DISQUS

Anthony, good post. I think that while national politics is sexy, local is where the meat is. Most of what government does that actually affects us on a daily basis is at the local or state level. I do think that technology and the Internet can help connect citizens to what's going on locally (town halls, meetings, etc.)

Both Henri and Riche are correct, officials at this level don't have the resources (money, experience) to deliver such applications. A platform will need to be developed that can scale nationwide but serve each locality and be free or affordable (and easy) for local officials and citizens to utilize.

Jimmy, this is just plain ignorance on display. Serving your country in the military is one of the greatest acts of selflessness out there. I do believe that, as a society, we have progressed quite a bit since the Vietnam War, when this type of behavior was much more prevalent. The fact that such incidents are now rare, and what seems to be a vast majority of those opposed to this war find this behavior sick is a good sign. Thanks for making the rest of us aware of this behavior.

My guess is that the Twitter team is finally in a position to come up for some fresh air, and they're evaluating the performance of the team. Some developers didn't cut it, but they weren't in a position to make the changes until now.

Geoff Livingston supports Shel http://www.livingstonbuzz.com/blog/2008/04/07/t...

I think the point is that Shel broke a lot of the rules on crisis management (threatening legal action, investigations) which was just more fodder for Loren. These are some of the things Shel advises clients on, and that's where the significant potential damage may be seen from his perspective.

If you Auto-Tweet the title of the blog post along w/ the tinyurl, that would be better...but simply posting "New Blog Post" w/ the link...I don't know who clicks on those.

But dear Lord, please turn off the Flickr Auto-Tweet feature! (I'm looking at you Chris Abraham!)

Yes, there is definitely a need for something like this, and I agree that there's a lot of stuff bubbling under the surface in the DC area. I'm looking forward to what you're putting together, and as always, I'm available to help out where I can.

I think we've all been getting lots of new followers that turn out to look more like companies than people. I don't follow them back.

I don't think that spam can become a problem in Twitter (as it currently is set up) because we all have the power to turn off anyone (or company) we like.

However, I hope that the rise of all these companies and bots doesn't make it harder for real people interested in engaging on Twitter to find friends who'll follow them back.

If I get a new follower and I see nothing but link dumping, auto-tweeting, or a lack of @'s, I'm not going to follow back. But if they look like a real person (a mix of thoughts, a few links, and conversation) I'll return the follow.

You could assume that the chasm on Jeremiah's chart is getting from launch/kick-start to growth. Jeremiah's just making the assumption here that the chasm has been crossed and isn't factoring it in.

Nick: It is an interesting question about when the decline happens. It's really the $100,000 question, since we're still in a very nascent stage and it is yet to be determined (one or two cases, such as Friendster, are not enough to build a reliable model). Adoption, at some point, must flatline, as there are only so many people in the world, unless you assume that your growth rate will mirror world population growth.

Regarding the chart I linked to showing a decline, think about it it in the case of the television. In the late 40's, early adopters were buying them, then in the early 50's, the early majority were buying them, and usage rates were spiking. By the late 50's, the late majority were buying them, and adoption was moving DOWN the curve, overall usage rates were still climbing...just not at the frantic pace as before. Moving down one curve, but up another (jeremiah's).

Jeremiah's chart and the common User Adoption chart that includes the chasm are measuring two different things. Assuming, as you state, that Jeremiah's chart is measuring "member activity" in a typical *successful* online community, the chart is not in conflict with the adoption curve(keep in mind that activity and adoption aren't the same thing).

The chasm (bridging the gap between innovators/early adopters to penetrate the early majority) is where many fail, but this is moot since Jeremiah's focusing on those that have made it. In addition. The adoption curve does taper off and begin to decline, but this is measuring the market size of each segment (innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, laggards, etc).

Assuming that the community continues along the adoption curve through the top of the curve and down the other side, it is still adding new people. You may be heading down the curve, but your activity curve continues to rise. And continual improvements, existing members can increase their activity as well.

Wikipedia entry on the Adoption Curve: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoption_curve

What the Clinton camp is pulling is the worst kind of dirty, divisive identity politics. The basic premise of ID politics - that we all identify with particular groups based on race, gender, class, etc. - may be somewhat valid, a candidate for president that exploits the worst aspects of ID politics (subtle, soft prejudices) for political gain isn't fit to be president. A president should aim to bring the country together, and I don't see how that's possible if the candidate employs such methods.

Social filtering is becoming increasingly valuable. Twitter is now more of a human-filtered RSS tool for me, leading me to spend less time w/ my Google Reader. And my time on Google Reader is devoted more to my friend's shared items than my straight feeds. With all of the content out there, social filtering will become more mainstream.

Great article. Twitter could be great tool to distribute on-the-ground human intelligence across a network in real-time (maybe somewhat asynchronously).

Twitter, however, appears to have some significant architectural issues that they haven't been able to overcome. If Twitter goes down during Steve Jobs' keynote, can it stand up to a real emergency? If they get these issues resolved, there's real value in such a tool in disaster situations.

FB is getting out of hand, and maybe this extended profile feature helps, but I'm still getting invited to afterlives and having sheep thrown at me.

Scoble was fine on the show. Not so sure about that Deutsch guy though.

Producers: "Just be yourself...and say [...]. thanks."

Didn't Donny Deutsch state that "The Big Idea" is the epicenter of entrepreneurship in America" at the end of your segment? Yeesh! Yes, it's all entertainment.

I really like the idea of separating software (tools) from processes. Focus on the way interactions online and offline take place...the tools just facilitate this.

I agree w/ Tim Walker..many focus on "things" - widgets, apps, etc... and lose sight of the true value of the process of using them can generate.

Daz: I think that social media can provide a real, human, and, most importantly, trustworthy face to the company. Honesty and transparency in good times and bad helps. People have a huge ability to get past mistakes if the org takes the right corrective action in a timely manner and communicates that in an interactive community forum. Things aren't always easy, mistakes and bad decisions are made, but it's how you respond to those matters a great deal.

Diggin' P.A.S.S.

Raising money online is still the aspect of campaigns that has been transformed significantly with the advent of the social web. Back in the day, you had to wait a week or more for checks to come in, whereas now Obama's Iowa victory leads to immediate cha-ching.

All this is around elections (understandable, considering the current backdrop), but how about interaction with government and officials beyond elections?

Data standards across multiple platforms would be great, but it's not going to happen for a while. Facebook and others like the barriers to exit that exist when you can't walk w/ your info. I think OpenID and data portability will be achieved, but probably not in 08. Each site/platform has unique db requirements and systems...imagine how difficult it would be to get everyone to standardize across the board!

Sharepoint is definitely feature-rich, but a total pain in the ass to set up and use. I'm forced to use it with a client and it's just not intuitive...hence, I presume, the need for specialists that do nothing but install and customize it. This decision app in Sharepoint may help capture decisions, but it doesn't help teams make good decisions.

Full Disclosure: I'm working on something on the side w/ a client...a Web app that will facilitate collaborative decision-making meetings over the Web.

Sometimes meetings are required to make a decision based upon available criteria and alternatives (assuming this is a more collaborative enterprise). These often don't go so well, as it's difficult to structure the conversation and make sure everyone's evaluating the same things. This type of meeting can be the most difficult to make productive.

Nick, I love what you are trying to do. I finished up the MBA program at GWU last May, and was trying to get something off the ground there (incubator, seed fund, etc.). There was lots of interest, but the bureaucracy is tough.

I'll be kicking my startup out the door in the next few months, and would love be be involved in helping create a more tight-knit entrepreneurial community.

Your prediction of start-up consolidation is interesting. You see a lot of outright acquisitions, but it doesn't seem to happen w/ two competing start-ups much (if ever, really...cases?).

I'm curious about how investors (Angels, VCs) would look upon such mergers...how do bylaws/term sheets address such situations?