<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Chicagoist: Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes, (Ain’t Nothin’ Gonna) Break My Stride</title>
<link>http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php</link>
<description>All comments for Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes, (Ain’t Nothin’ Gonna) Break My Stride</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2009 Marcus Gilmer</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:30:00 -0600</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>marcusisabadass@gmail.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>marcusisabadass@gmail.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>guest</title>
<link>http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1168870</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1168870</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2007 11:39:33 -0600</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Your post doesn&apos;t even come close to adhering to your definition of &quot;speculation&quot; since you are making crap up about a &quot;buyout&quot; without ANY evidence.  It is not a matter of &quot;incomplete&quot; or &quot;little hard evidence&quot;--there is NO evidence whatsoever.  

Definition of &quot;Libel&quot;:

1. To misrepresent damagingly
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>Rob Christopher</title>
<link>http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1168805</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1168805</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2007 10:51:35 -0600</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Definitions of &quot;speculation&quot;:

1. guess: a message expressing an opinion based on incomplete evidence; 2. a hypothesis that has been formed by speculating or conjecturing (usually with little hard evidence). &lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>guest</title>
<link>http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1168745</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1168745</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2007 10:09:06 -0600</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;The links in my posts are your friends and you should click them. That&apos;s why I put them in there.

The links in your posts are crap.  You link to some website called &quot;contactmusic&quot; where an anonymous post makes the claim--without any evidence, or independent reporting--that Wilmington got some &quot;voluntary buyout.&quot;  Then your next link is to a buyout for STOCKHOLDERS.  That link has nothing to do with Wilmington nor Tribune employees. 

It is pretty irresponsible to repeat baseless rumors--but getting basic facts straight doesn&apos;t appear to be Chicagoist&apos;s strong suit.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>Rob Christopher</title>
<link>http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1168301</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1168301</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2007 17:51:49 -0600</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Guest #2: Click on Wilmington&apos;s name in the post for a link to an article which says &quot;Chicago Tribune film critic Michael Wilmington is apparently among the newspaper&apos;s writers who have accepted voluntary buyout offers.&quot; The links in my posts are your friends and you should click them. That&apos;s why I put them in there.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>guest</title>
<link>http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1168256</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1168256</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2007 17:11:10 -0600</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;The speculation is that he decided to accept a voluntary buyout offer, but a managing editor at the Trib is mum on the subject.

WHO is speculating this?

Wait a minute, the &quot;buyout&quot; you link to refers to Trib. Co. stock-holders.  It has nothing to do with employees.  Are you saying that Wilmington was sitting on a bunch of TribCo stock?

It is true that Zell&apos;s purchase of the Trib involves the employee retirement fund, but the arrangement was hatched with the fund&apos;s trustee.  Employees don&apos;t really have any say in the matter.  Furthermore, the deal just changes the structure of the employee&apos;s pension.  Wilmington couldn&apos;t access the cash now, anyway.

You link to Michael Miner&apos;s blog as supposed &quot;evidence&quot; of the &quot;speculation&quot; but he makes no such assertion.

If you are going to make a claim that someone is striking it rich due to some &quot;buyout&quot; please point to real evidence instead of spreading baseless rumors.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>guest</title>
<link>http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1167989</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://chicagoist.com/2007/08/08/chchchchchanges.php#comment-1167989</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2007 15:11:59 -0600</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Is anyone doing a movie about Lollapalooza?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
