WebSeitz/wikilog
BlogWeb
is a Product Manager/CTO with a track-record of bringing a business perspective to building agile product-development teams for start-ups, and is seeking a senior role in an entrepreneurial organization building disruptive Internet-driven products.

(backlinks off) (map off)
(search off)
last edited by BillSeitz on Jun 23, 2009 9:43 pm

The universe of sites which link to each other. aka .

Which forms maybe a . I mean bunches of them.

Which could be amenable to . See , .

How might this evolve?

See [JonM] thoughts


Base case: current/low-tech (avoid aggregator tools/sites)

I have some number of sites which I read regularly. Some are blogs/personal, some news. Some are mainly for entertainment/diversion, some for "professional" reasons. Many blogs serve both hungers.

I end up on other sites mainly by following links from my primary sites (most often from within blogbits, but occasionally I'll randomly follow their Favorites links). I may also do some . If I hit a certain site often enough, or just notice that I really like the writing, I may add it to my list of regular visits.

What's wrong with this model?

Managing a large set of Favorites can be a pain (e.g. deleting bookmarks). Grouping them (e.g. by priority), and changing those groupings, even moreso.

Many methods of managing Favorites are fat-client-based, so my list isn't available from another machine.

I may miss some commentary from a B-list site about something of current interest. Especially if nobody else whom I read sucks it into a .

I may consider some authors to be of higher priority when they write about certain topics (-s), vs their default B-list status.

The real question is: what do I want to read today?

No, the real question is "does any of this matter?". As long as blogging is mainly for entertainment for fuzzy (or, honestly, ), it's hard to get serious about filtering. The quality of the results (like the various quality measures for search engines) doesn't really matter that much, it's just an arbitrary we feel good about using to reduce our options.

So, the next question is, what're the where this stuff "matters" more, and what do we need to do to get there? See and .

[OK], maybe that's too high a bar for right now. Maybe a better direction for right now echoes 's question of what could "emerge" from the , and what tools/practices are necessary to make that happen. So then the first step maybe is to define some goals (end outcomes or maybe promising-smelling midpoint-outcomes).

Possible goals

Some ideas for tools:

See : | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |


 




Bill Seitz, fluxent at gmail dot com, Weblog