<?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: CondoDomain slapped with MLS hand (of law) for providing basic data</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thefrontsteps.com/2008/06/03/condodomain-slapped-with-mls-hand-of-law-for-providing-basic-data/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thefrontsteps.com/2008/06/03/condodomain-slapped-with-mls-hand-of-law-for-providing-basic-data/</link>
	<description>Real Estate, Insight, Statistics, Gossip, &#38; News...With a Twist and Some Flavor</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 04:27:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: A. Longo</title>
		<link>http://thefrontsteps.com/2008/06/03/condodomain-slapped-with-mls-hand-of-law-for-providing-basic-data/comment-page-1/#comment-4737</link>
		<dc:creator>A. Longo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 23:10:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thefrontsteps.wordpress.com/?p=1567#comment-4737</guid>
		<description>Nuts isn&#039;t it?  This is so dramatically wrong that I am confident (with the help of all of us bloggers) this ruling will be heard at the higher power and corrected immediately.



There is absolutely no reason to have dual standards here or if any, the more lenient standard would be for us industry brokers?



Or am I just missing something here?



Until then I am bring our Boston site up to compliance (and paying for it too) errrrr...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nuts isn&#8217;t it?  This is so dramatically wrong that I am confident (with the help of all of us bloggers) this ruling will be heard at the higher power and corrected immediately.</p>
<p>There is absolutely no reason to have dual standards here or if any, the more lenient standard would be for us industry brokers?</p>
<p>Or am I just missing something here?</p>
<p>Until then I am bring our Boston site up to compliance (and paying for it too) errrrr&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

