Global Geek News Blog The home of more Global Geek News insight and opinions

13Mar/094

Why ‘Live Twittering’ is a Horrible Idea

Share on Facebook

Greetings Readers!

I have another rant again today.  Hopefully I will have some more upbeat things to write about after this but today's topic really irritated me this morning so after gathering my thoughts, I decided that I should address the idea of "live twittering" here.

'Live Twittering' is likely a new term to most people as thankfully it hasn't really caught on at this point.  Live Twittering is much like live blogging except it takes place on Twitter.  It can also take place on other micro-blogging services but since Twitter is the biggest, I will be talking about it today.  Live blogging and live Twittering are similar in that they are a live reporting of something as it happens.  Whether its a tv show or a press event, it is relaying information in near real time primarily for those who cant experience the event themselves or wish to share the experience with others.

Although similar, there is one major difference that I see to be a major problem.  Live blogging is attended by people who specifically seek to be apart of the live blog whereas with live Twittering, followers don't really have a choice without completely unfollowing the person.  Often times, live blogs contain material that people consider to be spoilers but that is something that is acknowledged and accepted by those who intentionally go and read or participate in the live blog.  This presents a major issue for live Twittering.  When live Twittering something such as a TV show (for example, the Battlestar Galactica finale), the live tweeter's followers will be inundated with information they either don't care about or don't want to know because they are unable to watch at that time and don't want to have the episode spoiled for them before they get a chance to watch.  Live twittering essentially takes away that choice for the user and leaves them with the only real option of unfollowing you either permanently or temporarily until they know you have stopped.

Its clear that the major difference is user choice.  The user can choose whether or not to be apart of their live blog, but the choice becomes much more difficult when you force the experience on them by live Twittering.   I have even had people threaten to unfollow me if I took that choice away from them, which is why I only do a live blog.  It all comes down to choice, something that should never be taken away from your potential audience.

New Twitter Etiquette (part 2) Rule:  Thou shalt not live Twitter!

If you want to see how I handle this issue, you are invited to watch and participate in my Battlestar Galactica live blog tonight on Pcnerd37.com.  I will be Twittering out the exact link when I go live (So follow me!).  The show starts at 10pm EST but I typically get things going around 9:30pm EST.

Programming Note:  I put up two Global Geek News Podcasts this week so check them out.  Wesley is busy with SXSW so I will likely do a solo show over the weekend and put it up as soon as its ready.

Follow me on Twitter & Friendfeed!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
24Jun/0811

I have been BANNED from Digg.com!

Share on Facebook

Greetings Readers!

I have some rather suprising news for you today.  I have been banned from Digg.com!  For those who don't know what happend, I will catch you up to speed before I post all correspondence that I had with Digg support.

Last week I made a wrote one of my insightful blog posts about Cisco's predictions on internet traffic in 2013.  It happened that a similar blog post from Om Malik made it to the front page of Digg about the same story.  To give Digg readers another view, I posted my link into the comments on I believe it was Thursday.  Due to my inability to link properly, I only got a single person to visit my blog from posting the link in the comments.  Saturday morning I woke up and went to Digg a story that I saw on my Digg RSS feed to find that my account was invalid.  I did some searching to find that all signs of my existence on Digg had been completely removed.  Being completely confused as to what was going on, I contacted Digg support only to find out I was banned.  The following is all of the emails exchanged between myself and Digg support with a few thoughts thrown in.  At the end is my thoughts on the whole issue and I will discuss it further on the next Global Geek News podcast.

Support,

This morning I woke up to find myself logged out of Digg when I went to Digg this story: http://digg.com/space/Giant_Tsunami_on_the_Sun_Captured_By_NASA_s_STERO_Spacecraft
Figuring Firefox just deleted my cookies as it does on occasion, I went to login only to have the strange error claiming my account, pcnerd37 is invalid. Can you shed any light on what is going on? Thanks for your help!

Sincerely,

Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

Digg's Response:

Thanks for getting in touch with us at Digg.com regarding your account.

Your account was reported to us for abusive activity in comments. Specifically, spamming Digg comments with your blog "Global Geek News has a great blog post about this story, www.globalgeeknews.com/blog"

As explicitly stated in the Digg.com Terms of Service located at http://digg.com/tos section 5.1 USER CONDUCT:

5.1 By way of example, and not as a limitation, you agree not to use the Services: to abuse, harass, threaten, impersonate or intimidate other Digg users;
Also, note that in our Terms of Service, we reserve the right to, “Digg may remove any Content and Digg accounts at any time for any reason (including, but not limited to, upon receipt of claims or allegations from third parties or authorities relating to such Content), or for no reason at all.”

We are willing to unban your account once we receive notification from you that you have reviewed the Digg.com Terms of Service and re-affirm your agreement to those terms.

Please don’t hesitate to contact us should you have any further questions.

Thank you,

-The Digg Support Team.

Ok, so I screwed up in two ways on the linking, not only did it not link but I apparently forgot to link to the direct article, but with the story remaining the top post on the blog, the main blog link will still take them to the right story.

Digg Support Team,

I have reviewed your terms of service, which I have always agreed to, and find the complaint without merit. The link which I failed to copy correctly, leaving off the part to the direct article (oops), was for more information on the post in which the comment was left. As a service to my fellow Digg users, I attempted to post a link to a blog post where more information on the dugg story could be found. It was not intended in any way to be "spam". If you want to get real technical about it, since I left off the http://, it was not even hyperlinked in the comments.

The Terms of Service section you quoted me seems to lack application here as I was not trying to abuse, harass, threaten, impersonate or intimidate other digg users. I was merely trying to give them a link for more information on the story which I believe to be in the spirit of Digg. Furthermore, I find actions taking against me were overkill. The appropriate response would be to delete the post and send a warning email, not delete or ban the account. Banning would be understandable if it was a case of repeated "abuse". I would suggest it is time to review your policies for interacting with loyal Digg users.

Also, in the interest of full disclosure, I will be podcasting and blogging about this experience on Global Geek News.

Sincerely,
Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

Digg needs to better define the terms such as "abuse" that it uses in its terms of service to help avoid confusion. Everything else here is fairly self explanatory.

Digg's Response:

Hi Jeremy,

In addition to section 5.1 on the Terms of Use, we would also like to specifically direct your attention to section 5.7 which states that you agree not to use the Services:

to submit stories or comments linking to affiliate programs, multi-level marketing schemes, *sites/blogs repurposing existing stories* (source hops), or off-topic content;

Also, the Digg FAQ directly addresses this policy as well:

Is it ok to put my website link as a signature in comments?
No, it is not okay to advertise anything of any kind in the comments section. We ask that, as a story commenter, you keep your comments on-topic to the story you're currently on. Any irrelevant links, spam, etc. could result in an account ban for the offending user.

-Digg Support

Digg is trying to pull relevant policies out of its butt, but they aren't doing a very good job as shown in my response email.

Digg Support,

Thanks for your response. As far as your Section 5.7, had I posted the correct link that I meant to (again, oops), It would clearly not be repurposing the story any more than the Digg story which was just a repurposing of a release from Cisco. In regards to your FAQ, there are two main things. First, It states IRRELEVANT links! The intended link, which I will include was not irrelevant. Second, asking and requiring are two different things. Asking implies a courtesy, not a necessity. If you are going to quote it, please reword it to say what you mean. Last, I noticed you completely avoided the issue about how you deal with these situations and Digg users. I find this very curious as most companies that care about their users would have a clear and consumer centric policy when it comes to dealing with users. It is best to keep in mind that it is the users that keep you in business and relations with them should be as plesant as possible. If you look at product surveys, people believe that a large part of product satisfaction is customer service, something that Digg needs to work on. The Townhalls are a great step in the right direction but not enough to create a great user experience with the company.

Again, I would like to reiterate that I have no problem with your terms of service other than some poor wording, but attempting to scew it to a situation it does not apply is simply childish. I would like to give you the opportunity to publicly address these issues, especially how you deal with users on your site on the Global Geek News podcast. I do not have an exact time yet, but I will be bringing up these issues and believe it is only fair and in everyones best interest if I invite a representative of Digg onto the show to state their case and join in on the discussion. If you would be interested, let me know and I will set everything up.

Here is the link to the story that I meant to put in the comment but didnt realize until after the edit period was over that the link was incorrect: http://globalgeeknews.com/blog/?p=39

Sincerely,

Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

They seem to be having a hard time explaining themselves so I give them the opportunity to explain themselves and have a civilized discussion on my podcast. As it appears in the end, they don't have enough interest to respond to that request. Thy didn't respond after this email ripping into them, so I figured its time to email them to see what is going on.

Digg Support,

What am I to assume from the fact that you did not return my last email? I have stated I have no problem with your terms of service, yet I am still banned. Why? Unless I hear otherwise, I will assume your lack of a response means that you realized you have screwed up but aren't willing to admit it. When it becomes apparent that this email conversation is over, that is when I will post my blog about this experience. My offer allowing somebody from Digg to come on the podcast to discuss various issues including its policies for interacting with users and how it defines its terms of service is still open. We typically record live on Thursdays if somebody would be interested in joining us. I finalize all show guests by Wednesday night, so you have until then to make arrangements to be on the podcast if you choose. Whether or not you are there, this will be discussed and I feel it is better for digg to be upfront and deal with this issue in an intelligent and civilized manner. If you choose not to take that path, I wish you luck with the bad publicity that results from the podcast and blog. I look forward to futher communications to resolve this issue in a way that can satisfy both parties.

Sincerely,
Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

I again ask Digg to have somebody on the podcast to talk about these issues but they still don't respond to the idea.

Digg's Response:

Hello Jeremy,

Sorry we didn't get back t you sooner. We have unbanned your account. Please note, however, that your account will remain under review, and any violation of Digg’s Terms of Service may result in a permanent ban of your account.

For more information, please see http://digg.com/faq and http://digg.com/tos.

--Digg Support

Getting unbanned is a partial victory. Since this was the last email they sent to me, I have no idea how long I will will "remain under review." There are still many other issues that need addressed but at least I can now Digg stories and leave comments (Not that I couldn't as I do have multiple accounts).

Digg Support,

Thanks for getting back to me. I greatly appreciate being unbanned from my favorite social news website. How long will my account remain under review? All of my points from my previous two emails still stand including my invitation to be on my podcast. Thanks again!

Sincerely,
Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

That is basically everything that has transpired as of this time as it appears they don't want to email me back or appear on the podcast.  There are still some major issues here, mainly revolving around how Digg interacts with its users.  Banning users with no warning and only giving the error "Invalid Account" is not how to deal with users.  If that wasn't bad enough, their pathetic attempts to hide behind their "Terms of Service" and "FAQ" is laughable.  Unless there is a huge demand, I will reserve further comment for the next Global Geek News podcast since this is already an extremely long post.  If anybody from Digg reads this, the invitation to be on the podcast is still open but you don't have much time to respond!  While I am not yet calling for a boycott of digg as I am still a loyal Digg fan, I will say becareful and when you have to deal with Digg, demand a higher level of customer relations than this pathic thing they have now!

Stay tuned for the podcast where I will talk about this in greater detail!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
16Jun/080

AP Issues DMCA Takedown Notice, Enrages Blogosphere

Share on Facebook

Greetings readers!

For those that don't spend their free time staring at their feed readers waiting for something to change, a major story has hit the blogosphere today about the AP issuing a DMCA takedown notice.  The notice was sent to the Drudge Retort, the left wing equivalent of the Drudge Report.  While sending such notices is not uncommon and I have sent a few myself, this heavy-handed action has set the blogosphere on fire as well as force the A.P. to reconsider its policies concerning copyright.  Since I don't have time to recap the whole issue, you can read up on it HERE and I will continue onto my thoughts.

The real issue here revolves around fair use.  Are people allowed to take small quotes from the A.P. news stories for the purpose of starting a discussion while still linking back to the original story.  If you are looking to understand fair use a little bit better as it applies to this case, it would be a good idea to head over to the post at Ars Technica.  The concept of fair use is one of the most vital ideas to the blogosphere.

The blogosphere largely revolves on the ability to harvest bits and pieces of news from other sources and using them to stimulate a discussion on a topic while making sure to give credit to the original source of the story.  If old media juggernauts like the A.P. can successfully keep people from blogging about news stories they  consider copyrighted or exclusive, this will virtually kill many blog posts that use mainstream media for news on which to put their own spin.  News should be treated as public knowledge, not limited to a single source.  One of the great things about both old and new media is the idea you can choose where you get your information.  Competition brings out the best in everybody!

The line in the sand has been drawn.  On one side you have the blogosphere where people such as Mike Arrington are banning the use of A.P. stories on popular blogs such as TechCrunch and on the other side you have the A.P., an organization that is owned by 1,500 newspapers who wants to cry about something that has been used by many people as a great advantage with sites such as Digg.

Shortly after the story broke and the backlash began, the A.P. decided it needed to set guidelines for using its stories in blogs.  Jim Kennedy, vice president and strategy director of The A.P., called the letters "heavy-handed" and said they were rethinking their policies toward bloggers.  The A.P. hopes to work with the Media Bloggers Association to help define guidelines for the use of their stories on blog posts.  Despite this, the threat still remains to the current way blogging is done.  No matter what solution is reached, it will not please everybody and the bigger the issue becomes, the bigger the publicity headache the A.P. will have.

My advice to the A.P.: It takes seconds for news to spread across the internet so take every link back to your site that you can and be happy with that.

I could go on and on about this, going into each aspect of the story, but I have other things I need to do before I head home.  On the small chance I do a podcast this week, I will likely use some of the time to rant about this.

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
13Mar/0844

Twitter Etiquette

Share on Facebook

With the explosion in popularity that Twitter has received, especially with the massive usage at SXSW, it has become very clear that some facets of twitter are beginning to annoy people. For the benefit of all twitter users, I have made a list of rules for Twitter usage.

  1. Conversations that require more more than two @ replies should be moved over to a direct message. People not involved in the conversation don't want to be spammed with conversation that should either take place at the water cooler or in private. I don't care if you are trying to decide on a place for lunch with your twitter friend. If it doesn't involve a large number of your twitter followers, don't fill our twitter feed with your discussions.
  2. If you are going to Twitter events, do it on an alternate account. For the sake of the sanity of those not at the event such as SXSW, we don't need to be made jealous by your twittering of every person you run into or panel you listen to. Use a second account that your followers can follow if they want to know every detail about your event experience.
  3. You should not twitter more than once every 15 min unless it is in reply to another twitter user. Certainly there are situations that make for an exception to this rule, but generally speaking, especially those people that are alerted via text message, get annoyed with constant twitters from a single person. It can also be very costly to those that get message via text message. I have stopped following several people for excessive twitter usage. You should never twitter more than 30 times in a day unless you want to lose followers.
  4. Do not follow massive amounts of random Twitter users for no reason. I have had many random people follow me that only a handful of people follow, yet they follow thousands of people. You cannot keep up with all of those people and are generally seen as a spammer hoping people will follow them so they can promote their projects. As a personal rule, there is no way I will follow you if you follow more than a thousand people than follow you.
  5. Automated Twitter messages should be done on a second account. I have noticed this problem primarily with Twitter users that use their account to announce things like when they are broadcasting on sites like Justin.tv. If you are going to enable such an automated Twitter messaging feature, use a second account for it so that if you have a bad connection and are constantly coming on and off, people don't get spammed with messages they don't want. Much like having a second account for Twittering about events, the same goes for automated Twitter messages.
  6. Don't post the same thing to multiple services. If you are going to have accounts for all the different services like Utterz and Pownce, post unique messages to each service. Don't post the same thing to all of the services. Nobody wants to receive the same message multiple times because they follow you on multiple services. Decide what you want to post to what service and stick with it. Don't post a single message to multiple services.
  7. If you have many projects that you want to plug updates on Twitter, make dedicated accounts for each project. I admit to breaking this rule, but if you have a project that you post every change you make, or have multiple projects that have regular changes, they should have their own, dedicated accounts. It is always a good idea to keep business and personal things separate. Not only will this keep from annoying your current followers, but it will also allow people interested in your projects to stay up to date without getting messages about every aspect of your life.

If you want to keep your followers happy and grow in Twitter popularity, I highly recommend following these rules. These are the rules that I have come up with that seem to address the worst problems I find on Twitter. If you have more to add to the list or have an issue with my rules, please post your opinion in the comments. While I choose twitter, many of these rules apply for the other services such as Pownce or Utterz.

There are now even more Twitter Etiquette rules!  Check out Twitter Etiquette Part 2!

Follow me on Twitter!

-Jeremy "pcnerd37" Bray

 
12Mar/082

Is Terrestrial Radio Dead?

Share on Facebook

Yesterday, I received a twitter message from Leo Laporte with the simple question, "Is radio dead?"  While I wouldn't exactly call terrestrial radio dead as millions of people still listen to it, I do believe that it is dying a slow death.

With the increasing number of people flocking to satellite radio or the internet for music, fewer and fewer people are able to say that they continue to listen to traditional radio stations.   While many people still see traditional radio as an adequate way to listen to music, news, talk radio and more, it is quickly becoming a means of last resort to listen to audio broadcasts.

Terrestrial radio suffers from two major problems, commercials and content.  The single biggest complaint I have had about terrestrial radio for years has been the commercials.  With many stations, its not uncommon to hear 15 min of commercials in an hour, often in sizable chunks.  While many people aren't as bothered by them on television and typically use the time for a bathroom break, make a sandwich, or place a phone call, such a format is not ideal for the listener on radio where most people are trapped in their car when listening to the radio with nothing to do but listen to the commercial or change the station.  This is much of the reason for the popularity of satellite radio.  For a monthly fee, you don't have to worry about commercials and you can drive coast to coast while still listening to your favorite station.  While I have yet to make the transition to satellite radio, the large blocks of commercials is the primary reason that when I am commuting, I listen primarily to CDs or podcasts on my Zune.

The other problem is content.  With traditional radio stations targeting a broad audience, it is often hard to find a station that plays more music that you like than what you don't.  With many stations playing music genres that span decades, it is often hard to find a station that plays more artists and songs that you like, than those that you don't.  It is this which I believe has fueled the rise of internet radio, mp3 players and podcasts.

With internet radio, mp3 players and podcasts, music, talk radio, news and more has become about what the individual listener wants, rather than the shotgun blast of traditional radio which stations hope will please as many listeners as possible at a single time.  With internet radio services such as Pandora and Shoutcast, it has become very easy for listeners to still be provided the content that they love, but still find new music based upon their likes and dislikes.   For those on the go that still want access to the music they love, mp3 players are continually increasing in popularity.  With custom playlists and easy ways to purchase music, mp3 players have become the gadget of choice for those wanting their favorite tunes no matter where they are.  For those that prefer talk radio, podcasts have become the way they stay up to date with news and listen to the topics they love.  While not all podcasts are talking, podcasts allow people to search for specific content based on the topics they enjoy, such as technology, space, news, entertainment and much more.

Clearly, until radio finds a new advertising model and a better way to become more listener centric, it will continue to bleed listeners to other mediums.  While radio won't die tomorrow, I hold little hope that it will be around in 10 or 15 years.