Comments on: Why pay attention to AttentionGate, er, AttentionTrust? http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/ Technology, music, video, art, news, reviews and muse on the web Wed, 17 Mar 2010 07:02:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2 By: Blogger code of conduct, meh » Make You Go Hmm http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-509789 Blogger code of conduct, meh » Make You Go Hmm Tue, 10 Apr 2007 01:19:48 +0000 http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-509789 [...] I’m not saying that those who choose to follow this code are bad people, but they are misguided if they think it will be worth any more than toilet paper. Reminds me of the AttentionTrust. Related PostsComment moderation dilemmaEnter the Blog is Right contest[site news] added spellchecker (for comments) and stats page [...] […] I’m not saying that those who choose to follow this code are bad people, but they are misguided if they think it will be worth any more than toilet paper. Reminds me of the AttentionTrust. Related PostsComment moderation dilemmaEnter the Blog is Right contest[site news] added spellchecker (for comments) and stats page […]

]]> By: Crock of Flucidity » Make You Go Hmm http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-412706 Crock of Flucidity » Make You Go Hmm Sun, 11 Feb 2007 00:49:17 +0000 http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-412706 [...] Is Flucidity BS? But I’m getting ahead of myself and probably most readers, let’s try and figure out what Flucidity is first and how it can/might be used. The verbose Flucidity website somewhat reminded me of a typical Steve Gillmor rant and pretty much everything that is and was the AttentionTrust. [...] […] Is Flucidity BS? But I’m getting ahead of myself and probably most readers, let’s try and figure out what Flucidity is first and how it can/might be used. The verbose Flucidity website somewhat reminded me of a typical Steve Gillmor rant and pretty much everything that is and was the AttentionTrust. […]

]]> By: The end of an underperformancing PayPerPost deal » Make You Go Hmm http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-381233 The end of an underperformancing PayPerPost deal » Make You Go Hmm Sat, 06 Jan 2007 19:42:09 +0000 http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-381233 [...] Perhaps this ties in somehow to all that attention trust stuff Steve Gilmor was blabbering about last year. Wonder how that worked out? About as well as FOAF, metadata in RSS and more. Not saying these were all inherently bad ideas, but it takes more than a good idea to fly. You need people to get behind and support these plans, ideas, solutions, mergers and that’s one thing the PPP/Performancing deal clearly didn’t have. Related PostsOne of the 28,000 performancing members sold and Microsoft’s review laptopsA possible practical use for Attention?Break time: Escape! [...] […] Perhaps this ties in somehow to all that attention trust stuff Steve Gilmor was blabbering about last year. Wonder how that worked out? About as well as FOAF, metadata in RSS and more. Not saying these were all inherently bad ideas, but it takes more than a good idea to fly. You need people to get behind and support these plans, ideas, solutions, mergers and that’s one thing the PPP/Performancing deal clearly didn’t have. Related PostsOne of the 28,000 performancing members sold and Microsoft’s review laptopsA possible practical use for Attention?Break time: Escape! […]

]]> By: Make You Go Hmm: » A possible practical use for Attention? http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-39506 Make You Go Hmm: » A possible practical use for Attention? Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:16:43 +0000 http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-39506 [...] I haven’t been very charitable to Attention Trust in the past, nor paid too much attention to it, but today I read a post from Nick Bradbury explaining a possible use involving OPML that makes sense: ranking feeds by user attention: We need a way to rank feeds that makes sense across aggregators, so that when you export OPML from one aggregator, the aggregator you import into would know which feeds you’re paying the most attention to. This could be used for any number of things - recommending related feeds, giving higher ranked feeds higher priority in feed listings, etc. [...] […] I haven’t been very charitable to Attention Trust in the past, nor paid too much attention to it, but today I read a post from Nick Bradbury explaining a possible use involving OPML that makes sense: ranking feeds by user attention: We need a way to rank feeds that makes sense across aggregators, so that when you export OPML from one aggregator, the aggregator you import into would know which feeds you’re paying the most attention to. This could be used for any number of things - recommending related feeds, giving higher ranked feeds higher priority in feed listings, etc. […]

]]> By: Make You Go Hmm: » How much of your attention does Google really have? http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-36093 Make You Go Hmm: » How much of your attention does Google really have? Thu, 03 Nov 2005 20:51:59 +0000 http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-36093 [...] And who needs AttentionTrust as long as we have personal choice? Nobody, not Microsoft, Yahoo, Google or ___ can patent that as long as I’m living in a democracy. [...] […] And who needs AttentionTrust as long as we have personal choice? Nobody, not Microsoft, Yahoo, Google or ___ can patent that as long as I’m living in a democracy. […]

]]> By: Andrew http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-23930 Andrew Fri, 30 Sep 2005 14:14:56 +0000 http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-23930 You hit this one pretty dead on...glad to see that we are in agreement here. Since I wrote this, I have been told by some people out there, a bit more about what AT has going on and have been assured that it will have a practical application of some sort...but still haven't really seen what that is going to be. I agree with you though wholeheartedly, in that the "straight shooter" method is always preferred over the long and boring tehcnofestos (I made that up...er...I guess it is kind of a manifesto written by someone in what I refer to as the Technorati crowd). ANYWAYS - I guess it remains to be seen how this all unfolds. The irony here is that AttentionTrust lost my attention a full month or so ago. You hit this one pretty dead on…glad to see that we are in agreement here. Since I wrote this, I have been told by some people out there, a bit more about what AT has going on and have been assured that it will have a practical application of some sort…but still haven’t really seen what that is going to be. I agree with you though wholeheartedly, in that the “straight shooter” method is always preferred over the long and boring tehcnofestos (I made that up…er…I guess it is kind of a manifesto written by someone in what I refer to as the Technorati crowd).

ANYWAYS - I guess it remains to be seen how this all unfolds. The irony here is that AttentionTrust lost my attention a full month or so ago.

]]> By: Adam http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-23814 Adam Fri, 30 Sep 2005 08:14:44 +0000 http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20050929/2439/#comment-23814 I'm sorry, but the pages on that site (and the "rights" it espouses) are so laughably obtuse that I swear it's something I'd expect to see in The Onion. Attention rights. For crying out loud. Plus a board of directors? Advisors? Are you SURE this isn't a joke, TDavid?! People should be compensated for their attention? If that's the case, I want to be paid for the 3.7 minutes I spent looking at their site. No, really! Oh, and for the record, I think <a href="http://www.bladam.com/archives/0509200002.htm">"Web 2.0" is absolute bullshit</a>, too. I’m sorry, but the pages on that site (and the “rights” it espouses) are so laughably obtuse that I swear it’s something I’d expect to see in The Onion.

Attention rights. For crying out loud. Plus a board of directors? Advisors? Are you SURE this isn’t a joke, TDavid?!

People should be compensated for their attention? If that’s the case, I want to be paid for the 3.7 minutes I spent looking at their site. No, really!

Oh, and for the record, I think “Web 2.0″ is absolute bullshit, too.

]]>