RE: [videoblogging] Advertising and personal vlogs : Was, " Blip doesn't love me anymore?"

[Charles Hope]

Yes, by all means, do stop by!

 

Eric Mortensen wrote a response to the original thread, but his answer
seems to be awaiting moderation?

 

 

 

 

From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:videoblogg...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of hpbatman7
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 16:13 PM
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Advertising and personal vlogs : Was, " Blip
doesn't love me anymore?"

 

  

> I'm sure we're all aware that they've been switching their focus >away

> from people like us and from YouTube clip content, to position 
> themselves more strongly as The Web TV Show People. It's obvious >that

> videoblogging isn't going to make anybody any money by itself, but >on

> the other hand there are a lot of people out there who use Blip 
> because it's a fantastic video sharing site, with a great set of 
> features - better than YouTube. Seems to me that things like your 
> videos are just sensible free social marketing for them - showing >off

> why Blip is great to people who usually just see YouTube embeds.

It's funny you should bring this up, as I have been wondering for a
while now, what the future of the type of video blogging I do is. When I
say "I", I mean people who shoot mainly personal video's and don't have
the ad's set to on.

All these video hosting sites need to find a way to make money, charging
for HD content is one (Google doesn't count as they have more money than
the whole world and YT probably doesn't cost them anything, contray to
some reports), limiting what you can upload and adding advertisments.
Now at one time adding advertisments to any personal vlog would cause a
massive flame war here with anyone who suggested that advertisments were
not all bad, that person would forever be branded a heritic and cast
out..Butif Blip doesn't make any money, then...bye, bye
video's...

So...what to do? Allow advererts? Or just hope that blip never goes
away? Self host? (which may or may not be an issue) I mean long gone are
the days when you could see a Josh Leo or Paul or a Steve or just a
personal vlogger on Blip's homepage or showcase pages..It is about being
a desitantion for "shows" on the web Which is fine, I mean they need to
make money like anyone else and they are still the most creater friendly
group I know of...this is not a bash of blip but more of a question of
"where do we go from here?" thing...

It's a very real possiblity that the only "free" game in town someday
will be YT

This email is a little all over the place but hopefully the main point
is coming across...will the little guy eventually get shut out? Will it
just be a small little market with a handfull of us just making personal
vid's because we can?

I'm going to be in NY tomorrow and Friday, maybe I should just drop by
blip and ask them? lol

Heath 
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
 , Rupert Howe 
wrote:
>
> Seems to me that you're being misunderstood. The weird thing is that 
> it seems almost deliberate. It reads like their stock position is 
> that if anybody asks whether something they're doing breaches the ToS,

> they should err on the side of caution in their response and just say 
> No. My personal reading of what you're doing is that it's fine under 
> their ToS, but it's a bit depressing to see this kind of response from

> them, that doesn't seem to be trying to help you out or understand 
> what it is that you're trying to do. Especially when they used to 
> handle all support requests more quickly and positively than anyone 
> else.
> 
> I'm sure we're all aware that they've been switching their focus away 
> from people like us and from YouTube clip content, to position 
> themselves more strongly as The Web TV Show People. It's obvious that 
> videoblogging isn't going to make anybody any money by itself, but on 
> the other hand there are a lot of people out there who use Blip 
> because it's a fantastic video sharing site, with a great set of 
> features - better than YouTube. Seems to me that things like your 
> videos are just sensible free social marketing for them - showing off 
> why Blip is great to people who usually just see YouTube embeds.
> 
> But perhaps the weight of HD content being uploaded to their servers, 
> which they have to transcode and stream out, is costing them too much 
> to be worth it. And I guess videoblogs and "marketing and 
> commercial" videos often opt out of advertising, therefore don't make 
> Blip any money. I know Vimeo banned videogame screencasts because 
> they were costing too much in terms of processing time and bandwidth. 
> Perhaps that's why Blip say "We are not a good solution for 
> screencasts" - even though they're actually a great solution for your 
> kind of screencasts.
> 
> So. Add some post-roll adverts onto your videos, make them some 
> money, and see how keen they are to nuke your account after that ;)
> 
> Rupert
> 
> 
> 
>

RE: [videoblogging] Re: manage Show Player

[Charles Hope]

Sara, I think I've figured out why you didn't get a helpful response
from your original support e-mail.  Emily responded?  We don't have any
Emily working with us!  Are you absolutely certain that you sent the
e-mail to supp...@blip.tv? Not .com or .fm? It is good to use the form
at , because not only is it certain to avoid the
unhelpful Emily, but it also gives us information about your set up
which can help us diagnose problems.

We do test on Internet Explorer versions 6 & 7.  If something is screwy,
we'd be very interested in the details so we can try to reproduce it.

Thanks again, Rupert, for your help!

RE: [videoblogging] manage Show Player

[Charles Hope]

Thanks, Rupert.  That's exactly the right answer.

Sara, I'm sorry that nobody got back to you from blip.tv support.  I
checked our e-mail system and don't see any correspondence from you at
all, so it must have gotten lost along the way.  Did you e-mail
supp...@blip.tv?

RE: [videoblogging] BlipTV videos not playing (anyone else see this?)

[Charles Hope]

You're not crazy.  Others have noticed the issue, we blogged about it at
 and we are still in the process of sleuthing, but according to
our network engineer, the problem has cleared up in the past hour.
Please let us know at [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you find any more problems.

Thanks,
Charles

RE: [videoblogging] thank you blip.tv -

[Charles Hope]

You're very welcome, Liza!

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Preventing embedded videos from playing automatically on Myspace message boards

[Charles HOPE]

We have just now put out a fix for this bug, so the problems should be clearing 
up at once.  Sorry for the inconveniences!




Heath wrote:
> 
> 
> My stuff on Myspace from blip auto plays as well. It's the player
> that you can embed into your site. It's started a while ago, I just
> never did anything about it. But I know it's also happening to me.
> 
> Heath
> http://batmangeek.com 
> http://heathparks.com 
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> , "Jan McLaughlin"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >
>  > In a situation like that, I would say calling Mr. Hudack on his cell
>  > might be in order. That is, if it's really a Blip issue - but based
>  > upon what you've described, I don't think it is.
>  >
>  > What you describe sounds very strange.
>  >
>  > Know there's an autoplay option in Blip's show player configuration
>  > process but can't imagine that even changing that option could cause
>  > autoplay across extant Blip embed code and/or players everywhere.
>  >
>  > When you upload to MySpace, those videos aren't hosted @ Blip, but
> at
>  > MySpace, so deleting the Blip files wouldn't affect how your MySpace
>  > vids autoplayed (or not).
>  >
>  > MySpace deleted all the videos I'd embedded in it and I can't for
> the
>  > life of me figure out how to re-do it.
>  >
>  > My best guess is that the problem is with MySpace, not Blip.
>  >
>  > Blip's cross-post to MySpace has been broken for a while - since
>  > MySpace altered something-or-other.
>  >
>  > MySpace deleted the half dozen or so videos that were on my profile.
>  > Ack. Not very video friendly.
>  >
>  > Jan
>  >
>  > On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 4:37 PM, duckpondpotter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>  > >
>  > > I recently had an incident where many of the videos I had
> embedded on
>  > > Myspace message boards from Blip Tv had started playing
> automatically.
>  > > This had the extremely undesirable effect of fouling the audio
> on the
>  > > homepage. We are making a documentary of the music scene in and
> around
>  > > our pottery shop, and the video posts, which were mainly musical
>  > > performances, were placed on the sites of musicians who were
> friends
>  > > with the people in the videos. When our videos started playing
>  > > automatically, we suddenly were flooded with angry complaints from
>  > > musicians that our videos were messing up their pages.
> AHH!!! We
>  > > had inadvertently become Spamers!!! I immediately deleted my
> videos
>  > > from Blip and e-mailed their staff for a solution to this. I
> also put
>  > > out a bulletin in Myspace explaining and apologizing for the
> problem.
>  > > Embedding video can be a great way to build an audience, but this
>  > > problem is suddenly making us more enemies than fans. I'm hoping
>  > > there might be somebody in the videoblogging community who can
> toss me
>  > > a lifeline here.
>  > >
>  > > Nick Friedman
>  > > The Duckpond Pottery
>  > > Brevard, North Carolina
>  > > www.myspace.com/duckpondatdusk
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > 
>  > >
>  > > Yahoo! Groups Links
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > --
>  > Jan McLaughlin
>  > Production Sound Mixer
>  > air = 862-571-5334
>  > aim = janofsound
>  > skype = janmclaughlin
>  >
> 
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercamp Who is going?

[Charles HOPE]

Don't take it personally.  You're on there with one million other terrorists, 
such as Nelson Mandela, Ted Kennedy, and every man named "John Williams".




ractalfece wrote:
> 
> 
> Even if gas was affordable, I'm terrified of cars. Two years ago I
> was in a bad mashup at hiway speeds. Nobody was hurt. But it left me
> having very little stomach for driving or being driven around.
> Especially with someone like you Irina who drives like a maniac. I am
> simply too terrified.
> 
> Another thing that blows: I found out I'm on the terrorist watch
> list. I was at the La Guardia airport in January and being my normal
> organized self, I showed up at the check-in desk with only forty
> minutes to spare. And the old man said, "Oh my goodness. I don't
> think you're going to make it." And he typed some things in his
> computer and then he chuckled, "And of course you're on the list." He
> paused again. "Okay you're on the flight. You made it by thirty
> seconds. But your bags probably aren't going to make it."
> 
> So this has been a mystery I've been trying to figure out. Why am I
> on the list?
> 
> Was it my library record?
> 
> Was it this video I filmed at a party in portland:
> 
>   
> >
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/55g73u 
> 
> Or is it a mistake? I watched a video about a "John Higgins" who was
> put on the list. Maybe he got put on the list because his name is
> similar to mine: "John Holden".
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOQ4lEzChQI 
> 
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> , Irina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >
>  > ok so john holden, we cant even drive any more
>  > do you have a prius, i think in all the prii, we can drive for $27
>  >
>  > On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 12:10 AM, ruperthowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  > wrote:
>  >
>  > > This is what I'm talking about. With ideas like this, we could
> change
>  > > the world.
>  > >
>  > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> 
> ,
>  > > "ractalfece"  wrote:
>  > > >
>  > > > If I make it to vloggercamp. And I'm really gonna try. If I make it
>  > > > I'll sit around and bullshit about kicking some mothervloggin
> ass with
>  > > > whoever will listen. Here's an idea that popped into my head and I
>  > > > don't know what to do with it. So I'm going to pretend I'm looking
>  > > > into a camp fire with a beer in my hand. Because that's really where
>  > > > ideas like this should go. Into a fire.
>  > > >
>  > > > Okay, you know the youtube system, how suggested videos pop up
> in the
>  > > > player after you watch one? And also there's the related video list
>  > > > over on the sidebar. In the early days it was based on tags. And you
>  > > > could get massive amounts of views by changing your tags to the tags
>  > > > of a popular video. But they've changed the algorithm. I think
>  > > > they're now using some sort of social scoring system sort of like
>  > > > google page rank. And the evidence I'm going on here is the strange
>  > > > experiences I've had with my videos. Someone leaves an intriguing
>  > > > comment and I want to know more about this person. I go to the
>  > > > commenter's youtube profile, I watch one of the commenter's
> videos and
>  > > > one of my own videos pops up in the player! I've also noticed odd
>  > > > behaviour with the videos I've favorited- they have a tendency
> to show
>  > > > up on the related sidebar list together.
>  > > >
>  > > > Okay, so do you realize what we as a vlogging community could do? We
>  > > > could create an insular social circle so that the majority of the
>  > > > videos that pop up are from our circle. Nay, our cult! We could all
>  > > > start inserting a single frame of satanic imagery. Think how this
>  > > > will look to the average youtuber. He or she keeps clicking on the
>  > > > videos that youtube suggests and everything youtube serves up
> has the
>  > > > same dark image inexplicably inserted into it. No better yet: a
>  > > > whispered phrase. Think about it.
>  > > >
>  > > > I'm gonna go take a leak over in those bushes now.
>  > > >
>  > > > WE COULD DRAMATICALLY INCREASE THE WHIRLY SPEED OF THE APOCALYPSE!
>  > > >
>  > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> 
> ,
>  > > "ruperthowe"  wrote:
>  > > > >
>  > > > > if i tell my wife that i'm burning $1000 that i can't really
> afford to
>  > > > > spend 5 days away (including my daughter's birthday) when she's 8
>  > > > > months pregnant and when my sister, her boyfriend and her two
> kids are
>  > > > > visiting from England and staying in our house just for
> FUN, then
>  > > > > i'll get fired. marit

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercamp Who is going?

[Charles HOPE]

I would like to go.  What happens if I register today and 24 other people don't 
do likewise?



Bill Streeter wrote:
> 
> 
> We have 5 people who have registered.
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> , Irina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >
>  > SO
>  > whats the count RIGHT NOW bill

Re: [videoblogging] Popcorn popping, the truth

[Charles HOPE]

Jay dedman wrote:
>
> We're not alone in our disappointment, and now YouTube is filling up
> with videos of groups of friends attempting to replicate the trick and
> subsequently failing to excite a scattering of corn. In terms of
> excitement, it's the exact opposite of the experimental craze that hit
> computer screens last summer when it was discovered that adding a
> Mentos sweet to a bottle of Diet Coke would create giant fountains of
> roaring foam.


I tried that, and it failed!

Re: [videoblogging] Twitter DOWN???

[Charles HOPE]

Twitter goes down several times a week. Get used to it.

Re: [videoblogging] where is blip tv?

[Charles HOPE]

Hello Jeff,

Did you get the e-mail I sent you 30 minutes ago?  If you use AOL Instant 
Messenger, try to reach me at 'zumbenji'.



jeff wrote:
> Hi
> I have been a basic member of blip tv for a few weeks, i upgraded to
> pro account today and thus far they have taken my money and i have
> received none of the benefits of the pro account. I have sent many
> emails and web form requests going back 3 days for help and have not
> received any replies! I have checked my spam box. I have a video that
> has been stuck in conversion for over 7 hours!
> Does anyone know what has  happened to the people at blip?
> Thanks
> Jeff
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality

[Charles HOPE]

Jay dedman wrote:
> 
> ahnow i know why we arent seeing eye to eye.
> you are assuming that all business is local where I get to meet the person
> who makes my goods and services.
> The good businessman then makes sure he is a good community citizen to
> maintain his profits.

That's not quite what I had in mind.  It's the ability of the customer to take 
their business elsewhere which is the ultimate check on corporate behavior. 
Personal relationships aren't necessary, but consumer alternatives are key, 
which is why I would like to see multiple utility networks. The stodgy 
resistance to the thought of giving Comcast true competition is why this thread 
was started.

> A long-term cause of the catastrophe was the location of the plant;
> authorities had tried and failed to persuade Carbide to build the plant away
> from densely-populated areas. Carbide explained their refusal on the expense
> that such a move would
> incur.[4]

That was a terrible tragedy. In a free-market system, where human rights were 
taken seriously, perhaps the extra revenue Carbide earned from their sweet 
location would have to be shared with the people nearby at risk.  I find it 
interesting that the authorities were so helpless to stop Carbide -- more 
likely they were paid off.  So that's where the extra revenue ended up going!

> All the libertarian ideals are great, but practical reality has produced the
> likes of Ron Paulwho is stridently anti-abortion.
 > there's goes my rights!

He is personally against abortion because of his experiences as an 
obstetrician, and yet his Constitutional ideals prevent him from advocating a 
federal ban on abortion.  There are your rights!

Ron Watson wrote:

 > Exxon Mobil when viewed as an economy is larger and far more
 > influential than the country of Austria.
 >
 > Think about that for a moment...
 >
 > Exxon Mobil is a larger economy than many Western European nations.

Given that I see market forces as more directly democratic and responsive than 
any current political system, I think this is a wonderfully progressive 
development.

 > I also think that the problem stems from too much freedom for
 > corporations. Corporations are property, not people, and they should
 > not have rights of citizens.

I don't disagree, and I think the application of the 14th amendment to the 
corporation was absurd (but yet, not as absurd as Wicker v Filburn). If 
corporations have too much power under the law, it was given them by a 
government with too much power to dispense.

 > I don't think we'll ever resolve this discussion, but I want you to
 > know that I empathize with your position in this situation.

I'm not sure exactly what shoes you think I'm wearing.  I don't defend free 
markets out of narrow self-interest as an entrepreneur; I was attracted to 
business because I discovered the beauty of free markets.

Re: [videoblogging] Blip is creating its own RSS feed for shows?

[Charles HOPE]

Hello Rox,

We are discussing this in the office and Angus is about to chime in here, but I 
wanted to note that indeed we have been providing RSS feeds for years, since 
our users have demanded we do so.

Just to be clear, is the issue that you had put in your Feedburner URL into the 
iTunes field of , and were expecting that to be 
delivered on your episode page?


Roxanne Darling wrote:
> Hi Videobloggers,
> I discovered tonight that Blip has created a separate RSS feed that it is
> using for our RSS and iTunes links on the detail page.  I don't know how
> long this has been in place but I very upset and disappointed.  Would some
> of the rest of you please check your links and see if this has happened to
> you?  Our original RSS and iTunes links are in use on the main Beach Walks
> show page for 3 out of 4 of the links; the hijacked RSS links are on the
> Pando link on the main show page and on all links on the detail pages.  We
> very specifically manage our RSS through Feedburner because it allows us to
> point our feed where ever we are hosting our files and our iTunes show page
> is very important for us for gathering reviews, etc.  To have a whole new
> feed that blip is pointing people to is in direct contradiction to our
> goals.  I understand more and more sites are doing this; I am not happy
> about it and I am just so surprised.
> 
> I prefer to not ignite the flame wars, but I would like to see what the rest
> of you are experiencing and think about this. Blip is renowned for their
> communication skills, so I expect them to be giving us some explanations
> ASAP.
> 
> Aloha,
> 
> Rox
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality

[Charles HOPE]

Jay dedman wrote:

> All anyone wants is a set of standards and guideliness that we can all
> depend on.
> right now, its all arbitrary..and dependent on the whims of the
> broadband providers.
> They COULD behave reasonably as you suggest.
> They COULD behave in their own self-interest as the presiding fear is.


If the companies are giving us a good deal out of the kindness of their hearts, 
I don't want any of it!  I don't have a personal relationship with these 
faceless bureaucracies and any such charity can be withdrawn at any time. I 
insist that they give me any deal motivated by corporate greed and selfishness. 
  This way I can be sure that it is in their interest to continue. And I want 
the satisfaction of knowing that, if they deviate, they're hurting themselves 
as well as me, and opening themselves up to attack from a competitor.

Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality

[Charles HOPE]

Jay dedman wrote:
>>  And who gets to decide if something is a "benefit to society" or not?
> 
> we the people, and the representatives we elect.

Meanwhile, in terms of education, medicine, and pretty much everything else, 
"public run" is a synonym for crappy and busted.

> 
> I hear you charles.
> Current governments certainly dont seem to work well.
> The corrupting influences are enormous.
> But I fear just tearing it all down, hoping people act for the good of
> the whole, with no alternative structuremight be worse.

The magic of market forces has nothing at all to do with hoping people act for 
the good of the whole.  That is a strawman argument, for over 200 years ago it 
was explained "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or 
the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own 
interest. "

So when was the last American government that wasn't corrupt?  Do you look back 
to the days of JFK?  FDR? Lincoln? How many of your good leaders do we get each 
century? How is that working out for you? You know the definition of insanity.

J. Rhett Aultman wrote:
 > I would tend to agree, too.  Just look at the history of rural
 > electrification to see the failure of private industry and market forces
 > to electrify rural areas, a critical step in providing the society we now
 > enjoy.

Is it a "failure" whenever the market cannot provide some good at a price 
within the reach of everybody?  Why isn't it a failure of the technology to be 
cheap enough?  Why isn't it a failure of the rural people to go move where 
modernity is available?

 >
 > A core belief in the right to unregulated commerce is that "if I sell it
 > and someone buys it, it's our right to do", but if the service or
 > production of the good has an effect on third parties, then the
 > libertarian notion of not forcing others is broken and requires attention.

Pollution is a form of trespassing. It is hardly libertarian to ignore such a 
crime.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Net-Neutrality

[Charles HOPE]

Steve Watkins wrote:
> All of the distortions and non-freeness of the market is in fact part of the 
> nature of 
> humans, how else did it come to be this way?

So is crime "human nature".  Should we continue to fight crime?

> Game theory is not an accurate model of human behaviour. Not everyone bahaves 
> by those 
> rules, there is a C called collaboration that counterbalances the C of 
> competition. 

Are you suggesting that Game Theory doesn't explain cooperation?  If you are, I 
suggest you read the book 
. I found it very 
enlightening.

Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality

[Charles HOPE]

Jay dedman wrote:

> Without any market regulation, a rich man (usually always men) can do
> anything they want.

Absolutely not.  When steel and oil were "monopolies", did people pay $500,000 
per ingot or barrel? Companies are always restricted by the marketplace unless 
they have government protection.  Even a monopoly cannot charge infinite prices 
because there are always alternatives at hand.

> a free market does not mean competition.

Then what prevents new entrants from coming in and profiting from the greed of 
the monopoly?

> Tell me where this dream of freedom is being lived where there are no
> need for laws and people live together in common sense.

I'm not suggesting no law at all.  I'm suggesting no laws that violate human 
rights.  If somebody wants to sell their service, and somebody else wants to 
pay for it, prohibition should be out of the question. Basic human dignity, 
which somehow gets lost in the abstract utopian rhetoric.

Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality

[Charles HOPE]

Jay dedman wrote:
>>  > People who cry "free market", just mean they want market regulation
>>  > that benefits them.
>>  > Regulation is about benefiting all citizens.
>>
>>  A free market has no market regulation (by definition).
> 
> absolutely correct.
> I put "free market" in quotes because all the proponents of this term
> never truly lived by their own preachings.
> Good old Uncle Milt is a great example.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_friedman
> usually, its just deregulate...but make sure its just in the right places.

Milt and the Chicago School are OK but they are the weaker branch of the 
free-market advocates.  If you want the real deal, who lack these 
inconsistencies you note, look to Von Mises and the Austrian School.

Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality

[Charles HOPE]

Jay dedman wrote:
>>  I have no idea why you think this is outrageous. If one utility network can
>> be
>>  installed, why not a reasonable number like, say, three or five? There
>> really
>>  is no reason why neighbors can't receive service from different networks.
>> You
>>  might have a good place to keep your ice cream during a blackout.
> 
> so you want to only have 3 or 5?
> why cant there be a 150?
> any citizen should be allowed to build their network.

Indeed they should. But most markets tend to settle down to a small number of 
companies, although never just one.

> I can also choose to not let people from your network talk to people
> on my network.
> fuck you. this is freedom.

You should definitely be free to establish ridiculous company policies which 
will knock your company out of business.

> This is why its outrageous.

What's outrageous? That companies should be able to shoot themselves in the 
foot if they choose?

Here's the situation: Broadband providers are now artificial monopolies, due to 
legislation.  Now we bemoan the problems inherent in the nature of a monopoly, 
and have two solutions before us.  We can remove their monopoly status.  Or we 
can add still more legislative engineering on top, in order to attempt to 
create a monopoly that doesn't stink like a monopoly. Sort of like a fat-free 
oil, or calorie-free sweetener, we want to tamper with nature. (Then we find 
out saccharin makes people gain weight.)

I don't think our economic and legislative skills are up to the task. The fact 
that the current crisis is of OUR OWN DOING indicates our inability to 
successfully tamper with markets.

Make no mistake, economy is like ecology.  It is a naturally occurring 
phenomenon, whose principles were discovered and researched by scientists.  It 
is not a machine designed by a team of engineers.

I find something very suburban in this denial of nature.

Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality

[Charles HOPE]

Jay dedman wrote:

> this is crazy to me.
> this is like saying that everyone can make their own power plants nd
> run lines all over town. (and charge for that power)
> everyone can make their own water companies and dig up the ground for
> pipes. (and charge for their use)
> or everyone can make their own roads. (and charge for their use)

I have no idea why you think this is outrageous.  If one utility network can be 
installed, why not a reasonable number like, say, three or five? There really 
is no reason why neighbors can't receive service from different networks.  You 
might have a good place to keep your ice cream during a blackout.

> Can I make my own army?

Why not?  You wouldn't be the first. 

Re: [videoblogging] Net-Neutrality

[Charles HOPE]

Richard H. Hall wrote:

> About network neutrality and competition. First, of course, if everyone has
> a fair playing field within the network (like a phone call from me to you,
> gets the same priority as a phone call from one AT&T executive to another),
> then competition will be increased, sine it allows innovators and start ups
> with lots of ideas and little money to compete and, in fact, we've seen this
> a lot already afforded by the web. Second, competition was SEVERELY
> curtailed when some court somewhere ruled that cable, and then dsl companies
> do not have to abide by common carriage laws when it comes to the internet.
> So, with phone lines, the companies who built the lines have to share the
> lines with other phone companies (they get a lot of tax breaks for building
> them and they are the default carrier, so it's still a good deal for them).
> Makes sense, of course, since we don't want every phone company building
> lines through public right aways and such. 


It doesn't make very much sense to me. There's plenty more room in the ground 
for wire, more space for newfangled telephone poles carrying broadband, and 
more radio spectrum. Using this seems a lot more fair to me than to have the 
first company pay for all the infrastructure and then forcing them to turn it 
over to a flock of free-riding competitors.  Or for the first company to foist 
the infrastructure bill on the overburdened taxpayer.

Re: [videoblogging] Blip Pro Account

[Charles HOPE]

At  there should be a "retry" button next to the video in 
question.  And you can get faster responses from us if you e-mail us at 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Thanks!


Sheldon Pineo wrote:
> Ok, I bit the bullet and bought a pro account.  Now, how do I
> re-encode a video.  Episode 30 (http://blip.tv/file/660015/) is still
> missing the last 1:21.
> Thanks.
> Shel.
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Comcast officially admits to throttling bandwidth use

[Charles HOPE]

Ron Watson wrote:
> 
> Enron was the largest wind producer in America. BP Bought and  
> throttled down Solarex, the most promising solar company in the  
> nation at one time.
> 
> Amoco and GM purchasing and dismantling light rail to ensure that the  
> automobile became the mandatory mode of transportation in America.


I would love to hear more details about these two cases. I am not familiar with 
them.


> Lobbying, in and of itself, is creation and maintenence of market  
> trends. It is not adapting, it is visionary.


When a bill is introduced into Congress by, for instance, the 
environmentalists, business must react by lobbying against it.  I don't 
consider this visionary. It is reactive, not proactive.

In general, I don't see business acting as strongly as it could in such cases. 
  But they are limited by responsibility to shareholders, to do only the 
minimum necessary to resist encroachments.  It is conceivable that business 
could hide behind many layers and hire thugs to intimidate and kill their 
enemies by the dozen, never getting caught.  Or stage well-publicized and 
intentional distribution shortages to, for example, withhold all cigarettes 
from New York City until cigarette taxes are lowered, smoking bans are dropped, 
or State House lawsuits retracted. Or even publish strongly worded full-page 
ads in the New York Times. Instead, they play meekly within the rules and obey 
when the laws find against them. Networks of corporate governance discourage 
risk and long-term planning.

Re: [videoblogging] Comcast officially admits to throttling bandwidth use

[Charles HOPE]

More fool us for believing that Comcastbucks could be restrained by an entity 
like Govmart, which is completely susceptible to corruption and typically works 
for the highest bidder.

Re: [videoblogging] Blip Encoding

[Charles HOPE]

Pro account users have a button available which retries flash conversion. 
Otherwise you can e-mail us at [EMAIL PROTECTED], for fastest service.  Your 
most 
recent video looks fine to me; both the flash and the QuickTime end with you 
saying "Hope this helps".



Sheldon Pineo wrote:
> Is it possible to ask for Blip to re-encode a FLV video?  My latest
> video is missing the last 1:21.  This problem is only with the FLV
> encoded video.  The MP4 file is fine.
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Comcast officially admits to throttling bandwidth use

[Charles HOPE]

Ron Watson wrote:
> Steve, great post as always..
> 
> I'll give an explanation.
> 
> We're scary. 


Show us evidence (even anecdotal) that Big Business is visionary enough to 
realize this, or plans long-term enough to take steps to shut down.  I think 
you are presuming that Big Business is a rational, energetic actor, and that 
you are mistaken. Big Business does not conspire to change contexts, but adapts.


> These guys built their empire promising us exactly what we have  
> today: "Every man a publisher. Every man a Network."
> 
> It was the bone they threw the public and elected officials to get  
> relaxed regulation, re-regulation in their interests and support for  
> their projects. 


It seems quite naïve to hold an industry to the empty promises made by its 
lobbyists in a system so corrupt. The actual promises delivered concerned 
strings of zeros deposited in legislators' bank accounts.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: National Protests of Scientology by Anonymous this Sunday

[Charles HOPE]

J. Rhett Aultman wrote:

> There are three problems I see with Scientology.  The first one is
> something Steve Fishman refers to as "spiritual informed consent".  The
> Catholic church is, for the most part, transparent.  It's easy to know
> what you'll be getting yourself into if you want to join their program. 
> The curricula for first mass are pretty easy to find, the theology is
> covered through a number of public documents, and the plan for your life
> is something the Catholic church encourages you to know.


Such graded revelation is common in the religions of Classical Antiquity.




> I think it's weird that so many people are up in arms over Scientology, when
> other religions have been practicing equally cult-like behavior for
> centuries.  

The devil you know...

Re: [videoblogging] Wanna Buy Revver? AND Whose got File Backups??

[Charles HOPE]

Hello Rox,

Of course we provide the original files and make them available for download. 
But what kind of backup service did you have in mind?



Roxanne Darling wrote:
> So time to think about backup plans. I for one am ready to pay extra for
> file back up services.  I am not on Revver, but I am on blip, and will
> follow up with Mike if he doesn't chime in on this thread.
> We backup all our original digital media, and have backup in place on the
> servers we manage for the first 350+ episodes.  Since then, we have hosted
> at blip, and I am not aware of backup service there.
> 
> Aloha,
> 
> Rox
> 
> 
> On Feb 6, 2008 12:47 PM, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> 
>>   This seems pertinent to the conversation we were having in the
>> "TrafficGeyser.com ?" thread...
>>
>> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/message/68599
>>
>> --
>> Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
>> http://ChangeLog.ca/
>>
>> Motorsport Videos
>> http://TireBiterZ.com/
>>
>> Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/
>>
>>
>> On Feb 6, 2008 1:55 PM, Tim Street <[EMAIL 
>> PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>> You know... there might be someone who for say tax purposes needs to
>>> spend $500K to get $1 Million in debt.
>>>
>>> I'm just hoping they show up soon. ;)
>>>
>>> Tim Street
>>> Creator/Executive Producer
>>> French Maid TV
>>> Subscribe for FREE @
>>> http://frenchmaidtv.com/itunes
>>> MyBlog
>>> http://1timstreet.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 6, 2008, at 1:51 PM, schlomo rabinowitz wrote:
>>>
 Curious what people on the list think about this:
 

 I'm especially talking to people like Tim Street, who has always
 done well
 with Revver's service-- how do you supplement the income that may
 disappear?
 I know you keep abreast of all the analogous services; but what
 happens to
 your audience when these folks leave?

 Who else around here is a Revver PowerUser?

 --
 Schlomo Rabinowitz
 http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
 http://hatfactory.net
 AIM:schlomochat
>>  
>>
> 
> 
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: It begins...

[Charles HOPE]

Chris wrote:
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Charles HOPE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Why do you put "honor system" in quotes?  I never used that phrase.
>  It wasn't 
>> the honor system or any other sort of kindness that put cheap cell
> phones in 
>> the hands of nearly everybody in the West, rich and poor.  It was pink 
>> unicorns. We are literally surrounded by the gifts bestowed by pink
> unicorns, 
>> and whenever pink unicorns are abolished, people become miserable,
> but if you 
>> nevertheless refuse to believe in them, there's no further proof I
> can produce. 
>>   So I suppose that makes you correct.
> 
> I don't know, it always seems to me there's an undercurrent of
> "industry is honest" and "government is not" in these arguments. But
> you're right, I shouldn't have made the assumption that you were
> suggesting a code of ethics might keep corporations honest sans
> regulation.


Not only did I not say it, but nobody says it.  There are no defenses of free 
markets reliant upon such ludicrous assumptions. The arguments are either based 
on observation (observe that wealth is proportional to economic freedom), or 
morals (only voluntary transactions preserve human dignity).

If I, like you, had no idea how naked self-interest could paradoxically result 
in good quality at affordable prices, my worldview would be equally depressive. 
Left to themselves, I would think that companies would charge infinite prices 
for abysmal goods, and only regulation enables consumers to survive.  How 
complete communism doesn't follow from that is beyond me. Do you really have 
any reasons why the government should not regulate all production and 
distribution? Why wouldn't consumers benefit from this?

Re: [videoblogging] Re: It begins...

[Charles HOPE]

Chris wrote:
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Charles HOPE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Sorry if I'm not willing to place implicit trust in this mystical
> "honor system" you seem to believe in, that will magically rein in
> these entities that have so far shown no compunctions against raping
> the planet, exploiting Third World labor and generally screwing the
> underclass.


Why do you put "honor system" in quotes?  I never used that phrase.  It wasn't 
the honor system or any other sort of kindness that put cheap cell phones in 
the hands of nearly everybody in the West, rich and poor.  It was pink 
unicorns. We are literally surrounded by the gifts bestowed by pink unicorns, 
and whenever pink unicorns are abolished, people become miserable, but if you 
nevertheless refuse to believe in them, there's no further proof I can produce. 
  So I suppose that makes you correct.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: It begins...

[Charles HOPE]

Chris wrote:
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Charles HOPE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hey Eddie!
>>
>> There are probably fewer than five people on this list that would
> find any 
>> value in the old-school ARPANET the government gave us decades ago.
>  Everything 
>> newer than that, and the cheap hardware and software that made vlogging 
>> possible, is a chocolate river brought to us by pink unicorns.
> 
> Who, amazingly, were able to do so under government regulation. Your
> argument is still as empty as air.


I can see how my arguments would appear empty to anybody who can't distinguish 
between "having benefited from" and "in spite of". They can observe plucky 
survival under harsh conditions, and credit the survival upon the treacherous 
conditions instead of the brave survivors!  What's more, I don't believe I can 
disprove such a claim.

Re: [videoblogging] It begins...

[Charles HOPE]

Hey Eddie!

There are probably fewer than five people on this list that would find any 
value in the old-school ARPANET the government gave us decades ago.  Everything 
newer than that, and the cheap hardware and software that made vlogging 
possible, is a chocolate river brought to us by pink unicorns.



Eddie Codel wrote:
> You mean like the Internet?
> 
> Hi Charles!
> 
> On Jan 18, 2008 2:05 PM, Charles HOPE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>> Judging from some of the attitudes here, one might be inclined to think
>> that
>> vlogging was invented by the government and promoted by grants.
>>
>>
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

Re: [videoblogging] It begins...

[Charles HOPE]

Brian Richardson - WhatTheCast? wrote:

> My cell provider gives me the option for a flat rate SMS & email plan, 
> which is one reason I use them over other providers. For every 
> per-megabyte cable provider there will be an alternative "all you can 
> suck" WiMAX or DSL provider.

But surely these low prices must be due to regulation!  Otherwise, the phone 
companies could charge whatever they wanted, and we would be paying $thousands 
a month for phone service, no?

> It's choice thanks to economics, the same economics that make it 
> possible for regular citizens to affordably get into online content 
> production.

Judging from some of the attitudes here, one might be inclined to think that 
vlogging was invented by the government and promoted by grants.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: It begins...

[Charles HOPE]

Steve Watkins wrote:
> Sometimes maybe but other times the regulations are there for very good 
> reasons, such as 
> public health. Would removing regulation of advertising benefit the honest?
> 
> Deregulation of the banking sector in recent decades plays a large part in 
> the financial 
> nightmare that has begun.

That wasn't deregulation, it was partial regulation, where profits are 
privatized and losses are socialized.  Under deregulation, you could start your 
own bank right now. Let's see you get away with that!

> I would certainly agree that one function of regulation is to make certain 
> sectors 
> inaccessible to smaller players, ut it often puts some shackles on the 
> corporations too. 
> Many times the lobbying they engage in is designed to weaken the regulation 
> (eg food 
> labelling).

 From the perspective of Big Business, the ideal amount of regulation is a 
hurdle high enough for only them to overcome. So sometimes it needs a little 
readjustment! However, Big Business never prefers complete deregulation, which 
is a fact that critics of the "free market" need to recognize.

> Corrupt and unfair it may be, but I still prefer the rule of law to a 
> free-for-all.
> 
> As for network scarcity, I dont find it easy to fully understand the 
> realities. If things were 
> more open, then the near monopolies of the telecoms companies could certainly 
> be 
> overcome. They will abuse their position, just like they did with traditional 
> telecoms over 
> the decades.  

Traditional telecoms exist as government protected monopolies, and even after 
being "deregulated" in the United States, were still completely subject to the 
FCC.

Communication monopolies are created and protected by governments. A market 
would make much more efficient use of wireless spectrum, and permit competitors 
to string up and bury so many more cables, such that any company with an 
unpopular tiered-pricing system, the like of which is under discussion, would 
simply be hurting themselves.

Under the current context of regulation, our only recourse is to throw money at 
our Congressmen, and if Big Business outspends us and wins, at least we can 
take consolation that we remain safe under the "rule of law".

[videoblogging] Comparing Flash encoding across different sites

[Charles HOPE]

Here is very interesting research comparing different ways that various sites 
(blip.tv, Veoh, Vimeo, Google Video and YouTube) encode Flash video.

Re: [videoblogging] It begins...

[Charles HOPE]

All of you are assuming network scarcity.  Networks are only scarce when 
regulated by a government (FCC, USPS, et al.) Most government regulation is 
designed by large corporate lobbyists to thwart competition pressure from 
smaller players.  Deregulation benefits the honest.


David Meade wrote:
> Yeah the scary stuffs starts when they start saying
> 
> "Video costs $1 ... unless you're getting it from the Comcast Media
> Store - then its free!"   That violates net neutrality.
> 
> It's also worth remembering that from the ISP standpoint - the
> publisher/hoster IS paying for the bandwidth used ... so some could
> argue here they're charging at both ends for the same thing.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: It begins...

[Charles HOPE]

Steve Watkins wrote:
> Anarchism 
> as it is popularly misunderstood, has a flaw in that either external or 
> internal forces could 
> take control and intimidate people far wose than their own government ever 
> could. 


It is impossible for chaotic gangs of rabble to even dream of slaughtering or 
stealing on the scale that governments have in the 20th century.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Rox Lumiere for Rupert

[Charles HOPE]

Sull, please stop telling people to shut up. This is a very annoying habit of 
yours and at this point, it pretty much is your only contribution to this list. 
Develop the discipline to avoid threads you don't like.



Sull wrote:
> Let me be the first to request that this thread ends now and any further
> communication concerning Andreas' eitquette or content linked on the Lumiere
> site be directed to:
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sull
> (the soapbox stomper)
> 
> On Jan 17, 2008 3:53 PM, Michael Verdi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>>   Let me be the first then, to request that you (Andreas and Brittany)
>> remove all links to my Lumiere videos from your site.
>> Specifically, here are the links I would like you to remove:
>> http://michaelverdi.com/index.php/2007/06/27/partly-cloudy-lumiere-1/
>> http://michaelverdi.com/index.php/2007/06/29/moon-lumiere-2/
>> http://michaelverdi.com/index.php/2007/07/04/dylan-talking-lumiere-3/
>>
>> http://michaelverdi.com/index.php/2007/07/17/approaching-phoenix-lumiere-4/
>>
>> - Verdi
>>  __._,_
>>
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Wikipedia Hypocrisy (was... Scoble...)

[Charles HOPE]

This type of conversation rings with a fear which I think unjustified. I find 
that many outside Big Business greatly overestimate its capacity for rational 
action.  But the standard mode is reaction, not action. The standard scale is 
short-term, not long-term. The standard motivation is ass-covering, not 
foresight, which means that instead of boldly changing the environment, they 
figure out how to survive in the new environment. So the usual result is just 
good enough, or too little too late.




Steve Watkins wrote:
> Ive seen no crushing from media companies. Same as when newspapers being 
> threatened 
> by the internet was a big story, at most all they could do was try to rubbish 
> the internet, 
> but there was no halting that tide.


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Wikipedia Hypocrisy (was... Scoble...)

[Charles HOPE]

If they've been seen to shape traffic, I don't think it's a stretch to consider 
that they might shape traffic to their competitive benefit.


Patrick Delongchamp wrote:
> The question isn't whether or not Net Neutrality is good or bad, it's
> whether or not TV networks are using net neutrality to crush this
> community.
> 
> That's what I mean when I say we should stick to the topic at hand.


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [videoblogging] My Amends To Robert Scoble

[Charles HOPE]

Patrick Delongchamp wrote:

> It's important to understand something before discrediting it.
> However, if this is of no interest to you I can recommend others that
> universally hold the same opinions of Wikipedia as your own.  They
> are:
> - creationists
> - people who easily buy into conspiracy theories
> - people who don't believe in the theory of evolution
> - people who buy into new age beliefs about quantum physics and movies
> like "What the Bleep do we Know!? Down the rabbit hole."


Hitler was a vegetarian. This is why I eat meat.

[videoblogging] Re: the inevitable conversation about what we're doing

[Charles Hope]

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "missbhavens1969"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jesus. This is getting so very, very ridiculous and out of hand.
> 
> What are you? On dope?


There's fighting between siblings, and there's fighting between
enemies. The casual observer can be mistaken. But I believe the
participants in this current hot thread will not have any hard
feelings when it's over. Isn't that what makes this a strong
community? What more could we ask for? It certainly seems better than
asking to remain the Next Hot Thing, like the examples that Scoble
mentioned, with 10 X more people, more buzz and hype, but a short
shelf life and shallower relationships.

Re: [videoblogging] Is Anyone Else Having This Problem With Blip??

[Charles HOPE]

gerry tejeda wrote:
> The information contained in this blog isn't completely accurate Charles.
> The first issue is my day-to-day stats are NOT correct.  I currently show no
> views for 2 days and I know for a fact that I've had viewers on these days.
> 
> 
> The second issue is Blip should've notified its loyal users like myself
> about this major problem via the My Dashboard on Blip.TV, and not on some
> blog where the information is  hidden and not as accessible to its end user.
> 
> 
> This style of communicating is ineffective and quite frustrating especially
> when you log into your Dashboard at Blip and the message you receive is
> Current system status All systems are looking good.
> 
> When is this problem going to be fixed?   Are we going to be exposed to this
> problem again in the future?  Are we going to have the correct numbers
> reflected in our stats after this problem is fixed? and when is this going
> to happen???


In general, our blog is where we make such announcements.  You are correct that 
the dashboard status should have been changed, I will bring that up.  Justin is 
working on the stats right now, he hopes to get it done in a few hours time. 
Thank you for your patience!

Re: [videoblogging] Is Anyone Else Having This Problem With Blip??

[Charles HOPE]

I expect quite a few people are experiencing something like this.  We blogged 
about our (temporary) statistics situation at 
.



gerrytshow wrote:
> Greetings My Fellow Videobloggers,
> 
> I just noticed that My Statistics Counter at Blip.TV hasn't been 
> working since Saturday.  I show no views for Sunday Dec 9 or Monday Dec 
> 10, and extremely low numbers for Saturday Dec 8 which is very unusual 
> as well. Is anyone else having this problem with Blip right now?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gerry T
> 
> The Gerry Show
> "Where Dating & Mating Always Come Together"
> http://TheGerryTShow.Blip.TV
> http://GerryT.com
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Introduction & Web Video Summit NY

[Charles HOPE]

The link breaks because it is too long.

http://tinyurl.com/2axquh

Allegedly, angle brackets work too:







Susan Buck wrote:
> Sorry - dont know why the link got broken up -
> http://flavorpill.com/newyork/events/2007/12/10/web-video-summit- 
> fall-2007

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Fwd: Google Alert - "irina slutsky"

[Charles HOPE]

Perhaps you should apply to become an author

http://www.irinaslutsky.com/authors/register

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Licensing

[Charles HOPE]

There is a "contradiction" in the GPL inasmuch as it prevents people from 
restricting the freedom of others.  (Just as laws against slavery impinge upon 
the freedom of slave owners.) Nevertheless, those that desire a freer freedom 
can pick the BSD license, which permits the software to be incorporated in 
unfree systems.  This is how Microsoft Windows contains TCP/IP code from BSD 
unix.




Enric wrote:
> This may start a whole discussion back and forth.  But, I find a
> problem with the philosophy and idea behind fully GPL and free
> software. As Richard Stallman posits freedom, it's the freedom of
> anyone to use software without restriction or barriers.  The
> contradiction I find is that is that is purely accomplished by
> compelling those that create software to release all the code.  So
> there is a contradiction in the word "freedom" in that it is taking
> away freedom of choice from those that create the work.  I see the
> best result is a wide inclusion of those producing open source and
> mixed open and closed source products. That way a wide range of
> products and perspectives produce a rich, valuable source of software.
> 
>   -- Enric
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Bored

[Charles HOPE]

Ron Watson wrote:
> People come in fresh and instead of searching  
> the archives, or after their search terms failed, they then ask a  
> question that was answered 3 months, or a year ago. 

> I think that Forums are far better situated to reflect permanence  
> than these groups, but that's just my opinion.

Funny how this topic keeps coming back every few months.

However, while bellyaching sounds much the same year to year, videoblogging is 
changing so quickly that revisiting perennial topics every three months often 
produces a new discussion worth having.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Bored

[Charles HOPE]

Patrick Delongchamp wrote:
> I'm definitely not a regular contributor but I agree with David.
> 
> This format just doesn't seem to be working as people keep
> unsubscribing and whenever there *is* an interesting discussion, it
> ends in bitterness.


Perhaps people could use e-mail clients that support threads?  And then have 
the discipline (?) to avoid the threads they don't like?

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?

[Charles HOPE]

Rupert wrote:

> 
> People will not watch shows on a computer.  Do you know anybody who  
> watches anything on a computer?  Other than the odd bored moment  
> surfing old TV shows on Youtube? 
...
> I firmly believe it's  
> just a matter of someone bringing internet video to the couch. 



I watch all my DVDs and my video subscriptions using Miro on my computer and my 
couch! When plugged in to my Bose wave radio, the video and audio is much 
better than my old CRT TV.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: everyday video in November

[Charles HOPE]

Adam Quirk, Wreck & Salvage wrote:
> Even though most of the shows on their front page could be labeled "internet
> tv", that doesn't make them any less independent than your personal vlog, or
> Rupert's, or Schlomo's, or mine.  I have Bullemhead.com to show my friends
> (like you) things from my life, things that catch my eye or ear.  I don't
> care if only a handful of people see it, as long as it's the right handful.
> Wreck & Salvage was born from a desire to share our work with a greater
> audience.  We don't have any funding, corporate or otherwise.  So how is our
> show less independent than a personal vlog?  Not trying to start shit, just
> interested in your reasoning.
> 
> Have you or anyone emailed the blip folks about promoting the NaVloPoMo?
> I'm sure they are open to suggestions, as that's pretty much been their M.O.
> from day one. You catch more flies with honey, etc.



What is a show?  We use the term to include anything which is regularly 
created, and which contains some degree of intent.  Wreck and Salvage is most 
definitely a show, by our usage.  As for "TV", I don't know what TV is anymore. 
  Does it cover public access? If there is a spectrum with Smallville on one 
side, and dogs on skateboards on the other, blip occupies a large area in the 
middle.

The situation at blip is not that we feel we have outgrown the original 
vloggers in search for greener ($) pastures. It is that we are well occupied 
keeping up with growth and making sure our servers are serving.  We have just 
moved offices, our project manager just left, and I don't even have time to 
update my blog anymore!  So I am wondering if there is any truth to your 
criticism, that needs correcting, because we really don't intend to leave the 
community behind.

But yes, if we had gotten an e-mail about NaVloPoMo, Eric certainly would have 
promoted it.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: It is official (kinda/sorta): vlog - video blog - vlogging

[Charles HOPE]

I was just hoping he would use the word "vlog".

I wonder if there are classes I can take so I can learn to skillfully 
reel the camera to and fro, in this slick corporate manner, in order to 
hold the attention of Gen ADHD and induce seasickness in anyone older.



Gena wrote:
> This isn't a videoblog. Zigging a hand held camera lens back and forth
> in a corporate studio with professional lighting shot with union crew
> does not make this a vlog. 
>
> I mean no disrespect to the efforts of Mr. Bono but you have a
> corporate entity thanking an employee of another corporate entity for
> access to their viewers who made the contributions by purchasing
> products based on his endorsement as a performer.
>
> Ok, fine. But it is not a video blog. Why am I ranting at you? I need
> to post it over there.
>
> Hmmn, it seems I have to be approved.
>
> Gena
> http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "bordercollieaustralianshepherd"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
>> Synergy: Bono Vlogs For NBC Nightly News From SNL Set
>>
>> "..."Hello, my name is Bono, and I'm a rock star" --- so begins today's
>> rather unusual video blog from NBC Nightly News"
>>
>>
>> 
> 
>   
>
>
>
>
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>   


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] does anyone have the link to the yahoo blip support group?

[Charles HOPE]

Here you go

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/blip-users

See you there!




Heath wrote:
> that's it, thats the question
> 
> Heath
> http://batmangeek.com
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Re:Miro

[Charles HOPE]

Patrick Race wrote:
> 
> Does anyone here use Miro as a core application and if so was it a conscious
> effort to adopt it or did it just slowly become a program you use?


Before my 60GB hard drive filled up due to a lack of recordable CDs, I liked 
the "lean back" experience of watching a half-hour show of all my friends 
latest vlog work. I like the continuous full-screen experience and dislike the 
stuttering that all too often plagues browser playback.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: vPIP 1.11 Beta (Ogg support & share video) available

[Charles Hope]

Don't worry, Richard.  There's no DRM on our road map.  However, your concern 
about DRM is that it has the unfortunate side effect of impeding your actual 
target audience.  So you seem to be against crude, inexact DRM, and not the 
ideal type which would only be noticed by violators of the Creative Commons. 
Perhaps you just want better DRM?



Richard (Show) Hall wrote:
> 
> Of course, it may be (though I'm skeptical) that I will thwart more
> "criminals" by putting this road block up, but the trade off between
> screwing up a "non-criminal's" viewing experience, is not even close to the
> advantage of blocking illegal use.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: vPIP 1.11 Beta (Ogg support & share video) available

[Charles Hope]

I think some vloggers here would appreciate DRM technology that thwarts 
disreputable aggregators who disregard Creative Commons licensing.



Steve Watkins wrote:
> DRM is understandably unpopular...

[videoblogging] Loren Feldman, 1938 Media, and blip.tv

[Charles Hope]

The storm has reached blip.tv now.

Yesterday, Loren Feldman, the author of a controversial video, decided to use 
blip as his host. A few hours later we received a letter warning us of 
potential damage to our brand. I responded that speech should be countered with 
speech, not censorship. What do you think? Here’s the e-mail exchange...

http://tinyurl.com/2cjy4g


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Loren says this group should be ashamed

[Charles Hope]

marforton wrote:
> 
> Nice. Clearly the real work starts now.   One less black tech blogger in
> this group.   Out.

Who's that?

Re: [videoblogging] Loren Feldman = Technigga

[Charles Hope]

Nerdiness, she has concluded, is largely a matter of racially tinged behavior.

In declining to appropriate African-American youth culture, thereby “refusing 
to exercise the racial privilege upon which white youth cultures are founded,” 
she writes, nerds may even be viewed as “traitors to whiteness.”

http://tinyurl.com/2yabex




Bill Cammack wrote:
> Loren Feldman = Technigga 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [videoblogging] For Dan McVicar (was Re: Loren Feldman = Technigga)

[Charles Hope]

Eric Rice wrote:
> 
> Do we allow ourselves to find something funny if we have the context
> around it to imply that it's okay? "A black guy did it and BET
> approves" for example, kinda says a lot. If a white guy did "Read a
> Book"...? Holy crap. 


It seems the signature of an "antiracist" is the holding of different groups to 
different standards of acceptable conduct.

Re: [videoblogging] For Dan McVicar (was Re: Loren Feldman = Techn igga)

[Charles Hope]

Bourgeois? This sort of humor is much, much more commonly enjoyed by lower 
class whites. In educated circles, such as this list, racist humor is 
universally denounced. As the past 30 emails monotonously indicate!

In other cultures around the world, racist humor is typically acceptable, only 
liberal western societies having declared war upon it in the name of globalism. 
Instead of exhibiting white privledge, this episode exhibits white repression, 
being the unique culture where xenophobia is forbidden.


--- original message ---
From: "Jeffrey Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] For Dan McVicar (was Re: Loren Feldman = Technigga)
Date: August 5, 2007
Time: 3:42:39 

If the piece were thought-provoking and went beyond the tactics of
neo-blackface tactics found amongst white American bourgeois males (see
links below, and those are merely the ones I could find in a two minute
span) to make his point, I would say Loren Feldman was an artist and not a
self-indulgent, racist attention whore.

What's sad is that even if Feldman had the best of intentions, he endorses
and encourages the use of "satire" as a means of confirming one's privileged
white straight bourgeois place in society by so clearly displaying and
making fun of what one is not in front of their white straight bourgeois
peers.

Is it any coincidence that Feldman, a hungry and driven entrepreneur moving
in circles dominated by white straight bourgeois males (several with money
to part with), would feel no qualms in posting such a thing?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=7H52mjVINt4

http://youtube.com/watch?v=XLh7AvyWk1Q

http://radgeek.com/gt/2006/11/03/thanks_bro

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0DXK/is_17_20/ai_110263213

http://www.tolerance.org/news/article_tol.jsp?id=713







On 05/08/07, Bill Cammack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com ,
> Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Bill,
> >
> > Interesting post. I noticed straightaway that you posted here and on
> > Twitter with no explanation or comment, and figured you were fishing
> > for our reactions.
> >
> > I don't doubt that he's well-connected and clued-up. I agree with
> > you that I'm sure he doesn't "believe that's the only way the black
> > TechCrunch could possibly be". And as you say, I'm sure he doesn't
> > think this stuff and that his view of black people isn't that limited.
> >
> > And I'm fine with him dissing people. I think attacking people
> > personally and aggressively and making fun of them is a terrible way
> > to make a living, but I don't have to watch.
>
> Yes. IMO, it's unfortunate. You hear stories of rock bands where the
> members detest each other, but they have no other way of making good
> money, so they stay together. Terrible way to make a living, but
> better than minimum wage. There are lots of people with no niche at
> all. Some of them wish they could be sarcastic and caustic... Others
> are glad that that's not their lot in life.
>
> > I've thought this all along, and so I don't feel "Hornswoggled"
>
> :)
>
> > For me, the point is that whatever he believes, "starting a
> > conversation" and "satire... to bring up a point" is not enough
> > justification for this video.
>
> Good point. There are many BETTER ways to start the exact same
> conversation without offending people.
>
> > Perhaps he thinks his role is to break the boundaries of what we
> > consider acceptable and be a shit-stirrer. Fair play. But I say
> > that there are some things that I'd rather people didn't mess about
> > with like rebellious kids, and then claim they have some kind of
> > moral diplomatic immunity because what they're doing is 'satire'.
> >
> > As in everything, there's a line you can cross where you start doing
> > more harm than good. Where that line is, it's hard to tell - so if
> > you care about not doing harm, you have to be careful. Unless you
> > don't care about what harm you do because the controversy helps you
> > get more viewers.
>
> Or, unless you don't care what harm you do to people, PERIOD. My goal
> is not to defend the person or the methods, and certainly not the
> EFFECT on people.
>
> > He says "Art is a subjective thing" which is a totally different
> > argument, and used like this is as big a cop-out as a priest saying
> > "God moves in mysterious ways" to explain a massive loss of life from
> > a natural disaster. It's worse than lazy thinking, it's cowardice -
> > as is him not commenting or responding to questions. If you don't
> > have the intellectual chops or courage to back something like this
> > up, don't do it in the first place.
>
> No doubt, Rupert. None whatsoever. That's why I was waiting before I
> commented. I wanted to see what his participation was going to be in
> the conversation that he started, but so far, it's been ZERO.
>
> > So whatever he really thinks, and whatever spin he puts on it, I
> > reserve my right to call him a dickhead who's doing more harm th

RE: [videoblogging] audio posting

[Charles Hope]

At blip we do support audio. Simply upload an mp3 file, and we play it in a 
flash player.

Thanks,
Charles



--- original message ---
From: "miglsd27" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [videoblogging] audio posting
Date: July 31, 2007
Time: 8:31:56 

I only recently realized there aren´t (are there?) free hosting services for 
audio, like Blip 
provides for video. Why is that? Any ideas on how to post audio on a blog for 
free, with a nice 
player and easy permalinks?

Miguel.



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [videoblogging] Re: NY Times Kit Seelye Can't Get Her Black Vloggers Straight!....

[Charles Hope]

Zenophon Abraham wrote:
> Hi Again,
> 
>  For example, why was it SO
> IMPORTANT to describe a "black man" in the second
> paragraph where I'm linked, and not the first one?  


Possibly because some people go on and on about a "digital divide", reinforcing 
the idea that nonwhites are rare around technology, therefore notable.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Cloverfield - First Movie With Camcorders

[Charles Hope]

JJ says the Ethan Haas stuff isn't connected to his new 1-18-08 movie. Current 
speculation links Ethan Haas to an upcoming video game called Alpha Omega.


bordercollieaustralianshepherd wrote:
> These links will give you more info.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  ield-in-front-of-transformers/>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "thisiswar3005"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hello All,
>>
>> I understand that J.J. Abrams is developing a movie with the code
> name Cloverfield and which 
>> is being filmed with camcorders.   
>>
>> That claim was challenged by one person; I believe that the film can
> be done this way, but 
>> what  say you?
>>
>> Here's the preview -- well, a doctored version developed by me.  
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKjbaB42YFc
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Local Vlog screenings (was: Weekly Video Conference)

[Charles Hope]

We (blip.tv) have been holding movie nights at the Pioneer theater 
(http://twoboots.com/pioneer) every few months. The next one will coincide with 
vloggercue (http://vloggercue.pbwiki.com/), most likely on Sunday 12 August.

David Meade wrote:
> Finding videos probably isn't a challenge for those who would be interested
> in doing this.  no?  What I think would be of great value on the wiki is a
> sort of FAQ/Tips on how to accomplish such an event:
> 
> 1) What sort of venues might be interested in participating?
> 2) Where should I start my search for a venue? (resources other than the
> yellow pages?)


Besides small alternative/art theaters, you may find certain bars or coffee 
shops amenable.


> 3) What are the important things to consider when selecting a venue?
> (facilities, surrounding area, hotels/transit, other?)
> 4) What list of requirements/preferences should I provide the venue
> management?
> 5) What objections/questions should I expect from the venue management
> during planning?
> 6) What is the venue going to expect of me? (If not money, then what else if
> anything should I expect to provide to the venue?)

The Pioneer theater prefers the content on Mini DV, with a DVD backup.

> 
> and even promotion stuff:
> 
> 1) How can I best get the word out locally?
> 
> 
> etc etc etc
> 
> 
> - Dave
> 

Re: [videoblogging] The Next Vloggercue

[Charles Hope]

Here you go!

http://vloggercue.pbwiki.com/



Susan wrote:
> It's happening again!
> http://www.vloggercue.com
> 
> August 10-12 
> New York City
> 
> Start making plans!  Bill or Adam, do you think you can set up a wiki
> like there was last year for people to say they're going, etc.?
> 
> Can't wait, and thanks guys!
> Susan
> http://vlog.kitykity.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Posting on BlipTV

[Charles Hope]

I just checked the original version of video that you linked to below,
and indeed the audio is way out of sync.  But at blip we don't do
anything at all to the original version.  I suspect that if you
doublecheck the file you uploaded, you'll see the same problem.

Please feel free to join our blip mailing list at
http://tinyurl.com/2hbgpl

Thanks!



> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dorothy Littlejohn
> Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 9:33
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [videoblogging] Posting on BlipTV
> 
> Something has changed at Blip and now my videos are all out 
> of sync. I have transferred the video from Final Cut into a 
> .mov via Quicktime, then to iSquint for transfer into an mp4, 
> then posted the video as an mp4. I have also gone from Final 
> Cut to Quicktime Conversion, then reduced that to an mp4 via 
> iSquint, but that would be a much bigger file.
> 
> My question is: what should I do with my Final Cut movie to 
> make it acceptable to BlipTV and be in sync (audio with visual)? 
> Dorothy
> www.people2peopletv.blogspot.com
> http://blip.tv/file/221114
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Request for user ban on Wikipedia "videoblogging" article

[Charles Hope]

There are many, many steps to take before calling for a ban.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:DR

This page teaches the way to engineer the system and come out smelling
like roses as Pat did.


 

> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Meiser
> Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 14:28
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Request for user ban on 
> Wikipedia "videoblogging" article
> 
> Yes, the user dispute process is not well documented. It's 
> quite clear to me after some chat's with admins that the 
> community sanction board is for repeatedly banned users.
> 
> It's not a matter of right or wrong, it's a matter of 
> procedure. Damn wikipedia is beuracratic. :)
> 
> There is in fact a "request for comment" on user conduct.  
> That would appear to be the proper step... I'm going to wait 
> a bit before I submit the issue there.
> 
> We'll see how things go... it does appear the mere 
> possibility of action keeps Pdelongchamp's excessive deletes 
> in check.  It's what happens a month, or two months from now 
> that will be the true sign.
> 
> In the meantime feel free to add to the vb article on 
> wikipedia or better yet on the new vlogumentary pbwiki.com 
> sitelet jay has set up where you can be assured you're hard 
> work will not be simply dissmissed and deleted at the drop of a hat.
> 
> The great thing about wikipedia is never really lost, and 
> eventually I'll get a chance to go back into the edit history 
> and resserect great contributions from past deletes.
> 
> -Mike
> 
> 
> On 5/5/07, Enric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Now for something completely different
> >
> >;)
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Delongchamp"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey everyone,
> > >
> > > I know there's about zero interest left in this. (i feel the same 
> > > way, i would have dropped it a long time ago if it weren't for my 
> > > wiki account on the chopping block)
> > >
> > > Just wanted to report that the Ban Request has been closed with 
> > > results pasted below.  Thankfully, if anything good came 
> out of this 
> > > it's that there's some good discussions going on in the talk page 
> > > and the article has gained a lot of sources.  I'd like to get a 
> > > third party Admin to check out the article in a week or 
> so and give 
> > > us some tips & comments.  Hopefully, someone'll throw in 
> some book citations.
> > > Good weekend and let's hope for a calmer Monday.
> > >
> > > Community sanction discussion
> > >
> > > "Well, what I see there, in for example this edit[1], is 
> the example 
> > > of dictionary definitions and a link farm. I'm sure you 
> were trying 
> > > to help, but that edit really *would* need a lot of improvement.
> > > Wikipedia is not[2] the dictionary, though we do have a sister 
> > > project, Wiktionary,[3] which you might wish to look at 
> if you want 
> > > to write dictionary definitions. Also, please note that, 
> to be quite 
> > > frank, I couldn't care less who any of you are, up to and 
> including 
> > > if you invented the Internet. We write from reliable sources,[4] 
> > > never our own knowledge, thoughts, or experience[5], so it really 
> > > doesn't matter a bit who an editor is. If Linus Torvalds[6] came 
> > > along to edit the Linux[7] article, he'd *still* be expected to 
> > > source. (And deal with me asking about a few bugfixes. 
> But that's a 
> > > different story.) From what I can see, Pdelongchamp has 
> been doing a 
> > > great job keeping laundry lists[8], dictionary definitions[9], 
> > > material "sourced" to blogs, and such things out of the article. 
> > > You'd probably not do badly to *listen to him*, and work at 
> > > improving the article. Most of the material I can see that 
> > > Pdelongchamp is removing really isn't acceptable."
> > > - Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
> > >
> > > [1]
> > 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Video_blog&diff=127290390&ol
> > did=127280521
> > > [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOT
> > > [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiktionary
> > > [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:RS
> > > [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOR
> > > [6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Torvalds
> > > [7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux
> > > [8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:LAUNDRY
> > > [9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:DICDEF
> > >
> > > "*Comments after looking at the evidence* Being sensitive to your 
> > > concerns I have to ask you guys from groups.yahoo.com/vlogging - 
> > > have you read policy documents before coming to Community 
> sanction 
> > > noticeboard? First off if members of the yahoo group are 
> working to 
> > > support each other this is a breach of Wikipedia:Sock 
> > > puppetry:Meatpuppets[1] and a serious one - Single purpose 
> > > accounts[2] are not encouraged. Second although 
> Pdelongchamp didn't 
> > > ment

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Threats and male vloggers

[Charles Hope]

Mike, they will only pay attention to people with long-standing
histories on Wikipedia.  If we sign up and vote they will ignore us all
as "meat puppets".  Judging by the extremity of the other cases under
discussion for banning, and the strength of Patrick's alibi, he will not
be visiting bantown.

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Threats and male vloggers

[Charles Hope]

Crossing a line? There are 1 articles on Wikipedia with unsourced
statements, and you've spent the last year obsessively purging a single
one of them, while gaming the social system there and building a clan to
defend against any potential challenges. What's a little heated language
for such an accomplished griefer?



> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick 
> Delongchamp
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 13:51
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Threats and male vloggers
> 
> I apologize.
> 
> I just wrote this reply to David Howell and I want to extend 
> it to David Meade.  Ugh.  This has not been a great week.  
> I'm genuinely sorry guys.
> 
> pat
> 
> 
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Patrick Delongchamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: May 3, 2007 1:44 PM
> Subject: Re: Vlog wiki
> To: David Howell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> Oh man.  Sorry David, I confused you and David Meade.
> 
> I guess i should take a step back for a bit.  I'm actually very sorry.
>  I try to be reasonable and understanding and I got upset.  I 
> crossed the line here. (even if I *had* been speaking to the 
> right david, i would have been crossing the line.)
> >
> >
> 
> On 5/3/07, David Howell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >   I apologize for the formatting.
> >
> > Allow me to post this here as well rather than just in an email to 
> > Patrick Delongchamp.
> >
> > Patrick. Quit fucking emailing me you nutjob.
> >
> > David Howell
> > to Patrick
> >
> > show details
> > 12:36 pm (3 minutes ago)
> > You fucking nutcase. I did not try to vote on whatever CN 
> page you are 
> > talking about.
> >
> > Quit emailing me.
> >
> > On 5/3/07, Patrick Delongchamp < 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > I noticed you tried to vote on the CN page.
> >
> > a) the discussion is closed
> > b) you didn't show in any way that MichaelVerdi isn't a meatpuppet 
> > which he clearly is. Read the policy she was quoting.
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:MEAT#Meatpuppets
> > c) It's also clear that Mmeiser was violating the policy as well by 
> > advertising and soliciting meatpuppets.
> >
> >
> > 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:MEAT#Advertising_and_soliciting_meatpu
> > ppets
> >
> > Calilil was trying to be considerate and you pretty much yelled at 
> > him. (CAPS = SHOUTING) Wikipedia isn't a game. I don't come to your 
> > house and smash your camera for no reason so don't try to come to 
> > Wikipedia and ban me for no reason.
> >
> > I tried to be friendly but you clearly enjoy getting a rise out of 
> > people. For example, your only comment to the Ban Request 
> results was 
> > to accuse me of spamming. That's a pretty sad rebuttle. You 
> might as 
> > well have just said "You forgot Poland."
> >
> > pd
> >
> > On 5/3/07, Patrick Delongchamp < 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > Hey Dave,
> > >
> > > Sorry about that. I didn't realize it would affect much to
> > change the
> > > subject of the message. I'll keep it in mind next time.
> > >
> > > I would encourage you to visit the Video blog article though and
> > read
> > > some of the history and discussions going on. It's interesting
> > to see
> > > the article finally begin to grow. You'll get a better 
> idea of the 
> > > difference between editors like Bullemhead and Ruperthowe 
> and myself 
> > > compared to editors like Mmeiser. It's a collaborative atmosphere 
> > > when people don't resort to personal attacks.
> > >
> > > pd
> > >
> >
> > --
> > David Howell
> > http://www.davidhowellstudios.com
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> > ,
> > "Patrick Delongchamp"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey Mike,
> > >
> > > I didn't mean for it to seam like you were threatening me. Sorry.
> > >
> > > It was just meant as a lighthearted reflection of the topics
> > currently being
> > > discussed in the group.
> > >
> > > pd
> > >
> > > On 5/3/07, Michael Verdi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 5/3/07, pdelongchamp 
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > and now ladies and gentlemen, ...your moment of zen. (please
> > accept this
> > > > > as humour with only a tinge of bitterness)
> > > > >
> > > > > "This user - Pdelongchamp - constantly fucks with the entry.
> > [...] It's
> > > > > pathetic. I can't believe Meiser still has the patience to try
> > work on
> > > > > the article as his changes usually get deleted within hours."
> > > > > -Michael Verdi
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Well Patrick,
> > > > I don't understand your subject line.
> > > > What you've quoted there is obviously not a threat. 
> It's just my 
> > > > observation of your assholeness which I stand by 100% whether 
> > > > there are wikipedia editors that agree with you or not.
> > > > Please fuck off,
> > > > Verdi
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > http://michaelverdi.com
> > > > http://spinxpress.com
> > > > http://freevlog.o

RE: [videoblogging] Video Blog Wikipedia Entry

[Charles Hope]

Unsourced statements call for immediate deletion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:All_articles_with_unsourced_statem
ents

I quit counting after 1000. I was still only up to the articles
beginning with the letter "A".

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercon 2007

[Charles Hope]

We've gone from discussing a meetup of the community, to currying media
attention (I thought we WERE the media?), to now planning a Million
Vlogger March on Washington! 

 

> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck Leggett
> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 12:03
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercon 2007
> 
> I agree it shouldn't be a factor. I stated it because one of 
> the arguments for having it in DC was the potential for 
> traditional media coverage.
> 
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Den 26.04.2007 kl. 17:14 skrev Chuck Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > 
> > > I believe traditional media will pick up on Vloggercon if held in 
> > > New Orleans.
> > 
> > Should this be a determining factor? Seems irrelevant to me. In my
> little  
> > world conferences are mainly about the people who attend, not the 
> > journalists who may or may not write about it afterwards.
> > 
> > --
> > Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
> > http://www.solitude.dk/ >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercon 2007

[Charles Hope]

I would like NYC even if especially to AVOID dreary politicos trying to
elbow their way in and hijack publicity. My hope for the political
impact of videoblogging revolves more around creating alternate centers
of attention, and less around helping establishment celebrities peddle
bread and circuses.

 

> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Devlon Duthie
> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 13:53
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercon 2007
> 
> I third it.
> 
> Thanks,
> Devlon
> 
> 
> 
> David Howell wrote:
> > I second NYC.
> >
> > David
> > http://www.davidhowellstudios.com
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Adam Quirk, Wreck & Salvage"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >   
> >> 1 vote for NYC
> >>
> >> On 4/25/07, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> I've got an idea.  Democracy!
> >>>
> >>>   
> >>
> >   
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Josh Wolf is Free

[Charles Hope]

> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Zulma Aguiar
> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 20:44
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [videoblogging] Josh Wolf is Free
> 
> http://hotzone.yahoo.com/b/hotzone/blogs28294
> 
>  That Yahoo Article is totally bias against journalists who 
> try to persuade public opinion.  In my opinion all 
> journalists have a BIAS no matter who or what is writing it.
> All humans have a specific view to the world that can never 
> be veiled unless useful information is omitted therefore 
> preventing democracy.
> In Europe people freely express their opinions in Newspapers, 
> they're often called Commentators and not Journalists.
> In the US we have this idea of objectivity which sounds nice 
> but in the name of objectivity a lot of useful information 
> gets "NEWSpoken" (See George
> Orwell) to us in a top down dummbed down manner.


Objectivity is only a meaningful concept when discussing facts that can
be proven.  The effect of most journalism is to leave the reader with an
impression, not to list provable facts. An exercise I often suggest is
to go through a newspaper article and cross out sentences that are not
even capable of being proven.  You won't be left with very much!  So by
"objective" journalists really mean "uncontroversial".

Furthermore, as I understand it, the salient point in this case is not
the distinction between journalism and activism, but the state's rights
issue of the federal government claiming interest in a local case
because the police cars in question were purchased with funding tainted
by the inclusion of a little federal money.  Thus can the federal
government claim practically unlimited jurisdiction, rather far beyond
the role envisioned by the founders.

RE: [videoblogging] AND SO IT BEGINS!

[Charles Hope]

Blip's participating twitter account, vlogweek2007 only picks up videos
tagged videobloggingweek2007!



> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rupert
> Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2007 18:59
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [videoblogging] AND SO IT BEGINS!
> 
> Can I just make clear... what is the correct tag for everyone 
> to use for videoblogging week?
> videobloggingweek2007 or videobloggingweek07 - people have 
> written both in recent emails about tagging.
> important to get it right.
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/
> http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Twitter & vlogging & Twittervlog!

[Charles Hope]

http://twitter.com/vlogweek2007


This is a twitter account which is being fed using twitterfeed from all
the blip posts tagged videobloggingweek2007.



> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of sull
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 13:48
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Twitter & vlogging & Twittervlog!
> 
> I had suggested setting up a shared blip account or 
> evenbetter using the blip upload API in an account designated 
> for vbweek07.
> no takers though.  that would give you the master vbweek07 
> blip feed to use.
> 
> else, could setup a PlanetPlanet style aggregator site that 
> includes feeds with a tag or category of videobloggingweek2007.
> that would also give you a merged rss and opml.
> 
> i'm too busy to even write the few messages i am posting to 
> this group today so i'm out :/
> 
> sull
> 
> On 29 Mar 2007 11:38:22 -0700, Steve Garfield 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >   That is a good question and although there are many ways to find 
> > videos tagged with videobloggingweek2007, what we need is 
> someone to 
> > step up and provide an easy and fun user experience for people who 
> > want to watch Videoblogging Week 2007 videos...
> >
> > If I had to take a stab at it, other than the tagging 
> route, everyone 
> > who is participating in Videoblogging Week 2007 would submit their 
> > feed to a site where, you would then be able to get out a 
> combined feed.
> >
> > You might also want to have the feed valid only for posts 
> from April 
> > 1st through April 7th.
> >
> > I would think that we could add our feeds to some type of OMPL 
> > directory, and then work with that.
> >
> > Anyone have an idea for a solution along these lines?
> >
> > On Mar 29, 2007, at 2:04 PM, Rupert wrote:
> >
> > > Even better, we should set up a Videobloggingweek twitter account 
> > > which runs off a feed of all the videobloggingweek videos 
> as they're 
> > > posted. I will set this up - which feed should I use? I'm 
> confused 
> > > about all the different ways we'll be centrally aggregating the 
> > > vbweek videos. Let me know, if you have thoughts or 
> concrete info on 
> > > this.
> >
> > --
> > Steve Garfield
> > http://SteveGarfield.com
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Twitter & vlogging & Twittervlog!

[Charles Hope]

You can tag your mobile videos.

http://tinyurl.com/2fwbeq

That way people can keep the videos inside their normal feeds.

  

> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rupert
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 14:08
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Twitter & vlogging & Twittervlog!
> 
> I asked Blip once before about publishing my 'Blipfoot' email 
> for multiple people to upload vids to, and they said no 
> (understandably) but i wonder if they'd make an exception for 
> vbweek, and have a dedicated email address and/or upload page 
> publicly available for a VBWeek account, which would then 
> output a feed.  Like you say, it could be open between 1st 
> and 7th April.
> Are you guys reading this over at Blip...? if no reply by 
> tomorrow, I'll just send an email direct.
> 
> On 29 Mar 2007, at 19:38, Steve Garfield wrote:
> 
> That is a good question and although there are many ways to 
> find videos tagged with videobloggingweek2007, what we need 
> is someone to step up and provide an easy and fun user 
> experience for people who want to watch Videoblogging Week 
> 2007 videos...
> 
> If I had to take a stab at it, other than the tagging route, 
> everyone who is participating in Videoblogging Week 2007 
> would submit their feed to a site where, you would then be 
> able to get out a combined feed.
> 
> You might also want to have the feed valid only for posts 
> from April 1st through April 7th.
> 
> I would think that we could add our feeds to some type of 
> OMPL directory, and then work with that.
> 
> Anyone have an idea for a solution along these lines?
> 
> On Mar 29, 2007, at 2:04 PM, Rupert wrote:
> 
>  > Even better, we should set up a Videobloggingweek twitter 
> account  > which runs off a feed of all the videobloggingweek 
> videos as they're  > posted. I will set this up - which feed 
> should I use? I'm confused  > about all the different ways 
> we'll be centrally aggregating the  > vbweek videos. Let me 
> know, if you have thoughts or concrete info on  > this.
> 
> --
> Steve Garfield
> http://SteveGarfield.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Re:Participate in Stop Cyberbullying Day-- Decency and Opposition

[Charles Hope]

This is getting BBC coverage because Kathy is afraid to leave her yard.
It is not because of snarkiness and "humor". It is because of (what she
perceived to be) death threats. 




> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of schlomo rabinowitz
> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 17:41
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re:Participate in Stop 
> Cyberbullying Day-- Decency and Opposition
> 
> I dont think death threats are specifically what is being 
> discussed.  I think there is a wider grey area that makes the 
> issue interesting.
> 
> Obviously, death threats are inapporpriate.
> 
> Schlomo
> 
> 
> On 27 Mar 2007 12:41:43 -0700, Charles Hope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> > > From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> > >  
> > > [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> > > ]
> > On Behalf Of schlomo rabinowitz
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 12:47
> > > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> 
> > > Subject: [videoblogging] Re:Participate in Stop Cyberbullying
> > >
> > > At Evilvlog, we have crossed the line before. We will again.
> >
> > Do you know what line is being discussed?
> >
> > You will issue death threats?
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Re:Participate in Stop Cyberbullying Day-- Decency and Opposition

[Charles Hope]

 > -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of schlomo rabinowitz
> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 12:47
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [videoblogging] Re:Participate in Stop Cyberbullying 
> 
> At Evilvlog, we have crossed the line before.  We will again.


Do you know what line is being discussed? 

You will issue death threats?

RE: [videoblogging] Turkish goverment banned YOUTUBE!... Please forward everybody!...

[Charles Hope]

And then they're confused as to why they're finding difficulty joining the EU. 
It's called the 20th Century, guys. Join it.




> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gokcen Karan
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 11:10
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [videoblogging] Turkish goverment banned YOUTUBE!... 
> Please forward everybody!...
> 
> Dear Friends;
> 
> Turkish goverments banned www.youtube.com in Turkey. 
> Somebodies put a video about Ataturk in youtube (Ataturk is 
> founder of Turkish republic) and defamation about him. Of 
> course it's not a good thing but banned a website I think is 
> not a democratic movement. Because only one video is included 
> this bad thing why other thousands videos are banned? I don't 
> understand why? And this reason Turkish goverment banned 
> youtube today.
> 
> And if you type www.youtube.com on your internet browser 
> anywhere in Turkey you will see below message.
> 
> 
> *
> __
> __
> *
> 
> *Bu siteye eriþim mahkeme kararýyla engellenmiþtir !...*
> 
> *www.youtube.com*  sitesine eriþim 
> Ýstanbul 1. Sulh Ceza Mahkemesi'nin 2007/384 sayý ve 
> 06.03.2007 tarihli kararý gereði engellenmiþtir.
> 
> Access to *www.youtube.com*
> site has been 
> suspended in accordance with decision no: 2007/384 dated
> 06.03.2007 of Istanbul First Criminal Peace Court.
> 
> __
> __
> 
> Gokcen Karan
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>  Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> ~--> Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See 
> the new email design.
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/hOt0.A/lOaOAA/yQLSAA/lBLqlB/TM
> --
> --~-> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercon=BarcampUSA?

[Charles Hope]

I'm not really excited at the prospect of attending a Vloggercon which
is engulfed and overwhelmed by a larger event, interesting in its own
right and competing for my attention.

Vloggercon 2007 should be quieter and more intimate, so that we can
really talk and actually be heard.

  

> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Enric
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 16:21
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercon=BarcampUSA?
> 
> I'd also be interested in Video Vertigo.  
> 
> Vlogging as a subset of another event is fine, but too far 
> away for me in Chicago.  I'd go to Vloggercon as it's own 
> event.  There's so much happening with video on the net that 
> I think an event that would expand to include new media 
> businesses, the transitions in traditional media, etc. would 
> be quite worthwhile.  
> 
>   -- Enric
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Den 27.02.2007 kl. 04:44 skrev Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > 
> > > Those people in EuropeChicago is a major hub.
> > > You guys have VlogEurope in September, right?
> > 
> > Yes, VlogEurope is weekend of 7-9 September (and it'll most likely
> turn  
> > into the Wednesday-to-Wednesday event it was last year). 
> Chicago is a 
> > major hub, but the date for barcampusa will most likely 
> mean that I'll 
> > stay home. If I went I'd end up spending one or two weeks in USA, be
> home  
> > for one week and then leave for VlogEurope for one week. That's just
> too  
> > close to each other for my taste.
> > 
> > In that case I'd have to hope for a video vertigo thing in 
> NYC on some 
> > other date. I may even be representing a company this time! :o)
> > 
> > --
> > Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
> > http://www.solitude.dk/ >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> ~--> 
> Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design.
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/hOt0.A/lOaOAA/yQLSAA/lBLqlB/TM
> --
> --~-> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

[videoblogging] Concerned about Videoronk? Do you speak Spanish?

[Charles Hope]

After a bit of wrangling, I have established a conversation with
somebody at the notorious aggregator, Videoronk, who seems to want to
implement the best practices put forward by this community.  The only
problem is that their English is about as good as my Espanyol. Is there
anybody with some free time interested in playing translator in this
teachable moment?
 
Charles


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting)

[Charles Hope]

Just to be clear for those who weren't there: it wasn't that we didn't
want evidence, but that we didn't want the distraction of snapping
cameras and flashes as we were talking.

Juan Carlos's pictures are somewhere out there on Flickr.

  

> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Markus Sandy
> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 11:51
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday 
> FlashMeeting)
> 
> Charles Hope wrote:
> 
> > > 5) What is video vertigo?
> >
> > video vertigo is the ultra-geek wing of the party. After 
> vloggercon we 
> > all got together for an afternoon and spoke acronyms and numbers at 
> > each other. It looked like this
> >
> > http://flickr. com/photos/ jdlasica/ 167980384/ in/photostream/ 
> > <http://flickr.com/photos/jdlasica/167980384/in/photostream/>
> >
> > After 4 hours we had only gotten started
> >
> 
> ok, so much  for "no posting photos from the  video vertigo event!  :)
> 
> that's  fine  by me
> 
> but now juan carlos should have his turn!
> 
> he seemed so bummed that day when we all agreed "no photo's"
> 
> (in fact, i think it was the only agreement  we came to that day)
> 
> i would love to see all those photos he took that day (might  
> make a cool movie/slideshow)
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> Markus Sandy
> 
> http://feeds.feedburner.com/apperceptions
> http://feeds.feedburner.com/digitaldojo
> http://feeds.feedburner.com/havemoneywillvlog
> http://feeds.feedburner.com/spinflow
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>  Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> ~--> Something is new at Yahoo! Groups.  
> Check out the enhanced email design.
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/kOt0.A/gOaOAA/yQLSAA/lBLqlB/TM
> --
> --~-> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups - Join or create groups, clubs, forums & 
> communities. Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting)

[Charles Hope]

 

> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard 
> (Show) Hall
> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 10:28
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday 

> 5) What is video vertigo?


video vertigo is the ultra-geek wing of the party. After vloggercon we
all got together for an afternoon and spoke acronyms and numbers at each
other. It looked like this

http://flickr.com/photos/jdlasica/167980384/in/photostream/

After 4 hours we had only gotten started.

RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting)

[Charles Hope]

> I'm sure most people would agree that it would be good to be 
> less Yahoo-centric, but how? 


Why do we have such self-hatred?  Even if attendance were strictly
limited to members of this list, it would be a fabulous gathering.  Do
we want 5000 new people attending that are unfamiliar with the culture
which we've created here over the past few years?  If there is a time
for reaching out to new people, is this it?  Are you flying across the
Atlantic Ocean to meet people you've been watching and corresponding
with for months, or absolute strangers?

RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting)

[Charles Hope]

Much longer Video Vertigo time could be a lot of fun. Particularly if it
were done in a Bar Camp/sleepover setting.  We might even get some code
done!

I just ate with Professor Van Every, Jay, Ryanne, and Markus.  We
admitted Panel Fatigue, and wanted more time simply hanging out, less
time sitting around doing panels.  Some of us remember the legendary
Vloggercue, which Adam Quirk hosted on his rooftop.  No panels, but
there was a projector, and demos were given.



> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Devlon Duthie
> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 18:17
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday 
> FlashMeeting)
> 
> Yeah, more 'how', less 'why' this time.
> 
> Great idea Randy, I'd love to see a session on RSS, how, why 
> future, etc. (another tie-in to vertigo?)  I think a big 
> problem with RSS is the speed of the adoption of 
> changes/advancements.  Education via these types of sessions 
> would increase awareness and the more people know and 
> understand it, the bigger the creative pool will be.
> 
> The 'town-hall' style of the sessions last year did kick ass. 
>  It would be cool to have folks from companies that consume 
> and produce rss there to talk with those attending, a big 
> brain-storm/education thing.
> 
> --Devlon
> 
> 
> 
> RANDY MANN wrote:
> > i have a  request for a secesion
> >
> > rss how it works,why it works and why cant i get it working
> >
> > On 2/22/07, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >   
> >>   Den 22.02.2007 kl. 22:10 skrev Michael Verdi 
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> 
> >>> :
> >>>   
> >>> I agree that it should be much easier to have it be much less
> >>>   
> >> yahoo-group
> >> 
> >>> centric which should make it pretty interesting.
> >>>   
> >> I mostly want a reason to go to the US.
> >>
> >> In my own selfish world - and that's all that matters on 
> the internet 
> >> - I'd like to see less making money, more creation. And I 
> don't care 
> >> for red
> >>
> >> carpets, but I do care for group hugs and hyperbole. I would also 
> >> like to see these Youtubers I keep hearing about, possibly 
> study them 
> >> in their natural habitat.
> >>
> >> I also would like to point out that it doesn't have to be named 
> >> Vloggercon.
> >>
> >> PS. The video vertigo summit last year was very valuable. 
> Tacking on 
> >> such a thing again would be a Good Thing in my book. Preferably a 
> >> full day instead of four-five hurried hours. Possibly in a setting 
> >> where mock-ups and wireframes can be made.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
> >> http://www.solitude.dk/ >
> >>  
> >>
> >> 
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> > Yahoo! Groups - Join or create groups, clubs, forums & 
> > communities. Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   
> 
> 
>  Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> ~--> Great things are happening at Yahoo! 
> Groups.  See the new email design.
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/lOt0.A/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/lBLqlB/TM
> --
> --~-> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups - Join or create groups, clubs, forums & 
> communities. Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting)

[Charles Hope]

With Schlomo's blessing, it's pretty much a done deal!  Blip.tv would
totally help organize it.

Why Vloggercon 2007?  Because the last one was one of the greatest
weekends of my life. 

We have months to work out the actual agenda.





> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Verdi
> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 14:45
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday 
> FlashMeeting)
> 
> What are people thinking they'd like do at another vloggercon 
> aside from meet and hang out (which is a given!)? What 
> developments in the last 9 months do you want to see 
> addressed? What wasn't addressed last time that should have 
> been? Basically I'm trying to steer the conversation from 
> when and where to why.
> 
> - Verdi
> 
> 
> On 2/22/07, schlomo rabinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >   I can be, yes.
> >
> > And between you and the multitudes of New Yawkers, I think 
> something 
> > beautiful can happen.
> >
> > Schlomo
> > http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> > http://webshots.com/is/spotlight
> > http://hatfactory.net
> > http://evilvlog.com
> >
> >
> > On 2/22/07, Robyn Tippins 
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Schlomo, will you be a planner this year again? I'll be 
> glad to lend 
> > > a
> > hand
> > > to whoever is organizing it. I'm on the east coast.
> > >
> > > Robyn Tippins
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com | Intel.com/software
> > >
> > > _
> > >
> > > From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:
> > videoblogging@yahoogroups.com ]
> > > On Behalf Of schlomo rabinowitz
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 2:11 PM
> > > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> 
> > > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday 
> > > FlashMeeting)
> > >
> > > I'm into having it in NYC.
> > >
> > > I've been offered a couple spaces for the event as well.
> > >
> > > Schlomo
> > > http://schlomolog. <http://schlomolog.blogspot.com> blogspot.com 
> > > http://webshots. <http://webshots.com/is/spotlight> 
> com/is/spotlight 
> > > http://hatfactory. <http://hatfactory.net> net http://evilvlog. 
> > > <http://evilvlog.com> com
> > >
> > > On 2/22/07, Enric <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:enric% 
> > > 40cirne.com>
> > com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If Vloggercon is on the East Coast, who would be the organizers?
> > > >
> > > > -- Enric
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > yahoogroups.com, "Robyn Tippins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll amen NY because it's cheap to fly into from 
> almost anywhere.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Robyn Tippins
> > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > > Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com | Intel.com/software
> > > > >
> > > > > _
> > > > >
> > > > > From: videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > yahoogroups.com
> > > > [mailto:videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > yahoogroups.com]
> > > > > On Behalf Of Charles Hope
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 12:32 PM
> > > > > To: videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > yahoogroups.com
> > > > > Subject: RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday
> > FlashMeeting)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > No, it was never in Ohio, but such suggestion was 
> floated a few
> > months
> > > > > ago. Our European friends would prefer easier access, 
> and since 
> > > > > our community sort of stretches between the West Coast and 
> > > > > Europe, New
> > York
> > >

RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting)

[Charles Hope]

No, it was never in Ohio, but such suggestion was floated a few months
ago.  Our European friends would prefer easier access, and since our
community sort of stretches between the West Coast and Europe, New York
City is in the middle, and that is where I am rooting for!  Can I get an
Amen?  



> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robyn Tippins
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:03
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday 
> FlashMeeting)
> 
> Is that where it was last year?
> 
>  
> 
> Robyn Tippins
> 
> 
> 
> Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com | Intel.com/software
> 
>   _  
> 
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of RANDY MANN
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 7:05 AM
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday 
> FlashMeeting)
> 
>  
> 
> of corse it would be nice to have vloggercon this year. Any 
> on ever go to ohio?
> 
> On 2/20/07, Enric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]  com> wrote:
> >
> > We talked about other things. Though Randy mentioned 
> "Vloggercon" in 
> > the FlashMeeting chat. And I'm thinking it would be nice to have 
> > Vloggercon this year. I don't know if people are up for 
> organizing it
> > -- it's a bit of work.
> >
> > -- Enric
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@ 
> yahoogroups.com ,
> > "Michael Verdi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Well it seemed to work for the last hour and a half at 
> least. It was
> > a good
> > > conversation.
> > > -Verdi
> > >
> > > On 2/20/07, johnleeke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Oh well, I think FlashMeeting is having problems. Or 
> maybe it's
> > > > just me.
> > > >
> > > > Not you. It was working at 6:30pm EST, then conked out 
> just after 
> > > > another FlashMeeting I was in, about 7:00pm. There must 
> have been 
> > > > server problems over in the UK.
> > > >
> > > > John
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > http://michaelverdi  .com 
> > > http://spinxpress.  com http://freevlog. 
> > >  org Author of Secrets Of Videoblogging - 
> > > http://tinyurl.
>  com/me4vs
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> > 
> >
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Re: videoronk & our cc licences

[Charles Hope]

 

> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Cammack
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 23:08
>
> On top of all that, in this case, when you told them about 
> your issue, they told you "I can't do nothin' for ya, man", 
> and claimed to be insulated from dealing with you directly 
> because they're aggregating a different site that already 
> aggregated you.
> 
> Short of "Whack-A-Mole" (or not using RSS at all), prevention 
> is currently impossible.
> 
> Recourse is where a traditional license might help you 
> out... or not.


Even a traditional license must be protected by playing "Whack-A-Mole".

I sent these guys some feedback through their web page, since I couldn't
find an e-mail address for them, letting them know that blip.tv would
appreciate their abiding by the Best Practices that are listed at
http://tinyurl.com/276vjf. We will see what response we get, if any.

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Jeff Pulver

[Charles Hope]

Steve, I actually find your input very useful, because you often enough
write what I'm too busy to find phrasing for.  This group doesn't need
to become an echo chamber of constant happy agreement.

Please, keep testing us.  It is the only path to truth.




From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Watkins
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 11:08
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Jeff Pulver



Thanks for the kind words, but please dont take this as me going

away because ive been criticised, fairly or unfairly. I just got

self-concious that I may be damaging the group, and that I
should 
chill out a bit. As far as Im concerned, people should feel as
free 
to criticise me as I criticise others.

Cheers

Steve Elbows

[videoblogging] Alive in Baghdad is on Digg!

[Charles Hope]

 
For those who don't know, this is a video blog which "was formed to
counter the sound-bite driven, 'Live From' news model. Through the work
of a team of Americans and Iraqi correspondents on the ground. Alive in
Baghdad brings testimonies from individual Iraqis, footage of daily life
in Iraq, and short news segments from Iraq to you."

RE: [videoblogging] Re: John Edwards to Run for President (announcement on YouTube)

[Charles Hope]

This defeatism is not how the Republicans mobilized their base and
created the message machine being described.


> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of J. Rhett Aultman
> Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 12:14
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: John Edwards to Run for 
> President (announcement on YouTube)
> 
> I never said anything about ideological biases in the media 
> one way or another. The major sources of news are, for the 
> most part, conduits for what they can get. The current series 
> of political strategists for the right are, however, masters 
> of the echo chamber effect in ways that the political 
> strategists for the left are not. It's a simple fact that 
> anyone facing a Rove-assisted politician will face an echo 
> chamber. It's his primary weapon, above everything else.
> 
> You are right that it's about taking the offensive. That's 
> why I don't think Edwards can win. His weak points are 
> already known and ripe for the punching, and as much as he 
> wants to counterpunch, he's not going to be able to aim for 
> soft spots. Should he make it out of the primaries alive, I 
> don't believe he could survive the first haymaker his 
> opponent delivers, no matter how positive, accessible, or 
> grassroots he is.
> 
> --
> Rhett.
> http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime 
>  
> 

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Congdon at Apple

[Charles Hope]

Thank you!  It's a blip thing, nothing to do with Scoble or Podtech.

  

> -Original Message-
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Obreahny O'Brien
> Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 17:33
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [videoblogging] Re: Congdon at Apple
> 
> It's really neat that Apple is working in conjunction with 
> you. Did Scoble hook you up? Is this a Podtech alliance; can 
> we except to see Irina Slutsky up there next? Or is it a deal 
> exclusively between Blip and Apple, where blip sort of 
> directs attention to the vlog/vlogger they'd like featured 
> who uses blip as their video distribution site

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Amanda on ABC is not a vlog

[Charles Hope]

Thanks for that suggestion.  I will pass it along!
 
 




From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard (Show) Hall
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 15:21
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Amanda on ABC is not a vlog



Should this be available via the amanda accross america feed?

On 12/22/06, Charles Hope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:charles%40blip.tv> > wrote:
>
> Amanda is still maintaining her vlog! She just posted a video
there
> today, in fact.
>
> Starring Amanda Congdon
<http://blip.tv/users/view/amandacongdon
<http://blip.tv/users/view/amandacongdon> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> 
>

-- 
http://richardhhall.org <http://richardhhall.org> 
http://richardshow.com <http://richardshow.com> 
http://inspiredhealing.tv <http://inspiredhealing.tv> 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Amanda on ABC is not a vlog

[Charles Hope]

Amanda is still maintaining her vlog! She just posted a video there
today, in fact.
 
Starring Amanda Congdon  


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] You NYC Vloggers!

[Charles Hope]

I'd like to remind you that there is a mailing list specifically for
us and our local issues.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nyc_vloggers/

See you all at the Art Bar on Friday!

[videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[Charles Hope]

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Ron Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sorry Amanda, please don't think I'm piling on you.
> 
> It's just that a straw broke the camel's back.
> 
> Why must people keep talking about the MSM...
> 
> As if it's mainstream!
> 
> It's a Corporate Media, and there's nothing 'Mainstream' about it.
> 
> Mainstream media would have 5 second commercials and freedom to  
> download and distrubute.


Let me guess. You were born in the year 2017 and you're here
scrounging for parts to fix your time machine. Awesome! I hope I live
long enough to see your future, but in 2006, ABC is still
unquestionably "mainstream".

Re: [videoblogging] Re: NYC December food, drinks, mirth

[Charles HOPE]

So we're having 2 meetups? One tonight, and one on Friday? Fine, I'll go to 
both!


Adam Quirk wrote:
> 
> 
> So, raise your hand if you can meet up December 15 in NYC.
> 
> So far me and MissB are coming, and that's probably enough to have a good
> time, but the more the merrier.



-- 
cofounder, blip.tv

blip blog
http://blog.blip.tv/blog/

me
http://www.onxiam.com/people/charles.hope/

[videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Charles Hope]

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> "Videoblog Community" should be ALL including YouTubers, MySpacers,
people who might 
> not be aware of DV, RSS, etc
> Possible reality: Videoblog Community = This Yahoo Group (The
Vloggies jumps right out 
> at me one this one)


How are they part of our vlogging community if you have to send us a
link to notify us of their existence? Clearly, they are part of a
different vlogging community. Is this a problem?

Maybe about a century ago all the car drivers of Boston once knew each
other. But when thousands of cars flooded the streets, these new
drivers did not join the gang of initial pioneers in any sense. They
just drove to work. Imperialism?

Re: [videoblogging] World Cup during Vloggercon

[Charles HOPE]

I hope this means you'll join me for 9 a.m. pint of beer as we toast
the American victory.

Jan McLaughlin wrote:
I'll keep my eyes peeled, Chas. World Cup or bust.
  
  
J
  
  
On Jun 2, 2006, at 4:50 PM, Charles HOPE wrote:
  
  
   That's true.  Now I just need to find a venue that will
show
it...


Deirdre Straughan wrote:Since it's the US team, that game will
certainly be broadcast in the US. I imagine the whole thing will be
broadcast on some ESPN channel or other.
    
    
On 6/1/06, Charles HOPE
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Unfortunately the World Cup is starting during Vloggercon!  I don't
know what we can do about the games that are ongoing during the
conference, but are you Europeans going to be around on Monday
morning?  9 a.m. California time, Team USA will squeak past the Czech
Republic. I'm wondering where we can catch that game.
  
  

SPONSORED
LINKS 
Fireant 
Individual 
Typepad 
Use 
Explains 

YAHOO! GROUPS
LINKS 

▪  Visit
your group "videoblogging"
on the web.

  

▪  To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

  

▪  Your
use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
Yahoo! Terms of Service .


  
  
  
  
--
  
best regards,
  
Deirdré Straughan
  
  
www.beginningwithi.com
(personal)
  
www.tvblob.com (work)
  


SPONSORED
LINKS 
Fireant 
Individual 
Typepad 
Use 
Explains 

YAHOO! GROUPS
LINKS 

▪  Visit
your group "videoblogging"
on the web.

  
▪  To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  
▪  Your
use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
Yahoo! Terms of
Service. 


  






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Typepad
  
  


Use
  
  
Explains
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.