Disqus - Friends of mona

Re: Invite Sunday Sunday Sunday!!!!

jeffisageek — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 09:29:11 -0000

please shoot me and email with the info and I will get one to ya. thanks!

Re: Back To Twitter As My Default Twitter Client

jeffisageek — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:11:42 -0000

hey Mitchell just checked out that greasemonkey script pbtweet and it rocks. think I am gonna use that one instead with twitter. thanks for the info.

Re: LEAKED: Details of the Facebook Home Page Redesign [Screenshots]

rizzn — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:08:07 -0000

It might have been more accurate to term this something other than a "redesign," at least in your writeup. This isn't so much an aesthetics upgrade as an info-infrastructure upgrade. What data appears where has been adjusted. A redesign implies radical changes to the UI, which hasn't happened at all.

Re: LEAKED: Details of the Facebook Home Page Redesign [Screenshots]

rizzn — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:05:13 -0000

Looks more or less the same.

Re: (jeff)isageek tv : ping.fm and posterous

jeffisageek — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 07:15:44 -0000

Erik

Very kool! Glad you found the info interesting. I enjoy using both services.

Re: My Thoughts on the FTC Disclosure Rules and Bloggers

rizzn — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:22:37 -0000

Wow, could you be more of an jerk?
Before you ask a blatantly stupid question like that, perhaps you should go
through and do a Google search on my name. Go ahead. I can wait.

I've been covering these FTC guidelines for months and months, before anyone
in the PR, marketing, tech or blogging world picked up on it, let alone the
mainstream press. I've been on numerous podcasts, guest posted, and been
quoted in the press dozens of times on this. I've read this document more
times than I care to admit, and I find your question more than a little
insulting.

Here's a little test for you - find me the word "blogger" defined in section
255 (not section 255.1 or any other subsection - section 255 where the
definitions are).

You won't find it.

The word blog is used once or twice in the examples, but never is it defined
what the FTC considers a blog. Surely, if you read Chris Brogan's site,
you're well aware of the liberal definition of the word blog in today's day
and age. Never once does the FTC document clearly define what social media
users they're targeting, and though the examples try to enumerate that, the
press statements from the FTC (Rich Cleland is who I'm referring to) have
made it clear that they're not sure they have a handle on it and wish to
create an environment of FUD so that everyone and their dog will hafta worry
about this.

This is the definition of Chilling Effect. Chilling effect is even
mentioned by name in the FTC documents (see: "Analysis of Comments
Concerning What Communications Should Be
Considered “Endorsements” Under § Section 255.0 of the Guides").
Unfortunately, the FTC chose to ignore such analysis and dip their little
paws into First Amendment regulation.

Mark my words - the first time this goes to court because some Twitter user
didn't say the right thing the right way, these guidelines will see the need
for revision. No judge with any respect for the constitution will allow
this.

Re: My Thoughts on the FTC Disclosure Rules and Bloggers

rizzn — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:00:17 -0000

I hafta wonder, then, if you've considered all the ramifications of these
regulations.
Given how nebulously these guidelines have been written (they never *once*
define terms within the guidelines), and the fact that guidelines haven't
been updated in thirty years, you hafta at least admit the fact that in 30
years, let alone one or two, the lattitude that the FTC has granted
themselves here can be widely interpreted to start regulating a lot of
things with this set of guidelines.

This is government creep at it's finest. Sure, if you believe every word
Rich Cleland has uttered the last several weeks, they sound pretty
innocuous. Truth is, though, most of what Rich says is in direct
contradiction to what's actually in the guidelines.

Re: My Thoughts on the FTC Disclosure Rules and Bloggers

rizzn — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:41:36 -0000

You're mistaken.
You should read the guidelines and the proposed changes, as well as much of
the analysis over at SiliconANGLE.

Re: My Thoughts on the FTC Disclosure Rules and Bloggers

rizzn — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 10:27:04 -0000

Again, that's an incorrect interpretation of the *guidelines.*
*Part* of the purpose of the *guidelines* is to define *specifically* how
bloggers define disclosure of financial relationships that could be
nebulously construed as endorsements.

Do you do consultant work for one of your clients then write about something
from your industry in a comment on a blog? If you don't properly disclose,
and that comment shows up on Twitter or Facebook or some other place where
your name and face appear in a lifestream, you could be guilty of improper
disclosure, since the money you receive could (and probably
does) influence your worldview in the opinions you express.

Then, you and your employer could be held liable.

The FTC needs to stay out of my speech. This isn't right.

Re: My Thoughts on the FTC Disclosure Rules and Bloggers

rizzn — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 23:04:16 -0000

Free speech actually does guarantee us the opportunity to subvert important details.

See any presidential debate.

For that matter, define important. What's important should be defined by the speaker (or content creator), not the government, and ultimately by the audience.

Audiences in social media tech typically demand transparency on sponsorship relations, and speakers and content creators who don't disclose should be free to blow their reputation.

Re: My Thoughts on the FTC Disclosure Rules and Bloggers

rizzn — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:57:17 -0000

Incorrect.

Bloggers, according to the guidelines, can be fined. Rich Cleland has been spinning it in the press as if they cannot, but read the guidelines for yourself, and you'll see otherwise.

Bloggers and social media users (Twitter, Facebook, etc) that are employed and use social media to promote their work can be held liable as well, if the FTC isn't particularly satisfied with the style disclosure they use.

Re: My Thoughts on the FTC Disclosure Rules and Bloggers

rizzn — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:51:42 -0000

Wrong.

Certainly endorsements and testimonials are covered in *certain aspects* of other industries (mostly diet pills and celeb endorsement deals).

Bloggers and social media users are *particularly* singled out, and Old Media is left to do as they will.

A newspaper man can go to a movie for free, and not disclose. That's fine.

If a blogger does the same, he can go through a painful investigation with the FTC, as can the advertiser.

Re: My New Geek Bag

jeffisageek — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 15:48:50 -0000

I will have to check the brand when i get home..but it was swiss something i
believe and it was 20 bucks.

Re: Google Wave : A Quick Look [screencast]

jeffisageek — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 12:47:53 -0000

No not yet :)

-- Sent from my Palm Prē

Re: Washington Post’s Twitter ruckus exposes social media bubble

rizzn — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:22:36 -0000

in all seriousness, though...
... yes, their biz models would probably be better served by being
transparent social media publishing platforms.

They're not, though, and much of the WaPo business functions on the
one-directional broadcast model, not the bi-directional communication model.
As such, they don't have the luxury in that model to not control the spin
and image of the organization in hierarchal fashion.

Remember how CNN and Sanchez became the lightning rod for the #CNNfail
situation?

Did you read how WaPo got thrashed by Jeff Nolan today on an unrelated
topic? (
http://siliconangle.net/ver2/2009/09/28/the-ala...)

The difference is that Sanchez could engage frankly and try to diffuse the
issue, where as WaPo will go the way of the record industry, turning into a
whipping boy for all their foibles.

Their choice, I suppose.

Re: The Cartoon That Predicted Google Chrome OS

rizzn — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 21:58:12 -0000

Actually, it sorta is.

It's technology 101: a browser isn't an operating system. Even my gramma can tell you that, and she can't find the start button.

Re: I have 3,571 tweets that show that Twitter isn’t for lunch anymore

rizzn — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 02:54:14 -0000

My policy, in general, is to "rip into" (or engage in debate) pundits and praise startups. Pundits know how to dish it out and take it. Startups, if they're not good or don't impress me for whatever reason, don't get the press.

Why waste time on a startup going point by point as to why it sucks? The 'net is littered with half-assed attempts and blatant site clones. It's better to ignore them and let them go away than to give them air time and come across as someone who is constantly negative towards business.

Re: I have 3,571 tweets that show that Twitter isn’t for lunch anymore

rizzn — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 02:50:01 -0000

I wasn't aware John had a reputation for being an ass-kisser (if I'm reading your comment correctly). Have you read his work recently? He gives praise where it's due, but he's not against calling folks out when the situation requires, either.

[Disclosure: I work for/directly with him - but I suppose that means I know his work a bit better than most]

Re: The Travis Rodgers Show – Beta Edition

rizzn — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:06:43 -0000

Test comment.

Re: The Palm Pre : A New Era For (jeff)isageek

jeffisageek — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 00:54:02 -0000

I have the Samsung Instinct so I am really ready to switch to the pre :)

Re: Need Some Wallpapers For Your Palm Pre?

jeffisageek — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:16:07 -0000

Hey Tony

Thanks for sharing those other links I will check those out for sure. I agree Switcharoo is an awesome little app.

Re: Rackspace Downtime

rizzn — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 04:10:29 -0000

Gotta be honest, I've heard the opposite. You talk to enough people, and you'll probably find someone who hates every hosting company.

Re: Bloggers are not household names - still

rizzn — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:35:05 -0000

Ah, one month long sampling - lemme go re-search. I don't know that I've been mentioned that many times in a month. :-p

...

That drops it down to 99. Much more realistic.

Re: Meet Me In Kansas City : Geek/Tech Related Meetups

jeffisageek — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:18:13 -0000

oh that sounds kool. would love to find out some more info. feel free to email me jeffisageek@gmail.com

Thanks!

Re: Custom browser for Facebook (Scripting News)

rizzn — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 20:04:04 -0000

I mostly interact with Facebook via Seesmic and some offbrand Windows desktop widget I found - and I love it because it's more organized, quicker responses, and the functions I use are ready at hand at any point.