Igniter - Latest Comments

Re: http://igniter.tumblr.com/post/33716758905

William, the old innkeeper — Wed, 01 May 2013 17:45:25 -0000

What an outstanding photo! And, that's what the "Welcome Dinner" really looks like for those who spend time with us in PROVENCE PARADISE. Looks good? You bet! Our way of saying "Welcome to our 'hamlet.'"

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

Abdallah Al-Hakim — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:54:16 -0000

fun and useful discussion indeed. I think the process will involve a bit of work from the user side to get build their communities and conversations. There is not easy way around this and perhaps there shouldn't be :) There are great tools to help such as disqus and engagio but but relationships through meaningful conversations which lead to communities should involve a bit of work.

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

Michael Lewkowitz — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:15:03 -0000

Another solution to the fragmentation problem -> http://www.livefyre.com (ht @phillipadsmith )

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

awaldstein — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:01:16 -0000

I'm sure it is in the mindset of Disqus. I know the team and have been pushing this for awhile.

On the roadmap...I'm not privy to that.

But...parsing social data to create a semantically implicit web is really hard. Disqus has the dataset, it is just a question of whether they have a model.

My sense is not...D12 is a huge undertaking and includes monetization. If you are going to undertake what we are discussing, that itself needs to be the focus.

Fun discussion. I think and blog and consult on community. Obsessed actually a bit with it.

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

Michael Lewkowitz — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 08:29:55 -0000

Yes, I do think @disqus is closest to handling the fragmentation problem, will be interesting to see if/when it shows up on the roadmap. Do you think it will?

And yes, well said about engagement. It's more about the people.

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

Michael Lewkowitz — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 08:20:40 -0000

Thanks @Abdallah Al-Hakim . I was thinking first about aggregation and display which are not - as far as i can tell - handled by Engagio. They do however address the point of fragmentation from the perspective of the content author and commenters. Might be interesting if that could be embedded in the clog like disqus is, allowing comment streams from all instances of that content to be displayed if appropriated.

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

awaldstein — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 05:17:25 -0000

Thnx for alerting me to this post.

I agree with the steps but the dynamics are more complex, less distinct.

The connecting thread is Disqus actually, the discovery mechanism Engagio at least in your scenario.

But Engagement is less the subject of each of them, it is the human factor. You can create the environment but it always beyond the mechanics of the tools.

As far as community building as a platform. No cookie cutter exists but Disqus, more than any other has the potential for this if that is the direction they choose to go in.

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

Abdallah Al-Hakim — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 00:03:29 -0000

very intriguing. I think it is a three step process - a)discovery b)engagement and c)community building. The first two steps of the process are already being managed by Engagio (at least for me) - actually it was through Engagio that I discovered this interesting post and got engaged in the conversation. The third point is regarding community building around these conversations and making them discoverable. This is where no such product exist yet but I think Engagio is moving along the right track. Both @awaldstein and @William Mougayar:disqus should be interested in this post

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

Michael Lewkowitz — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 18:09:36 -0000

From a community vibrancy perspective I think that is the ideal scenario - I also think it is a very tricky thing implement that needs some deep thinking and grounding in online social dynamics - which I don't think we really do understand yet - and probably more often misinterpret.
Where this question also leads is to ask which audience is the most important - the organization or the community. The answer to that would definitely suggest some different pathways and starting points I think.

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

aweissman — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:55:28 -0000

let's even extend it further - what if by default it was open to anyone - inside and outside the org, and then the community regulates itself?

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

Michael Lewkowitz — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:47:40 -0000

I think that could be really interesting... particularly if it were community members that had established themselves in some way within the community already. Perhaps manually selected, perhaps informed by participation dynamics such as comments, likes, flags etc.
Of course, it would also depend on the application of something like this and the culture of the 'organization' implementing it. Some might want just a small subset of the official team participating, where others may choose to very nearly open it to all but those who the community actively rejects. This is where selecting the initial use case will be particularly important as they complexity/possibilities can quickly complicate things.

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

aweissman — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:40:53 -0000

What about letting people from outside the organization contribute too?

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

Michael Lewkowitz — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:59:27 -0000

1. My initial instinct is that this would work best for new teams or groups and those of smaller e.g. <20 size. I think it could scale but the magic in that will be how is content curated and surfaced in a way that strengthens the community and conversation rather than drowning it in noise.
2. As for write privileges, I see that about about selecting people as contributors (e.g. founders/employees/members) and then authorizing some specific sources (e.g. blog and twitter). To limit/focus content perhaps it would only pull posts/tweets with #clogxyz tags.
3. Probably both :-) But I'm not sure it's 'forcing' a single aggregator but rather introducing an 'aggregator' that serves to represent the company (replacing conventional website)
4. For filtering - see 1 - for discussion, dunno.

5. What are you thinking of here? Had been thinking yet of discovery dimension.

Re: Clog with me! The future of websites.

Peter Flaschner — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:46:36 -0000

Interesting. Lots of angles and questions:

– what's the right size team for this? Does it work for a team of 10? 100? 1000?
– what happens when you consider write privileges
– are you fixing a problem or causing another one by forcing a single aggregator onto the team
– if you cut the discussion from the post, how do you filter for noise across the platform
– what's the discovery model for both content and people?

10,000 more questions. Beer and scheming.

Re: Your Activity is Your Currency

Michael Lewkowitz — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 11:25:42 -0000

Well, ultimately, we're building this to help humanity build a better future, sooner. But that's a bit big for anyone to begin, so we're starting with something simple. If you use online tools to do what you do, this is for you. Epic helps you track and compare your activity on the web. We've heard it described "Like Mint for your life" and in the coming weeks we'll take it further… ultimately helping you accomplish more of what matters, to you.

Re: Your Activity is Your Currency

Jeremy Mansfield — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 11:00:29 -0000

And why would I want to sign up for something like this? I don't get it.

Re: Your Activity is Your Currency

Michael Lewkowitz — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 13:26:35 -0000

Thanks @Taylor Davidson - glad you're already building your currency. Looking forward to seeing how you put it to use!

Re: Your Activity is Your Currency

Taylor Davidson — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 13:24:25 -0000

Already using @epichq, intrigued by the credit system. Looking forward to seeing it in action!

Re: Summit on the Future

Taylor Davidson — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 11:30:23 -0000

That's a summit I'd attend.

Re: You are a…

Denis Carr — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:14:25 -0000

Agree. @flashlight's and this thread's comments on context are important considerations.

We used 'Guest' in the restaurant industry because it drew on the context of "welcoming" and "special event".

Re: You are a…

Michael Lewkowitz — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 09:06:24 -0000

I'm not sure, but it does have a better connotation than member in that it implies more action/agency.

Re: You are a…

Jerry Michalski — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:15:57 -0000

Is "participant" too formal? It does describe people who choose to participate in something.

Re: You are a…

Michael Lewkowitz — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 14:37:37 -0000

Well said.

Re: You are a…

Rick Fisher — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 14:23:59 -0000

Member means you got picked or met some criteria so it can sound
disingenuous unless you're really are member. I'm a member of
the Olympic team sounds cool but I'm a member of my credit card company
sounds lame.

David R Verchere
CEO
PostHelpers
apps.facebook.com/posthelpers

Re: You are a…

Michael Lewkowitz — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 13:59:05 -0000

It is language UI for sure. @flashlight's breakdown was excellent. For epic.io I'm considering 'member' and 'user'. The interesting difference to me is that member feels more like the person is part of the 'epic' community while user clarifies the distinctions that epic.io is a tool that they are using. The former feels like it's more about the service while the 'user' ironicly communicates that its more about the person.

All very interesting.
... sent while mobile.