<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>123 Social Media » business social media - Latest Comments in Corporate Social Media Reputation - How to be Dugg to Death</title><link>http://123socialmedia.disqus.com/</link><description>Business Social Media Promotion and Measurement</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:11:50 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Corporate Social Media Reputation - How to be Dugg to Death</title><link>http://123socialmedia.com/2008/07/31/corporate-social-media-reputation-how-to-be-dugg-to-death/#comment-2475485</link><description>I didn't paint RipOffReport negatively: just stated what it does. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I'm not even sure RipOffReport has countrywide on it (I didn't mention, nor check) - I just know that RipOffReport is another site "dedicated to promoting company mistakes" and in their specific case "profiting from promoting company mistakes"&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;RipOffReport is merely an aggregation point of information that ranks well for search results. Dozens (hundreds or thousands) of sites also rank for such like-minded complaints, but very few have a profit model developed around it. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;As for Countrywide... they have thousands of complaints all over the web. I do think it is ironic that someone who likes RipOffReport questions another site's ability to debate and analyze whether or not the site is itself - a Ripoff (according to the SEOmoz article, there are a lot of companies who have valid enough complaints to drag them into court.)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Barry Hurd</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:11:50 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Corporate Social Media Reputation - How to be Dugg to Death</title><link>http://123socialmedia.com/2008/07/31/corporate-social-media-reputation-how-to-be-dugg-to-death/#comment-2475484</link><description>It's interesting that this site would paint Ripoff Report so negatively when it was a pissed off consumer that posted at another site that apparently ruined the Countrywide reputation. Why not that site? I've been a fan of &lt;a href="http://ripoffreport.com" rel="nofollow"&gt;ripoffreport.com&lt;/a&gt; ever since it saved me from making a stupid investment mistake...a few quick clicks and I found the company had dozens of reports against them, and after reading them, I quickly figured out the pitfalls. The accusations of extortion look like sour grapes to me...bad guys getting caught and trying to hide their schemes. It's Magedson's site...why shouldn't he get paid to investigate? I've read both sides, and I don't see the evidence (and neither have the judges who've ruled in their favor)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Salye</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 18:04:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Corporate Social Media Reputation - How to be Dugg to Death</title><link>http://123socialmedia.com/2008/07/31/corporate-social-media-reputation-how-to-be-dugg-to-death/#comment-2475483</link><description>Ouch....I wonder how much loss Country Wide suffered as a result of this...</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">MayK</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 01:38:27 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>