Robert Scoble has a "Social Problem"
[update - it is taking an EXTREMELY long time for comments to post - and many are being held in moderation. I am NOT trying to censor anyone. But it is almost 5am, and I can't watch the Spam filter anymore right now. I'll unplug your comments in the morning. But almost 9K comments on this post, almost all spam, have caused my system to clamp down in self defense]
Robert is a reporter. But he is also "drinking his own Kool-Aid". He loves everything new on the web and often tells us how great it is.
Then he moves on to the next shiny lure - leaving everyone else to figure out how the last lure adds value (often leaving the company behind the technology wondering the same things).
Robert is great at finding the new shiny lures, and sharing them with us. I just wish he would make the next (logical, I think) step - offer me some analysis. How can a banker, or a broker - a webmaster or a PR Pro benefit from the shiny lure? What does the lure offer beyond the initial allure?
Yes, I want Robert to think deeper and analyze things more.
And I want him to do it because I know that he can - he just has no time. He flippers from one shiny lure to the other so quickly that he never let’s the hook sink in. Nothing lasts longer than the first, fleeting strike. The last video was the last video. The next lure is the next video.
With a few exceptions, like QIK. Maybe FriendFeed (but I think that lasts another three months for Scoble, tops).
FaceBook was THE INTERNET as far as Robert was concerned - and that lasted a long time. But Robert sees a lot of shiny lures.
I would like him to spend more time telling me (based on real research) which ones I should strike at. Where my time and money are best spent, and why.
The "RSS Aggregator of the week" just isn’t it.
Robert’s "Social Problem" is that he can’t recommend everything to us and have us still find him credible. And like any other "Sales Pitch" - people need to know how it will help them. Not just Robert Scoble, but his viewers. His "Social Problem" is that he is not having the conversation with his audience that they want. They don’t just want a cheerleader - they want guidance. And examples.
And finally, they want something that works for "real people" - and not just Robert Scoble.
And the most cool thing about writing this is that I know it won’t piss Robert off - He saves that for the Gillmor Gang!
*** Random Post ***
May 25th, 2008 at 22:49
The “lures” that have done their damage are now on the sidebar on my blog.
May 25th, 2008 at 22:53
It’s not Robert’s social problem, it’s ours if we blindly follow the Shiny Toy Hunters from one site to the next. We have to use these tools and sites ourselves and find out if they have utility for us based on OUR experiences, not hype from Scoble and others.
One thing we should have all learned by now is that there will always be a ‘next big thing’. And there will always be someone claiming they are the one that found it first. We have ourselves to blame if we blindly follow them from mirage to mirage.
May 25th, 2008 at 22:54
Part of being an early adopter is finding something new, understanding its potential and pushing it as hard as you can until your friends are there, and then their friends and then… strangers. When the strangers join in, and the experience wasn’t all you had hoped it would be… you find the next shiny thing, understand its potential and push it as hard as you can.
That’s what Robert does. That’s what I’ve done (at times). We need people like Robert to keep doing their job and others have the task of taking the next role you’re looking for, optimizing ROIs, etc.
May 25th, 2008 at 22:57
@Mack - that is a good point - but if I have to continually talk customers out of “shiny lures” then it isn’t just an individual problem anymore. MANY of my clients set up Facebook accounts. Then Robert left FB (pretty much). I know - FB may have made him leave.
But wouldn’t it be cool if Robert went back a year from today, reviewed his video from that date, and told us where the company was right/wrong, where RObert guessed right/wrong, etc.
Or if in the video he does tomorrow he moves beyond the “Wow” in the video to talking about it a week later - when he isn;t looking into the eyes of the Founder and CEO?
I just think that would be interesting.
Rob
May 25th, 2008 at 23:02
@Louis - I agree with you. I am NOT arguing that what Robert does has no value - quite the opposite. I have seen the value of Scoble firsthand.
But I know Robert is capable of a more in-depth analysis of companies, and where and how their technology can be utilized, than he is demonstrating.
And I would like to see more depth. Even if that means less videos about the newest aggregator on the net.
And if that is just me, then fine. I shared an opinion that is uniquely mine. But I think there are more people out there like me - people that would like to see Robert move beyond the 30 minute video - and even beyond the initial meeting.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:17
Rob got a BrightKite invite?
I think any of us going back and saying ‘this is where I got it right, here’s where I got it wrong’ is instructive for others and healthy for us. You’ll have to ask Scoble why he doesn’t want to do this.
Personally, I am now far less likely to try out a new social site/service if I suddenly see the Shiny Toy Hunters overhyping it. BrightKite is a perfect example, buzz for it went from through the roof to nothing in a week or so.
There’s a fine line to walk between being a tastemaker, and being a Shiny Toy Hunter. Personally I think most people are getting tired of hearing every few weeks that they need to pack up and move on to the ‘next big thing’.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:17
Well, a year ago today I talked about Zoho. They’ve gotten more important since then. http://scobleizer.com/2007/05/25/
I also talked about Xbox Marketing. That still is worth watching, if you are into marketing. Zooomr? Never landed real funding, so became far less relevant. Scott Guthrie at Microsoft? Is even more cool today since Microsoft has a much better Internet strategy today than a year ago. Googlers post? Not about shiny stuff anyway, so not really relevant to this conversation.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:19
It’s as if at times he is the “Pied Piper of SocialMedia” luring rats. Once outside of Hamelin, if the Pied Piper is nowhere to be found, the rats are left saying “what the hell?”
I’m all for following the latest thing around (I’ll never be the one to find it; I’m not that quick). But I think with such declarations does come a responsibility to not only qualify the claim on the way in but quantify the reason for jumping away, too. I’m not talking about a SWOT analysis, here. But even a little “Hey, I was wrong Widget Service Like Whoa is much better.”
Then again, maybe I am just silly for being a rat.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:20
@Mack - yes, did Brightkite - posted two days ago on how to delete the account. Shiny lure.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:24
@Robert - no, either you are being pith, or you are missing my point. I do NOT want you to go back a year and “tell me if you were right or wrong”. What I want is to get a better idea of what is “important” - and that is hard to get from a video that you do sitting with the Founders. You can share that opinion on a follow up blog post a few days later - if you can free up the time.
I guess my fundamental point is that every video you do, it is polite, and you are excited - and it is cool. And that’s it. No more commentary. My clients may be telling me to install X,Y and Z. And they don;t know why. Or why not. Becuase you do not clearly address usage cases. Just “Wow! Factors”
May 25th, 2008 at 23:25
“I’m all for following the latest thing around (I’ll never be the one to find it; I’m not that quick). But I think with such declarations does come a responsibility to not only qualify the claim on the way in but quantify the reason for jumping away, too. I’m not talking about a SWOT analysis, here. But even a little “Hey, I was wrong Widget Service Like Whoa is much better.—
Agreed. A year ago I was posting on my blog about how I just did not get Twitter and how it all seemed like a waste of time. Since then I have definitely changed my stance on Twitter and am happy to admit on my blog that I was wrong, and I encouraged my readers to give Twitter another shot.
At a recent conf I had a reader come up to me and thank me for my post on Twitter, saying it inspired them to give Twitter another shot.
And besides Jennifer, you are just a Friendfeed snob anyway
May 25th, 2008 at 23:27
@Jennifer - I think (rat analogies aside) we are wanting the same thing. DEPTH.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:28
I think it is key that you called Robert a reporter and not a journalist. The best journalists evaluate things and use a critical eye to give us context.
I think what Scoble does is quite entertaining, but I need some critical thinking and analysis to help me make choices and decisions.
Just being most able to drink out of a firehose doesn’t merit any more attention than the winner of the pie-eating contest.
So much for the late-night thoughts of a journalist and a woman who’s spent more than a little time playing with and looking at this Web thang.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:30
@Charlotte-Anne - THANK YOU! You made my point - which is that I think Robert is a reporter - but I think he COULD be, and SHOULD be, a Journalist.
And that is really all this post was about!
May 25th, 2008 at 23:32
I’d say it’s more of a dilemma than a problem - problem makes it sound like he can’t help it, when the truth is that he’s just honestly short of the amount of time it would take to dedicate himself to that sort of endeavor.
I can’t imagine the pressure Robert is under to always be the one finding the “new” thing. Can you imagine the heyday that would be had if there were a “big shiny new thing” and he was too busy reviewing something that didn’t make it but he thought would previously and missed out on the latest ‘big shiny new toy’? He would be buried under blog posts that screamed “Scoble must be losing his touch - how did he miss ShinyNewToy.com??”
So his options pretty much are to skim the surface, or to be thought irrelevant. I guess I’d opt for the former too. :\
May 25th, 2008 at 23:33
@Rob - Yep, depth. I think Charlotte Anne articulated it spot on. The rat analogy is more just my punchy overtired-ness at work.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:37
@GeekMommy If that’s the case, isn’t he going to eventually render himself irrelevant, if in the end he’s declaring *everything* a Shiny New Thing just to ensure that he doesn’t miss something?
The other thing is… I’m absolutely positive that he hasn’t been the first to declare something a Shiny New Thing. Perhaps the loudest, but not always the first. So I think there’s nothing to lose by adding a wee bit of substantive direction to the thoughts of “why yes” and “why not anymore.”
But I do see your point. It’s gotta be a tightrope walk, for sure.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:39
@GeekMommy - I agree with you, and I don’t. If Robert ends up showing us shiny objects for the rest of his life he will never achieve the status I think he could, to wit, a Journalist. He will always be a pundit, known for sound bites (or QIK-clips), but not for any deep thinking.
To be know for deep-thinking, you have to engage in deep thought. And running from one lure to another prohibits that.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:40
“I can’t imagine the pressure Robert is under to always be the one finding the “new†thing. ”
I remember after I had been blogging for a few months on my blog back in 2006, one day one of my posts made Tech Meme. This had never happened before, and suddenly I was giddy over the incoming traffic.
So I made the BIG mistake the next day of trying to write another post that would get picked up on TechMeme. I did it, and again got some traffic.
But the end result was that I wasn’t getting any comments, and was writing about stuff that my regular community of readers could care less about. I was putting pressure on myself to make Tech Meme, when making Tech Meme did nothing for me.
I don’t really feel sympathy for anyone that feels ‘pressure’ to be a Shiny Toy Hunter.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:42
@all - I am NOT even suggesting Robert does less video - but at some point he either needs to engage with (hire) others to do the background analysis - OR - team up with someone like Techcrunch that already does the analysis. And include that as part of his post. There just isn’t much “there” there in Robert’s posts. Besides the “Wow, shiny” factor.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:46
BTW to Rob’s point, I think if Scoble would do exactly what he’s suggesting, it would seriously boost his reputation and equity with his readers. And would make his blog MUCH more interesting.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:49
“And finally, they want something that works for “real people” - and not just Robert Scoble.” I agree with the author, but I also realize: we follow Robert Scoble into these “new lures” because we know everyone else will follow too: even if it’s for only a short while. We want to be where the people are. And that is a credit to Mr. Scoble and the influence he casts over social networking on the web.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:54
@Jennifer - I don’t know that he declares *every* new thing the ’shiny new thing’ - I’ve certainly been in a ton of betas that I’ve never heard him so much as mention. But yes, if he is always running from one to the next, in the long run, he will burn out.
@Rob - agreed - but I don’t think he *will* keep going that direction. At some point, Robert will begin taking different approaches… I think he’s already started doing that with his Fast Company TV stuff - and it will only increase. He’s too interesting and too smart to not evolve as time goes by.
I do agree that maybe if he progressed to “Scoble Inc” he should consider hiring a junior flunky or two to help out with the retrospective analysis. But I think he’s a little bogged down at the moment for that.
@Mack yeah, I’m with you on not wanting to be the ’shiny hunter’ - but someone does have to do it, so I guess we’re lucky it’s Robert et al. Let’s us try the shiny new things, decide for ourselves, and either utilize them or move on.
May 25th, 2008 at 23:59
Good points.
On our new WorkFast.TV show I’ll be far more into discovering what actually works. I think that’s where the collaboration with Shel Israel will actually bear some fruit (he’s far more of a pragmatist than I am).
But, this is really a collaboration. I put out a shiny new object. Right now it’s FriendFeed. You really need to see the commentary around FriendFeed to discover the truth.
You’ve already seen how I’m refactoring my belief about FriendFeed (did you read last weekend’s posts where I did two, one on why FriendFeed is awesome and one on why it sucks?)
Is that not journalism?
My journalism is in filtering stuff out, as well. You can tell what I really am using vs. what I just covered on my video show. If you don’t, I’d be happy to tell you!
But the real good stuff? Watch FriendFeed and you’ll see what I’m actually using. Seesmic. Qik. Google Reader. Dopplr. Google Calendar. Gmail. Twitter. Upcoming.org. Flickr. Wordpress.com.
Those have stuck around. The ones you can’t see? Google Docs and Spreadsheets, for instance. Those are work services and we’ll cover those on WorkFast.TV starting in June.
May 26th, 2008 at 00:05
@All - let’s look at this another way. About a year ago, Robert told all of my clients that they needed to be on Facebook. Many of them chased Facebook. Robert fell out of love and married Twitter, and many of my clients, once bitten, were reluctant to follow Robert again. Just recently I have gotten them interested, and gotten a lot of new interest in Twitter. But now Twitter is yesterday’s news because today it is FriendFeed.
What is the Average Joe to think? That Robert is fleeting and not interesting/important because he lacks focus? That I am an idiot for trying to move them to Twitter when Robert is trying to move *MY* conversation to FriendFeed?
That Robert and I are both stupid?
NONE of the above is true - but ALL of the above can be seen as true.
And yes, this IS all about me
May 26th, 2008 at 00:08
>I don’t know that he declares *every* new thing the ’shiny new thing’ - I’ve certainly been in a ton of betas that I’ve never heard him so much as mention.
I certainly don’t. I have more than 250 things that PR people have asked me to try out that I either haven’t gotten to, or have gotten to but thought that they weren’t interesting enough.
I also read 600+ RSS feeds and hang out on Twitter (studying 23,000 early adopters) and FriendFeed (studying 2,500+ early adopters) and Google Reader (500+ friends) and on Facebook (5,000 early adopters) to see what people actually use.
I wasn’t the first to try FriendFeed. I got onto it after about 30 people told me it was really great.
After I got onto it I realized they were right, and it’s off to the races.
May 26th, 2008 at 00:14
@Robert - good to know that I didn’t have you 100% wrong. That’s about exactly what I was trying to imply but solely based on observation, not on actually having heard you say it yourself.
@Rob - there’s something to the Facebook-to-Twitter thing, but Robert wasn’t alone in that… But the Twitter to Friend Feed thing? That’s not what I hear him advocating. Friend Feed is proving to be a very interesting tool - but it’s not a replacement tool, so much as an accessory. I don’t see Robert moving off of Twitter - and actually, I do tend to check his Tweets to see where they are coming from… so I can say with a bit of certainty that he hasn’t “abandoned” Twitter for Friend Feed, so much as he’s been advocating the benefits of someone who uses Twitter, RSS, Flickr etc using Friend Feed as well.
The message to your customers has to be - ‘no, he isn’t saying leave Twitter for FF, he’s saying if you use Twitter, there is also great benefit to be had from FF - that’s a very different tune.’
May 26th, 2008 at 00:15
>Robert fell out of love and married Twitter, and many of my clients, once bitten, were reluctant to follow Robert again.
Really? Damn. Facebook is used by 80 million people. Twitter, 1 million. I was far more right about Facebook than any of us are about Twitter.
The three problems I have with Facebook didn’t show up until WAY AFTER I started to use it. What are they?
1. They have a block on number of friends you can have. I had no idea about this until I got to about 3,000 friends. That was a couple months after I was all excited about Facebook. When I hit that limit I realized it was a major limitation in the business utility of Facebook. Sorry, I wouldn’t have known that until I used it for a while.
2. They kick people off and when they do they erase everything and hide it from any users’ view. This happens not only when you are doing something slimy, like I was, when I tried to break Facebook’s Terms of Service, but also when you do something like just send too many messages to your friends (like Irina Slutsky, a former employee of mine, learned two weeks ago when she was erased from Facebook). I didn’t know they were such jerks until I used it for several months and heard from other users’ experiences (I get a new email every few days from someone who got kicked off).
3. Facebook is a walled garden. Now, this one I did realize very quickly, but I didn’t understand how this is a big deal until after using it for a while. Even this week I discovered that events put into Facebook aren’t available for searches on Google, while events put into Upcoming.org are. Sorry, I might have known that was a problem, but I didn’t really think it through until I was a user of it for a while.
Anyone who just blindly follows a user into a service without doing his/her own research deserves what they get, too. I would rather have smart informed readers who’ll tell me when I’m wrong after they come to their own conclusions.
May 26th, 2008 at 00:25
@Robert - Twitter has more like 2 million users, just FYI - not that it changes your argument. But we digress, greatly. My initial point, and one I still think is valid, is that you do great interviews - I love watching them and have been present when you filmed a dozen (between QIK and Rocky). I have watched your videos for years - and read your blog for even longer.
But now you are part of something bigger - not JUST FastCompany.TV, although that is part of it. It is also true that you are big enough to make an break a company. Just through your words, or your Tweets.
And I know you are smart - and that you have a lot of extra commentary you can often add - but it does not fit into your videos. Take the Rackspace IPO, for example. I know your FastCompany people told you about that even while you interviewed Rackspace. And you did the right thing - you didn’t bring it up in the interview - but a follow on post that included that data (*even today after it is public knowledge) would have helped your readers - and probably have gotten more people to go back and watch that video. Who does that add value to?
All of us.
And that is my point - you have more value to add than just video, or a blog post telling me about your video. Scoble+FastCompoany should = more in-depth analysis than just the video. And a little follow through sometimes, maybe 6 months to a year later that says, “Here is how Dell made 500K off Twitter this year” would be interesting. AND it allows you to AGAIN point back to prior videos.
Who wins?
All of us.
May 26th, 2008 at 00:32
Also I think the motivation of the Shiny Toy Hunters also comes into play. Are they hunting for the toys because they want to find the sites/tools that can provide value to others, or because they want to be known as the one that found it first, and thus draw attention to themselves?
I tend to follow someone like Chris Brogan. Chris picks up on these new social sites/tools pretty quickly, but he doesn’t blindly hype them. He provides well-thought opinions on what he thinks will work, and what won’t. His motivation is solely rooted in finding tools that will be of value to others.
Not saying that’s NOT Scoble’s motivation, but that I could see how it could be easy to get caught up in the ‘thrill of the hunt’, and hype a site/tool that might not warrant the attention.
May 26th, 2008 at 00:36
@Mack - I honestly think Robert’s motivations are as pure as they can be. He does love the thrill of the hunt.
And he has a huge following now. A lot of CEO’s follow him - not just the “nerds in the basement”.
I think he should start feeding the CEO’s.
May 26th, 2008 at 00:41
Rob: agreed. But there’s a limit to how much I can do. I brought you the Twitter story through Google Reader’s Shared Items and on FriendFeed. Not on my blog. Although FriendFeed is embedded on my blog.
Chris Brogan? He’s a great guy. But does he hit any of the early adopter walls I hit with Facebook or Twitter or FriendFeed? No. He can’t tell you the rules of using Twitter if you’re following 10s of thousands of people. I can. On the other hand, I’m too busy. There are limits to what one person can do. That’s why it’s so important to watch how the crowd deals with the info I do put out there.
On Rackspace. Agreed. I should have gotten a blog post out there about that. I just was too busy learning about FriendFeed and really understanding that at a level no one else does. Look at Chris Brogan. He’s only put 50 comments into FriendFeed. http://friendfeed.com/chrisbrogan how the heck can he tell you the same things about FriendFeed that I can tell you? Hmmm?
May 26th, 2008 at 00:47
On other points, I see you are talking about where the conversation is happening. It’s happening both here and over on FriendFeed. You should check out who is talking with you there: http://friendfeed.com/kr8tr
May 26th, 2008 at 00:52
@Robert - and now we get back to my main point.
You are not “Robert Scoble” the “guy” anymore. You are an industry. Either Fastcompany, a third party deal with someone like Techcrunch, whomever, needs to happen - you need more depth - and if you get it, you get more viewers to your videos.
And that means more value for your sponsor. And your company.
And as for where the conversation is? There are still 6 replies on Friendfeed, and now 33 here. And only one on FF is not duplicated here.
Besides - this is MY post, on MY blog - Why In The Hell should I move that to FF? What have they done for me? Driven traffic? This post got 32 hits from FF. 165 from Twitter. Over 400 from “other places”.
Stop selling me FF - I am *not* buying. And in 6 months, they won’t be selling anything. They will be deadpooled.
May 26th, 2008 at 00:55
>They will be deadpooled.
That I can already tell you is absolutely hillarious. They are run by several guys who have millions of dollars of Google money (they were the original people behind Gmail and Google Calendar).
I don’t really care if you join up or not.
By the way, already the #3 place I get traffic from is FriendFeed. Why? Because by joining the conversation and helping feed it other people will come and check you out too.
FriendFeed is also growing FAR FASTER than Twitter ever did. I already have more than 10,000 followers. It took me many more months on Twitter to reach that level than it did on FriendFeed.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:03
Robert - I am really, really happy that you like FF. I don’t. They are growing by aggregating (stealing some will argue) MY content - FOR A PROFIT (unless I missed something and they are a non-profit entity). And they do it WITHOUT my permission.
It is one thing to aggregate a blog post. Moving the *entire conversation* away from the content creator is just wrong - unless the content creator agrees. I know we differ in this belief.
FF is possibly even violating copyright law, depending on the state. I don;t plan to challenge - someone might.
But that isn’t why it will die.
It will die because there is another bright shiny lure out there - and once Scoble takes that bait, FF will be the worm that wasn’t eaten. If not for you, FF wouldn’t be the PITA content/conversation shifting (stealing) company it is today.
But perhaps the next bright shiny thing will actually ask me if they can use my data first. Maybe they will actually give me tools to keep the conversation on my blog, AND on the bright shiny lure site.
That is what a reputable company would do - involve me in my own freaking conversation
May 26th, 2008 at 01:11
Whoops… sorry Rob, gotta disagree with you there. You want to keep FF from taking this conversation there? Easy go to http://friendfeed.com/?editservices=1 and remove your rss feed.
Then the content/conversation stays here.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:14
>They are growing by aggregating (stealing some will argue) MY content
Absolutely false. YOU added Twitter into FriendFeed. You don’t want the conversation to happen there, don’t add it there. Of course you can’t control where I share your posts to and we’ll talk about you on FriendFeed anywhere.
Oh, and who the F*** are you to try to say that you “own” my conversation about your post. I own that, not you. Look up copyright law. I own my words, even when typed onto your blog.
Your headline is all that FriendFeed aggregates from YOUR content. The rest of it is OURS.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:16
@GeekMommy - sorry, but that is ludicrous. Like telling my bank robber NOT to steal my money once he already has broken into the bank! So we go from giving people permission to having to actively stop them? No, sorry. You are wrong. My content is my content and I shouldn’t have to tell people (one by one) not to steal it.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:23
How exactly is FriendFeed stealing your content? I am curious. They don’t appear to be spidering random sites or content providers.
The only way your content gets into the FF stream is if someone links to it, or you add your RSS (other) feeds to their system.
To one of Robert’s points, I only found you and your site through FF. I probably never would have otherwise.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:26
>My content is my content and I shouldn’t have to tell people (one by one) not to steal it.
Rob, please delete all my comments here. They belong to me and I want them back.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:29
Um, you must’ve missed something, Rob.
You *chose* to give FF that RSS feed when you signed up - in fact, you have to type it in. You said you “And they do it WITHOUT my permission.” Incorrect.
Which is why I opted not to put in certain things I didn’t want aggregated on FF.
I gave you a link to fix *your* error - not theirs.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:29
Um, you must’ve missed something, Rob.
You chose to give FF that RSS feed when you signed up - in fact, you have to type it in. You said you “And they do it WITHOUT my permission.” Incorrect.
Which is why I opted not to put in certain things I didn’t want aggregated on FF.
I gave you a link to fix your error - not theirs.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:35
@Scoble - don’t take it so personally - You can talk ABOUT me wherever you want to. You can talk TO me wherever *I* choose to engage you.
And I just think that if we are talking about a blog post I wrote, that conversation belongs here, where I wrote the blog post. Not on the site of the week. I know comments left here will survive the next year. Comments left on third party sites? Not so sure. Most of them fail. Most of them don’t last 1/10th of the time I have been blogging. They die, that data dies. For all practical purposes.
And you are right - I followed you to FF, and I set up a dozen accounts. They are gone now though - even though I can’t find how to completely delete my account. My bad.
Simply put, Robert, I don’t want to go to ANY other site to TALK ABOUT MY SITE. And we disagree about that. Fine.
And FriendFeed is still ugly.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:40
You deleted all MY comments when you deleted that. I will never comment on this blog again because of that, thanks. Now please remove all of my comments from this blog. THOSE ARE MY content and I own them. Thanks.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:41
@Lon - I was talking in the sense of “stealing attention”, which yes, isn’t the same as content - unless my content (be it comments here or blog posts here) ends up on FF.
It is so easy to turn a discussion about one thing into an argument about another - which has certainly happened here. I am not sure why/how, and it really doesn’t matter. What DOES matter to me is when Scoble, or anyone else, advocates moving the discussion about my blog post to another service. I think that is wrong. He doesn’t. We disagree. And he’s a friend. But we disagree.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:43
@rob - thanks for the clarification.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:47
really cheapens your desire to ‘keep the discussion here’ to know that you then started blocking comments you didn’t like…
Just means that you will be engaged here less often.
Too bad, I thought you were a smart guy with an interesting perspective. I disagreed with you on one point, one time and you blocked me? Yeah.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:50
Scoble says I was a bad boy for deleting his comments regarding this post on FriendFeed - but I did NOT do that. I removed my feed from FriendFeed - THEY deleted the associated comments (with no warning to me). http://tinyurl.com/6ohknu
This is NOT a well though service. It is exclusionary of the people it should be including. And it let’s history be revised by a simple unsubscribe.
And THAT is why I would rather the conversation took place right here, on my blog.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:53
First of all, you’re not blocking Robert from commenting here, are you? that makes no sense, because now the discussion has moved from here to FF.
Second, the most interesting part of this discussion is how it’s moved from being a ’shiny thing’ - early adopter discussion into being a discussion about control over your data.
Do I own this comment? Or do you? If you post on my FF page, do I own the comment or do you? and if I own it, why do you get to delete it?
I’d argue that on your site, I agree to give control of my comment to you. But on FF, which is a site that aggregates content on their servers and gives users certain degrees of control over their content, who actually has ultimate control? It looks as though you do, because by deleting your FF posts, you also control the connected discussions, which I view as a weakness on FF’s part.
May 26th, 2008 at 01:59
The combination of powerful “sneezers” migrating to FriendFeed and the need for better aggregation of our Social Media feeds (which I think they will improve on due to the large amount of feedback they are now receiving) will help make sure FriendFeed does not go to the DeadPool. That, and because Scoble said so…
May 26th, 2008 at 02:00
@Karoli - blocking Robert? No way. Maryam would kill me!
Who owns your comment here? Read my Terms of Use - I specifically make that clear.
And yes, FriendFeed is totally fubar’ed because they don’t just let me delete MY data - they let me delete YOUR associated data. But that wasn’t my bad - FF didn’t tell me they were doing that. They just deleted part of Internet History.
And that is THEIR bad, not mine.
May 26th, 2008 at 02:01
…and in looking at this more carefully, I see that the messages Robert posted to you on FF and cross-posted to Twitter are still on his feed.
It’s worth noting that if a twitter convo had taken place via @replies and you deleted your twitter account, those replies would still be available because they each stand alone without any interdependency.
May 26th, 2008 at 02:03
@Karoli Yet Robert’s last-standing Twitter post makes me out to be a “deleter”
Who do *I* trust with my conversations? Me, or FriendFeed?
May 26th, 2008 at 02:05
I answer this post further in a place that I control: http://friendfeed.com/e/7ea9b75a-b30a-8cac-15c7-64e1da674b69
May 26th, 2008 at 02:06
@Thinking Serious. We’ll see. If they actually replicate the conversations they are hijacking BACK to the initiating blog, they might survive. Odds are not in any startups favor. Even the ones Robert favors.
May 26th, 2008 at 02:16
NOT a single comment posted here has been blocked in any way whatsoever. Don’t believe what your read on FF - I am *NOT* blocking comments to this post. There is a delay in processing - and Robert Scoble owes me an apology.
May 26th, 2008 at 02:22
@rob Perhaps they need to do what http://www.DocStoc.com is doing with their CPP program: http://tinyurl.com/5ygbf8
May 26th, 2008 at 02:23
@rob Perhaps they need to do what DocStoc.com is doing with their CPP program: http://tinyurl.com/5ygbf8
May 26th, 2008 at 02:33
@Karoli good point. also, i can see the logic in deleting comments made directly on posts, when deleting someone’s account. and deleting an account after one has decided, for their own reasons, that they no longer wish to use the service, is their right.
i don’t get the logic of expecting FF to archive comments made to items in deleted accounts. where, exactly, would you go to read these comments? with no context? just curious, please inform me if i’m missing something.
May 26th, 2008 at 02:34
leaving the kerfuffle behind and getting back to the point, here’s one i don’t understand: why do “bankers, brokers and PR Pros” need to be shown benefit from a tool for it to be either useful or newsworthy?
May 26th, 2008 at 02:34
That social problem (which really is a problem for him) is the reason why TechCrunch is in the top 100 Time list and Scobleizer is not.
May 26th, 2008 at 02:43
rob, the first half dozen posts I made here were without any trouble and then all of a sudden they started getting moderated. It made me feel like you decided to delete my posts. I’m sorry for making that assumption, but you can certainly see how I’d get to that assumption, especially after you deleted all your stuff from FriendFeed. It made me think you didn’t want to have a conversation with me anymore because you could see I was talking about you all over the place.
May 26th, 2008 at 02:51
@r8lobster - that is the question I wish would have been asked first. Robert is in a unique situation that I think could be used to educate as well as entertain. And some of that education includes background info on the companies he reports on.
People can disagree with me on that - and that is fine. But that has nothing to do with how FF uses my data (something I didn’t really realize until this post and comment thread).
So I removed my feeds from FriendFeed. And THEY in turn removed the associated comments - without warning me that would happen. That is THERE bad, not mine.
All I wanted was for Robert to hire an intern. Someone to do more background, provide quality links, etc.
May 26th, 2008 at 02:59
@rob so i’m going to kind of repeat myself here, attempting to rephrase in the interest of clarity. let’s say that you had a … blog, for instance, and decided to take it offline. the comments would go with it, yes? so if you have a profile on a social site, you take it down, the comments go with it yes? and in both cases you have placed content on the interwebs, and decided to withdraw from (whatever it is).
so let’s hypothesize that you deleted your account, but it did not affect the comments left on your posts. however, having been deleted, there are no posts, and there is no user. how, exactly, would we expect FF to archive these comments, in absence of any context? are we expecting them to leave up just the comments, without there being a central place the whole discussion would be displayed?
how exactly would the comments have any relevance outside of the original thread, which was part of your profile and your decision to delete? just wondering, please let me know if i’m missing something obvious.
May 26th, 2008 at 03:08
@Scoble, comment #38. Read my ToU. You leave a comment and I own it. And I didn’t have to go anywhere to get it. You left it here.
May 26th, 2008 at 03:16
>why do “bankers, brokers and PR Pros†need to be shown benefit from a tool for it to be either useful or newsworthy?
On our new show, starting in June, that’s exactly what we’ll do.
But this whole thing shows why my opinion of tools changes over time. I get excited by things. Like I’m excited by FriendFeed right now. Then I hit the edges. People point out problems with the toolset, or I hit problems that I never would have hit if I didn’t use the tool and really become expert in it.
No one else has hit the issue that Rob caused tonight (one of deleting top-level posts also deleting all the conversation underneath that post).
So, tonight my opinion of FriendFeed changed. I’m now a little more careful about where I get involved in a conversation. If I do that on my own comment cluster in FriendFeed no one else can delete my words.
Now, it might be that if I keep hitting different problems, and if something better comes along, that I’ll start hating FriendFeed and moving toward something else.
That’s how this process works. An intern is NOT going to help there.
By the way, I have some help on the new show to do more research and get better guests and be more prepared because we’re going to be very buttoned up on this new show, not loose like I am with my cell phone.
May 26th, 2008 at 03:25
OK, it is past 4am here - and I did find that comments coming in through FriendFeed are taking a LONG time to get through my Spam filters - but I am not blocking anything.
I need to sleep. I’ll check in the morning and make sure anything in the moderation queue is cleared, and will comment on anything new.
But honestly folks - I just wanted Robert to build a “business end” to his “video business”. Nothing more. And I still think it makes sense for him to do that.
May 26th, 2008 at 03:34
I think, that is exactly what I like of Robert Scoble’s postings. Just to get informed a new great thing is up on the horizon.
I don’t need no advices or major critics. I want to know about the existence of new stuff… I go and check myself, and might even blog on that
May 26th, 2008 at 03:41
And Robert - I don NOT want you to change your videos! I love your videos - even some of the QIK ones (If I am in them). I just want what I stated about 8 non-stop hours ago - depth. I know you can provide more than time allows you to. And I know you would be good at presenting some more depth on companies.
And that wasn’t a negative 68 comments ago, and it is not now.
May 26th, 2008 at 06:24
[...] Robert Scoble has a "Social Problem" [...]
May 26th, 2008 at 07:32
*record screeching noise*
Brogan is no Scoble, Scoble is no Brogan. They offer different perspectives, they have very different backgrounds and they communicate with their readers in much different ways. Correct me if I am wrong but Brogan doesn’t try to be the a shiny toy finder. And when he *does* find something new he is very analytical, very purposeful, and seemingly cautious. I’ve never seen Brogan turn fanboy over something, at least not without some serious justification.
*turns record back on*
May 26th, 2008 at 07:36
“Chris Brogan? He’s a great guy. But does he hit any of the early adopter walls I hit with Facebook or Twitter or FriendFeed? No. He can’t tell you the rules of using Twitter if you’re following 10s of thousands of people. I can.”
I wasn’t saying that Chris was a better guy that you Robert, I said that for ME, I get more value from what Chris is doing, than from you telling me how to effectively manage following 20,000 people. You are offering advice that isn’t valuable to me, while Chris is.
Early adopters no doubt love ‘the thrill of the hunt’, and want to hear about the new toys ASAP. I think most of us just want advice from power users on how to better use these tools.
May 26th, 2008 at 07:41
“rob, the first half dozen posts I made here were without any trouble and then all of a sudden they started getting moderated. It made me feel like you decided to delete my posts. I’m sorry for making that assumption, but you can certainly see how I’d get to that assumption, especially after you deleted all your stuff from FriendFeed. It made me think you didn’t want to have a conversation with me anymore because you could see I was talking about you all over the place.”
BTW I had several of my comments moderated. Rob and I were actually discussing this on Twitter, and he explained that he was getting so many comments so quickly, that they were being flagged as potential spam.
I can see how you could have jumped to the wrong conclusion, but then again the situation was clearly explained by Rob on Twitter.
May 26th, 2008 at 07:59
Going back to Rob’s original question about in depth analysis versus following new trends, I am astonished that people need to be spoonfed and told what to do or what’s what. What happened to innate curiousity and finding/trying things out for themselves?
For the record, I’m not a tech geek or even an early adopter - I’m a scientist interested in new things and figuring out for myself what works for me and what doesn’t. I like what Robert does, pointing out new tools and technologies; I can go play with them myself. We shouldn’t suppose that what works for one person works for another, and nor do I like being told what to do by someone else. I do like hearing about things and figuring them out for myself.
Everybody’s busy, whether it be Rob, Robert, the bankers, the readership here or me. Surely we all owe it to ourselves to test things out and see what’s useful in the context of our own situation and environment? Facebook, for example, works for some and not for others. Same with Twitter and Friendfeed.
Each to themselves and their own lives. Take ownership of your own experiences, try new things and experiment but don’t expect others to tell you what’s best for you.
May 26th, 2008 at 08:09
[...] Leggio sent me this post where Rob La Gesse calls out Robert Scoble for being passionate about shiny new things, and [...]
May 26th, 2008 at 09:37
Hmmm…Interesting thread.
On the topic of commenting…My rule (personal) is if I want to have a conversation “WITH” someone, I comment wherever they are (their blog or whatever) and they then own/control it. If I just want to comment “ABOUT” someone/something, it can be wherever I choose and I own it. I always try to give the creator/originator the traffic where they chose to post. To me it’s just respectful.
May 26th, 2008 at 11:24
“FriendFeed is also growing FAR FASTER than Twitter ever did. I already have more than 10,000 followers. It took me many more months on Twitter to reach that level than it did on FriendFeed.”
Robert do you think that the quick growth of your followers on FF might be influenced by the fact that you already have 20K+ followers on Twitter? You have a larger base on Twitter to promote FF on, so I could easily see how you could quickly get Twitter followers to subscribe to you on FF.
May 26th, 2008 at 11:56
“I just wish he would make the next (logical, I think) step - offer me some analysis.”
There is PLENTY of analysis done. You need to do a search on things like Facebook. Even if in some instances, there was not, who cares. I can sample features and services for myself. I don’t need someone to spend every hour they have breaking every technology they find interesting down.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:00
Robert is among the earliest of early adopters. He always has been the champion of the next big thing (NBT). This guarantees him stats like Babe Ruth. He simultaneously leads the league in home runs and strikeouts.Sometimes it’s hard to tell for a while which a Scoble Pick will be. Robert is currently in lovewith FriendFeed, and a good number of technically adept people have followed him there with gratitude. Less geeky friends of mine tried FriendFeed and are confused by it. For those of you tell clients to instantly follow Scoble as he bops from one NBT to the next, I’d be careful. For those of you who like to be early to the part, so you can influence others on new cool stuff, I’d advise you to follow Scoble everywhere. That’s not who I am or how I adopt tech, so that’s why Robert & I seem to be such a balanced match.
May 26th, 2008 at 13:18
Why ask Robert for advice or guidance? Ask a social media consultant. That’s what Chris Brogan is. But it’s not what Robert is. Robert’s a golden retriever. He comes back to you with something he found in his mouth. Then it’s your job to check it out and find out if it’s edible.
Truthfully, I usually try everything the way Robert does, but I can’t fit a lot of things in my life, so I leave them. If they are useful, I don’t leave them. Isn’t that the way technology should be seen? You try it. If you see the use case, you stay there. If not, you move on. Most things have a use case and weaknesses. The next company rectifies the weaknesses, so you move on. I mean, I’ve been communicating with readers since bCentral, but I sure don’t stay with it. However, I do still use YahooGroups. Why, because it does some things very well. That doesn’t mean I won’t try Twitter, Friendfeed, or whatever.
And I’m not a geek. Just a person. And pretty soon I will be a grandma.
May 26th, 2008 at 13:41
Francine, the ‘golden retriever’ is a perfect analogy. That’s what I imagine when Robert starts going crazy over something.
However, as Robert discovered, his analysis of FriendFeed is a little bit flawed, particularly when he suggests it as a replacement for Twitter. (Though today, a gaping black hole might just be a Twitter replacement, it’s so unstable).
It’s unfortunate that it took a public volley of accusation and denunciation full of absolutes to arrive at the conclusion that yes, FriendFeed has a flaw and no, Rob did NOT intentionally delete Robert’s content, and finally, that there is a real issue about who controls content on some sites, with FriendFeed leading the way when it comes to elements of conversation.
May 26th, 2008 at 14:05
[...] on your viewpoint. The unwitting trigger for the backlash was Rob La Gesse, a consultant who also writes a blog. And what did La Gesse do? He decided that he didn’t like the fact that comments about his [...]
May 26th, 2008 at 14:50
FriendFeed has more than one flaw. Flaw #1 is that they do not respond to developer inquiries (been well over a week now). Flaw #2 is the “history” page does not allow you to retrieve data past page 11 - if you click on page 14, you get results for page 11. The API “works” in the exact same dysfunctional manner.
And of course, they let me delete someone else’s content - with out my knowledge, or the content creator’s permission.
May 26th, 2008 at 16:42
Are we certain that the creator of a comment really owns it or is it just an assumption?
Years ago I was at a conference directed at designers/illustrators where they were talking about copyright law. As I recall, there were a few areas where the creator didn’t own their creation, one was when it was part of a compilation. In those cases the person/company compiling owned everything. Since it’s so long ago and at the time it didn’t apply to me, I can’t recall the examples used. Could comments be considered in that same class?
If so, the blog owner, or FriendFeed (etc) would own all comments no matter the creator.
May 26th, 2008 at 16:46
@PXLated - I am not sure - you raise a good point. But here on my blog my Terms of Use cover the “ownership” of comments very clearly - and it has been that way for a LONG time. Of course, the issue has never come up. But if I deleted my blog today, would anyone have recourse against me, even without my ToU? I don’t think so.
May 26th, 2008 at 16:57
rob - There’s the legal side (TOS, EULAs) and the practical side of challenging them. Depending on the law, a TOC may not apply (legally). But, in any case, a person probably wouldn’t take the time to challenge.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:24
[...] or to the commenter. Ironically the meat of the discussion is in the comment threads. Rob La Gesse deletes his FriendFeed account (all comments disappear), Robert Scoble declares that he owns his comments, Mathew Ingram asks if [...]
May 31st, 2008 at 01:10
[...] week where Rob La Gesse was irritated at the comments that were occurring on FriendFeed about his blog post…so he pulled his blog RSS from FriendFeed, which eradicated that post and all its comments [...]
June 14th, 2008 at 21:18
Robert Scoble just made his Friend Feed private.
That is an Elitist and in my book FAIL.
June 14th, 2008 at 23:16
Not true Igor. I simply blocked you. I don’t want to have interactions with someone named “Igor the Troll.”
June 15th, 2008 at 00:02
@Robert - thanks for clarifying - I asked you before responding to @igor because I did not think he was correct, and I wanted your input.
@Igor - Sorry, but you called this one wrong, and you really do have a handle that says, “Ban Me Now”. Rethink that, And get your facts straight.
Rob
June 16th, 2008 at 04:27
[...] Scoble and La Gesse have a flame war over who “owns” comments and threads(lagesse) [...]