Disqus - Latest Comments for axisportals

Re: The iPad Is Not a Computer, But I Wish It Was

axisportals — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 17:39:38 -0000

Well, I'm still holding out for the 3G model, but . . .

I wonder if part of the problem here has to do with expectations--kind of like when a reviewer reviews the film, book, or music that might have been rather than what is actually before him or her.

I'm guessing it will take a little while for iPad users to get a feel for the tool's suitable niche. Of course, the tool itself will undoubtedly evolve over time in response to user feedback, but in the meanwhile I have to confess that instead of seeing yet another techie guru's assessment (sorry, Louis, you are, after all, among my favorites of that select group), I'd really rather put one in the hands of a teen or a kid, then just sit back and see what happens.

"Kid at heart" would also do. I know I'm just looking forward to playing with the thing. I have an inkling that I'm going to love what it does to reading and writing, which haven't been as mobile as they might be in any extended form. Here's a tool that maybe makes it possible to sit in the tree house out back and pull up a copy of the original _Alice's Adventures in Wonderland_, and to write about one's own adventures in something other than Twitter's or FB's telegraphic style.

In short, I'm more interested in discovering what it is and what it might do than what it isn't and what it can't do.

Re: It’s Not Me, It’s You, FriendFeed

axisportals — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 14:07:06 -0000

Hardly ever even login to FF any more, except via FB from time to time. Once the discussion in any tool becomes mostly self-referential (in this instance, it was why FF matters, whether to go or stay, the ethical and moral arguments either way, etc.) then it generally feels like time to leave. I still like FF much better than FB, but it's one of those "if it's good in theory but not good in practice then it's not really good in theory, either" sorts of things. Same thing happened on Plurk, which is also not for the lazy, and which I also like way better than FB.

In some ways, these smaller tools (in the grand scheme of things) remind me of the trade offs of attending private vs. public schools. The community is smaller and tends to be highly literate, but the things that are good about that kind of self-selection can also prove challenging as people weary of one another, and the whole begins to seem somehow too closed a system.

Re: Screenshots Emerge of the New Twitter Retweet Feature

axisportals — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 23:01:44 -0000

True, Chris--I hope you're right about that. Then again, the RT with a comment isn't just a copy, so . . . I'm in "let's see what it looks like in action" mode. How a thing is designed to be used and how people actually use it (lists being a case in point) don't always match.

Re: Screenshots Emerge of the New Twitter Retweet Feature

axisportals — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:45:13 -0000

The threaded replies really would bring twitter in closer proximity to the FF experience, but I do wonder how listing out the RTs will impact the Twitter economy. I tend not to like the echo chamber that endless RTing creates. Will this ease that or make it worse? With lists already in place, do we really need to RT? Why, for instance, *ever* RT Mashable or Scoble? Stick them in a list, run the list feed to a widget, all done.

Re: Did Twitter Just Kill #followfriday?

axisportals — Wed, 13 May 2009 00:44:33 -0000

Everything still seems to be showing up on FF, so that's cool.

Re: Did Twitter Just Kill #followfriday?

axisportals — Wed, 13 May 2009 00:27:25 -0000

I find the #followfriday thing to be very useful, perhaps because I'm a relatively small scale user. A recommendation from someone credible helps me identify good accounts to follow, and the handful of times I've been recommended have been flattering and gratifying, and have resulted in some great new connections.

That said, I don't think it's a huge deal to start those posts with something besides the @.

On the other hand, I'd always much rather have a choice. Why not let users decide? For those of us who scan and dip very comfortably, it can be valuable to keep the @replies in the flow.

Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/04/are-linkedin-groups-tuckered-out.html

axisportals — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 22:47:20 -0000

I suppose I don't tend to the badges too much because I know that putting them there is a simple matter of clicking, and that they don't necessarily represent much engagement. A quick scan reveals someone's interests, and that's about it. The expertise points are another thing. That's a fascinating economy, to me. Every network or society *does* have an economy, so there's no getting around that--sometimes it's followers, sometimes it's karma, sometimes it's expertise points and so on. Most anything can have exchange value. I have noticed that some folks on LI deliberately leave their questions open so as not to rank answers, and there we have an example of how people inevitably game an economy to suit their own tastes, needs, and beliefs. Some apparently find it rude to rank replies. On the flip side, there are folks who have so very many expertise points that, for me at least, they lose some credibility. After all, a real expert, I figure, does have to spend some time actually working with real clients, and wouldn't have either the time or the inclination to game the system. Discerning the shades of meaning in such a system is always fascinating.

Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/04/are-linkedin-groups-tuckered-out.html

axisportals — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:36:05 -0000

Absolutely--I wasn't kidding about the badges. I do disagree with you about giving content away, though. Seems to me that we simply must do that to some extent in order to build our connections throughout the social web. That's how reputations are built and sustained. You could always echo any really highly developed content on your blog if you wanted to stake more of a claim on it, and have it exist beyond the boundaries of LinkedIn. Meanwhile, the "expertise" points there really do matter to some, so it's not a bad idea to gain some of those if you can.

Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/04/are-linkedin-groups-tuckered-out.html

axisportals — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 15:26:52 -0000

Piers is correct, it seems to me. In many respects, the main advantage to joining a group is simply that it's a shortcut to declaring one's interests--you get a nifty little badge for your profile and everything. I don't think that's very much of an advantage for relatively small scale users like me, though. Those who worked together to create the more thriving groups are likely the ones who benefit most from the whole inGroup deal.

Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/04/are-linkedin-groups-tuckered-out.html

axisportals — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:38:31 -0000

I have joined a few LinkedGroups, and even started one some time ago (which a few folks have actually joined, although I've not done much with it at all). I see that some of the groups I've joined do regularly push out information, but for the most part the best actual discussions on LinkedIn tend to come in the Q and A area, so when I'm of a mind to invest some discussion time there, that's generally where I head. The TwitGroups show some promise here, as well, but I think that for those to take off, they'd really have to be connected to some other platform (e.g. friendfeed) that supported longer discussion.

Ironic, isn't it? We've seen the discussion list die out, but some of the most robust conversations I've ever had evolved (sometimes over days and weeks) in those exchanges. Meanwhile, the itty bitty tweet that looms so large is evanescent, and leaves us yearning for more involved conversation.