This message is just to keep Yahoo from tossing the archives.

Sorry, too much crap from idiots.


--
To the Sirens first shalt thou come, who bewitch all men...
I edit the Net: <URL:http://www.robotwisdom.com/>
"...frequented by the digerati" --The New York Times

Hi

I,m writing just to say bye!
I signed this list thinking to read about weblogs, but it like more than
an open strife between Jorn and Dave. I could be wrong, but it's boring
me.

Sorry
Marcus

___________________________________________________________________
ZAMORIM :: http://zamorim.eti.br

Jorn, I don't have personality problems, and you hurt me too. At least I'm
reaching out with the olive branch and saying I'm sorry. Geez Louise. Get
over yourself. Dave


----- Original Message -----
From: <jorn@...>
To: <weblogs@egroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 6:41 AM
Subject: Re: [weblogs] Jorn Quotes Satchel


> >   "Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt.
> > Dance like nobody's watching."
> >   Good advice. Hard to do.
> >   I missed the best rebut to your whining rant about my social behavior.
>
> Oh dear.
>
> >   Love like you've never been hurt. Something I said or did hurt you. I
> > never wanted to hurt you Jorn, but I'm sorry I did. I want to be
friends.
>
> Dave (you dumb lug) when the guy who did the hurting quotes Satchel to
> the person he hurt, he's just proving himself even more of a jerk.  You
> can't minimize your personality problems by telling me to ignore them.
> You minimize them by taking repsponsibility for them, and trying to
> compensate for them.
>
>
>
> --
> To the Sirens first shalt thou come, who bewitch all men...
> I edit the Net: <URL:http://www.robotwisdom.com/>
> "...frequented by the digerati" --The New York Times
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Enter to WIN one of 10 NEW Kenmore Ranges!
> Only at sears.com
> http://click.egroups.com/1/2677/5/_/416/_/955546920/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>

>   "Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt.
> Dance like nobody's watching."
>   Good advice. Hard to do.
>   I missed the best rebut to your whining rant about my social behavior.

Oh dear.

>   Love like you've never been hurt. Something I said or did hurt you. I
> never wanted to hurt you Jorn, but I'm sorry I did. I want to be friends.

Dave (you dumb lug) when the guy who did the hurting quotes Satchel to
the person he hurt, he's just proving himself even more of a jerk.  You
can't minimize your personality problems by telling me to ignore them.
You minimize them by taking repsponsibility for them, and trying to
compensate for them.



--
To the Sirens first shalt thou come, who bewitch all men...
I edit the Net: <URL:http://www.robotwisdom.com/>
"...frequented by the digerati" --The New York Times

----- Original Message -----

From: Dave Winer

To: Weblogs@Egroups.Com

Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 6:20 AM

Subject: [weblogs] Jorn Quotes Satchel

"Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt. Dance like nobody's watching."

 

Good advice. Hard to do.

 

I missed the best rebut to your whining rant about my social behavior.

 

Love like you've never been hurt. Something I said or did hurt you. I never wanted to hurt you Jorn, but I'm sorry I did. I want to be friends.

 

And I also think your readers deserve to know about Scripting News. Otherwise they might get the impression that it was an early weblog that went away. This is not true of course, and that's a higher calling, the truth.

 

Thanks for listening.

 

Dave

---

---

One of my speculations about the current state of society is that we
make 'stars' of anyone who can withstand the scrutiny/attacks of the
mass media and still give the appearance of having fun.

And it's not like having fun is anything special-- most of us were
excellent at it up until jr-high or so.  But my experience from then on
was that the more visibly you have a good time, the more likely others
are to try to squelch you.

(And one of the reasons I've been logging less is that I very much
started feeling like a target, proportionately as the media was
recognising me.)



--
To the Sirens first shalt thou come, who bewitch all men...
I edit the Net: <URL:http://www.robotwisdom.com/>
"...frequented by the digerati" --The New York Times

ORIGINAL MESSAGE
<jorn@...> Sent: "Link my wearables!"

The media lab does a lot of research with wearable pcs,
and networked toys, etc. Does  this lead to a society
where every aspect of your daily life can be linked in
your log-- eg, a little video of your run-in in the
supermarket line? ...from multiple angles-- the store's
cam, your headmount, and a wired bystander?

<URL:http://www.robotwisdom.com/>


REPLY
Yes, it does, of course. The operative word being
"can". The problem is not even about the question "why"
but rather with the common sense knowledge that we will
have arrived at precisely the section of hell where the
phrase "too much information" is more than a tired
buzzphrase.

Not enough smart editors, too much bandwidth, too
little discretion, too many portals into and out of the
web. Too much. Call me eliteist but I do not believe
that all information is valuable or contains any
digestable wisdom and that all personal disclosure
serves any purpose beyond vanity. Of course, that all
said, it's gonna happen and we can all see it, I
expect.

I think weblogs probably have to maintain a certain
type of "purity" to be taken seriously in the immediate
future. The juxtaposition of journal, narrative and
weblogging is tightening very, very quickly. I also
think there is a very important future for them as we
approach that precise place in hell to which I earlier
referred. More and more people (as individuals and
commercial collections) will need to access
specialized, clean, unencumbered information. In fact,
I'd wager money on the specializaiton of weblogging as
being the big economic future of the whole concept.

So, yes - it means we could log our lives. It also
builds a market for weblogging. It'll be a jungle out
there - guides will be required.

Catherine

> every aspect of your daily life can be
> linked in your log

JenniCam could do this now, if her archives were arranged right-- here's
where Geoff arrived, here we are talking about breaking up, here I am
crying...


--
To the Sirens first shalt thou come, who bewitch all men...
I edit the Net: <URL:http://www.robotwisdom.com/>
"...frequented by the digerati" --The New York Times

The media lab does a lot of research with wearable pcs, and networked
toys, etc.

Does this lead to a society where every aspect of your daily life can be
linked in your log-- eg, a little video of your run-in in the
supermarket line? ...from multiple angles-- the store's cam, your
headmount, and a wired bystander?


--
To the Sirens first shalt thou come, who bewitch all men...
I edit the Net: <URL:http://www.robotwisdom.com/>
"...frequented by the digerati" --The New York Times

I'll ask the obvious annoying question: does anyone besides Jorn actually
use the calendar?

Mike Gunderloy
http://www.larkfarm.com/weblog.asp

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dori Smith [mailto:dori@...]
>Someone else would
> have to handle archiving and calendaring, though.

--- In weblogs@egroups.com, Dan Lyke <danlyke@f...>  wrote:
> flutterby.com is happy to host 'blog related mailing lists via
majordomo,
> although you'll have to pester me a bit to get web archives of
the lists
> up, and I haven't got a calendar system written.

I host a few lists now (see
<http://www.chalcedony.com/wisewomen/> for a couple of
examples), so another isn't a big deal. Someone else would
have to handle archiving and calendaring, though.

Dori

On Tue, 11 Apr 2000, Mike Gunderloy wrote:
> This is a pretty low-traffic list and there are plenty of list-management
> packages out there. Arrow is free for Windows up to something like 500
> users, and I know there are free packages in *nix land as well. So really,
> all it would take is someone volunteering to host and set it up.

flutterby.com is happy to host 'blog related mailing lists via majordomo,
although you'll have to pester me a bit to get web archives of the lists
up, and I haven't got a calendar system written.

Dan

---- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Humphries" <bill@...>
To: <weblogs@egroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 1:23 PM
Subject: [weblogs] Timeout! [was Zeldman's Icons]


> You know, Zeldman's Icon's would be a good name for a band...
:-)

> If I understand Dave's plan correctly, you pick a Zeldman Icon to
represent
> yourself in the context of Weblogs.com. There's no ownership implied.
It's
> the same concept as everyone having different handles in Chat or IRC,
> because the system can't tell Bill and Bill apart. But outside of the
> Weblogs.com 'namespace' anyone can take the same icon and use it as
they
> may, subject to Zeldman's rules.
right, because the "handle" is the identity. and when the icons are
flung around or used decoratively that's one thing, but once they start
being used to convey identity, things seem (to me, anyway) to change a
little, to evolve, as Dave said.

from what i could tell, the Zeldman icons had always been used
decoratively. no one was using them for identity that i could see
anywhere (and believe me, i looked!). so i thought, hey, here is a great
resource, then. but again, once that "handle" means "you," someone
else's use of it alters "you." it is almost like someone using the "IBM"
logo to refer to their weblog, right? no one is saying IBM "owns" the
letters I-B-M, but to use those letters to refer to yourself would be a
little questionable, right?

so, for example, what if a really well known weblog like Evhead,
kottke.org, Robot Wisdom, etc. (or anyone really) by chance happened to
pick one of the icons i use prominently for the Blogit identity. people
get used to seeing that, associating the icon with that specific weblog,
then if they happen to stumble upon my site by an even smaller chance
;-), suddenly it's like: why is this guy using Robot Wisdom's icon?
right? the identity gets really diluted.

and besides, Robot Wisdom would likely never use the icon for anything
else and could probably care less what the icon is, right? and don't
tell me people don't use weblogs.com as a weblog resource! it's probably
the main one people do use, so really it is kind of a big deal, in that
sense. so, while i thought Dave's idea of using the Zeldman icons was
cool (and why wouldn't i? :-)), i was only suggesting that hey, with a
ton to choose from, maybe be a little sensitive to the fact that someone
is using them in a specific way, for identity. (now i will be known as
the weblog that uses the icons that it wants no one else to use, erk.)

> Jeff, when Dave asked how you were using the Zeldman icons, I think he
meant
> in a functional, rather than esthetic sense. I.e.. you're using them
as
> graphic elements on the site, they aren't playing the role of unique
keys.
well, for me aesthetics fulfill a functional requirement. ;-)

thanks for trying to clarify things, hope i didn't muddy them up even
more.

-jw

On Tue, 11 Apr 2000, Dave Winer wrote:

> "If you have a weblog site registered, you can choose an icon. We will
> use this icon to link to your site in features we're dreaming up now."
>

I've been thinking about this for the last few days.

Much as I love Jeffrey's work, there isn't an icon in that set
that I'd choose as representing my page.

what you are doing reminds me of the favicon feature of IE,
where web page authors can create an icon that IE will use in
any favorites created for a site or page.

Maybe in a future version of this weblogs.com feature, I'll
be able to submit my own branding graphic, like I submit my
own ad-banner now?

Anita Rowland
Anita's BOD -> http://www.halcyon.com/anitar/journal/
Anita's LOL -> http://anitar.pitas.com/

I actually just wanted a clear statement of how he used them, without the
extra stuff that I don't understand about what's proper or not. Dave

> The Zeldman icons have been in use on our servers at least since
9/21/99:
>
> http://discuss.userland.com/msgReader$11306
>
> At that time people could use any Zeldman icon in any UserLand-hosted
page
> by putting the name in "double quotes".
>
> It was a mania in the early days of EditThisPage.Com, lots of people
hurling
> icons all over the place. It was fun. This is kind of the next step in
that
> evolution.
it would seem so! another issue is the fact that i am not, strictly
speaking, using the "original" icons, but have modified them into
animated .gifs. so, what implications does that have, if any?

it seems to me that a writer, for example, constructs a work from what
is given (the alphabet), and from that makes something new, something
that is copyrighted, etc. no one says: "you don't 'own' your story b/c
it was made out of language, which is freely given to everyone." in the
same way, then, even though the raw materials i used are the Zeldman
icons, i have constructed new icons from what was given, the meaning of
the icons is different, they convey new connotations, etc. so in that
sense they are a "unique" work, just as a story or piece of music is
unique even though it is drawing from sources that everyone else uses
(the same notes, letters of the alphabet, etc.). moreover, i did that
intentionally, and am not just arguing this after the fact b/c i don't
want someone to use the same icons as me, etc.

mostly, on the practical level, i was just suggesting as a simple
courtesy that the issue at least be considered, b/c there's a ton of
other icons to choose from.

thanks,
-jw

You know, Zeldman's Icon's would be a good name for a band...

I think people are talking past each other. And I'm foolishly going to try
and sort this out.

If I understand Dave's plan correctly, you pick a Zeldman Icon to represent
yourself in the context of Weblogs.com. There's no ownership implied. It's
the same concept as everyone having different handles in Chat or IRC,
because the system can't tell Bill and Bill apart. But outside of the
Weblogs.com 'namespace' anyone can take the same icon and use it as they
may, subject to Zeldman's rules.

Jeff, when Dave asked how you were using the Zeldman icons, I think he meant
in a functional, rather than esthetic sense. I.e.. you're using them as
graphic elements on the site, they aren't playing the role of unique keys.

Is that what people meant?

Bill Humphries <bill@...>
http://www.whump.com/moreLikeThis/

PS: I got the Unabomber icon on Weblogs.com, cause I went as him for
Halloween back in '95. I'll have to dig up a picture of me in that getup.

PPS to echelon: Note we're talking Halloween costume here. Damn paranoids.

> What identity are you proposing to establish by using someone else's
work
> which has been freely given to any and all takers?
the same one you or anyone else would be proposing to establish by
choosing one for their identity w/in the weblogs.com list.

-jw

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://blogit.pitas.com
news, ports, & whatever

The Zeldman icons have been in use on our servers at least since 9/21/99:

http://discuss.userland.com/msgReader$11306

At that time people could use any Zeldman icon in any UserLand-hosted page
by putting the name in "double quotes".

It was a mania in the early days of EditThisPage.Com, lots of people hurling
icons all over the place. It was fun. This is kind of the next step in that
evolution.

Dave


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Wiggin" <wiggin@...>
To: <weblogs@egroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: [weblogs] New feature on Weblogs.Com


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dave Winer
> To: weblogs@egroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 12:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [weblogs] New feature on Weblogs.Com
>
>
> > Interesting. I didn't know. Is there a page explaining how you use the
> Zeldman icons? Dave
>
> how i use them? specifically, the icons i use were intentionally chosen
> to make reference to postructural issues involving Freud, Jacques Lacan,
> pop-cultural signifiers, buddhism & the far east, etc. in the effort of
> making a specific statement, or series of statements as the icons
> change. (also serving as ironic non-commercial commentary on the nature
> of animated .gifs, etc.). i never thought to have a page explaining it,
> just as a poet or a writer does not make a separate page or book to
> explain what the "poem" or the book means -- it means whatever you think
> it means for you. i suppose i could make a page, but i would rather have
> the visitor decide what i means for them, if anything. if it means
> nothing but is just decorative for a person, fine. but they were
> definitely selected to suggest identity, however, if that's what you
> mean.
>
> as for the other post that just came in as i was writing this, i'm not
> saying i "own" the icons, or that anyone else is not free to use them in
> any way they want, only trying to suggest that when the idea comes up
> for using them specifically for identity, maybe we are treading on
> slightly different ground, for the potential exists to dilute an already
> existing identity  (and one that was created through hard work, i'll
> just add, fwiw). almost as if i were to come out with a weblog
> software tool and call it "New Frontier" ;-), or something similar. i'm
> sure that would rankle the Frontier people, especially if it were a
> competing product, right? ;-) maybe it's a little  different, w/
> trademarks, etc. involved, but it is interesting (as Dave said it would
> be ;-)) and it does raise interesting questions re: copyrights, etc.,
> too.
>
> -jw
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> http://blogit.pitas.com
> news, ports, & whatever
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Join Garden.com's affiliate program and enjoy numerous benefits.
> To learn more click here:
> http://click.egroups.com/1/2753/5/_/416/_/955473263/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>

----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Winer
To: weblogs@egroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: [weblogs] New feature on Weblogs.Com


> Interesting. I didn't know. Is there a page explaining how you use the
Zeldman icons? Dave

how i use them? specifically, the icons i use were intentionally chosen
to make reference to postructural issues involving Freud, Jacques Lacan,
pop-cultural signifiers, buddhism & the far east, etc. in the effort of
making a specific statement, or series of statements as the icons
change. (also serving as ironic non-commercial commentary on the nature
of animated .gifs, etc.). i never thought to have a page explaining it,
just as a poet or a writer does not make a separate page or book to
explain what the "poem" or the book means -- it means whatever you think
it means for you. i suppose i could make a page, but i would rather have
the visitor decide what i means for them, if anything. if it means
nothing but is just decorative for a person, fine. but they were
definitely selected to suggest identity, however, if that's what you
mean.

as for the other post, that just came in as i was writing this, i'm not
saying i "own" the icons, or that anyone else is not free to use them in
any way they want, only trying to suggest that when the idea comes up
for using them specifically for identity, maybe we are treading on
slightly different ground, for the potential exists to dilute an already
existing identity (and one that was created through hard work, i'll just
add, fwiw).  maybe there is room here (w/in the weblogs.com community
list, at least) for consideration of that in the same way two people
would not use the same icon for identity within the weblogs list itself.
or, it's also kind of like if i were to come out with a weblog software
tool and call it "New Frontier" ;-), or something similar. i'm sure that
would rankle the Frontier people, especially if it were a competing
product, right? ;-) maybe it's a little  different, w/ trademarks, etc.
involved, but it is interesting (as Dave said it would be ;-)) and it
does raise interesting questions re: copyrights, etc., too.

-jw

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://blogit.pitas.com
news, ports, & whatever

----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Winer
To: weblogs@egroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: [weblogs] New feature on Weblogs.Com


> Interesting. I didn't know. Is there a page explaining how you use the
Zeldman icons? Dave

how i use them? specifically, the icons i use were intentionally chosen
to make reference to postructural issues involving Freud, Jacques Lacan,
pop-cultural signifiers, buddhism & the far east, etc. in the effort of
making a specific statement, or series of statements as the icons
change. (also serving as ironic non-commercial commentary on the nature
of animated .gifs, etc.). i never thought to have a page explaining it,
just as a poet or a writer does not make a separate page or book to
explain what the "poem" or the book means -- it means whatever you think
it means for you. i suppose i could make a page, but i would rather have
the visitor decide what i means for them, if anything. if it means
nothing but is just decorative for a person, fine. but they were
definitely selected to suggest identity, however, if that's what you
mean.

as for the other post that just came in as i was writing this, i'm not
saying i "own" the icons, or that anyone else is not free to use them in
any way they want, only trying to suggest that when the idea comes up
for using them specifically for identity, maybe we are treading on
slightly different ground, for the potential exists to dilute an already
existing identity  (and one that was created through hard work, i'll
just add, fwiw). almost as if i were to come out with a weblog
software tool and call it "New Frontier" ;-), or something similar. i'm
sure that would rankle the Frontier people, especially if it were a
competing product, right? ;-) maybe it's a little  different, w/
trademarks, etc. involved, but it is interesting (as Dave said it would
be ;-)) and it does raise interesting questions re: copyrights, etc.,
too.

-jw

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://blogit.pitas.com
news, ports, & whatever

In a message dated 4/11/2000 12:28:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
wiggin@... writes:

<< what about those of us who already use and have been using Zeldman icons
on our weblogs for months for the very reason you propose: to establish
identity? seems that there may be room for a little toe-stepping here? the
question is maybe to what extent does "first come, first served" apply.
    >>

What identity are you proposing to establish by using someone else's work
which has been freely given to any and all takers?

Mike
WOIFM  - http://perpetualbeta.com/weblog.html
mike@...

On Tue, 11 Apr 2000, Jeff Wiggin wrote:

> what about those of us who already use and have been using Zeldman
> icons on our weblogs for months for the very reason you propose: to
> establish identity? seems that there may be room for a little
> toe-stepping here? the question is maybe to what extent does "first
> come, first served" apply.

So, wait. Mr. Zeldman has been offering free icons and other goodies for
over two years now (that's as long as I've been aware of zeldman.com), and
you're implying that you're the first to ever use these for any personal
web project? Are you now in ownership of the work Mr. Zeldman has done for
us out of his own generosity, and are mindful of their distribution,
monitoring with a cautious eye?

The burden you must bear, young warrior. Find solace in the fact that you
are a trendsetter amongst your peers, a true visionary shining light upon
these dark and trying times. When the deeds of our day are entered into
the annuls of time, your name and website will be praised and glorified.


(Yessir, it's Snarky Post Day on the weblogs list, and the excitement
never stops. Here is your grain of salt. Please take it with this post.)


Jason

++ jason@... ++ http://www.nullmeansnull.com/ ++

----- Original Message -----

From: Jeff Wiggin

To: weblogs@egroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 9:25 AM

Subject: Re: [weblogs] New feature on Weblogs.Com

what about those of us who already use and have been using Zeldman icons on our weblogs for months for the very reason you propose: to establish identity? seems that there may be room for a little toe-stepping here? the question is maybe to what extent does "first come, first served" apply.

 

thanks,

jeff w.

 

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=

http://blogit.pitas.com

news, ports, & whatever

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Dave Winer

To: Weblogs@Egroups.Com

Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 12:06 PM

Subject: [weblogs] New feature on Weblogs.Com

Weblogs.Com: <a href="http://www.weblogs.com/zeldmanIcons">Choose your Icon</a>.

 

"If you have a weblog site registered, you can choose an icon. We will use this icon to link to your site in features we're dreaming up now."

 

People talk about programmerish features, well this is a webloggerish feature. If you don't run a weblog it might not make sense. There's a chance to play with a graphic language for changes in weblogspace.

 

I've been rolling this out slowly, so there are already some very good icons taken. It's a land-grab, and if it's successful, we'll get more visual images for our collective writing work.

 

It can't possibly *not* be interesting. ";->"

 

---

---

----- Original Message -----

From: Dave Winer

To: Weblogs@Egroups.Com

Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 12:06 PM

Subject: [weblogs] New feature on Weblogs.Com

Weblogs.Com: <a href="http://www.weblogs.com/zeldmanIcons">Choose your Icon</a>.

 

"If you have a weblog site registered, you can choose an icon. We will use this icon to link to your site in features we're dreaming up now."

 

People talk about programmerish features, well this is a webloggerish feature. If you don't run a weblog it might not make sense. There's a chance to play with a graphic language for changes in weblogspace.

 

I've been rolling this out slowly, so there are already some very good icons taken. It's a land-grab, and if it's successful, we'll get more visual images for our collective writing work.

 

It can't possibly *not* be interesting. ";->"

 

Proof that it's even worse than it appears.

This is what my bookmarks look like this morning:

http://static.userland.com/misc/snImages/itsEvenWorseThanItAppears.gif

You gotta laugh sometimes.

Dave

Jorn,

I not only agree with everything you said about me, and that exchange we had
many months ago, but I'll add a quote from one of my favorite Grateful Dead
songs, Touch of Gray: "I know the rent is in arrears, the dog has not been
fed in years, it's even worse than it appears."

Thanks.

It's a pleasure doing business with you.

Dave


----- Original Message -----
From: <jorn@...>
To: <weblogs@egroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: [weblogs] OneList guts eGroups


> > If a group of people can do something like that, surely you and I can
work
> > out our differences.
>
> well, the first thing would be to acknowledge the truth of my
> disclaimer, and that it totally sucked as a way to deal with one of your
> users.
>
>
>
> --
> To the Sirens first shalt thou come, who bewitch all men...
> I edit the Net: <URL:http://www.robotwisdom.com/>
> "...frequented by the digerati" --The New York Times
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  You have a voice mail message waiting for you at iHello.com:
> http://click.egroups.com/1/2936/5/_/416/_/955464886/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>