<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
	<channel>
		<title>Grading Lotteries</title>
		<link>https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/189457</link>
		<atom:link href="https://www.lotterypost.com/rss/topic/189457" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<description>Lottery Post Forum Topic: Grading Lotteries</description>
		<dc:language>en-us</dc:language>
		<generator>Lottery Post RSS Generator</generator>
		<item>
			<title>Grading Lotteries</title>
			<link>https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/189457</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/189457</guid>
			<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2009 02:23:09 GMT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>JimmySand9</dc:creator>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Maybe you remember a professor in Texas a while back did a survey the different lotteries across America, and graded them on certain merits (http://www.sacstat.org). However, the survey tended to focus on fairness, transparency, and overall idiot-proofing. There&#x27;s nothing wrong with that, but there is more to a lottery&#x27;s quality than just posting odds and recalling instant games when the top prizes are gone. The survey did not grade on the quality of the games offered, nor give enough emphasis o... &#x5b;&#xa0;<a href="https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/189457">More</a>&#xa0;&#x5d;</p>]]></description>
			<category>JimmySand9</category>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

