Blogs

Useful for future articles about telemetry, microcontent.

I totally resonated with Clay Shirky’s article about the issues that led up to the rapid loss of elevation that the Dean campaign experienced. It mirrors the “campaign v. candidate” thesis that I had been putting out, but with an eloquence and completeness that I hadn’t reached (in my mind or in bits). There’s an important point that runs through this whole line of reasoning, and which I haven’t seen brought out yet.

My comment to Clay’s latest thoughts on social software and the Dean Campaign (Link): I think focussing in on the disconnect between 1-3 and 4 is important to do. Two hypotheses: I think alot of people were drawn to the Dean the Campaign as much as Dean the Candidate, but when it came time to really vote, the attachment to the Campaign wasnat sticky enough to keep people on board when others had real momentum for the first time.

Clay Shirky’s post about the whether social software has been bad for the Dean campaign reinforces my model of what’s happened: People are in love with Dean the Campaign, but not necessarily in love with Dean the Candidate. This is compounded by the fact that people post their opinions on Dean sites and start to believe that their opinions ARE the Dean opinions, when in fact the candidate is what he is.

Just read Nova Spivack’s attempt at some Laws for Social Networking. If you work through his 4 laws, I think they all boil down to 2 fundamental issues: 1. For any given person there’s a number of direct links beyond which it is difficult to manage and a pain to deal with, and 2. The nature of social interactions makes it desirable to not traverse more than 3 hops to make a connection.

Awesome. t a c i t u s: Contenders

Clever zip code search tool. Link

From Kevin Kelly – Cool Tools: Self publishing manual

Wow - amazing scanner art. Link

AKMA with great links to Congregations and the Web. Link