- Eight Ways to Combine Typefaces
- 4 Ways to Improve Your Mobile Metaphors
- CSS Positioning 101
- Site to Phone – Send links or text from your browser to your phone
- NEA – Get Smart!
- 10 Proven Strategies to Break the Ban and Build Opportunities for Student Learning with Cell Phones
- F&M mLearning Pilot Presentation
- 100 Mobile Tools for Teachers
- eLearning Slam: Designing mobile eLearning courses
- What do Students Think of Using iPads in Class? Pilot Survey Results – iPads in Education
Okay, I finally did it. I jumped ship and have decided to leave Jumptags. Why? Well, I wasn’t happy about it. The choice was hard, but in the end, there really wasn’t a choice.
Jumptags was great.
I really like My Jumptags. I particularly like that you can create bookmarks for different types of media, include images/photos, code, and videos. I also like that you can create sort of hidden tags, too. But the death-nail for me was that the Jumptags tool bar wasn’t working for me in Firefox on my Mac. Even the bookmarklet was giving me issues. For a few weeks, I thought maybe something was up. Then about a week ago, I took a long hard look at everything, and I determined that the toolbar was not working … and not working consistently. So, I made the decision to move my bookmarks. I can’t work this hard to get a bookmark into Jumptags. It has to be seamless and unobtrusive. Now, it is neither for me.
Moving to Diigo
I took a look around at the possible options for bookmarking services, including diigo, delicious, among others. Delicious certainly is robust and functional, but it doesn’t have a lot of integration features with APIs and other services. (It’s still not the prettiest thing to look at either — even after Yahoo! got ’em.) Diigo on the other hand is extensive. It does offer a lot of service, but it’s also a little overkill for many things. I don’t necessarily need to use the annotations right now, but I was willing to consider diigo and its smorgasbord of services even if I wasn’t going to use them all.
I also decided to give diigo a try because of how easily it was to import my bookmarks from Jumptags. Unfortunately, diigo does not like two-word tags. Jumptags did allow spaces inside of tags. (Tags were delimited by commas — not spaces.) Diigo instead opts for hyphenated tags. So, I definitely have some cleaning up to do.
Join in … again.
I also went ahead and created a group for my Viral-Notebook site. You can see the group and join the group at http://groups.diigo.com/group/viral-notebook. With diigo you can set your email options to send to you any group bookmark updates. So, be sure to set this up. If you do join the group, then you will be able to contribute to the Viral Notebook bookmarks as well. So, I encourage you to do so.
Plus, I have decided to go ahead and allow diigo to publish the bookmarks into my Viral-Notebook blog as well. I am considering adding a couple of lists (which are a little new to me and a little confusing to me) for specific courses for my students. So, I’ll let you know when that happens.
Something’s been bugging me a lot lately: I’ve been thinking about “indirect objects,” retweets, and reposts. Huh? Indirect objects? You know, indirect objects from 10th grade English grammar class. They are the “to whom or for who the action is being done.” They usually come at the end of a sentence. It’s usually how you can tell whether you’re supposed to use the word who or whom. And what do they have to do with retweets and reposts? Here it is: When someone retweets or reposts a whole post, a massive chunk of a post, or even writes two lines to preface a video, is that ethical? To whom or for whom will others attribute the ideas? Are they in some way attempting to leverage someone else’s knowledge and works for their own acclaim or profit or notoriety? Let me give you a few examples of things that have begun to bother me.
Probably eight to ten months ago, I received an email for an RSS feed from a Diigo group that I subscribe to. In the email digest, someone had bookmarked and annotated a blog post of which a portion of the blog post was some text I had written. (Admittedly, this sort of thing where someone actually reads and bookmarks something of mine everyday, so I happen to notice that the text sounded rather familiar.) In the annotation, the individual attributed the ideas and point of view to the blog owner instead of to me. Yes, I had given the blog owner permission to use the text, and he had used my name in the attribution to the post. But the individual who bookmarked it, did not really see the idea as mine.
Also, I read RSS feeds from a lot of places. In a couple of feeds, I’ve read notes from a presentation. Someone sitting in the audience is taking notes and then publishes the notes on his or her blog…usually along with the link to the presentation. If it were my presentation, I’m sure I’d be flattered that someone wanted to publish my ideas. But here’s where I start to question it. If they are more well known than I am, have a larger Twitter following, or more subscribers to their blog, then they will receive the hits and acclaim for my ideas through their publishing outlet. Did I as the presenter just lose some control of my ideas? By allowing someone else to publish (or even republish) my ideas, did I just give away a portion of my ownership — or even copyrights?
So, my question is, at what point do you lose control of your ideas when they are so easily published and republishable by others? Coming from publishing background, I certainly understand that ideas can be usurped by anyone. For an intense example, consider the swastika. I also certainly understand that those individuals with an audience are the ones able to promote ideas. This have been going on forever with magazines and TV. But in this “age” or citizen journalism, where anyone should be able to promote their ideas, and “the flat world,” where playing fields have supposedly been leveled, are ideas and knowledge just easier to be misrepresented?
I’m not even talking about embed codes here. I understand that social media have changed the way we view marketing and celebrity. Retweets, Delicious, Digg, authority on Technorati—sure these represent new methods to determine authority, value, and credibility. But what I’m wondering is much more basic and personal. What are the ethics or netiqette to re-publishing or mashing up others’ ideas? This is more than just attribution. Copyright and fair use really doesn’t seem to cover this. What do you think?
[In an effort of full disclosure, image courtesy of Pasquale D’Silva and Function Web Design & Development .]