<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Guardian 24,367 (Sat 19 Apr)/Araucaria - Doodah doodah day</title>
	<atom:link href="http://fifteensquared.net/2008/04/26/guardian-24367-sat-19-apraraucaria-doodah-doodah-day/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://fifteensquared.net/2008/04/26/guardian-24367-sat-19-apraraucaria-doodah-doodah-day/</link>
	<description>Never knowingly undersolved.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 21:22:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://fifteensquared.net/2008/04/26/guardian-24367-sat-19-apraraucaria-doodah-doodah-day/#comment-21330</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 22:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=1476#comment-21330</guid>
		<description>I tend to agree with rightback's disapproval of 15d. Apart from that, there doesn't seem to be a lot to say about this one, as the lack of comments perhaps indicates: an oddly subdued one for Araucaria, especially as a prize puzzle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I tend to agree with rightback&#8217;s disapproval of 15d. Apart from that, there doesn&#8217;t seem to be a lot to say about this one, as the lack of comments perhaps indicates: an oddly subdued one for Araucaria, especially as a prize puzzle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Ridge</title>
		<link>http://fifteensquared.net/2008/04/26/guardian-24367-sat-19-apraraucaria-doodah-doodah-day/#comment-21293</link>
		<dc:creator>John Ridge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 09:53:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=1476#comment-21293</guid>
		<description>15 I took "former" to indicate that the phrase "old china" is a bit  dated, so it is a proper def. No one now says "Wotcher, me old china" - do they?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>15 I took &#8220;former&#8221; to indicate that the phrase &#8220;old china&#8221; is a bit  dated, so it is a proper def. No one now says &#8220;Wotcher, me old china&#8221; - do they?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
