Hi, my name is Mark Boudreau from Montreal and I publish the blog
The Rock and Roll Report (www.rockandrollreport.com). I joined this
group for two reasons. The first is that as I cover radio
extensively on my site and feature stations and shows that epitomize
rock and roll radio I am always looking out for radio in all its
forms and podcasting is an exciting take on what radio will become
in the future.
The second reason is that I intend to produce a podcast for my site
this spring. It will essentially be a recap of the previous week's
postings as well as original interviews and hopefully once I get the
legalities sorted out musical content from the indie and unsigned
bands I tend to write about. I am hoping that the podcasts reviewed
here will give me some ideas and stir my audio imagination.

Hi folks,

Rob here.  I'm a former radio guy actually.  Worked for 5 years on top 40
and rock stations doing every shift imaginable.  THen I worked for 5 years
for a major broadcast research/production company. Produced some shows that
aired on a station in Japan. Then I got out for work in computers - I
currently supervise a help desk that is contracted out to a number of
companies.  I "keep my feet wet" with my own Live365 stream
(http://www.usdin.net/posrock) and I'm considering a podcast myself.

I joined the group to get to know some podcasts, and review them with an eye
towards what works and what doesn't.  I don't want to impose traditional
"radio rules" on them, but rather look with an eye towards how podcasts can
get mainstreamed the way blogs are now.  Podcasting is very niche, and I'd
love to see it grow and grow.  I live in New Jersey, near Princeton.

--*Rob


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

Hello all,

A short intro from The Netherlands (that's were I live).
I heard from podcasting only a few months ago. From that moment I
started to catch some of them and followed the developments and
discussions closely. I also did some first tryouts by myself, more to
get familiar with the techniques.

I'm interested in new (commercial) ideas regarding podcasting. There
are a lot of experimental and funny podcasts on the net today, but
what's happening after the fun, that's my point to focus on.

I joined this group to learn more about podcasting, to become inspired
and to help other podcasters with some feedback and useful comments.

In my Dutch weblog called Nieuwsbode (www.nieuwsbode.com) I sometimes
write about podcasting among other subjects.

Regards from Holland and talk to you later,
Marc.

Hey guys,

I am a long-time freelance journalist and now copywriter.

I got into Web broadcasting in April, 2003. At the time, I created a
show called "Near-Life Experience" and was offering it in mp3 form and
streaming via Shoutcast. I learned all I needed to know about
recording, mics, audio editing, etc over the year and a half I did the
show.

In fact, I learned so much about recording, and subsequently gathered
all necessary equipment, that I am now beginning to work as a voice
actor--recording assignments from apartment.

A few months before I heard about podcasting for the first time, I had
pretty much abandoned the show to focus on writing and voice acting. I
have to admit, as podcasting began to take off in such a big way, I
was left thinking, where were you guys in 2003 when I was starting
out!? :)

I'm in the process of reviving my show. But in the meantime, I want to
give feedback to other podcasters. Some people have awesome ideas for
shows, but their setup or delivery is really crappy. If us offering
constructive criticism can help someone polish their show, that would
be very cool.

Be well,

Wendy
http://www.wendywallace.com

I'm Michael Lehman.

My weblog is here: http://www.sofwareland.org
My podcasts are here: http://radio.weblogs.com/0141212/rss.xml
Contact info: softwareland =at= softwareland =dot= org


I'm a long-time software developer (36 years come this April!) and
musician.  I currently work for Microsoft (6 months this Wednesday!)
as a "Senior Consultant" in Silicon Valley.  I was wandering around
the net last September 30th or so and ran into podcasting via Dave
Winer's Scripting News (as I had just started my MSFT-hosted blog
http://blogs.msdn.com/mglehman) and it just leaped off the screen and
said "DO THIS!".  I've got a modest recording studio at my home as
I've been into audio production since I did my first "John Denver-
esque" album with a 12-string guitar and a 2-track-sound-on-sound
tape recorder back in late 1976!  I've also been told, from time-to-
time that I had something of a "radio" voice and always wanted to do
some kind of "show".

Dave Winer and I had worked on a project just after one of his
companies (Living Videotext) had been bought by Symantec so I'd been
lurking on his blog for some years now.

As far as I can tell, I started the 13th-podcast (of the current
era), as there were only 12 listed in both the ipodder.org and
podcasting.net directories when I posted my first show on October 2nd.

I had the good fortune to be asked by Dave Winer to assist Doug
Kaye in recording and webcasting the BloggerCon III sessions last
November where I was able to re-connect in-person with Dave, and meet
Adam, Dawn, Drew and Dave Slusher, along with many other fine folk
(podcasters and bloggers) and got inspired to do even more.

I've now produced over 50 shows in 4 separate "show" formats, the
most voluminous of which is "Mike's Manic Minute" which I try to do
as-daily-as-possible (I know that's not proper English but it gets
the idea across ;) )  The other "show" formats
are: "Softwareland", "In Mike's Life", and my music show, "The
Podtridge Family".


So, in a nutshell, I've done most everything wrong once, and am
trying not to do it again (too many times!), which means I'm both
empathetic and constructively critical somewhat simultaneously!

I think we're all still in just the infancy of the whole one-person-
one-voice movement and everybody should join in!

I'm Bret Fausett.

My weblog is here: http://blog.lextext.com/
My podcasts are here: http://www.internet.pro/
Contact info here: http://www.blogware.com/profiles/lextext/index.html

I'm a lawyer, not a radio guy, so I'm joining to pick up tips and hear
suggestions on how to improve. I started podcasting for the same reason
that people climb mountains: because it's there. This is so obviously
the future of radio that I knew I wanted to get near it, touch it, take
it out for a spin.

      -- Bret

Greetings all...

I got involved with the podcasting thing when I released a client based
off the enclosure-aware aggregator code I'd been running to get IT
Conversations files. This was around August 2004 after reading about
Adam's AppleScript iPodder. At that point I also started to record
podcasts, because there wasn't much out there at the time except for
Morning Coffee Notes, Daily Source Code, and Evil Genius Chronicles. I
started RasterWeb! Audio and was interested in providing a short (under
2 minutes) podcast of some amusement. Or so I hoped...


Pete Prodoehl
http://rasterweb.net/raster/

My interest ... ?
I'm part of Julian's technical support network.

I hadn't heard of Podcasting until Julian gave me a demo, and
although I've not created any of my own (so far) I'm quite interested
in how the technology can be used to provide "thought for the day"
type material, but also the idea of being able to download audio
guides to various places.

I have a history professor friend who gives very interesting guided
talks around Nottingham and as an avid listener of BBC Radio
4's "Down your way" - (sadly, no longer on the air) - having the
technology to create a lightweight version of the programme (which
captured the sounds and "local" colour of an area by a mixture of
interview, soundscape recordings and narration) has a certain appeal.

For now, I'll probably lurk (aka "keep a watching brief") although
I'm sure I'll get dragged into technical discussions.

Welcome all.  To let you know:

There are 30 people in Podcast-Review at the start.

I suggest we start with brief introductions.

You may want to have a poke around the website and webfeeds

Podcast review website: www.herecomespod.org.uk/review
RSS: www.herecomespod.org.uk/review/podcast-review.xml
With enclosures: www.herecomespod.org.uk/review/podcast-review-enc.xml

The plan is to start real reviewing and critiquing around Wednesday when we
have got to grips with who is here.

There are a couple of podcasts up already on the website with links, feeds
and streams (I thought I should start by putting myself up for the chopper),
but thare are still a couple of slots available. The streams are intended to
let people get an immediate impression and help those on dialup.

Details of candidates (not the MP3 <g>) can be sent via the email link on
the website, and they'll get picked up.

Rgds

Julian

Web: www.thepicturepost.co.uk
Blog: www.herecomespod.org.uk/blog/
Podcast/RSS: http://www.bestchurches.org.uk/rss/offthebeatentrack.xml

Hi all,

Since Julian dropped his intro, I thought I would jump in and let
everyone know my goals.  I am also relatively new to Podcasting but I
think it's an incredible social phenomena and tool when everything is
said and done.

I'm interested first and foremost in capturing real conversations
<http://beercasting.com/shows/nyc-squad/> between strangers and
friends.  To that end, I've started my own branch of Podcasting called
Beercasting which I am out on the road promoting.

My second goal, however, is to help people create this new medium.  To
that end, I'm working on tools and helping out with this list.  Feedback
is the most important ingredient for growth and I hope I'll be able to
provide some constructive insight into what can make your podcast shine
(I hope you'll be able to help me as well).

I am a programmer / entrepreneur working on social networking and now
podcasting at large.

Look forward to some great stuff!
Greg

P.S. Check out the cities for my Beercasting America Tour
<http://beercasting.com> - let's meet up!

--
------------
http://beercasting.com
Beercasting - Podcasting With A Buzz!

Start Your Own Beercast Today!

Check out The NYC Beercasting Squad:
http://beercasting.com/shows/nyc-squad/



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

Hi all

I just opened up the group.

I'm Julian Doncaster - owner of this group.

I came into podcasting quite recently.

My special interest in podcasting is in the "do-it-yourself" aspects, and
the idea of reaching small, specialist audiences.

I started with podcasts for my site is at www.bestchurches.org.uk -
encouraging visits to ancient churches. My podcasts are short
segments highlighting good places to visit while on the way to somewhere
else.

My day job is as a freelance photographer/greeting card publisher, with a
specialism in low volume ranges for tourist attractions. Podcasting seems
complementary to this interest.

I've been in IT since about 1982. First computer was a BBC Micro. Degree is
in telecomms/computing. Recently, I was working in IT in London for a few
years, but got out a couple of years ago and I'm trying to make a go of the
photography.

Fun link: www.herecomesbod.com, a children's TV programme from my youth. See
the episode "Bod's Dream" at http://www.herecomesbod.com/html/bodsDream.html
.

I started this group and website (www.herecomespod.org.uk/review) because it
seemed like a good thing to do at the time, and there was an expressed need.

Julian

Commercial website: www.thepicturepost.co.uk
Podcast review website: www.herecomespod.org.uk/review/
Podcast review text webfeed:
www.herecomespod.org.uk/review/podcast-review.xml
Podcast review podcast webfeed:
www.herecomespod.org.uk/review/podcast-review.xml
Blog: www.herecomespod/blog/
Podcast/RSS: http://www.bestchurches.org.uk/rss/offthebeatentrack.xml

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the podcast-review
group.

   File        : /GuideLines.txt
   Uploaded by : julianduk <julianduk@...>
   Description : Guidelines for Podcast-Review Group

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/podcast-review/files/GuideLines.txt

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

julianduk <julianduk@...>

I'll be doing these things today:

* Clear the webpage of podcasts apart from a link to my latest
"ancient church" podcast and Mike's Manic Minute, leaving these 2
short ones for people to look at rather than an empty site. I trust
that is OK.

(If anybody wants to keep looking at the site as it is now, there is a
development copy on www.herecomespod.org.uk/reviewtest/ ).

* Clear the list archives of anything sensitive.

* Putting the user guidance about the list together, into the
introductory message and also post a copy on the web site. Following
our conversations I'll not push the idea of "review editor" heavily -
so that we can think about it some more.

* Approving members for the list. Currently I have 23 awaiting
approval. I will be asking people to introduce themselves but not to
post too many messages until we start reviewing.

* Bringing the pr-moderators group online for this sort of posting.
This is the "private group" we have been talking about for discussing
the management of the list.

You should all have received invitations to join.

(Steve F - Yahoo seems happy with your email now so I just made you a
moderator of podcast-review and invited you to join pr-moderators.)

During the weekend I'll be:

* Asking each of for a podcast for review in the first week. As
discussed before I'm planning to put in one podcast from each of us -
to introduce the moderators.

I'll send a separate email asking for your suggestion. If anyone
doesn't want to be in this first group, that's fine - please say so.

At the end of the weekend I'll be:

* Introducing the "starter" group of podcasts for review to the
podcast-review list.

* Telling people how to submit a podcast suggestion.

* Posting a note on the other mailing lists.

I think that's it for now. Phew <8-). Please email me if I have missed
anything. I hope no one's sinking under the emails (don't worry we are
going to be OK!)

Rgds + thanks for all the help

Julian

For info: my Yahoo Instant Messageing and Skype IDs are both
julianduk. I am having Skype problems, however.

From: "revolution_in_the_corner" <podcast-review@...>
To: <podcast-review@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 2:12 PM
Subject: [podcast-review] Re: Suggested Approach to running the list


> Generally, this all looks good. I've posted my questions and responses
> below. I might be asking some pretty obvious questions, but I just wanted
> to make sure I'm on the same page as everyone else before we open the
> floodgates.

Far better to have all the questions asked <g>.

First thing to say is that everything is quite provisional - so up for
change if it doesn't work.

> > * Selection of podcasts done using whatever criteria the Editor chooses
but
> > they need to state what those are in advance on the calendar.
>
> Not that I'm criticizing this at all, but I wonder why we're posting the
> criteria for choosing each podcast.

My thinking is that if something is published on the calendar, say like
this:

<this week's theme>Podcasts about Travelling
<week 2 theme>Podcasts by women
<week 3 theme>Podcasts about technology
<week 4 theme>Podcasts to entertain your children
<week 5 theme>Anything goes
<week 6 theme>News Podcasts

We get::

* A bit of notice so people can make a podcast to submit - will get some
people started in podcasting.
* Some structure to the list discussions over the short-medium term.
* A hook for specialist audiences and the opportunity for existing list
members to talk to their friends. "Hey there are podcasts about your job on
podcast-review next week" rather than "Hey podcast-review is cool".
* A chance to look back over several months to see that we are covering a
range of areas.

> > * The Editor posts a separate message (roughly format I have suggested
> > before on list) on the day before the week starts.
>
> I'll have to go back and read this earlier posted format, but I assume
> this will be fine.

I'm going to suggest a couple of changes, but
>

> I would prefer to ask now rather than later: What is the purpose of
> assigning one person to be the main Editor for a week?

Mainly variety, and that podcasting is changing rapidly so if we all do
things we are more likely to keep up to date with new things. There's
nothing to stop another of us telling the editor about a great new podcast
we found.

I've never
> been part of a group that was structured like this. I can see the
> main advantage for us: no one person gets burnt out with admin
> duties if this group becomes popular. Is there a distinct advantage
> for the main body of group members?

Yes. They get to know who to approach if they have something for review, and
over time who is interested in which areas.

> What is the advantage for the general group of making the Editor
> stand up and essentially introduce him or herself every week?

Same as above - but I hope it won't be quite that formal.

> > * Any member can submit a podcast for review (Question: do we want a
single
> > dedicated email address for this?) or the moderator can invite external
> > guests. Question: do we require the author of an external podcast to
join
> > the group for the week?
>
> Should we select only from the submitted podcasts or will these just be
> a collection of podcasts we can choose from if we prefer?

My initial ought was start off leaving it to the editor completely, but I
think it is important to take from both those suggested and those you think
are good and deserve a wider audience.

Perhaps we could say take at least 2 which you like and think will be of
interest to the group, and two of those suggested in your group of 4-6.

I'm quite keen on the idea of having one each week from a "podcast
celebrity" (e.g., Adam, Doug Kaye, Ami Gahran, Tod Maffin) who joins the
list for the week - perhaps we should let the list establish itself before
trying that.
>
> > * At the end of the week the discussion of that weeks podcasts ceases on
the
> > list. This should probably a sharp (say 1 day?) but voluntary cut-off.
>
> So we're going to expect non-moderators to voluntarily stop threads
> when the week's review for a specific podcast is up?
Yes.

>If they don't will
> we be doing anything to enforce this? I'm envisioning us having to
> politely remind people that we need to move on. That's not a problem
> for me, I just wanted to make sure we're all clear on the anticipated
> protocol.

Correct. I don't expect any problems early on, as most people are acquainted
from other forums and should be polite.

One reason for having a few moderators is so that if it is necessary we have
the resource to change to be a fully moderated list (i.e., each message is
approved) for a bit - which I don't expect to happen. I think it will
self-moderate.

There are a couple of other things we can do to soften the cutoff - one
would be to have a "last weeks podcasts" page on the website with a
blog-like comments mechanism.
>
> > Other points:
> >
> > * In general conversations should be using interleaved comments, and
> > trailing messages should be trimmed.
>
> I've never moderated a Yahoo group before. Are the tools for enforcing
> this obvious? I'm also assuming that people signing up will be asked to
> review expected rules for participation before joining. Do we have these
> ready for people to read?

Yes they will be in the introductory message and linked from the home page.

If it is necessary members can be moderated on a per-individual basis.

>
> > Ideas:
> >
> > * There may be a case for "special guests" - e.g., we get Doug Kaye to
> > submit a podcast, and then come on list for the week to talk about it.
> > Established "stars" will pull an audience and have a lot to teach us
all.
>
> I'm all for popularizing the process. Can we all agree not to fawn over
> anyone in public. Let the "stars" stand on their own merit and pretty much
> defend and present themselves, okay?

Yes. Now there's a thought - throwing Dave Winer off the list <g>

I'd expect them to learn as much as us.

>
> > * There may be an advantage in having "themed" weeks (e.g., podcasts for
> > education, podcasts by women, 'live" broadcasts, related to rock music
etc).
>
> Especially around public events, I see this as a good thing. We should
> probably avoid any specific religious or personal themes at the
> expense of others. Maybe themes should be discussed internally
> before being used in the public group?

Agreed.

>
> > * Do we want a single dedicated email address for submission, where we
all
> > know the password. This would provide a list of "possibles" available
each
> > week.
>
> Excellent idea, IMO.

Now set up on gmail by Steve D.

>
> > * Who wants to do the first week? This should probably be someone who
has
> > listened to lots of podcasts - I have not done so as I have been
building
> > websites intensively. Volunteers?
>
> I've listened to a dozen or two, but only a few with regularity. I would
be
> willing to step up as a secondary moderator if someone with more varied
> podcast listening experience would man the helm.
>
> > * What day should we start the review week on? I can see a case for
Monday
> > (traditional start of work week), Wednesday (we won't have a rush of
comment
> > at the end of the weekend) or Saturday (more people are at home at the
start
> > of the weekend). I'm tempted to suggest the announcements of the
podcasts be
> > posted at midnight on the Tuesday (Yahoo will let you schedule this).
>
> Since we're still discussing this, I would say we shouldn't start any
earlier than
> Monday.

OK - I have said an ambiguous "at the end of the weekend" - so we'll see
when we are ready (probably Sunday everning or Monday morning). Always good
to keep them on tenterhooks.

>
> > * Do you think my suggested way of running the review process is about
> > right.
>
> I'm still a little unsure of the "Editor of the Week" structure of this
> proposal. If you haven't already, can you maybe provide a little more
> reassurance about this being the way to go. I'm not convinced yet.

I've done that above - any more comments very welcome.

In any case I suggest that after 6 weeks (1 set of podcasts each) we review
the way we are working.

What do you think?

If we don't do "editor of the week" we would need some other way to select a
set of podcasts for review. I'm open to doing that through  a discussion on
the moderators' list. What do others think? (and we'll see who reads this
post to the end....)

Julian

Generally, this all looks good. I've posted my questions and responses
below. I might be asking some pretty obvious questions, but I just wanted
to make sure I'm on the same page as everyone else before we open the
floodgates. I've removed sections of Julian's original post where I had
nothing to add:

--- In podcast-review@yahoogroups.com, "Julian Yahoo 1" <julianduk@y...> wrote:
> * Selection of podcasts done using whatever criteria the Editor chooses but
> they need to state what those are in advance on the calendar.

Not that I'm criticizing this at all, but I wonder why we're posting the
criteria for choosing each podcast. Will these criteria be up for internal
discussion after they're posted or will they be posted publicly to give
reviewers some "motivation" for sinking their teeth into this week's
selections?

> * The Editor posts a separate message (roughly format I have suggested
> before on list) on the day before the week starts.

I'll have to go back and read this earlier posted format, but I assume
this will be fine.

I would prefer to ask now rather than later: What is the purpose of
assigning one person to be the main Editor for a week?  I've never
been part of a group that was structured like this. I can see the
main advantage for us: no one person gets burnt out with admin
duties if this group becomes popular. Is there a distinct advantage
for the main body of group members?

What is the advantage for the general group of making the Editor
stand up and essentially introduce him or herself every week?

> * Any member can submit a podcast for review (Question: do we want a single
> dedicated email address for this?) or the moderator can invite external
> guests. Question: do we require the author of an external podcast to join
> the group for the week?

Should we select only from the submitted podcasts or will these just be
a collection of podcasts we can choose from if we prefer?

> * At the end of the week the discussion of that weeks podcasts ceases on the
> list. This should probably a sharp (say 1 day?) but voluntary cut-off.

So we're going to expect non-moderators to voluntarily stop threads
when the week's review for a specific podcast is up? If they don't will
we be doing anything to enforce this? I'm envisioning us having to
politely remind people that we need to move on. That's not a problem
for me, I just wanted to make sure we're all clear on the anticipated
protocol.

> Other points:
>
> * In general conversations should be using interleaved comments, and
> trailing messages should be trimmed.

I've never moderated a Yahoo group before. Are the tools for enforcing
this obvious? I'm also assuming that people signing up will be asked to
review expected rules for participation before joining. Do we have these
ready for people to read?

> Ideas:
>
> * There may be a case for "special guests" - e.g., we get Doug Kaye to
> submit a podcast, and then come on list for the week to talk about it.
> Established "stars" will pull an audience and have a lot to teach us all.

I'm all for popularizing the process. Can we all agree not to fawn over
anyone in public. Let the "stars" stand on their own merit and pretty much
defend and present themselves, okay?

> * There may be an advantage in having "themed" weeks (e.g., podcasts for
> education, podcasts by women, 'live" broadcasts, related to rock music etc).

Especially around public events, I see this as a good thing. We should
probably avoid any specific religious or personal themes at the
expense of others. Maybe themes should be discussed internally
before being used in the public group?

> * Do we want a single dedicated email address for submission, where we all
> know the password. This would provide a list of "possibles" available each
> week.

Excellent idea, IMO.

> * Who wants to do the first week? This should probably be someone who has
> listened to lots of podcasts - I have not done so as I have been building
> websites intensively. Volunteers?

I've listened to a dozen or two, but only a few with regularity. I would be
willing to step up as a secondary moderator if someone with more varied
podcast listening experience would man the helm.

> * What day should we start the review week on? I can see a case for Monday
> (traditional start of work week), Wednesday (we won't have a rush of comment
> at the end of the weekend) or Saturday (more people are at home at the start
> of the weekend). I'm tempted to suggest the announcements of the podcasts be
> posted at midnight on the Tuesday (Yahoo will let you schedule this).

Since we're still discussing this, I would say we shouldn't start any earlier
than
Monday.

> * Do you think my suggested way of running the review process is about
> right.

I'm still a little unsure of the "Editor of the Week" structure of this
proposal. If you haven't already, can you maybe provide a little more
reassurance about this being the way to go. I'm not convinced yet.

> Comments requested on suggested Yahoo settings:

They all seem logical and sober to me.

- Steve Fish

"Julian Yahoo 1" <julianduk@...> wrote:
>Thanks - good questions. I'll chime in with my thoughts in a few hours or
>tomorrow AM if that is OK - when I've had time to think a couple of things
>through.

Rule missing in your set:
No Fullqoutes. Fullqoutes are for full idiots. ;o)

Acutally this joke does not work as good as in german
Fullqoute - we say this in german also to describe fullqoutes
Volltrottel - stupid bloody idiot.

Full and Voll are the same in meaning. A person who does fullqoutes is
therefor a Vollquottel. ;o)

Nicole

--
podcasts: http://gnak.de/ - http://useful-sounds.de/ (english)
blogs: http://beissholz.de/ - http://ideengeberin.de/

Right guys - I'm ready to go live on this list. I suggest we start at the
weekend and that the first discussion period run from Saturday 8th January
to Tuesday 18th January. The longer period is to allow some more time for
people to join and for teething troubles to get sorted out.

I've hooked up a "shopwindow" which people outside the list can see:

* A blog (with an audio stream player) for the show notes and review
questions each time.
* A podcast feed (with enclosures). We'd never live it down if we didn't
have one of these.
* A webfeed (no enclosures) which can have just the text.

Updating of these can be triggered from an email sent at the same time as
you send podcasts for review to the list. I'll send details off list.

Addresses:

Blog: http://www.herecomespod.org.uk/review/
Webfeed: http://www.herecomespod.org.uk/review/podcast-review.xml
Podcast feed: http://www.herecomespod.org.uk/review/podcast-review_enc.xml
(Note: these may change in a couple of days when I get a domain)

What I need now:

* Confirmation from everyone that you are ready to rock.
* Comments on my emails of yesterday - if you agree please say so.
* A volunteer list moderator (or two) and review host for week one. I'm
happy to do this one. If I do, I'll be choosing one podcast from each of us
for review.

Calendar is here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/podcast-review/cal///group/podcast-review?v=4&t=11\
05142400&i=9&pv=2

Julian

----- Original Message -----
From: "Julian Doncaster (Yahoo1)" <julianduk@...>
To: <podcast-review@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 2:54 PM
Subject: [podcast-review] Test Postings


>
> Just to let you know that I'm sending through a couple of test postings
this
> afternoon.
>
> They will have the MP3 file's location in the title.
>
> Julian
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

OK - here we go with my suggestions. There are several questions in the text
but I've listed them at the bottom for ease of comment. This is quite long,
but I wanted to cover all the bases.

I think we need consensus from everyone before we go live - but if everyone
agrees then I'm happy to go live by the weekend. Who wants to do the first
week?

ISTM that the main difficulties with this group will be these:

* It could get turned into a place where people just send their podcasts for
promotion - as they do with (for example) openpodcast.org. That is not our
purpose. Rather we are about reviewing podcasts so that we can all learn. I
note that Ben Tucker is tightening up openpodcast.org by attempting to split
off "promos".
* We could get swamped by members or podcasts for review, which would
fragment the conversation. This implies that we need some clear but relaxed
regulation - that will work whether the group bumbles along with 50 members,
or shoots up to have 1000. I'm remembering Adam Curry's comment that
ipodder-dev "went out of control".
* The moderator workload could be heavy.
* The group could get daunting to newcomers. For example - 50 new podcasts a
day might have this effect.

Therefore my suggested starting point is:

* A selection of 3-6 podcasts selected for review each week by the "Editor
for the Week". The Editor would be each of us in turn.
* This process can be managed via a Yahoogroups Calendar with the on-duty
moderators published 2-3 weeks in advance.
* Selection of podcasts done using whatever criteria the Editor chooses but
they need to state what those are in advance on the calendar.
* The Editor posts a separate message (roughly format I have suggested
before on list) on the day before the week starts.
* Any member can submit a podcast for review (Question: do we want a single
dedicated email address for this?) or the moderator can invite external
guests. Question: do we require the author of an external podcast to join
the group for the week?
* At the end of the week the discussion of that weeks podcasts ceases on the
list. This should probably a sharp (say 1 day?) but voluntary cut-off.
* In addition to the "podcast selector" there is another 1 (or 2?)
moderators on duty that week to keep an eye on the list - so that the
"podcast selector" can focus on the conversation. Off-duty moderators can
still intervene if necessary in emergency, The "duty rota" would also be
placed on the calendar. This sounds complicated but it works on other lists
I am involved in.

Yahoo settings:

* Members only can post (I'm sure about this)
* New members only require approval  for the first week or so (comments?)
* Archive access by members only (comments?)
* Archive access by members only (comments?)
* Posters' email addresses truncated - Yahoo still lets you get in touch via
a form (I'm fairly sure about this)
* Attachments absolutely not allowed (I'm dead certain about this!)
* Files area limited to moderators (I'm sure about this)
* Monthly reminder of guidelines and how to unsubscribe sent out. (I'm sure
about this)

We tolerate a certain amount of off topic chatter (indicated by OT: in the
subject), but keep an eye on it. "On topic" means related to this week's
review podcasts.

Other points:

* In general conversations should be using interleaved comments, and
trailing messages should be trimmed.
* The list language is English.

Ideas:

* There may be a case for "special guests" - e.g., we get Doug Kaye to
submit a podcast, and then come on list for the week to talk about it.
Established "stars" will pull an audience and have a lot to teach us all.
* There may be an advantage in having "themed" weeks (e.g., podcasts for
education, podcasts by women, 'live" broadcasts, related to rock music etc).
* There are other features we can use later - Yahoo polls etc for "podcast
of the week". I suggest we get going for a couple of weeks before we think
about those.

Questions for comment

* Do we want a single dedicated email address for submission, where we all
know the password. This would provide a list of "possibles" available each
week.
* Who wants to do the first week? This should probably be someone who has
listened to lots of podcasts - I have not done so as I have been building
websites intensively. Volunteers?
* What day should we start the review week on? I can see a case for Monday
(traditional start of work week), Wednesday (we won't have a rush of comment
at the end of the weekend) or Saturday (more people are at home at the start
of the weekend). I'm tempted to suggest the announcements of the podcasts be
posted at midnight on the Tuesday (Yahoo will let you schedule this).
* Do you think my suggested way of running the review process is about
right.
* Is there anything I need to think about in more detail?

Comments requested on suggested Yahoo settings:

* Members only can post (I'm sure about this)
* New members only require approval  for the first week or so (comments?)
* Archive access by members only (comments?)
* Archive access by members only (comments?)
* Posters' email addresses truncated - Yahoo still lets you get in touch via
a form (I'm fairly sure about this)
* Attachments absolutely not allowed (I'm dead certain about this!)
* Files area limited to moderators (I'm sure about this)
* Monthly reminder of guidelines and how to unsubscribe sent out. (I'm sure
about this)

Moderation and Moderators in Yahoogroups



This has taken a couple of days to put together and edit down - sorry to
keep you waiting and I hope that everyone had a good break. This post is a
few thoughts about the role of moderators in Yahoo groups. My suggestions
for policies for podcast-review are a separate posting. Comments,
improvements, corrections are extremely welcome - these are just a start. It
outlines the factors I have been thinking about that provide the background
information to the policies.



A successful Email Group is one that works almost without intervention-
moderators seem to be invisible. This happens when a group has an
established "style" accepted by the critical mass of members, and
"self-moderate".



The main job of moderators is to begin and support that process.



·        In the early stages of a group moderators set and demonstrate the
style of the group.

·        As a group grows moderators intervene as necessary, in a consistent
way, to maintain the style.

·        If anything gets out of hand, moderators are responsible for
enforcement measures - usually the minimum necessary.



It takes time for any group for any group to get to know itself. This is
more difficult when there is:



·        Rapid growth or turnover of membership.

·        A very large group.

·        Very heavy traffic.

·        Different and distinct subgroups (examples: two languages with few
bilingual speakers; two separate interest groups).

·        Disrespect between group members.



Several aspects can be controlled in Yahoo:



·        New members: require approval / do not require approval

·        Who can post: anyone / members / moderators / owner

·        Messages requiring approval: all messages / no messages / new users

·        Archive access: anyone / members only / moderators only

·        Visibility of posters email address: visible / not visible



How many moderators are needed?



·        The Yahoo limit is 15

·        Few enough to keep in touch with each other

·        Enough so that no individual gets swamped by the work

·        Enough so that events or emergencies requiring action can be done
quickly enough (probably means within 3-6 hours - but depends on style of
group) .This implies that - one or other of the moderators is on every ho

·        Enough so that jobs can be rotated and the process is resilient.
Need cover for holidays / busy periods / someone getting run over by a bus
are covered



© Julian Doncaster - julianduk@.... 4/1/2004.

May be reproduced with acknowledgement.

> So are we decided to proceed in a manner that makes us
> the reviewers and everyone else the content providers? I'm
> concerned that doing so, even if effective in the short
> term, sets us up to be perceived as self-appointed experts.
> In my opinion, this not only puts the bulk of responsibility
> on our backs, but also isn't best for the Podcasting
> community.

No we haven't - I've been away for a bit and haven't been able to post what
I meant by moderator.

My fault -sorry.

Hold your horses for a few hours and I'll be there <8-!.

> Consider this: we could be moderators for the group, but
> allow everyone to chime in with constructive criticism. We
> would instead spend our time refusing abusive content
> and responding to people about why their content wasn't
> approved. Although this isn't as glamourous a job, it
> allows the general intent of the group to be met without
> imposing our limited review perspective on an
> ever-changing medium.
>
You outline my intentions exactly.

Julian

Web: www.thepicturepost.co.uk
Blog: www.herecomespod.org.uk/blog/
Podcast/RSS: http://www.bestchurches.org.uk/rss/offthebeatentrack.xml

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve" <podcast-review@...>
To: <podcast-review@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 3:35 PM
Subject: [podcast-review] Re: Greetings from the other Steve


>
>
> So are we decided to proceed in a manner that makes us
> the reviewers and everyone else the content providers? I'm
> concerned that doing so, even if effective in the short
> term, sets us up to be perceived as self-appointed experts.
> In my opinion, this not only puts the bulk of responsibility
> on our backs, but also isn't best for the Podcasting
> community.
>
> Consider this: we could be moderators for the group, but
> allow everyone to chime in with constructive criticism. We
> would instead spend our time refusing abusive content
> and responding to people about why their content wasn't
> approved. Although this isn't as glamourous a job, it
> allows the general intent of the group to be met without
> imposing our limited review perspective on an
> ever-changing medium.
>
> The other other Steve   ;)
>
> --- In podcast-review@yahoogroups.com, Gregory Narain <greg@b...> wrote:
> > Hey Steve,
> >
> > Gld you're in the loop now and ready to rumble.  I wanted to pitch in
> > some input on your idea and tie it back to a little project I took part
> > in with a friend.  This project was called the Weblog Invasion Tour
> > (WIT) and it served to bring awareness to various blogs out there that
> > we thought were of note but needed more attention.  We went about this
> > by linking to them, commenting on their site, etc. as much as we could
> > for 1 week.  At the end, we moved on to another site.
> >
> > I know this was effective because it was how I met my friend.  He had
> > been reading my site and nominated it for this "service".
> >
> > I prefer the framework you lay out here mostly because it gets to be
> > extremely harried if we have thousands of reviews flying by.  At the
> > same time, I almost feel like it would be a bit stifling so early in the
> > Podcasting world if we only got a small segment reviewed.  Perhaps
> > there's a hybrid approach that could be used.
> >
> > Another project which I hosted recently on my site was something called
> > the "Carnival of the Capitalists".  It's a roving blog billboard.  The
> > way it works is that people volunteer to host the Carnival (right now
> > they have hosts dedicated all the way through May or something).  The
> > week before your designated to be the host, you are given the login to a
> > gmail account.  All people who want to have a piece published in the
> > COTC for that week send an e-mail with either a link or synopsis to
> > their article.  It then becomes the week's host to read through all the
> > posts and then pick out the best ones, etc. and write their entry up.
> >
> > I haven't really given this much thought, but let me give it a shot.  We
> > would easily use the a separate list or mail account for registration
> > purposes by which submissions for the list are given.  We could then
> > also make a decision like you outlined and designate a few to be
> > processed each week.and publicize this.  Anyone can send direct comments
> > to anyone on the list immediately if they so desired.. The week's
> > reviews, though, would be moderated by us and filtered to focus down on
> > those few sites we're allowing in.
> >
> > One of the things that ranks high in my minds is a sense of reputation
> > and discovery.  I would like to have a way to know who's rating the
> > Podcast, be able to find out more about their show, etc.
> > Well these are just some rough ideas, they are not really lucid right
> > now, but I will make another pass once I've had a moment to digest my
> > coffee :)   For anyone that's thinking this might be hard to manage,
> > I'll be happy to whip up the backed to process this sort of thing.
> >
> > I've already been keen on getting some sort of Weekly Top XX list going
> > to highlight what's hot/new for the week.
> > More later,
> > Greg
> >
> > --
> > ------------
> > http://beercasting.com
> > Served Fresh and Frost (Almost) Every Single Damned Day!
> >
> > Start Your Own Beercast Today!
> >
> > Check out The re:chaj Show:
> > http://beercasting.com/shows/reChaj
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

So are we decided to proceed in a manner that makes us
the reviewers and everyone else the content providers? I'm
concerned that doing so, even if effective in the short
term, sets us up to be perceived as self-appointed experts.
In my opinion, this not only puts the bulk of responsibility
on our backs, but also isn't best for the Podcasting
community.

Consider this: we could be moderators for the group, but
allow everyone to chime in with constructive criticism. We
would instead spend our time refusing abusive content
and responding to people about why their content wasn't
approved. Although this isn't as glamourous a job, it
allows the general intent of the group to be met without
imposing our limited review perspective on an
ever-changing medium.

The other other Steve   ;)

--- In podcast-review@yahoogroups.com, Gregory Narain <greg@b...> wrote:
> Hey Steve,
>
> Gld you're in the loop now and ready to rumble.  I wanted to pitch in
> some input on your idea and tie it back to a little project I took part
> in with a friend.  This project was called the Weblog Invasion Tour
> (WIT) and it served to bring awareness to various blogs out there that
> we thought were of note but needed more attention.  We went about this
> by linking to them, commenting on their site, etc. as much as we could
> for 1 week.  At the end, we moved on to another site.
>
> I know this was effective because it was how I met my friend.  He had
> been reading my site and nominated it for this "service".
>
> I prefer the framework you lay out here mostly because it gets to be
> extremely harried if we have thousands of reviews flying by.  At the
> same time, I almost feel like it would be a bit stifling so early in the
> Podcasting world if we only got a small segment reviewed.  Perhaps
> there's a hybrid approach that could be used.
>
> Another project which I hosted recently on my site was something called
> the "Carnival of the Capitalists".  It's a roving blog billboard.  The
> way it works is that people volunteer to host the Carnival (right now
> they have hosts dedicated all the way through May or something).  The
> week before your designated to be the host, you are given the login to a
> gmail account.  All people who want to have a piece published in the
> COTC for that week send an e-mail with either a link or synopsis to
> their article.  It then becomes the week's host to read through all the
> posts and then pick out the best ones, etc. and write their entry up.
>
> I haven't really given this much thought, but let me give it a shot.  We
> would easily use the a separate list or mail account for registration
> purposes by which submissions for the list are given.  We could then
> also make a decision like you outlined and designate a few to be
> processed each week.and publicize this.  Anyone can send direct comments
> to anyone on the list immediately if they so desired.. The week's
> reviews, though, would be moderated by us and filtered to focus down on
> those few sites we're allowing in.
>
> One of the things that ranks high in my minds is a sense of reputation
> and discovery.  I would like to have a way to know who's rating the
> Podcast, be able to find out more about their show, etc.
> Well these are just some rough ideas, they are not really lucid right
> now, but I will make another pass once I've had a moment to digest my
> coffee :)   For anyone that's thinking this might be hard to manage,
> I'll be happy to whip up the backed to process this sort of thing.
>
> I've already been keen on getting some sort of Weekly Top XX list going
> to highlight what's hot/new for the week.
> More later,
> Greg
>
> --
> ------------
> http://beercasting.com
> Served Fresh and Frost (Almost) Every Single Damned Day!
>
> Start Your Own Beercast Today!
>
> Check out The re:chaj Show:
> http://beercasting.com/shows/reChaj

Hey Steve,

Gld you're in the loop now and ready to rumble.  I wanted to pitch in
some input on your idea and tie it back to a little project I took part
in with a friend.  This project was called the Weblog Invasion Tour
(WIT) and it served to bring awareness to various blogs out there that
we thought were of note but needed more attention.  We went about this
by linking to them, commenting on their site, etc. as much as we could
for 1 week.  At the end, we moved on to another site.

I know this was effective because it was how I met my friend.  He had
been reading my site and nominated it for this "service".

I prefer the framework you lay out here mostly because it gets to be
extremely harried if we have thousands of reviews flying by.  At the
same time, I almost feel like it would be a bit stifling so early in the
Podcasting world if we only got a small segment reviewed.  Perhaps
there's a hybrid approach that could be used.

Another project which I hosted recently on my site was something called
the "Carnival of the Capitalists".  It's a roving blog billboard.  The
way it works is that people volunteer to host the Carnival (right now
they have hosts dedicated all the way through May or something).  The
week before your designated to be the host, you are given the login to a
gmail account.  All people who want to have a piece published in the
COTC for that week send an e-mail with either a link or synopsis to
their article.  It then becomes the week's host to read through all the
posts and then pick out the best ones, etc. and write their entry up.

I haven't really given this much thought, but let me give it a shot.  We
would easily use the a separate list or mail account for registration
purposes by which submissions for the list are given.  We could then
also make a decision like you outlined and designate a few to be
processed each week.and publicize this.  Anyone can send direct comments
to anyone on the list immediately if they so desired.. The week's
reviews, though, would be moderated by us and filtered to focus down on
those few sites we're allowing in.

One of the things that ranks high in my minds is a sense of reputation
and discovery.  I would like to have a way to know who's rating the
Podcast, be able to find out more about their show, etc.
Well these are just some rough ideas, they are not really lucid right
now, but I will make another pass once I've had a moment to digest my
coffee :)   For anyone that's thinking this might be hard to manage,
I'll be happy to whip up the backed to process this sort of thing.

I've already been keen on getting some sort of Weekly Top XX list going
to highlight what's hot/new for the week.
More later,
Greg

--
------------
http://beercasting.com
Served Fresh and Frost (Almost) Every Single Damned Day!

Start Your Own Beercast Today!

Check out The re:chaj Show:
http://beercasting.com/shows/reChaj

Just got back from Punta Cana and I'm ecstatic that this group is
getting moving.  I think it's a fantastic idea and there's definitely
a need for it.

Ok, first a quick introduction (so we know where we're all coming
from) and then I'll get into my thoughts for the group.  I'm an
educator from Chicago.  I taught Kindergarten for 4 years and then
took over as Director of Technology.  I've been podcasting for about
three or four weeks now, and have finished 7 podcasts now.  I started
off just checking it out to see how feasible it would be to use in an
elementary setting, but I've really begun to enjoy it and intend to
continue on.  <shameless plug>If you want to check it out, you can
find it at Teach42.com</shameless plug>

As to the group itself, I think that one of the great things about
podcasting is that it has the ability to reach niches.  I talked about
this in a podcast I think (or it might have been one of the ones I
deleted).  The reason that TechTV has failed again and again is that
it doesn't appeal to broad enough audience to make it profitable.
That's not to say it didn't have a ton of people who watched it (and
still do), but with all the overhead, it just isn't a winning formula.
  However a podcast costs nothing.  If someone wants to do a podcast
about people who are interested in the way technology is affecting the
rodeo clown industry, they can do it.  Perhaps there might only be 10
other people in the world who are also interested in the subject but a
person could do that podcast and reach those 10 people.

Ok, didn't mean to evangelize, but the reason I mentioned that is
because I don't think limiting the reviews to just a few people is a
necessarily a good idea.  I was thinking that we really ought to
figure out a process whereby we identify two or three podcasts for a
given week and encourage conversation about then.  Not just about the
content, but about the quality and style of the podcast itself as
well.  For a full week, the conversation revolves around a few
podcasts and we really get into them in depth.

Alright, I'm exhausted from jetlag and probably not thinking too
clearly.  But I'm very excited about the group!

Steve
www.teach42.com

For me, the example makes your "request for feedback" posting rules clear.
Thanks for
including that.

Since this is a new group, I have to ask: Do we, as moderators, have specific
guidelines
about what we are supposed to do? Are we 6 going to be the only ones reviewing
content
and providing feedback? I certainly don't want this to devolve into a "your
podcast sucks"
message board and see the value in restricting feedback in some way, but don't
want this
to become a group where people submit their work for our approval.

This is probably what you mean by making us moderators: We moderate posts before
they
show up on the group page, but generally allow the discussion to flow freely
unless there's
a problem with a submission. Is that accurate? If so, does anyone have
experience in
effectively isolating the signal from the noise? I guess that's what the carbon
copy/private
group would be for... discussing that and other issues related to effectively
moderating the
group.

On another note, I am concerned that making the group archives public would
introduce
an unnecessary avenue for abuse. Since we want to provide people a place where
they feel
safe asking for feedback and searching for answers, it doesn't seem like much to
expect
people to join before they can read the posts. If participants will be providing
meaningful
criticism and honestly looking for intelligent responses, joining the group
seems like a
helpful minimal litmus test for people to pass. I guess it boils down to
analyzing whether
the advantages of public access to reviews outweighs the disadvantages. I don't
think it
does, but could be persuaded otherwise. Maybe we should start with the archives
private
and make them public if its requested and we agree it's advantageous.

Steve - Revolution in the Corner
http://revolutioninthecorner.com/

--- In podcast-review@yahoogroups.com, "julianduk" <julianduk@y...> wrote:
>
>
> Ok guys.
>
> I've been thinking about running the group. I think we need some
> guidelines, and I've included a few suggestions after my signoff
> below.
>
> For the group, I'd suggest that I make all of us six founders into
> moderators, and that we see how it goes from there. That way there
> will be someone there to deal with any issues more regularly.
>
> I think we will need to be quite strong about this only being a
> review, not a discussion, group - especially if podcasting grows
> quickly.
>
> I'd also suggest that we limit the file area to demos, and non-MP3
> documents.
>
> As for us moderators talking among ourselves, I think carbon copies
> should do it - but we can always create a private moderators'
> discussion list later if we need. If we want to, we could do a "week
> on, several weeks off" moderation setup - but we can set that up
> later.
>
> Any comments/suggestions welcome. What do you think about access to
> archives - should they be public?
>
> I'd like to be up and running by New Year if possible - but if we
> need longer to work things out with people being away, we can take
> the time.
>
> Julian
>
>
> * Basics:
>
>  - No attachments. Period.
>  - The list is for review of programmes, not for testing whether a
> web feed or link works, and not for or asking "how do I do this"
> questions. Anyone posting a link should have tested that it works.
>  - Of course, responses can include technical advice.
>  - The files area only to be used by moderators.
>  - Plain text only in postings.
>  - No flaming. Period.
>
> * Purpose: to review podcasts in order to help improve the ability of
> podcasters by constructive criticism.
>
> * Method
>
>  - Post details of a podcast: which may be a link to an MP3 or RSS
> feed. It must include the link, the size of the file, and the length
> of the programme. If the link is a long one, also post a shorturl.
> (e.g., www.tinyurl.com)
>  - Optionally, post an explanation of why you have made the programme
> in a particular way, and details of any questions you would like to
> ask or areas where you are looking for comment.
>  - Responses and comments must be under the same title.
>
> Example of a posting:
>
> --------------------------------------
> Podcast: Off the Beaten Track: Visit Charing Church in Kent, England
>
> Full Link:
> http://www.herecomespod.org.uk/mp3/bech/Kent_Charing_St_Peter_and_St_P
> aul.mp3
> Short Link: http://tinyurl.com/5u77g
> Duration (mm:ss): 4:39
> Size: 1.85Mb
>
> This podcast is to encourage visitors to my ancient local church
> building.
>
> Please comment on:
>
> * My use of the music.
> * The way I have explained about the building.
> * The length of the programme.
> * Anything that you think can be improved.
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> Julian Doncaster
> ------------------------------

First of all, I'm glad to be part of this group. I've wanted this kind of
feedback and feel
lucky to be part of a group willing to offer useful, constructive criticism for
Podcasters.

Secondly, I've been in many different bands over the years, played many
instruments, and
produced lots of personal audio content. I have a degree in Communications
(Radio,
Television, & Film with an emphasis on Radio/Audio production) from the
University of
Texas, but that and $10 will get me a cup of coffee at Starbucks these days.
I've never
seriously pursued a job in the field. Although I've recently created a bunch of
new music
using my Mac, Podcasting not only gives me an outlet for that music, but also
all of the
other ways I've experimented with computer audio technology over the years. It's
a great
new opportunity to give people a voice to reach the micro (or possibly even
macro)
audience that shares their interests.

So how did I get into Podcasting specifically? I'm based in Austin, TX and
created a Weblog
(Revolution in the Corner) to address the growing need I saw for people to
formulate new
creative ideas without worrying about pleasing a mass audience. The music scene
in
Austin is stagnating because everyone is more interested in fitting into a niche
or making
millions of fans (and dollars) instead of making the best product they can. The
site was
intended to address the need for creating great new work for yourself (hence the
Revolution "in the corner") and then see if other people like it instead of
producing with
the larger audience in mind. Although it's basically a soapbox for me right now,
I hope to
eventually evolve it into a place where other people can participate as well.
Podcasting
became a natural extension of this need to create for and effectively reach
smaller
audiences.

Unfortunately, (in my opinion) the medium has quickly devolved into small
cliques - new
podcasts only deemed legitimate when they become "recognized" by a small number
of
people who are considered the leaders of Podcasting. In my mind, that completely
defeats
the potential greatness of this medium. Not that there's anything inherently
nefarious
within the existing structure (except the strong potential for stagnation),
there just need
to be viable alternatives. There will always be great content creators who don't
get much
recognition. This group can be the way they get the constructive feedback they
need to
keep going.

I've recently been having major technological problems with my Mac and iPod, so
I should
have plenty of time to pop in here, promote the group, and provide input and
feedback as
needed. I look forward to participating and helping this be meaningful and
helpful to the
Podcast community.

Thanks,

Steve - Revolution in the Corner
http://revolutioninthecorner.com/

Ok guys.

I've been thinking about running the group. I think we need some
guidelines, and I've included a few suggestions after my signoff
below.

For the group, I'd suggest that I make all of us six founders into
moderators, and that we see how it goes from there. That way there
will be someone there to deal with any issues more regularly.

I think we will need to be quite strong about this only being a
review, not a discussion, group - especially if podcasting grows
quickly.

I'd also suggest that we limit the file area to demos, and non-MP3
documents.

As for us moderators talking among ourselves, I think carbon copies
should do it - but we can always create a private moderators'
discussion list later if we need. If we want to, we could do a "week
on, several weeks off" moderation setup - but we can set that up
later.

Any comments/suggestions welcome. What do you think about access to
archives - should they be public?

I'd like to be up and running by New Year if possible - but if we
need longer to work things out with people being away, we can take
the time.

Julian


* Basics:

  - No attachments. Period.
  - The list is for review of programmes, not for testing whether a
web feed or link works, and not for or asking "how do I do this"
questions. Anyone posting a link should have tested that it works.
  - Of course, responses can include technical advice.
  - The files area only to be used by moderators.
  - Plain text only in postings.
  - No flaming. Period.

* Purpose: to review podcasts in order to help improve the ability of
podcasters by constructive criticism.

* Method

  - Post details of a podcast: which may be a link to an MP3 or RSS
feed. It must include the link, the size of the file, and the length
of the programme. If the link is a long one, also post a shorturl.
(e.g., www.tinyurl.com)
  - Optionally, post an explanation of why you have made the programme
in a particular way, and details of any questions you would like to
ask or areas where you are looking for comment.
  - Responses and comments must be under the same title.

Example of a posting:

--------------------------------------
Podcast: Off the Beaten Track: Visit Charing Church in Kent, England

Full Link:
http://www.herecomespod.org.uk/mp3/bech/Kent_Charing_St_Peter_and_St_P
aul.mp3
Short Link: http://tinyurl.com/5u77g
Duration (mm:ss): 4:39
Size: 1.85Mb

This podcast is to encourage visitors to my ancient local church
building.

Please comment on:

* My use of the music.
* The way I have explained about the building.
* The length of the programme.
* Anything that you think can be improved.

Thanks for your help.

Julian Doncaster
------------------------------

Steve Dembo (<sdembo@...>  http://www.revolutioninthecorner.com/) has
offered to come on board, so I have sent him an invitation.

That makes 6, which feels about right.

I'm just about to post some suggestions on how to run the list.

Perhaps we can be running by New Year.

Julian

Web: www.thepicturepost.co.uk
Blog: www.therules.blog-city.com
Podcast/RSS: http://www.bestchurches.org.uk/rss/offthebeatentrack.xml

I'm based in Derbshire - pretty much central in England, between Nottingham and
Sheffield.

I came into podcasting very recently (about 10 days ago). Im interested in the
"do-it-yourself" aspects, and the idea of reaching small, specialist audiences.

My website for my podcasts is at www.bestchurches.org.uk. My podcasts are short
segments highlighting good places to visit while on the way to somewhere else. I
may be doing some more stuff at www.herecomepod.org.uk .

My day job is as a freelance photographer/greeting card publisher, with a
specialism in low volume ranges for tourist attractions. I have done ranges for
a number of our local Cathedrals.

I've been in IT since about 1982. First computer was a BBC Micro. Degree is in
telecomms/computing. Recently, I was working in IT in London for a few years,
but got out a couple of years ago and I'm trying to make a go of the
photography.

Fun link: www.herecomesbod.com, a children's TV programme from my youth. See the
episode "Bod's Dream" at http://www.herecomesbod.com/html/bodsDream.html .

Julian

Web: www.thepicturepost.co.uk
Blog: www.therules.blog-city.com
Podcast/RSS: http://www.bestchurches.org.uk/rss/offthebeatentrack.xml


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

Hello all,

I thought I would do a quick intro since Julian made it possible.

For anyone that doesn't remember me, I am the self-appointed antagonist
for the [podcasters] list.  Though it may seem I am here to make
trouble, nothing could be further from the truth.  As a
techno-socio-preneur I am always keen to three sorts of things: 1) those
things that involve technology 2) those things that drive people into
technology and 3) those things that create opportunities for business.

My main concern with everything, however, is to figure out how to make
technology easier for everyone to understand and use.  Over the past 10
years or so I have held every conceivable position from graphic designer
to programmer to marketing and brand consultant and on.  I hope I can
use that experience to help us all be successful as this thing grows.

My specific interest in Podcasting (what I call Beercasting and soon
Sparkcasting) is on the side that creation side.  I am working to make
podcasting into a social tool for people to meet one another and begin
relationships of any kind.  In my opinion, the entire process is still
too complicated for most people and I am actually removing the process
from them, reducing it down to simply the committment to show up for the
event.  So far, the process is quite infectious and I'm getting more and
more RSVPs each week to do it.  To put it simply, people love doing it
but most would not show up if they had to do the backend processing.

So that's my schtick.  I'm here if anyone needs help in any area I can help.

Best regards and happy holidays!
Greg
http://beercasting.com
julianduk wrote:

>
>
> That was quick - several of you have joined already.
>
> I'll post some suggestions for the group this evening - if I
> haven't "imbibed too much of the juice of the grape" <8-*
>
> In the meantime I've opened up posting so that we can send an intro.
>
> I think most of us know each other already, though.
>
> The list of people offering to be involved at the start is:
>
> Greg Narain
> greg@...
> http://www.beercasting.com/
>
> Julian Doncaster
> julianduk@...
> http://therules.blog-city.com/
>
> Nicole Simon
> nisi@...
> http://useful-sounds.de/
>
> Steve Fish
> plunderfish@...
> http://www.revolutioninthecorner.com/
>
> Mike Lehman
> yahoo@...
> http://www.mikelehman.com/
>
> Julian
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Yahoo! Groups Sponsor*
> ADVERTISEMENT
> click here
>
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=1293mtth9/M=298184.5639630.6699735.3001176/D=groups\
/S=1705007709:HM/EXP=1104001441/A=2495202/R=0/SIG=11evjk50a/*http://www.netflix.\
com/Default?mqso=60188913>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Yahoo! Groups Links*
>
>     * To visit your group on the web, go to:
>       http://groups.yahoo.com/group/podcast-review/
>
>     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       podcast-review-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:podcast-review-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
>     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

That was quick - several of you have joined already.

I'll post some suggestions for the group this evening - if I
haven't "imbibed too much of the juice of the grape" <8-*

In the meantime I've opened up posting so that we can send an intro.

I think most of us know each other already, though.

The list of people offering to be involved at the start is:

Greg Narain
greg@...
http://www.beercasting.com/

Julian Doncaster
julianduk@...
http://therules.blog-city.com/

Nicole Simon
nisi@...
http://useful-sounds.de/

Steve Fish
plunderfish@...
http://www.revolutioninthecorner.com/

Mike Lehman
yahoo@...
http://www.mikelehman.com/

Julian