shell vulnerable.<br />
Secondly: A conker (whether in training or not) should be a thing of beauty: deep brown and shiny. Your old conker will be dull coloured and crinkly.<br />
It is like comparing WHAuden with a baby&#8217;s bottom.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

