<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Granite Geek - Latest Comments in NH Supreme Court ponders anonymous comments</title><link>http://granitegeek.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://granitegeek.disqus.com/nh_supreme_court_ponders_anonymous_comments/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 08:53:18 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: NH Supreme Court ponders anonymous comments</title><link>http://granitegeek.org/blog/2009/11/05/nh-supreme-court-ponders-anonymous-comments/#comment-22241430</link><description>&lt;p&gt;But of course THEN....no more anonymous rubber-stamp grand jury for the state....with records/evidence that can't be accessed and only one-sided arguments from the state prosecutor being heard...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Guest</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 08:53:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: NH Supreme Court ponders anonymous comments</title><link>http://granitegeek.org/blog/2009/11/05/nh-supreme-court-ponders-anonymous-comments/#comment-22241366</link><description>&lt;p&gt;We should do away with anonymous voting too...what were they thinking when they came up with that???&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Guest</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 08:50:35 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>