DISQUS

Thank you for the link. But actually, while it was posted on my blog, the quote is by guest blogger Nicoletta Iacobacci.
:-) Bruno

Interesting experiment, and definitely a must-read book. But while video-storytelling make it easier for you to "share", it makes it more difficult for the people at the other end to receive and benefit from that sharing: the same comments and quotes put in a blog post are easily scannable, digestible, I can copy/paste them into further blog posts (hence, further sharing). Video kills all that: people have to watch 36 minutes of videos (in 36 minutes you could have typed ALOT of quotes) to know what you say, cannot scan, can't fast-forward (since they have no idea where to fast-forward to), and can't do any further sharing.

Good niche, and timely. I would suggest that you take into account, in your thinking, the big (BIG) differences that exist in solo-ing in the US vs Europe. Wishing you sucess :-)

Stephanie: thanks for the accurate notes. Just one detail: the "radical approach to what magazines should do online" (and I'm talking about magazines, not daily newspapers) is described in detail here:
http://www.lunchoverip.com/2006/10/netgeist2_wh...>

Hello Stephanie, thank you for this, you didn't forget anything. My guess is that promoted comments should be added at the bottom of the post, and show up as such in both the "general" blog page and the permalinked page, in a way that's graphically clearly identifiable, as you suggest. The overall idea is really that some comments are extremely valuable and leaving them in the "comment" page, almost "physically" separated from the main post, kills part of that value.
I see an additional element that you may want to add to your list: if a new reader wants to post a comment to one of the "promoted" comments, the new comment should be appended -- as any other comment -- to the main comments section: the blogger will always have the possibility to "promote" it or part of it later. In other words, the "promoted" comments become part of the post, and all the other functionalities (permalink, comments link, etc) remain the same.
Overall the whole idea is to increase the "conversationality" of the blogosphere, which right now is pretty much a simulacrum, and it is so not because bloggers are not trying, but mainly because the tools we're using are still very much publishing tools rather than discussion tools (I know, I should not make this kind of general statements, CoComment and Twitter and all, but my point is that blogging platforms don't seem to have much evolved in the last couple of years). Bruno

Well Robert, thank you. Also for the great contribution to the panel. (PS: the URL of my blog has changed: http://www.LunchOverIP.com) See you at the next conference. And, David: sorry for the typing, I guess I should encourage conference organizers to set up liveblogging corners away from the other participants, but happy you enjoyed the posts. B.

Thanks for linking to my posts Mathew. In fact, Devouard's comments were not "an exaggeration" - she said they had money in the bank for 3/4 months, but never translated that into "Wikipedia is going to shut down" as some bloggers have done. There are many questions of course surrounding the sustainability of Wikipedia given the incredible growth and the feeble revenue streams, but Devouard told me repeatedly at LIFT that she did not worry about the future of Wikipedia. B-

J'ai reçu la même invitation pour parler du même sujet dans une autre émission de la Première et j'ai dit oui, exactement parce que je voulais dire ce que tu as écrit dans ton post (j'en ai mis une version brève ici. Le coeur de la question est que les médias adorent l'opposition blogs-journaux, alors que c'est plutôt une dialectique de laquelle les deux sortiront transformés (de laquelle sortira le véritable "nouveau média").