Disqus - Latest Comments for timbo12

Re: Globe and Mail pay wall comes down

timbo12 — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:21:15 -0000

Granted. I feel you may have increased the likelihood of conflation, though, by comparing what the G&M did with what the NYT did. Taking the pay wall off some current columns is a far cry from opening up the archives, with dramatically different business reasons behind each move and wildly different results to be expected.

And anyway, you have to admit the headline is hyperbolic. "Some of the locks are off" would be accurate. "The locks are off (of some stuff we thought people would pay for but they wouldn't)" would also be accurate. "The locks are off" is quite plainly false. It's like saying "The oil is in Alberta."

Re: Globe and Mail pay wall comes down

timbo12 — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 19:59:42 -0000

I know...and applaud...but that's why I was surprised to see you adding to your company's rhetoric. "The locks are off" - no they aren't. "Globe and Mail pay wall comes down" - no it doesn't. "Why did the paper decide to drop the wall?" It didn't.

Re: Globe and Mail pay wall comes down

timbo12 — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 02:11:29 -0000

I fail to see how the Globe will experience a "surge" in uniques when the archives are still blocked. I find it seriously unlikely that new readers will surge in for Blatch and Simpson. So, I find it unlikely that it was done for the same reasons that the NYT did it.

Also, what the hell do senior editors know about the web? Not much, if they think that linking to stories that will be blocked after some period of time is something bloggers (or others) will want to do.

The locks are most certainly NOT off.

Re: A Commenter’s Rights

timbo12 — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 09:55:20 -0000

One thing that does not appear to have been mentioned - with respect to the right of a commenter to delete his own comment - is that once a comment has been made, other comments might be made on that comment. If the comment is then deleted, all the rest of the comments might be out of context and the conversation ruined. As a commenter, what about my right not to look like a retard if someone deletes a comment that I have commented on and then there's me, with some inane, out-of-context free-floating comment that doesn't make sense now?

I don't think commenters should be able to edit or delete after a certain typo-edit period. The blogger and the other commenters have rights too.

Re: Russell Smith: Web-bashing 101

timbo12 — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 16:26:28 -0000

In fairness, the proper analogy would be:
"You shouldn't use snake-oil because it has side effects."
"Hey! That's not a good reason to abstain from snake-oil, because mainstream medicine has side-effects, and nobody thinks that's bad. What's the real argument against snake-oil?"

Now to bring it back around:
Smith: blogs are bad because it leads to a million sources reporting the same thing.
Ingram: Wait, MSMs do that too. that's not a good argument against blogs.

See, Seth? Mathew was doing the logical fallacy thing before you got here.

Re: Russell Smith: Web-bashing 101

timbo12 — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:27:21 -0000

No problem. I mean, it's one thing to fill out a print paper's news hole with wire copy and rejigged press releases, but I just cannot see the point of rushing press releases online. Why? So they can say they were first? To prove they have the best desk jockeys?

I'm a content-whore myself, and when I was doing traffic strategy for a community newspaper not so long ago I tried to get everything I could online as spider-food. But one also has to service one's readership. Not sure how anyone's served by clogging up Google with 100s of variations on the same theme.

More importantly, I think, is that for that extra smidgen of traffic, they're risking their credibility - which is a lot like virginity, if you know what I mean. Once it's gone...

Re: Russell Smith: Web-bashing 101

timbo12 — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:03:25 -0000

I'd like to answer #2, Matt. It's different because bloggers aren't pretending to be reporting original news. Whereas, the mainstream media are reprinting wire copy and press releases on their websites in a mad frenzy, without even checking basic facts (as I showed over on my blog today), and pretending it's original.

To what end? What consultant got paid millions of dollars telling them to do this? I'd like to know.

Re: A million sources, one story - and MSMs are the worst

timbo12 — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:24:32 -0000

Hey, my first Disqus comment! Thanks Mathew.

Re: Blogs and the business of community

timbo12 — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 14:39:03 -0000

Jesus...Disqus and Boxtrapper don't play well together. Sorry Mathew...will fix this.

Re: Blogs and the business of community

timbo12 — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:38:08 -0000

The message you sent to Tim requires that you verify that you
are a real live human being and not a spam source.

To complete this verification, simply reply to this message and leave
the subject line intact.

The headers of the message sent from your address are shown below:

From Fri Mar 21 11:37:04 2008
Received: from disqus.com ([74.86.107.154] helo=disqus.net)
by host185.canaca.com with esmtp (Exim 4.68)
(envelope-from <>)
id 1JcjIm-0007bq-Kt
for tim@burden.ca; Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:37:04 -0400
Received: from fray.disqus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by disqus.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92D0E203400F
for <tim@burden.ca>; Fri, 21 Mar 2008 10:37:02 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [Disqus] Re: Blogs and the business of community

Re: Blogs and the business of community

timbo12 — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 20:14:18 -0000

Antje, there's no way to close the ad and look at the content without filling out the form. That annoys the crap out of me.

Re: A literary and scientific giant dies

timbo12 — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 23:12:55 -0000

I'm reading it here first.

I have him twice in my Facebook quotes, and 2001 is listed as one of my favourite movies. He and Freeman Dyson and E.O. Wilson and Douglas Hofstadter kept my puny teenaged brain from shriveling up.

Once again, we will not see the Final Theorem.

Re: Is embedding better than quoting?

timbo12 — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 19:28:45 -0000

Test