Thanks for your thoughtful post and introducing the ideas of distortion and other thoughts that address the facts of the blogging world rather than the utopian vision of blogging. I'm hoping we can achieve many of the visions of blogging but the only way to get there is by addressing where we are not on track with that vision. What I like about this is that the competition you mention can operate subconsciously. The well-meaning blogger may just *forget* to put in a link to the original and immediate sources or *not have time*. There are tons of low-end, relatively newbie bloggers on the relative bottom of the heap who would like the democratic vision of blogging as participatory journalism to be true because, if nothing else, they would like to be discovered. So they/we would be the ones most motivated to set a good example that will help further the utopian vision and thus our own visibility and ability to contribute. As long as people like you keep us honest. Thanks again.
Janet Tokerud |
January 21, 2004 07:04 PM
_but perhaps we can do a better job then history..._
You do not mention the potential for parasites to take the whole system down. In many ways the blogsphere is similar to Usenet News, which is now relegated to an obscure corner of the Internet because posting on it is an invitation to be drown in SPAM.
Your comment below the comment entry field testifies to the fact that parasites are attempting to infiltrate the blogsphere. It's possible that rather than evolving into something interesting/significant, it will collapse.
Mark R. Sizer |
January 21, 2004 07:16 PM
good points Janet, I should mention I'm just as guilty as the next blogger when it comes to neglecting to credit. For the main posts I make a major effort to state where I found links, but sometime I mess up. Sometimes I don't even know. And I certainly don't include the whole chain of links.
Then there is the issue of my sidebar "linkage", for that I made a conscious decision not to include "discovery credit". Why? Because quite simply I wouldn't be able to maintain it if I did. Its purely architectual, in order to throw lots of links up like that it can't take much time.
Mark, very good points as well. good to bring up the Usenet. I'd like to think that the blogsphere is a couple stages of evolution beyond the usenet, in that the architecture is more flexible and ready to deal with spam. But that's not necessarily true, and certainly not proven. Interesting thing about parasites though, is that often they become essential parts of an ecosystem, wonder if spam ever will?
January 21, 2004 07:51 PM
"It's purely architectural": precisely. Code is law. It's why I vastly prefer the more typical blog-entry format, with its room for attribution.
Janet, how familiar are you with the various proposals to semantically tag links, so that an attribution link could also include metadata like "friend" or "archnemesis"? Would that help bring newer, lesser-known voices into play?
January 21, 2004 10:36 PM
now there is the internet. and i really appreciate people like you who take their chance in such an excellent way to give an impression on certain topics. thanks for having me here.
online casinos |
July 30, 2004 08:03 AM