Comments on: Good or bad? Wrong question http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/03/30/good-or-bad-wrong-question/ ... at the intersection of media, technology, business and the web Tue, 04 Oct 2011 13:01:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Mathew http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/03/30/good-or-bad-wrong-question/comment-page-1/#comment-242188 Mathew Fri, 30 Mar 2007 20:41:56 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/03/30/good-or-bad-wrong-question/#comment-242188 I think you're probably right, Webomatica -- that's a good way to look at it. Or there's always the crack analogy, which Mark clearly prefers :-) And Karoli, I expect that you and I are probably very similar -- I'm tempted by Twitter and other tools as well, because of what they make possible. And I'm a big fan of del.icio.us as well, and likely couldn't live without it. I think you’re probably right, Webomatica — that’s a good way to look at it. Or there’s always the crack analogy, which Mark clearly prefers :-)

And Karoli, I expect that you and I are probably very similar — I’m tempted by Twitter and other tools as well, because of what they make possible. And I’m a big fan of del.icio.us as well, and likely couldn’t live without it.

]]> By: Karoli http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/03/30/good-or-bad-wrong-question/comment-page-1/#comment-242183 Karoli Fri, 30 Mar 2007 20:14:15 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/03/30/good-or-bad-wrong-question/#comment-242183 The time-wasting aspect was my first objection to Twitter. Well, that and the idea of telling a bunch of people what I was doing. But I've found value in it. Not the same value that I find in blogs and blogging, but they're tools that I consider 'augmenting' tools to the larger social media connections. Still, I'm easily distracted (as evidenced by the fact that I'm here commenting on your post instead of finishing up Friday-afternoon details), and so I have to really pay attention to how I use them and when. I use Reddit but actually prefer del.icio.us (mostly because I used it first), and that I could not live without. It makes my life much, much easier because with one mouse click I can organize pages, sites, blog posts and other material I want to find again. Far from being timewasting, I view it as one of my most valuable tools. The time-wasting aspect was my first objection to Twitter. Well, that and the idea of telling a bunch of people what I was doing.

But I’ve found value in it. Not the same value that I find in blogs and blogging, but they’re tools that I consider ‘augmenting’ tools to the larger social media connections.

Still, I’m easily distracted (as evidenced by the fact that I’m here commenting on your post instead of finishing up Friday-afternoon details), and so I have to really pay attention to how I use them and when.

I use Reddit but actually prefer del.icio.us (mostly because I used it first), and that I could not live without. It makes my life much, much easier because with one mouse click I can organize pages, sites, blog posts and other material I want to find again. Far from being timewasting, I view it as one of my most valuable tools.

]]> By: Mark Evans http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/03/30/good-or-bad-wrong-question/comment-page-1/#comment-242179 Mark Evans Fri, 30 Mar 2007 20:03:15 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/03/30/good-or-bad-wrong-question/#comment-242179 Things like Twitter are just digital crack - little real value but certainly good places to waste time if you want something else to do other than watch TV. Things like Twitter are just digital crack – little real value but certainly good places to waste time if you want something else to do other than watch TV.

]]> By: Webomatica http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/03/30/good-or-bad-wrong-question/comment-page-1/#comment-242175 Webomatica Fri, 30 Mar 2007 19:35:28 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/03/30/good-or-bad-wrong-question/#comment-242175 What's better is relative, but personally it is worth noting that newspapers are largely relevant for a day or two, magazines go into depth on a weekly basis, while novels are supposed to last longer and not be so time sensitive. Then there's the sensational tabloids and all that that entails. It seems the web certainly leans more towards the tabloid, time sensitive side because of its digital nature (just can't imagine reading anything really long let alone a novel on a computer) and the short, instant gratification audience. What’s better is relative, but personally it is worth noting that newspapers are largely relevant for a day or two, magazines go into depth on a weekly basis, while novels are supposed to last longer and not be so time sensitive. Then there’s the sensational tabloids and all that that entails.

It seems the web certainly leans more towards the tabloid, time sensitive side because of its digital nature (just can’t imagine reading anything really long let alone a novel on a computer) and the short, instant gratification audience.

]]>