DISQUS

Is it tough for you guys to be so awesome?

So....uh... how does this work? Do we need to link something in Lijit? Or does it "just work"?

So....uh... how does this work? Do we need to link something in Lijit? Or does it "just work"?

Thanks for the recap!

So does that mean I can get more stickers this year?? Woo hoo!

Looking forward to seeing you!

Yeah, this will last about 30 seconds.... we've seen a number of these types of efforts over the years, whether focused on Second Life or blogging.

But this is a significant step into the niche beyond those efforts. Makes me wonder what a traditional agency would be like if they only focused on print ads that measure a quarter page or less.

Thanks for the inclusion on the list! This is a fantastic list and I'm proud to be included in such great company.

Jake McKee's last blog post..Presenting in Dallas: How LEGO caught the Cluetrain

All due respect, man, it's time to step out of the "Scoble Bubble" and say hello to the rest of the world. So you use friendfeed, fantastic. For ALL of my clients still struggling to understand the point of Twitter, to all of my relatives that can't remember to check my flickr stream, and to my friends in the industry who only sometimes visit my blog because they're busy working, blog comments aren't dead as much as not quite understood. We may agree that blog comments aren't getting the traffic they should but that's because you've moved past them while the rest of the world has mostly yet to find them.

I'm curious though - if blog comments are so dead (whatever that statement means), why are we seeing an uptick in Disqus/Intense Debate adoption?

Couldn't agree more - my experience doing similar work is in near exact alignment with what you've outlined here.

So this is either an example of how different people are interested in things in different ways, or that she did her research in advance and wrote content in a way you'd actually enjoy.

See, I personally read that content and am bored beyond belief. Why would I care how many subscribers the Facebook page had? Why would I need to see "NEW ERA" in all caps? I hate the word "Leverage" these days.

But you read it and enjoyed it and blogged about it.

Since I'm not sure whether the sender did pre-research on you, I'll extend the benefit of the doubt and assume she did and that she crafted this email appropriate to your desired tone and content!

Jake McKee's last blog post..Rapid Fire - Wednesday, April 23

@Robert, come on man, this is ridiculous. You said:

> "If you want an adult night out, go to a Playboy party."

Wow. So when my wife and I leave the baby with the in-laws and head out with another couple to get away from the kids for a while, the only viable destination has to be sponsored by Playboy? Or when I want date night with the wife, the movie we see should be softcore porn? That's beyond foolish, and hopefully you don't actually mean it.

"Photography should be a family affair and you should expect to have kids involved."

This seems fairly obvious, but you know that Photography and Flickr aren't one in the same, right? That'd be like saying the Facebook party at SXSW equates to the use of social networking.

(As a side note, I didn't hear you complaining about kids not being allowed at the FB SXSW party...)

"Not to mention that my son isn’t your usual kid and is very respectful of adults. Even last night he didn’t get involved in trying to get into the party and waited quietly outside."

Bravo. You've taught your kid great manners, congrats. Seriously. But beyond that, A-List power doesn't (or shouldn't) equate to different treatment.

The craziest thing in this thread, however is this line:
"If you say you don’t want my son around because you want to be 'child free' then that’s an attack on me and my family."

Absolutely, unquestionably false. Wrong, wrong, wrong. This is an aggressively foolish argument to try to make - no one is "attacking" you, your son, or your family by saying they want to attend an event free of kids. They're simply saying that at a bar on a Saturday night, there's an assumption by *most* people that kids are not included.

I honestly can't believe we're having this discussion...

Great attention grabbing headline, pointless post.

Apple had Windows running on a Mac how far back? How much earlier than the switch to Intel chips made it more REALISTIC to run Windows on a Mac?

As others of have said, Jobs didn't say it couldn't be done. What he said was: "it performs too slowly on the iPhone". Considering how poorly Flash performs on my desktop Mac, a point Robert that you seem to be ignoring completely, I sure as hell don't want it on my iPhone.

Robert, I'll point this out, as others have, again: It wouldn't be "impossible" to make a stable DESKTOP version of the Flash player either, but Adobe is choosing not to do that. What makes you think that if they're not committed to a decent Mac desktop player they'd be committed to a decent iPhone player?

Have you actually USED Flash on the Mac? It's a slow, crash-prone dog.

In Firefox, if I have more than a couple of tabs open that have any level of Flash content on the pages, I'm destined for a browser crash every couple hours.

I was recently having consistent, reliable crashes when using a video camera through the Flash-based player in Utterz (totally Flash, not Utterz, I recreated the exact error in other "grab your video cam with Flash" apps). So I started digging.

Turns out that there's a great deal of discussion about the Mac Flash player, with many people suggesting a downgrade to the older version. (Didn't solve my problem, unfortunately)

If the Flash player on full sized Macs is a resource hog, prone to crashes, why would I possibly want it on a mini-sized Mac (the iPhone)?

Honestly, I'm bummed at Apple's decision, but not because I think they made the wrong one. Hopefully this will get Adobe into gear and actually make a robust Mac version of the Flash player...

I agree, but also to a point. Why just Google though? I wish there was an alternative link to the other big services too, since not everyone (strange as this seems) uses Google.

But.

There are cases where either the mapping is too much info for confusing intersections, or has the info wrong. My buddies at Red Knight Learning Systems have a great, reduced info map that helps clearly tell people how to get to them when the mapping might confuse or mistake:

http://www.redknightlearning.com/images/map.gif

I think the bigger point is here to

a) clearly list your address in a format that is COPY/PASTE FRIENDLY

b) double check what the major mapping systems do with your address to ensure they're helping not hindering

c) provide direct links if they are, or offer a better alternative if not

d) great your visistors with milk and warm cookies when they're actually able to find you!

OK, I'll ask the obvious question.... which is it, Robert? Were you pushing FB buttons fully knowing the likely outcome (like you talk about today) or were you shocked and surprised at what happened (as you implied yesterday)? I'm having a hard time following your position here...

Further, I find it a ridiculous argument to say that you just used this data in a test account. Where does that account live? The data is stored somewhere, right? Are you involved in a formal relationship with Plaxo enough to ensure that this "test" account isn't going to roll your 5,000 bits of new data into the larger master database? Either man up and admit you have a formal relationship with Plaxo or agree that there are enough unknowns here that you've made a mistake in trusting them so implicitly.

The real issue in this discussion is one of context. The context of when and how I'm asking for my Gmail info (a practice I neither support or agree with, FYI), is one of limited use and specific purpose. The context of what this Plaxo script is doing is far more broad reaching. And given Plaxo's previous reputation (which adds to the context), who's to say that once they get out of beta they wouldn't extend the collection of data past name, email, birthday alone?

Context matters.

Adding to your personal address book is a different context than adding to the corporate database of a business known for spamming.

I'm not saying you should, necessarily, have gotten permission to do this, but I'm saying we all should start applying more common sense to the way we handle this implied trust inherent in the friending process.

Since you've given contradictory positions about what this whole debacle was based on (beta test and/or poke at FB), it's hard to know what your real motivations are here. But whether this was a beta test or some sort of civil disobedience, the fact remains, you made your 5,000+ FB contacts unwitting accomplices in that process.

Absolutely agree with the vacuum comment. I regularly hear/read/overhear stuff like "the blogosphere won't accept _____" or "conversation is an overused term". Fact is, within our circles these generalizations may be absolutely true. But just because *we* get it doesn't mean the rest of the world does. I'm excited that after 7+ years of doing this kind of work it's finally starting to get some traction, but it's FAR too early to call the race "finished".

Totally agree about the change in direct re: speaking. I've actually made the same point here:

http://www.communityguy.com/1243/2008-year-of-t...

Great minds and all... !

Actually, upon further review, I think Mashable is flat wrong.

I hope to god the compare to site is an opt-in feature...

Am I the only one that sees the irony here? After all, we social media people get together A LOT in many locations, venues, event styles to help each other learn. That's really all that Blog Council is - just in a style slightly different than what we use.

If people of like mind and situation want to get together to kvetch, learn, share, and question who are we to slap their hands??

I'm more than a little disappointed in your assessment, Robert. As Kami correctly points out, this group isn't about companies trying to get started, it's a group dedicated to helping each other learn and grow in an environment that is comfortable to them.

Why is this a bad thing?

As someone who has been in a huge company doing exactly this kind of work, I'm actually pretty shocked that you have issue with this. Either you're saying that the job you did at MS wasn't that tough and you couldn't/didn't benefit from the advice of others in similar positions, or you're saying that other people in similar positions don't have anything relevant to offer anyone else.

So wait... in your mind the people doing it right (and thus don't really need the help of others) are the ones that should make up this group, not the ones that aren't doing it right (and thus need help from others)?

Uh....

Yeah! Rockin the end-of-day session, baby!

:)

So wait, I can't make money on random musings unless I'm providing very valuable content?? That's so very unlike the offline world where I constantly have people hand me money for my random chatter at cocktail parties....

Ugh, I hate this meme. As Yehuda points out, I too could say that I "make money" from my blog in form of advertising, support for pending sales leads, and credibility. I'm not sure where my biz would be without the blog, yet I rarely "make money" directly from the page views and unique user counts.

It really goes to show the value of "trust" in the Word of Mouth process. I first signed up from the earliest of early spam mails I heard/saw/received. It came from a friend of mine within the social media industry that I have 100% faith in. Getting an invite from him always (or at least used to) equate to an instant registration on that particular site.

Sadly, Quechup has committed what amounts to cyber-terrorism... making me rethink the things I once thought were safe and will likely never be able to believe are safe again. Boo on them.