[videoblogging] making directories

this is interesting. its a list of known blogs circa 2000: http://www.jjg.net/retired/portal/tpoowl.html there's no really directory for text blogs that i know of...did they not think to do it? how will we be more successful? jay -- Adventures in Videoblogging http://www.momentshowing.net>

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

One of the things that helped people find weblogs in the very early days was weblogs.com, which was acquired recently by Verisign. All it is really is a ping server. Bloggers would ping it when they posted something new, and it contains a list of the recent posts. When there were only a handful of

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 02:32:51 +0100, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > this is interesting. > its a list of known blogs circa 2000: > http://www.jjg.net/retired/portal/tpoowl.html I'm not on it! I got my first Blogger blog in October 2000, and if I had one a ton of other people had them.

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

It would be cool if there were some metadata format to have timecoded shownotes associated with vidcasts so that you could keep track of their content on a "post by post" basis and just get the clips you want. I know Doug Kaye basically already does this with some of the content on IT Conversation

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

Write a text description in your blog software when you post your video. No need to overcomplicate things. - Andreas On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 14:45:29 +0100, Michael Ridley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It would be cool if there were some metadata format to have timecoded > shownotes associated wi

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

Sure but how do I link to the segmet 15 minutes in? -m On 12/4/05, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Write a text description in your blog software when you post your video. > No need to overcomplicate things. > > - Andreas > > On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 14:45:29 +0100, Michael Rid

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

If you've got 15 minutes you don't have a blog entry. You have a tv program in a blog. - Andreas On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 15:20:24 +0100, Michael Ridley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sure but how do I link to the segmet 15 minutes in? > > -m > > On 12/4/05, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen <[EMAIL PROTE

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

On Dec 4, 2005, at 9:40 AM, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen wrote: > If you've got 15 minutes you don't have a blog entry. You have a tv > program in a blog. Fact check: False. Non sequitur. The hypothetical inference is unrelated to the conclusion. Videoblog entries are not defined by the minute.

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 15:59:56 +0100, andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Dec 4, 2005, at 9:40 AM, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen wrote: > >> If you've got 15 minutes you don't have a blog entry. You have a tv >> program in a blog. > > Fact check: False. Non sequitur. The hypothetical

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

"Time" can "play" in as a sentiment for the definition, but it can not restrict the definition. You can say "typically or often", but you are a butcher for saying 15min is not allowed. You will need to come up with a cut-off point. Especially, and specifically to the point that you made abou

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

silly answer. you might find this article by jon udell more enlightening http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2005/01/07/primetime.html this is one area where quicktime really sux compared to the others (real, windows, etc) Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen wrote: >If you've got 15 minutes you

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

We were talking about a generalized example, no absolutes. It's academically dishonest to equate the general example with an absolute rule. - Andreas On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 17:15:48 +0100, andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Time" can "play" in as a sentiment for the definition,

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

this is one area where quicktime really sux compared to the others(real, windows, etc)  QT+SMIL then.   On 12/4/05, Markus Sandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: silly answer.you might find this article by jon udell more enlightening http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2005/01/07/primetime.htmlth

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

QT + SMIL really sux. I hate watching things load/buffer forever. -josh On 12/4/05, Michael Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > this is one area where quicktime really sux compared to the others > > (real, windows, etc) > > QT+SMIL then. > > > > > On 12/4/05, Markus Sandy <[EMAIL PROTEC

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

Time in the context of videoblogs, or more specifically the actual video,  can only be a preference of the creator and audience but cannot be a factor in qualifying it as a videoblog against any other label that one might conjure up.   If I have what is agreed to be a videoblog, and for whateve

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

buffering happens with all platforms...   On 12/4/05, Joshua Kinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: QT + SMIL really sux.I hate watching things load/buffer forever.-joshOn 12/4/05, Michael Sullivan < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>>> > this is one area where quicktime really sux compared to the others> >

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

craigslist works pretty well   On 12/3/05, Joshua Kinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: One of the things that helped people find weblogs in the very earlydays was weblogs.com, which was acquired recently by Verisign. All itis really is a ping server. Bloggers would ping it when they postedsomethi

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

You started off the converstation by saying: "If you've got 15 minutes you don't have a blog entry. "Then you sent a few more e-mails elaborating on time and defending your claim.Now you are giving up and suggesting that its my fault for assuming you were not speaking generally (which is what I w

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

Craigslist works well because people are putting stuff in distinct categories in order to be found in those distinct categories.But.. craigslist is also very temporal. Only the recent stuff is noticed. Its harder to find things that aren't the most recent. -JoshOn 12/4/05, Michael Sullivan <[EMA

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

You seem to be looking for trouble everywhere. When I wrote my first email I wasn't aware that this had become an academic discussion list. If I knew that my email would've been a lot longer and a lot more boring to 98% of the people on this list. You can be proud about "calling me" on being

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

alright, i see your point... enter vodcasts. ;-)  On 12/4/05, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You seem to be looking for trouble everywhere. When I wrote my first emailI wasn't aware that this had become an academic discussion list. If I knew that my email would've been a l

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 18:01:31 +0100, Michael Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If I have what is agreed to be a videoblog, and for whatever reason my > latest post contains a long video... 20 minutes. > Your going to tell me that I no longer have a videoblog and this was not > a > videoblog

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 18:27:42 +0100, Michael Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > alright, i see your point... > enter vodcasts. > ;-) Exactly. :o) - Andreas -- http://www.solitude.dk/> Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. Yahoo! Groups Sponso

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

These threads really get off topic quickly. I'm much more interested in what makes a good directory rather than whether a video blog should be restricted to under 15 minutes. Personally, I like to leave the content decisions up to the creators. They make what they want, I view what I want. I don't

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

Andreas, some guy was asking a technical question about linking and you stepped in to destroy him by diverting the question into some irrational, diatribe about universals. > > The real question is: Does all this help anyone get closer to why long > videos don't fit into the blogging use patte

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

You guys are so closed if you think this. On Dec 4, 2005, at 12:33 PM, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen wrote: > On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 18:27:42 +0100, Michael Sullivan > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> alright, i see your point... >> enter vodcasts. >> ;-) > > Exactly. :o) > > - Andreas > -- > http://w

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

> It's always dangerous to predict the future, but I can try anyway. I think > video-only blogs will take directories to heart because people can't > decide if they're blogging or making tv for iPod and PSP. Text blogs and > mixed-media will continue like they always have because it's a better way

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 20:44:00 +0100, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > but the fact that people can make content for TV/portables is not > necessarily a bad thing. No, no. But it's different. - Andreas -- http://www.solitude.dk/> Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen wrote: > On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 02:32:51 +0100, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >>this is interesting. >>its a list of known blogs circa 2000: >>http://www.jjg.net/retired/portal/tpoowl.html > > I'm not on it! I got my first Blogger blog in October 2000, and if

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

Jay dedman wrote: > there is a difference between the personal videoblogs and the "show" > videoblogs. > personal videoblgs cant really be categorized because they are about > anything the person wants (like blogging). > the show videolbogs are easy to categorize becasue they are like > mini-tv sh

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

On Dec 5, 2005, at 10:40 AM, Pete Prodoehl wrote: > Jay dedman wrote: >> there is a difference between the personal videoblogs and the >> "show" videoblogs. >> personal videoblgs cant really be categorized because they are about >> anything the person wants (like blogging). >> the show videolbo

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

> I can't help but think that someone who walks around pointing a > camera at them-self and then puts that up for the world to see is a > show. > I understand however the rejection of the word as it applies to this > particular medium when people feel it may indicate something > contrived, or plann

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

ahhh, the joy of language.many personal video journals may contain an individual 'putting on a show'.  it may be them and it may be true to form, but you have to admit that once you are doing self-video, people will have tendencies to not be a total bore... hell, even socially anywhere, people w

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

On Dec 5, 2005, at 11:51 AM, Michael Sullivan wrote: > if its within a videoblog form the word 'show' would be hard > to use. they would just be videos. > I disagree. And so, what you are getting at here is the word "blog". It is important. As you all know, I have always looked to the

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

> making directories what else is their to say on that? anyone? shit, i started this crazy thread. but i learned something. in the beginning of the summer, Clint said that linking is the real currency to blogging. how often do you link to videos you like? as Andreas and Peter have clearly po

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

but what part of what i said do you disagree with, specifically?thanks.On 12/5/05, andrew michael baron < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On Dec 5, 2005, at 11:51 AM, Michael Sullivan wrote: >  if its within a videoblog form the word 'show' would be hard> to use.  they would just be videos.>I disag

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

i see... you took the ending of my point and excluded the beginning.so, its out of context.  in talking specifically about the word 'show', i pointed out that it would be hard to call a corporate internal videoblog of boring meetings a 'show'.  might not be a practical example, but just making

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

I just dont see why it would be difficult to use the word "show" in context of a videoblog. What are your thoughts on this?On Dec 5, 2005, at 12:27 PM, Michael Sullivan wrote: but what part of what i said do you disagree with, specifically?thanks.On 12/5/05, andrew michael baron < [EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

Let's extend the "show" analogy a bit... To me, most videoblogs are *segments*. Only when you have multiple segments, does it become a *show*. I view *show* in this context as much more of a "container" than simply anything. That's just my opinion on it, and my knee-jerk, though. andrew michae

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

Ok, I follow you now. This is pretty funny. I definitely misunderstood.I was reading along and when I came to this part:"a show is something that tries to be entertaining.a corporate business meeting... an accountant explaining numbers and codes training seminars all most likely to bore y

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

again, I am not suggesting that.  my point is much more narrow than what you are interpreting.On 12/5/05, andrew michael baron < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I just dont see why it would be difficult to use the word "show" in context of a videoblog. What are your thoughts on this?On Dec 5, 2005, a

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

> I just dont see why it would be difficult to use the word "show" in context > of a videoblog. What > are your thoughts on this? yes, a videoblog can be anything. a video in a blog. could be a 5 hour epic or a 10 second clip. what im discussing is the format, process, and intention in making

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

On Dec 5, 2005, at 12:33 PM, Brad Webb wrote: > Let's extend the "show" analogy a bit... > > To me, most videoblogs are *segments*. Only when you have multiple > segments, does it become a *show*. I view *show* in this context as > much > more of a "container" than simply anything. > > That's j

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

I think the ideas of linking bleed into things like sharable playlists, which i have much interest in.rss, xspf, smil etcetera will be used more and more for sharing 'collections' of media and it's permalinks.  people will make feeds/playlists that are not just derived from a blog... but like on

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

screw it, lets just clal them "PODS" like CurrenTV;-) On 12/5/05, Brad Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:Let's extend the "show" analogy a bit...To me, most videoblogs are *segments*. Only when you have multiple segments, does it become a *show*. I view *show* in this context as muchmore of a "con

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

andrew michael baron wrote: >On Dec 5, 2005, at 12:33 PM, Brad Webb wrote: > > > >>Let's extend the "show" analogy a bit... >> >>To me, most videoblogs are *segments*. Only when you have multiple >>segments, does it become a *show*. I view *show* in this context as >>much >>more of a "containe

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

Perhaps my read is too simplistic, I interpret the "personal" and "show" types as the same. It's identity. Public sphere invokes identity. Social intercourse is, well, social intercourse and that's all that matters. Fsck style. Fsck rank. Fsck enclosures. Just do it. Blog, vlog, sing and dance,

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

So the difference is just that the Real World is more complex? On Dec 5, 2005, at 12:45 PM, Brad Webb wrote: > andrew michael baron wrote: > >> On Dec 5, 2005, at 12:33 PM, Brad Webb wrote: >> >> >> >>> Let's extend the "show" analogy a bit... >>> >>> To me, most videoblogs are *segments*. Only w

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

>>until we start linking to each other so our videos are easy to findand spread out everywhere... directories will be important.New people will need a place to begin.maybe people will start tagging videos in the directories...we startself-organizing.<<   Really, really coming in late to th

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

To qualify as having a "show" title, being in a "container" -- sure. I mean, the reality is, it's all semantics, and effectively irrelevant -- imo, the label we put on any of this is made totally obsolete by the content and conversations going on behind them. andrew michael baron wrote: >So th

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

I think "show" vs. "personal diary" may be the wrong way to put it.Really it comes down to the intent of the creator and their goals in terms of reaching an audience.Some people make stuff for a generalized (and thus larger) audience. This type of content needs to be "entertaining" or somehow ha

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

I think Andrew's on to something here. To my mind, the "reality" element of what vlogging captures is one of its many charms. I use the idea of capturing the "reality" of life as an impetus to make efforts toward crafting life as a more interesting "show". Dig? Jan -- "It isn't done alone. Pa

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

riter, ActivistAdvisor: The Immortality InstituteHoboken, NJhttp://www.randywickerreporting.blogspot.com/201-656-3280     - Original Message - From: Jan McLaughlin To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 4:03 PM Subject: Re: [videoblogging]

Re: [videoblogging] making directories

BevSykes wrote: > > Really, really coming in late to this thread, but I started keeping an on-line journal before the term "blog" had been created, much less "vlog." > When I first began writing a journal in 2000, I began checking out the journaling world and found journals I am still reading t