One of the topics that we touched on this semester that I found shocking and sometimes amazing was the world of Internet gaming; something that I had never tried or participated in. My participation is still limited by only creating a Second Life account of which I still have yet to explore all of the possibilities.
The most intriguing thing, from a researcher perspective is how integrated most of these online world have become in some people's lives as their main form of income, entertainment and a social outlet. The scope that I would like to examine is the social outlet. Why gaming? isn't it more valuable to have face to face communication?
Well it turns out that while I was completing some research for an independent marketing firm in the area that was examining the World of War craft environment to gain some market perspective on this relatively new phenomenon, it was pointed out to me that the demographic not only consists of "highly intelligent males in their late teens-mid twenties". This is of course the tip of the ice burg and pretty much everyone from all walks of life participate in these games, but for the most part this demographic will be the one I explore in an attempt to understand the motives and reasoning for the vast growth and real world implications that have occurred in lue of face to face communication.
From this research perspective it is important not only to evaluate the good and the bad. Some of the positive implications from gaming are:
Broadening a social network that can potentially span the globe.
The potential to have monetary gain (Second Life).
WOW there is potential for monetary gain from competitions as well.
Having the availability to not only play online, but communicate to each other verbally and live.
The games can bring others into a social circle that otherwise wouldn't have ever met.
The gamers have a common interest and therefore a common bond; belonging to a community.
On the other hand some of the negative implications are as follows:
All computer mediated communication; lack of face to face communication which could lead to misrepresentation or less depth in the relationships (pseudo-friends).
This can potentially become addictive, with common reports of gamers playing for extended periods of time.
Due to the time spent, people lack real world communication skills by dedicating their efforts to the online communities.
The lack of communication skills in the real world could lead to introversion and limiting the potential for developing real world relationships.
Also it is possible that people carry over their game life to real life. (examples of this were displayed in class by a gamer killing themselves "to be with his characters in the game" or when a gamer sold a highly revered item in WOW on eBay that was loaned to him. The person who loaned out the item retaliated with murder.
These are some Pros and Cons associated with the new way to communicate and have become some hot button issues in the news today. As a newly developed community there are many avenues yet to be explored and nobody is really sure what will happen either it be good or bad. Social researchers are paying close attention as these gamers grow in numbers and incidents of success and social support find their way to the medias as well as the stories of murder and addiction also surface. Where the trend is going is still unclear, all that we know for sure is that more people are signing on to play now more than ever.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Net Economies
When attempting to think of an economy that I actively participate online with, other than a commodity driven economy with monetary gain, the best I could think of are my class discussion boards.
An open source software web site; a pro gift economy web site states that, "gifts that an individual might offer in large or even unlimited amounts to a community, into the gift economy, we need to look beyond traditional units of account like hours and dollars, and cultivate the greater "forest" in which individuals who give unlimited or immense quantities of their particular gifts and services would be compensated not with exact amounts of money but with sufficient reciprocal gifts from other community members"(www.transactions.net).
With this definition that is on a more grandiose scale than my example, but never the less the same principal. The gift economy that I participate in; discussion boards, follows suit as a gift economy by following the principal of reciprocation. For example when preparing for the exam and if you miss notes or need a little help with an assignment you can shout out at your class and hope that someone out of kindness will respond. Often people do respond too, but sometimes they expect you to reciprocate the favor.
Kollack discusses gift economies in a group setting, "While a balanced reciprocacy with a particular individual may not be possible, there is a sense that the balance might occur within the group as a whole" (Kollack, 2).
First of all in this type of setting you may or may not experience an exchange with one individual. As said before, a person may ask for something in return, yet there is no explicit obligation to repay. On the other hand if someone simply helps you out they may get information and another juncture from another member of the class. The ultimate hope is that when you do help someone else they will either be willing to help you or contribute to others. In the most perfect of conditions everyone would contribute to make the ultimately best source of information. That is also an idea that helps support the credibility of Wikipedia, which could fall under the category of a public good and a gift economy.
Kollack describes the idea that reciprocacy can be of a service or idea, but this author still believes that being able to quantify the value of the "gift" makes it worthwhile.
"What happens if there is no tangible return or rewards are not quantifiable? I suggest that the gift economy weakens and content providers seek more than just intangible rewards — reciprocity in the form of tangible compensation" (Synergic Earth News,Veale,1).
I agree with this to a sense as well, however personal value or appreciation for information or an virtual good may simply out weigh the costs of being able to quantify its worth. A discussion board still could be quantifiable as monetary and a gain in grades. Here is my chain of thought:
You miss a class
You miss notes
You have quiz that you need full credit to pass the class
You get that information from a friendly classmate online
You pass the quiz
You pass the class
You don't waste your tuition, time invested or supply costs for the class.
Even using Veale's principal for a gift economy the discussion board still hold up, in fact if used properly its value can be immeasurable when it comes to learning more. You will have that forever, however as said before there are few situations where this Utopian idea of free exchange works to it's fullest potential for all of the users in an equal proportion.
An open source software web site; a pro gift economy web site states that, "gifts that an individual might offer in large or even unlimited amounts to a community, into the gift economy, we need to look beyond traditional units of account like hours and dollars, and cultivate the greater "forest" in which individuals who give unlimited or immense quantities of their particular gifts and services would be compensated not with exact amounts of money but with sufficient reciprocal gifts from other community members"(www.transactions.net).
With this definition that is on a more grandiose scale than my example, but never the less the same principal. The gift economy that I participate in; discussion boards, follows suit as a gift economy by following the principal of reciprocation. For example when preparing for the exam and if you miss notes or need a little help with an assignment you can shout out at your class and hope that someone out of kindness will respond. Often people do respond too, but sometimes they expect you to reciprocate the favor.
Kollack discusses gift economies in a group setting, "While a balanced reciprocacy with a particular individual may not be possible, there is a sense that the balance might occur within the group as a whole" (Kollack, 2).
First of all in this type of setting you may or may not experience an exchange with one individual. As said before, a person may ask for something in return, yet there is no explicit obligation to repay. On the other hand if someone simply helps you out they may get information and another juncture from another member of the class. The ultimate hope is that when you do help someone else they will either be willing to help you or contribute to others. In the most perfect of conditions everyone would contribute to make the ultimately best source of information. That is also an idea that helps support the credibility of Wikipedia, which could fall under the category of a public good and a gift economy.
Kollack describes the idea that reciprocacy can be of a service or idea, but this author still believes that being able to quantify the value of the "gift" makes it worthwhile.
"What happens if there is no tangible return or rewards are not quantifiable? I suggest that the gift economy weakens and content providers seek more than just intangible rewards — reciprocity in the form of tangible compensation" (Synergic Earth News,Veale,1).
I agree with this to a sense as well, however personal value or appreciation for information or an virtual good may simply out weigh the costs of being able to quantify its worth. A discussion board still could be quantifiable as monetary and a gain in grades. Here is my chain of thought:
You miss a class
You miss notes
You have quiz that you need full credit to pass the class
You get that information from a friendly classmate online
You pass the quiz
You pass the class
You don't waste your tuition, time invested or supply costs for the class.
Even using Veale's principal for a gift economy the discussion board still hold up, in fact if used properly its value can be immeasurable when it comes to learning more. You will have that forever, however as said before there are few situations where this Utopian idea of free exchange works to it's fullest potential for all of the users in an equal proportion.
Monday, April 23, 2007
1st Blog re-re do
I chose to talk about hypertext. A bit late now that i know the term and have realized that I have used this technology more times than I can count without knowing what I was doing was inserting hypertext into documents and slides or just clicking on them.
Hypertext, in its most frequently-used form, is text on a computer which can be "clicked on" for more information on a subject. Hypertext is a relatively recent paradigm in computer user interfacing, attempting to overcome the old limitations of written text. Rather than remaining static like traditional text, hypertext will dynamically "branch or perform on request" taking the user to related subjects on demand (Nelson 1970). Thus, hypertext makes possible an organization of material through links and connections (called hyperlinks) which overcome the lack of interconnections in written or printed text.
This definition I did find interesting because it looks at broadening the horizons of text by making text itself interactive and multi layered.
1945- Memex is created, a fanciful idea that volumes of information could be stored at a desk top. Nelson and Engelbart took the idea further and developed the wonder of hypertext in its first stages in 1965 through the mid seventies. Small developments occurred that made leaps as far as the studies in hypertext went. In 1977 the first application of hypertext was used, further developments like "guide" allowed for the application to be available on personal computers (Wikipedia). Since this time hyperlinks have become a backbone to the Internet experience. Without hypertext a web page would just be a page and each document or related idea would therefore be separated in virtual space. With the use of hypertext the Internet has become a source of information with limitless depth and breadth of information.
Hypertext, in its most frequently-used form, is text on a computer which can be "clicked on" for more information on a subject. Hypertext is a relatively recent paradigm in computer user interfacing, attempting to overcome the old limitations of written text. Rather than remaining static like traditional text, hypertext will dynamically "branch or perform on request" taking the user to related subjects on demand (Nelson 1970). Thus, hypertext makes possible an organization of material through links and connections (called hyperlinks) which overcome the lack of interconnections in written or printed text.
This definition I did find interesting because it looks at broadening the horizons of text by making text itself interactive and multi layered.
1945- Memex is created, a fanciful idea that volumes of information could be stored at a desk top. Nelson and Engelbart took the idea further and developed the wonder of hypertext in its first stages in 1965 through the mid seventies. Small developments occurred that made leaps as far as the studies in hypertext went. In 1977 the first application of hypertext was used, further developments like "guide" allowed for the application to be available on personal computers (Wikipedia). Since this time hyperlinks have become a backbone to the Internet experience. Without hypertext a web page would just be a page and each document or related idea would therefore be separated in virtual space. With the use of hypertext the Internet has become a source of information with limitless depth and breadth of information.
Copyright
The arguments over copyright infringement and protecting the rights of authors vs. public domain has been a long standing debate that is still making headlines today. The most recent mass media frenzy that made headlines for months was of course Napster and their run in with Metallica. As the Internet emerged as an source of downloading music, it cough the attention of the music industry and the big names that rely on the record sales to promote their business. Makes sense, but record sales in retrospect really weren't effected. In a study to compare the effect of record sales and music downloads it was found that "We match 0.01% of the world’s downloads to U.S. sales data for a large number of albums. To establish causality, we instrument for downloads using data on international school holidays and technical features related to file sharing. Downloads have an effect on sales which is statistically indistinguishable from zero."(Oberholzer-Gee, Strumpf, 1); the distribution of the music may have actually have been viewed as a promotional tool. What this topic boils down to... who decides what they can or can't do with something you have created?
This is the debate around copyright. Granted if you have a brilliant idea and someone takes that idea and capitalizes on it, wouldn't you feel robbed? What if you wanted to keep it a secret, even if it served the greater good of the public, and someone took your idea and benefited the world? Is stealing it right then?
According to the law it is, to an extent. Works that are not protected under the copyright law include "works in which the copyright has expired, some government created works, things expressly put in the public domain, and may include any "idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work" ((17 USC § 102b) Ovalle, 3).
Other works that do not fall in this category are protected depending on when it was created, available for renewal, etc.
I think that the fine line between what is public and what is private actually boils down to the creators intent and what they have in mind to do with whatever it is that they create. The only exemptions would apply to the government and medical/scientific fields that would aid in the advancement or survival of the overall human race. That is just my opinion. If you create it-it's yours and I think there should only be a few exemptions. "Fair use is codified in Title 17 Chapter 1 § 107.Fair use is an important exemption to a copyright holder's rights. Any use for "purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research is not an infringement of copyright"(Ovalle, 6).
Now believe me, I like a free download just like the next guy and believe that the Utopian society would be a shared economy (really though- it can't work, people will only take advantage and capitalize on each other); you have to draw the line somewhere.
Ways to enforce and protect copyright infringement on the Internet are in place, but constantly face problems due to the various ways to create intellectual property that is really easy. Also there are limitless ways to download use, alter and change that property. It is difficult to regulate with all of these variables, but the rules still apply and it is still illegal to download or use copyrighted and protected material.
This is the debate around copyright. Granted if you have a brilliant idea and someone takes that idea and capitalizes on it, wouldn't you feel robbed? What if you wanted to keep it a secret, even if it served the greater good of the public, and someone took your idea and benefited the world? Is stealing it right then?
According to the law it is, to an extent. Works that are not protected under the copyright law include "works in which the copyright has expired, some government created works, things expressly put in the public domain, and may include any "idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work" ((17 USC § 102b) Ovalle, 3).
Other works that do not fall in this category are protected depending on when it was created, available for renewal, etc.
I think that the fine line between what is public and what is private actually boils down to the creators intent and what they have in mind to do with whatever it is that they create. The only exemptions would apply to the government and medical/scientific fields that would aid in the advancement or survival of the overall human race. That is just my opinion. If you create it-it's yours and I think there should only be a few exemptions. "Fair use is codified in Title 17 Chapter 1 § 107.Fair use is an important exemption to a copyright holder's rights. Any use for "purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research is not an infringement of copyright"(Ovalle, 6).
Now believe me, I like a free download just like the next guy and believe that the Utopian society would be a shared economy (really though- it can't work, people will only take advantage and capitalize on each other); you have to draw the line somewhere.
Ways to enforce and protect copyright infringement on the Internet are in place, but constantly face problems due to the various ways to create intellectual property that is really easy. Also there are limitless ways to download use, alter and change that property. It is difficult to regulate with all of these variables, but the rules still apply and it is still illegal to download or use copyrighted and protected material.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Links
As I have been reading more into my project and more class material is presented i have noticed that essentially everything is tied together one way or another. For instance, one of these ties that I noticed a tie to are politics and journalism. Journalism plays the major role and touches on any topic of human interest, politics and a hot topic like net neutrality defiantly apply, which also could fall under the politics or journalism category. That is the general role of journalism; on the Internet journalism takes shape as a public way to communicate. Really, if you think about it so many possibilities and opportunities to reach out without very much effort and be able to organize and share oppinions, ideas, creative work, feelings, suggestions (it truly is endless the amount of information available).
Politics rely on communication. The platform and way that they present themselves are all forms of how they communicate their political ideas. This also applies to political groups too. The Internet provides a medium where citizen & professional journalists can communicate and have their ideas equally accessible to the world. Like minded folks can gain momentum and organize ideas in ways that were never possible. The turnaround is instant too, consider the possibilities. People can do a search for a topic like global warming and get involved by touching a button (and often there is no liability or real responsibility to back an idea and have your oppinion count. I think in general people are more informed.
On that note I have been happy to see citizen journalist as people who are making some great points and effecting a lot of people. A good example is Utube. Anyone can post and it is a very popular web site with a lot of visibility. If you make a good point or have anything to share that catches the eye of someone it can become a viral video. (hell Andy Milanarcus, I think that's his name, he has a show on MTV now because of his posts.)
People are effecting the process of information with their own lines of thought like never before and I think that is a related or "linked idea" to everything that we have discussed this semester, it is truly amazing.
Politics rely on communication. The platform and way that they present themselves are all forms of how they communicate their political ideas. This also applies to political groups too. The Internet provides a medium where citizen & professional journalists can communicate and have their ideas equally accessible to the world. Like minded folks can gain momentum and organize ideas in ways that were never possible. The turnaround is instant too, consider the possibilities. People can do a search for a topic like global warming and get involved by touching a button (and often there is no liability or real responsibility to back an idea and have your oppinion count. I think in general people are more informed.
On that note I have been happy to see citizen journalist as people who are making some great points and effecting a lot of people. A good example is Utube. Anyone can post and it is a very popular web site with a lot of visibility. If you make a good point or have anything to share that catches the eye of someone it can become a viral video. (hell Andy Milanarcus, I think that's his name, he has a show on MTV now because of his posts.)
People are effecting the process of information with their own lines of thought like never before and I think that is a related or "linked idea" to everything that we have discussed this semester, it is truly amazing.
Friday, April 13, 2007
Net Neutrality
The debate over net neutrality seems to have many points of interest and frankly I think that all parties involved have something valuable to offer and all should be equally accessible to all.
Net Neutrality-"The idea that a maximally useful public information network aspires to treat all content, sites and platforms equally"(Wikipedia; Tim Wu, Columbia Law).
The debate as it stands now is that Internet content providers are having to pay up for taking up too much band with. By taking up Verizon's or Time Warner's band with they are claiming the right to charge. The problem in that lies that competitors and select high traffic providers may get preference and those who are less popular will have to compensate with higher prices. It seams plausible in a capitalist world and everything costs something, right? Is band with included?
I do think that there is value to provide better quality service. Therefore there is value for band with and I can understand why they think they have the right to charge. My major issue is the control that these new found gatekeepers have. As mentioned in the article found in the Wall Street Journal, "A Battle for Control of the Web", Cox cable is brought up as being directly linked with limiting access to users for their direct competition. Sounds like a monopoly. Now the term monopoly sounds dated and synonymous for Rockefeller, but think of it... a monopoly is basically any type of industry that provides an essential service to the public. It is usually in high demand (the Internet is in high demand & so is the information on it) and they have total control of what where who when and how it is distributed or in this case viewed. I think if these providers that think they can start to charge and not expect the entire industry to run into some major issues and customer complaints.
It seems that every ones interest is at stake because we are all susceptible to having our right to public information being kept private because our provider doesn't happen to do business with because NEWS XYZ is their competitor. Also as the professionals who drive the advancement in the field the topic is of special interest because they fear that it will limit progress to the technology itself, but also the information that the Internet provides. Oh yeah did I mention 1st amendment rights?
Overall I think it is quite clear my stance with network neutrality. There is a bigger picture here and I am sad to say that companies that want to charge or pick and chose who they allow access to is just another way to nickle and dime everyone. It isn't worth making service better for a few who can afford it, all content on the Internet has equal priority just as those who chose to view it do. And anyways how does your local service provider know what you want to look for, so why should they choose what you can access?
Net Neutrality-"The idea that a maximally useful public information network aspires to treat all content, sites and platforms equally"(Wikipedia; Tim Wu, Columbia Law).
The debate as it stands now is that Internet content providers are having to pay up for taking up too much band with. By taking up Verizon's or Time Warner's band with they are claiming the right to charge. The problem in that lies that competitors and select high traffic providers may get preference and those who are less popular will have to compensate with higher prices. It seams plausible in a capitalist world and everything costs something, right? Is band with included?
I do think that there is value to provide better quality service. Therefore there is value for band with and I can understand why they think they have the right to charge. My major issue is the control that these new found gatekeepers have. As mentioned in the article found in the Wall Street Journal, "A Battle for Control of the Web", Cox cable is brought up as being directly linked with limiting access to users for their direct competition. Sounds like a monopoly. Now the term monopoly sounds dated and synonymous for Rockefeller, but think of it... a monopoly is basically any type of industry that provides an essential service to the public. It is usually in high demand (the Internet is in high demand & so is the information on it) and they have total control of what where who when and how it is distributed or in this case viewed. I think if these providers that think they can start to charge and not expect the entire industry to run into some major issues and customer complaints.
It seems that every ones interest is at stake because we are all susceptible to having our right to public information being kept private because our provider doesn't happen to do business with because NEWS XYZ is their competitor. Also as the professionals who drive the advancement in the field the topic is of special interest because they fear that it will limit progress to the technology itself, but also the information that the Internet provides. Oh yeah did I mention 1st amendment rights?
Overall I think it is quite clear my stance with network neutrality. There is a bigger picture here and I am sad to say that companies that want to charge or pick and chose who they allow access to is just another way to nickle and dime everyone. It isn't worth making service better for a few who can afford it, all content on the Internet has equal priority just as those who chose to view it do. And anyways how does your local service provider know what you want to look for, so why should they choose what you can access?
Friday, April 6, 2007
Second Life
Well overall my second life experience is pretty slow. It is probably my computer but other wise second life world is pretty fascinating. I was impressed immediately by the depth of rules and expectations in this virtual world. Not only does it mimic common courtesy of the real world it is essential to maintaining an open environment where creativity can be shared without the threat of being harassed or compromised. In short you still have your own privacy and rights just like in life.
I am still trying to get a grasp on how Second Life works and how much it actually involves. I am not that involved in the whole programming thing so it is difficult for me to really wrap my head around it.
I have to say though I do not usually have major issues on my computer, it is a bit slow, however SL continuously crashed. I did read a notice about the system crashing but I did find that to be disappointing.
The concept of SL is pretty interesting though; there are many ways to interact on a social level or on a professional level and people are surprisingly paying a lot of money for virtual property. I stepped into an auction online and it was going for $2,500.00. To me that is a jaw dropper and I suppose the most intriguing part of it all to me. 270 Linden Dollars is equal to one US dollar, approximately. I am very curious as to how people can justify purchasing virtual property-but the fact that people do buy it makes me want to start creating.
I think that as the program and the programmers (Linden Lab) create a more and more developed world with more real world relevance it can be used as a tool in lue of actually meeting with people. I am timid to expect that everyone uses this virtual world as an actual means of living a life. I was impressed at first by the volume of people that have logged onto SL but in reality there are not that many everyday users who actually spend a considerable amount of time online. Wikipedia pointed about that many users are non-active accounts and the real representation of users is closer to 20,000-30,000 people in a given day; definitely still notable. I am curious to follow where SL goes to and there is more improvements on the way, including real time voice between avatars. That would be interesting to see and experience. Like I said SL has promise and is obviously getting a lot of attention from the public, if it were just a bit more practical or applicable in day to day activity it would really take off.
I am still trying to get a grasp on how Second Life works and how much it actually involves. I am not that involved in the whole programming thing so it is difficult for me to really wrap my head around it.
I have to say though I do not usually have major issues on my computer, it is a bit slow, however SL continuously crashed. I did read a notice about the system crashing but I did find that to be disappointing.
The concept of SL is pretty interesting though; there are many ways to interact on a social level or on a professional level and people are surprisingly paying a lot of money for virtual property. I stepped into an auction online and it was going for $2,500.00. To me that is a jaw dropper and I suppose the most intriguing part of it all to me. 270 Linden Dollars is equal to one US dollar, approximately. I am very curious as to how people can justify purchasing virtual property-but the fact that people do buy it makes me want to start creating.
I think that as the program and the programmers (Linden Lab) create a more and more developed world with more real world relevance it can be used as a tool in lue of actually meeting with people. I am timid to expect that everyone uses this virtual world as an actual means of living a life. I was impressed at first by the volume of people that have logged onto SL but in reality there are not that many everyday users who actually spend a considerable amount of time online. Wikipedia pointed about that many users are non-active accounts and the real representation of users is closer to 20,000-30,000 people in a given day; definitely still notable. I am curious to follow where SL goes to and there is more improvements on the way, including real time voice between avatars. That would be interesting to see and experience. Like I said SL has promise and is obviously getting a lot of attention from the public, if it were just a bit more practical or applicable in day to day activity it would really take off.
Friday, March 30, 2007
In The News
Fox News Website: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,260583,00.html
Buffalo News: "U.N. calls for prompt solution to Iran-Britain Dispute" A4 3/30/2007
Buffalo News website http://www.buffalonews.com/
When comparing the top story of British sailors and marines, which has been pretty much everywhere this last week, I found a number of sources to compare the story. Being that the issue has been around for a week there are many different spins and topics that the article could cover. For instance FOX News (which in my humble opinion is not the best news source) had a pretty good website and their article focused on the actual occurrence of "who, what, where, when and how" the British Troops became captive and what the circumstances for their captivity are. The article was longer than most Internet articles and displayed all on one page without a link to another page. Often I have noticed, to fit more on the Internets cover page news sources will have a headline with a link, so they an get more top stories in your view. This article covers a good portion of the page, I was impressed. Another great point of viewing Internet articles is that there is always room for pictures, that doesn't always happen in print. Another key difference is that on the Internet you can often find related articles or hyperlinks to other sources that talk about this topic.
The Buffalo News article on the other hand, I am sure has already run articles about the conditions of their captivity and a detailed report of what had happened that day. The Buffalo News on the other hand took some new factors into consideration, such as the U.N.'s role and what the course of action is to free the solders. Another side of the story was put on the table by looking at Manouchehr Mottaki, Iran's Foreign Minister, had to say about he issue. By looking at all side of the story and having the most up to date information makes the Buffalo News appear to be more reputable. As far as layout and presentation is concerned there is not as much space to layout the article, but they do get it on one page with a small but meaningful picture that clearly displays the social climate in Iran. The picture in the FOX News website was still a beautiful picture of the vessel that the troops were on, but did not have the same emotion in the photo like the Buffalo News photo choice had.
When comparing the two medias next to one another, well that's just it it is a bit harder to carry your PC with you isn't it- or is it. A lot of people are using laptops and blackberry to get their information why do we need print then? The format of print news is nostalgic and it is still a staple for many. Those who opt to carry a .5 lbs. paper compared to a 5lbs. lap top might have something to do with it too. I suppose it is up to the persons individual preference. Although leaders of the print industry such as Sulzberger, owner, chairman and publisher of The New York Times sees things moving to the Internet.(http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/822775.html)
“Given the constant erosion of the printed press, do you see the New York Times still being printed in five years?
“I really don’t know whether we’ll be printing the Times in five years, and you know what? I don’t care either,” he says.
Sulzberger is focusing on how to best manage the transition from print to Internet.
“The Internet is a wonderful place to be, and we’re leading there,” he points out.
The Times, in fact, has doubled its online readership to 1.5 million a day to go along with its 1.1 million subscribers for the print edition.”
Frankly I am stuck in print and really do not want to adopt to the Internet for all of my news information but it seems that we might be headed that way weather we like it or not, but at least there are a lot of benefits, not to mention from a business perspective how much cash it would save the leaders of the news to forgo printing! It could really change the news industry.
Buffalo News: "U.N. calls for prompt solution to Iran-Britain Dispute" A4 3/30/2007
Buffalo News website http://www.buffalonews.com/
When comparing the top story of British sailors and marines, which has been pretty much everywhere this last week, I found a number of sources to compare the story. Being that the issue has been around for a week there are many different spins and topics that the article could cover. For instance FOX News (which in my humble opinion is not the best news source) had a pretty good website and their article focused on the actual occurrence of "who, what, where, when and how" the British Troops became captive and what the circumstances for their captivity are. The article was longer than most Internet articles and displayed all on one page without a link to another page. Often I have noticed, to fit more on the Internets cover page news sources will have a headline with a link, so they an get more top stories in your view. This article covers a good portion of the page, I was impressed. Another great point of viewing Internet articles is that there is always room for pictures, that doesn't always happen in print. Another key difference is that on the Internet you can often find related articles or hyperlinks to other sources that talk about this topic.
The Buffalo News article on the other hand, I am sure has already run articles about the conditions of their captivity and a detailed report of what had happened that day. The Buffalo News on the other hand took some new factors into consideration, such as the U.N.'s role and what the course of action is to free the solders. Another side of the story was put on the table by looking at Manouchehr Mottaki, Iran's Foreign Minister, had to say about he issue. By looking at all side of the story and having the most up to date information makes the Buffalo News appear to be more reputable. As far as layout and presentation is concerned there is not as much space to layout the article, but they do get it on one page with a small but meaningful picture that clearly displays the social climate in Iran. The picture in the FOX News website was still a beautiful picture of the vessel that the troops were on, but did not have the same emotion in the photo like the Buffalo News photo choice had.
When comparing the two medias next to one another, well that's just it it is a bit harder to carry your PC with you isn't it- or is it. A lot of people are using laptops and blackberry to get their information why do we need print then? The format of print news is nostalgic and it is still a staple for many. Those who opt to carry a .5 lbs. paper compared to a 5lbs. lap top might have something to do with it too. I suppose it is up to the persons individual preference. Although leaders of the print industry such as Sulzberger, owner, chairman and publisher of The New York Times sees things moving to the Internet.(http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/822775.html)
“Given the constant erosion of the printed press, do you see the New York Times still being printed in five years?
“I really don’t know whether we’ll be printing the Times in five years, and you know what? I don’t care either,” he says.
Sulzberger is focusing on how to best manage the transition from print to Internet.
“The Internet is a wonderful place to be, and we’re leading there,” he points out.
The Times, in fact, has doubled its online readership to 1.5 million a day to go along with its 1.1 million subscribers for the print edition.”
Frankly I am stuck in print and really do not want to adopt to the Internet for all of my news information but it seems that we might be headed that way weather we like it or not, but at least there are a lot of benefits, not to mention from a business perspective how much cash it would save the leaders of the news to forgo printing! It could really change the news industry.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Politics
Bogger's Name: Christina Abt
Title: Anatomy of an (authentic) American political campaign
URL: http://avoterschoice.blogspot.com/
Occupation: Politician in Eden
DOB: Friday, August 05, 2005
Rank: 2,924,506
This blog is obviously not a very visible blog or have a lot of public interest, but for purpose of this assignment it was a very well managed blog that I thought could be useful to the public, a politician and politician's office perspective. The construction of the blog is rather objective and specifically looks as the political process in the US, but more specifically the political process in the small town of Eden. The overall tone of the posts are constructive and give some insight to the political issues at hand in the WNY area, but mostly the blog examines a personal perspective of Abt's ongoing processes in town government. This is a last post on this blog and gives a pretty good sense of what Christina Abt was hoping to accomplish.
"Most of all, I hope that my willingness to give of my time, effort and energy to make the election process a legal one will encourage people in Eden and across Western New York to make more of an effort to vote and to get involved. If I have made that difference, then it was all worthwhile".
This blog was intended to give the average voter some insight to the political process and could have been a very good opportunity for a politician to directly relate to the public, however a lot of the posts have zero feedback. I do definitely believe that the action on the site would have improved if her political demographic wasn't in Eden, not to say that they are not on the Internet but I do think that they are late adopters and probably were not looking for a political influence or information on the Internet.
I do believe that the Internet in many realms greatly affects the political process and aids in democracy. Everyone has a voice and the ability to create a potentially damaging website like the recent newsworthy Hillary video on Flickr, a constructive blog like Abt's, a debate blog or anything else that can touch on a political campaign or issues. I think that it is detrimental to advance with the new forms of reaching the public, especially now when the Internet is such a vital aspect of many people's lives, weather it be information based, professional, or for social purposes.
"Instead of reporting on politics, the media are active participants in the political process through their role in publicity. Increasingly, the media has become central to political life. Politicians who do not constantly stay abreast of the media's requirements and actively plan their publicity tend to fall quickly out of favour. Those who are not good 'media performers' suffer the same fate"(Thornton 8).
This quote reflects how this can be handled, especially looking at the upcoming presidential election and all the buzz surrounding it. Hillary, instead of crumbling from the unneeded press attention for the numerous parodies and slanderous websites, rather took it in stride and on the Today Show turned the whole PR mess into a positive. Hillary can handle the media and I believe that her early attempts to activate her campaign on the Internet has given her an edge with the public and especially younger voters. It is important to handle these scrutinizing situations well and I think that she does. In today's media where anyone can create a website or an attention grabbing video it can become viral and can potentially sway public opinion.
"An important distinction between public opinion as a critical authority balancing political and social power, and public opinion as something than publicity can manipulate to support people, institutions, products or programs" (Habermas, 1989:236); (Thornton 11).
I think this point is now more critical than ever. True the public opinion always has had great influence but as said before things have changed and instead of only being able to reach the American public by means of printed circulars used in the early elections of the US, a thought or idea can instantly be put into a public forum and could easily gain power and others support or resistance relatively easily. This approach applies to all forms of politics not just on a national level, but on a local level too; as you can see by Abt's blog.
In short I think that blogs are affecting local governments in a great way, opening up doors and means of effective communication between politicians and the public. These ways of communicating create a relatively small forum to discuss issues that those in that group care about most. In the same note anyone who has an issue about the government or a road that needs repair can start to get the backing and reach those who have the same interest with little effort.
Title: Anatomy of an (authentic) American political campaign
URL: http://avoterschoice.blogspot.com/
Occupation: Politician in Eden
DOB: Friday, August 05, 2005
Rank: 2,924,506
This blog is obviously not a very visible blog or have a lot of public interest, but for purpose of this assignment it was a very well managed blog that I thought could be useful to the public, a politician and politician's office perspective. The construction of the blog is rather objective and specifically looks as the political process in the US, but more specifically the political process in the small town of Eden. The overall tone of the posts are constructive and give some insight to the political issues at hand in the WNY area, but mostly the blog examines a personal perspective of Abt's ongoing processes in town government. This is a last post on this blog and gives a pretty good sense of what Christina Abt was hoping to accomplish.
"Most of all, I hope that my willingness to give of my time, effort and energy to make the election process a legal one will encourage people in Eden and across Western New York to make more of an effort to vote and to get involved. If I have made that difference, then it was all worthwhile".
This blog was intended to give the average voter some insight to the political process and could have been a very good opportunity for a politician to directly relate to the public, however a lot of the posts have zero feedback. I do definitely believe that the action on the site would have improved if her political demographic wasn't in Eden, not to say that they are not on the Internet but I do think that they are late adopters and probably were not looking for a political influence or information on the Internet.
I do believe that the Internet in many realms greatly affects the political process and aids in democracy. Everyone has a voice and the ability to create a potentially damaging website like the recent newsworthy Hillary video on Flickr, a constructive blog like Abt's, a debate blog or anything else that can touch on a political campaign or issues. I think that it is detrimental to advance with the new forms of reaching the public, especially now when the Internet is such a vital aspect of many people's lives, weather it be information based, professional, or for social purposes.
"Instead of reporting on politics, the media are active participants in the political process through their role in publicity. Increasingly, the media has become central to political life. Politicians who do not constantly stay abreast of the media's requirements and actively plan their publicity tend to fall quickly out of favour. Those who are not good 'media performers' suffer the same fate"(Thornton 8).
This quote reflects how this can be handled, especially looking at the upcoming presidential election and all the buzz surrounding it. Hillary, instead of crumbling from the unneeded press attention for the numerous parodies and slanderous websites, rather took it in stride and on the Today Show turned the whole PR mess into a positive. Hillary can handle the media and I believe that her early attempts to activate her campaign on the Internet has given her an edge with the public and especially younger voters. It is important to handle these scrutinizing situations well and I think that she does. In today's media where anyone can create a website or an attention grabbing video it can become viral and can potentially sway public opinion.
"An important distinction between public opinion as a critical authority balancing political and social power, and public opinion as something than publicity can manipulate to support people, institutions, products or programs" (Habermas, 1989:236); (Thornton 11).
I think this point is now more critical than ever. True the public opinion always has had great influence but as said before things have changed and instead of only being able to reach the American public by means of printed circulars used in the early elections of the US, a thought or idea can instantly be put into a public forum and could easily gain power and others support or resistance relatively easily. This approach applies to all forms of politics not just on a national level, but on a local level too; as you can see by Abt's blog.
In short I think that blogs are affecting local governments in a great way, opening up doors and means of effective communication between politicians and the public. These ways of communicating create a relatively small forum to discuss issues that those in that group care about most. In the same note anyone who has an issue about the government or a road that needs repair can start to get the backing and reach those who have the same interest with little effort.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Communities
I have a bad habit of limiting my Internet experience and am an extremely slow adopter to the online communities for a social outlet; I only use them when required for communication or for a class. A community that is completely mediated by the Internet is my online course for one of my comm. classes. I am actually taking two courses right now that are completely reliant on the Internet as a means of all interaction. If you wish to obviously speak to a person face to face it can be arranged.
Within the group we have several discussion boards and the option to email the professor. The only disadvantage, in my opinion is that there is no real interaction between students, not even in the discussion boards. We tend to post, leave it be and just add new threads, not elaborate on the existing.
The experiences that I have had online are limited as far as making actual bonds or connections with people. I do have a very limited association to my other class mates, but it usually focuses strictly on academic issues at hand. I do have to say in comparison to other more casual Internet communities common bonds and relationships are formed. In these less formal sites people are more likely to seek out this pseudo friendship in Internet communities.
"While some participants believe that people should only indicate meaningful relationships, it is primarily non-participants who perpetuate the expectation that Friending is the same as listing one’s closest buddies"(Boyd). Boyd's statement about 'friending' is more supportive of the notion than I am, I wouldn't even call them just a list of buddies but rather, for some, a list of anonymous people that you might only talk to a few on a regular basis. Boyd furhter explaines why all of these so called friends come from. "Saying no to someone can be tricky so some prefer to accept Friendship with someone they barely know rather than going through the socially awkward process of rejecting them"(Boyd). I think this is more commonplace on internet communites than anything, at least in the myspace realm.
This opinion I have of Internet communities is only due to my experience of people not responding or the painstaking anticipation of those 'oh so meaningful responses'; I would rather just call the person on the phone. I guess you could say I lack patients. You would assume that instant messaging would be a solution for a person like me, and it does help...but I do not live on the computer and neither does everyone else. Unless you set up a meeting time it can be hard to catch people.
I do wish that my online courses were a bit more relationship oriented, I think I would ask more questions and feel more confident about my work. There is almost no collaboration or even communication among peers- I think it could be much more interactive if everyone or the professor took the initiative to create the proper medium for our communication to take place.
Within the group we have several discussion boards and the option to email the professor. The only disadvantage, in my opinion is that there is no real interaction between students, not even in the discussion boards. We tend to post, leave it be and just add new threads, not elaborate on the existing.
The experiences that I have had online are limited as far as making actual bonds or connections with people. I do have a very limited association to my other class mates, but it usually focuses strictly on academic issues at hand. I do have to say in comparison to other more casual Internet communities common bonds and relationships are formed. In these less formal sites people are more likely to seek out this pseudo friendship in Internet communities.
"While some participants believe that people should only indicate meaningful relationships, it is primarily non-participants who perpetuate the expectation that Friending is the same as listing one’s closest buddies"(Boyd). Boyd's statement about 'friending' is more supportive of the notion than I am, I wouldn't even call them just a list of buddies but rather, for some, a list of anonymous people that you might only talk to a few on a regular basis. Boyd furhter explaines why all of these so called friends come from. "Saying no to someone can be tricky so some prefer to accept Friendship with someone they barely know rather than going through the socially awkward process of rejecting them"(Boyd). I think this is more commonplace on internet communites than anything, at least in the myspace realm.
This opinion I have of Internet communities is only due to my experience of people not responding or the painstaking anticipation of those 'oh so meaningful responses'; I would rather just call the person on the phone. I guess you could say I lack patients. You would assume that instant messaging would be a solution for a person like me, and it does help...but I do not live on the computer and neither does everyone else. Unless you set up a meeting time it can be hard to catch people.
I do wish that my online courses were a bit more relationship oriented, I think I would ask more questions and feel more confident about my work. There is almost no collaboration or even communication among peers- I think it could be much more interactive if everyone or the professor took the initiative to create the proper medium for our communication to take place.
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Web App (Optional)
I'm a late poster with this one,but I recently discovered the beauty of Flickr & thought I would elaborate. The URL is www.flickr.com
I stumbled on the site for my own use this past week, although I have seen video clips an other applications on it before in class and from friends. Flickr is basically a way to share photos and clips for anyone to use and it is free. It is basically set up like a basic photo editor program with a small, easily readable menu. On Flickr you are able to share and organize photos for easy viewing and enjoyment for everyone. An added note anyone can add a tag or respond to a photo, much like you are sharing with someone in person.
The site is organized by running a search for a label or keyword that is linked to a photo or a group and the ability to upload photos from many applications allows a greater number of photos to be shared in the digital world. After all who doesn't have 700 photos on their hard drive and memory cards that we never look at. The website basically serves as a pseudo photo album.
The websites design is clean and minimalistic. Few but bright colors are used to reflect the style of today and those who use it, from what I imagine mostly a younger group under 30 at this juncture, but is a great tool for anyone at any age. Keeping it simple also reflects on the ease of using the site, it is very user-friendly and takes little effort to begin your own collections of photos to share with the world.
Socially the power here can effect a lot of average people. If you have access to the Internet you can use this very easy site. People can share information and save a lot of money to get their photos to their friends and family. There could also be some business applications too, depending on how their used (I am sure there may be more privacy issues there). This website can potentially, in the Hallmark sense bring them closer together through photo sharing. All in all this is more of a major convenience than way to change society. It just changes the way we photo share.
I love the idea of Flickr and I found it to be useful while looking for wedding ideas. And frankly i am more than ready to share my wedding photos too, how wonderful is it to be able to share all of your photos, not just the really good ones or the ones you have extra prints for and don't mind passing around the family. Now everyone has an opportunity to see them all and say what they want too. I have to say that is going to come in handy when my fiance's cousin wants to see the pictures in Thailand!
I stumbled on the site for my own use this past week, although I have seen video clips an other applications on it before in class and from friends. Flickr is basically a way to share photos and clips for anyone to use and it is free. It is basically set up like a basic photo editor program with a small, easily readable menu. On Flickr you are able to share and organize photos for easy viewing and enjoyment for everyone. An added note anyone can add a tag or respond to a photo, much like you are sharing with someone in person.
The site is organized by running a search for a label or keyword that is linked to a photo or a group and the ability to upload photos from many applications allows a greater number of photos to be shared in the digital world. After all who doesn't have 700 photos on their hard drive and memory cards that we never look at. The website basically serves as a pseudo photo album.
The websites design is clean and minimalistic. Few but bright colors are used to reflect the style of today and those who use it, from what I imagine mostly a younger group under 30 at this juncture, but is a great tool for anyone at any age. Keeping it simple also reflects on the ease of using the site, it is very user-friendly and takes little effort to begin your own collections of photos to share with the world.
Socially the power here can effect a lot of average people. If you have access to the Internet you can use this very easy site. People can share information and save a lot of money to get their photos to their friends and family. There could also be some business applications too, depending on how their used (I am sure there may be more privacy issues there). This website can potentially, in the Hallmark sense bring them closer together through photo sharing. All in all this is more of a major convenience than way to change society. It just changes the way we photo share.
I love the idea of Flickr and I found it to be useful while looking for wedding ideas. And frankly i am more than ready to share my wedding photos too, how wonderful is it to be able to share all of your photos, not just the really good ones or the ones you have extra prints for and don't mind passing around the family. Now everyone has an opportunity to see them all and say what they want too. I have to say that is going to come in handy when my fiance's cousin wants to see the pictures in Thailand!
Friday, February 23, 2007
What's My Name?
I unlike many many others, even in this class, I do not depend on the Internet as means of a social network or community. I try to keep it old school and restrict my time to communication to strictly emails and this lovely blog. I represent myself as Jen and was pretty careful about what type of information I divulge. For instance, under my limited profile, which is limited for a reason, the only snippet of information you can get is that I live in Boston. I chose that because I wanted to give everyone an idea of who I am but not spill my life onto the Internet.
Once upon a time, when AOL first became popular I had many pseudonyms that I used & often misrepresented myself as an older teen and was dumb enough to post pictures and give information that was too close too home. Now knowing what I know about the dangerous territory of Internet usage, predators, identity theft, etc. I would have never put that information on the Internet. What really scares me is where did it go and who in fact received it.
According to Identity and the Virtual Community, many people use the Internet for dual purposes based on their intentions. There are those who want to build a legitimate reputation and gain credibility; then there are those who want to completely misrepresent themselves. I suppose the determining factor of how you represent yourself on the Internet greatly depends on your motivations themselves.
Falsifying your identity can be a cause for concern, regardless of motivation or intent. Some who are interpreting the information seek a reputable source. In order to trust the source at all it is important to identify who you are - your identity creates a link between validity (Donath 1).
The reassuring thing is, well at least to me anyways, is that I am not concerned with an Internet based reputation at all. I may have created a very modest rep. on this website, whatever that may be, but I do not maintain a my space account or talk in chat's IMs or any other means of communication on the Internet. I think that it is creepy if people can find out information or even build a basis to make an assumption about you. I would rather keep my thoughts and feelings, triumphs, failures and opinions limited to my friends, family, co workers and people I identify with. I am sure there are millions out there who can identify with me too, but why the hell do I care? I don't know them.
And that leads my to stealing my identity- there is non for the average user to steal! I love that, but it also scares me to death that my really private information like banking information is floating around in cyber space. I try to be careful and watch my software to make sure I'm protected, but that is the only type of identity theft I think I am vulnerable to. Wow, I probably sound really naive right now! But it's true I watch my actions and what I put online more than any spy ware does, I can assure you that.
Once upon a time, when AOL first became popular I had many pseudonyms that I used & often misrepresented myself as an older teen and was dumb enough to post pictures and give information that was too close too home. Now knowing what I know about the dangerous territory of Internet usage, predators, identity theft, etc. I would have never put that information on the Internet. What really scares me is where did it go and who in fact received it.
According to Identity and the Virtual Community, many people use the Internet for dual purposes based on their intentions. There are those who want to build a legitimate reputation and gain credibility; then there are those who want to completely misrepresent themselves. I suppose the determining factor of how you represent yourself on the Internet greatly depends on your motivations themselves.
Falsifying your identity can be a cause for concern, regardless of motivation or intent. Some who are interpreting the information seek a reputable source. In order to trust the source at all it is important to identify who you are - your identity creates a link between validity (Donath 1).
The reassuring thing is, well at least to me anyways, is that I am not concerned with an Internet based reputation at all. I may have created a very modest rep. on this website, whatever that may be, but I do not maintain a my space account or talk in chat's IMs or any other means of communication on the Internet. I think that it is creepy if people can find out information or even build a basis to make an assumption about you. I would rather keep my thoughts and feelings, triumphs, failures and opinions limited to my friends, family, co workers and people I identify with. I am sure there are millions out there who can identify with me too, but why the hell do I care? I don't know them.
And that leads my to stealing my identity- there is non for the average user to steal! I love that, but it also scares me to death that my really private information like banking information is floating around in cyber space. I try to be careful and watch my software to make sure I'm protected, but that is the only type of identity theft I think I am vulnerable to. Wow, I probably sound really naive right now! But it's true I watch my actions and what I put online more than any spy ware does, I can assure you that.
Friday, February 16, 2007
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Internet Privacy week #4
Privacy- (Internet) the ability to control and limit the amount of personal information that is published or obtained via the Internet & that ability to limit the access to that information at your discretion.
Not only are there major problems with overall computer security, but the Internet provides never ending and constantly changing technology to allow hackers, spy ware, etc. to view everything that you do. I believe that the biggest issue of Internet security is in fact the endless options and changing environment that the Internet provides. On one hand it is a world of information and human interaction, but it also can open the flood gates to personal information no matter how up to date your software is. In the tech. world it is nearly impossible to always be up to date, as soon as you have it there is something better available & the software that you have already has a glitch that someone out there in cyberspace has bypassed.
Personally my privacy online is important to me & to be honest, I am not even comfortable posting this fabulous blog. It isn't that I don't want to share my ideas; I don't even like the fact that people can gather little tid-bits of information about my life (name, town, school I go to etc.) I also have problems with doing any sort of banking or bill pay online. I feel as though it is the most convenient, but really anyone could be watching my every move or every password I type. To me, that is terrifying.
I, being the "shut in" that I am, do not have a personal story where my information was stolen, but the biggest breach that did effect a friend was when TJmax's information from a credit card data base was stolen just after Christmas. My friend, who was obviously concerned, did what everyone would to and changed her credit numbers and account information, however who knows what other personal information was also leaked. What if it was her social security number? Well maybe it was. She won't be able to tell if there are more issues with the stolen information probably until it is too late. Unfortunately the only thing that you can do is change your information and hope for the best.
Not only are there major problems with overall computer security, but the Internet provides never ending and constantly changing technology to allow hackers, spy ware, etc. to view everything that you do. I believe that the biggest issue of Internet security is in fact the endless options and changing environment that the Internet provides. On one hand it is a world of information and human interaction, but it also can open the flood gates to personal information no matter how up to date your software is. In the tech. world it is nearly impossible to always be up to date, as soon as you have it there is something better available & the software that you have already has a glitch that someone out there in cyberspace has bypassed.
Personally my privacy online is important to me & to be honest, I am not even comfortable posting this fabulous blog. It isn't that I don't want to share my ideas; I don't even like the fact that people can gather little tid-bits of information about my life (name, town, school I go to etc.) I also have problems with doing any sort of banking or bill pay online. I feel as though it is the most convenient, but really anyone could be watching my every move or every password I type. To me, that is terrifying.
I, being the "shut in" that I am, do not have a personal story where my information was stolen, but the biggest breach that did effect a friend was when TJmax's information from a credit card data base was stolen just after Christmas. My friend, who was obviously concerned, did what everyone would to and changed her credit numbers and account information, however who knows what other personal information was also leaked. What if it was her social security number? Well maybe it was. She won't be able to tell if there are more issues with the stolen information probably until it is too late. Unfortunately the only thing that you can do is change your information and hope for the best.
Monday, February 5, 2007
My re-first posting
Turning over a new leaf.
Well not really, I have been bogged down and I'm back. I'm sure it isn't a big deal to anyone but me. I have been out of the loop with a lot of things going on in my life.
I live in ski country and needless to say the weather is pleasant and sunny-Ha! Whatever I like the snow. If anyone watched the news and they refer to the 219, that is where I live. It is crazy out here. On Sunday there were eleven cars in the ditch or abandoned on one road.
I think the weather is clearing though, it hasn't snowed this evening at all.
Well onto another topic, I have had trouble blogging and I hope at least a few others have had trouble too! It makes me feel better about my technological deficiencies.
I have two unsuccessful blogs, I couldn't re-enter after I had signed off.
If you want to check out my sweet other blank sites I will post the links after I finally attempt it instead of reading about it. And eventually I hope to eliminate those empty sites once I figure out how to do that! I have a lot to do.
Well I will keep everyone up to date as I begin to develop my blogging skills!
Well not really, I have been bogged down and I'm back. I'm sure it isn't a big deal to anyone but me. I have been out of the loop with a lot of things going on in my life.
I live in ski country and needless to say the weather is pleasant and sunny-Ha! Whatever I like the snow. If anyone watched the news and they refer to the 219, that is where I live. It is crazy out here. On Sunday there were eleven cars in the ditch or abandoned on one road.
I think the weather is clearing though, it hasn't snowed this evening at all.
Well onto another topic, I have had trouble blogging and I hope at least a few others have had trouble too! It makes me feel better about my technological deficiencies.
I have two unsuccessful blogs, I couldn't re-enter after I had signed off.
If you want to check out my sweet other blank sites I will post the links after I finally attempt it instead of reading about it. And eventually I hope to eliminate those empty sites once I figure out how to do that! I have a lot to do.
Well I will keep everyone up to date as I begin to develop my blogging skills!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)