Comments for The Nature of Narrative in the Age of Networks http://jimbanister.com Storytelling, Storyforming & Storydwelling -- Engines of Engagement Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:57:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 Comment on GoGo, Yer Gone (If Only!) by Ted Haeger http://jimbanister.com/?p=335&cpage=1#comment-552 Ted Haeger Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:57:53 +0000 http://jimbanister.com/?p=335#comment-552 Jim: I started to comment here, but decided to reply through my blog. Pingback seemed to fail, so here is: "GoGo the No-Go: Chasing the Margins of the Wired World" http://reverendted.wordpress.com/2010/03/29/gogo-the-no-go-chasing-the-margins-of-the-wired-world/ --Ted Jim:
I started to comment here, but decided to reply through my blog. Pingback seemed to fail, so here is:
“GoGo the No-Go: Chasing the Margins of the Wired World”
http://reverendted.wordpress.com/2010/03/29/gogo-the-no-go-chasing-the-margins-of-the-wired-world/
–Ted

]]> Comment on GoGo, Yer Gone (If Only!) by GoGo the No-Go: Chasing the Margins of the Wired World « Reverend Ted’s Blog http://jimbanister.com/?p=335&cpage=1#comment-551 GoGo the No-Go: Chasing the Margins of the Wired World « Reverend Ted’s Blog Mon, 29 Mar 2010 16:42:13 +0000 http://jimbanister.com/?p=335#comment-551 [...] on March 29, 2010 by Ted Haeger SpectrumDNA’s CEO Jim Bannister, a local to Park City, wrote this weekend about GoGo’s craptastic in-flight Internet service. I started a reply on his blog post, then [...] [...] on March 29, 2010 by Ted Haeger SpectrumDNA’s CEO Jim Bannister, a local to Park City, wrote this weekend about GoGo’s craptastic in-flight Internet service. I started a reply on his blog post, then [...]

]]> Comment on Twitography & Social Nicheworking by   Contextroversy — The Nature of Narrative in the Age of Networks http://jimbanister.com/?p=205&cpage=1#comment-425   Contextroversy — The Nature of Narrative in the Age of Networks Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:34:21 +0000 http://jimbanister.com/?p=205#comment-425 [...] These are the ultimate contexts that I predict will rule social media.  It’s social nicheworking. [...] [...] These are the ultimate contexts that I predict will rule social media.  It’s social nicheworking. [...]

]]> Comment on Video TOBAW is here. by Christian http://jimbanister.com/?p=283&cpage=1#comment-408 Christian Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:59:44 +0000 http://jimbanister.com/?p=283#comment-408 This would be a fascinating addition to the FAIL Blog! This would be a fascinating addition to the FAIL Blog!

]]> Comment on Compete doesn’t do rollups, dawg… by cumulusguy http://jimbanister.com/?p=180&cpage=1#comment-341 cumulusguy Thu, 23 Jul 2009 14:35:15 +0000 http://jimbanister.com/?p=180#comment-341 Really? That's the only response? With a fake email, t'boot? Wow. Ok. First, I'd be surprised if anyone other than one with vested interest would reply to this post at all, but I'll give the folks at Compete the benefit of the doubt and assume the comment is not from them. The entire comment doesn't really dignify a response, but here goes anyway. What does "Free" have to do with anything? Nothing is free. Compete has their angles, and they're working 'em hard. They'd *love* me to become a "Pro" user for $1500 per month (which is the only plan that makes any sense given their features chart). That's $18,000 per year. Good for them. But Compete appears to me a data-miner representing themselves as a legitimate, contemporary measurement service. If you can't help publishers accurately reflect their audience... well, how can one possibly defend that? Compete comes across as a one-note song if they think that measuring singular domains is the way of the now, or the future. To be honest, I couldn't swear any other sampling service is any more accurate (Compete consistently under-reports, but so do ComScore, NetRatings and others). And I'm not asserting that Compete has no value, I just don't see the value to a company who's business involves more that a single domain. Use Quantcast. If some legitimate response from Compete is forthcoming, I'm happy to entertain it in a considered, constructive discourse. Really? That’s the only response? With a fake email, t’boot? Wow. Ok. First, I’d be surprised if anyone other than one with vested interest would reply to this post at all, but I’ll give the folks at Compete the benefit of the doubt and assume the comment is not from them. The entire comment doesn’t really dignify a response, but here goes anyway.

What does “Free” have to do with anything? Nothing is free. Compete has their angles, and they’re working ‘em hard. They’d *love* me to become a “Pro” user for $1500 per month (which is the only plan that makes any sense given their features chart). That’s $18,000 per year. Good for them.

But Compete appears to me a data-miner representing themselves as a legitimate, contemporary measurement service. If you can’t help publishers accurately reflect their audience… well, how can one possibly defend that? Compete comes across as a one-note song if they think that measuring singular domains is the way of the now, or the future.

To be honest, I couldn’t swear any other sampling service is any more accurate (Compete consistently under-reports, but so do ComScore, NetRatings and others). And I’m not asserting that Compete has no value, I just don’t see the value to a company who’s business involves more that a single domain. Use Quantcast.

If some legitimate response from Compete is forthcoming, I’m happy to entertain it in a considered, constructive discourse.

]]> Comment on Compete doesn’t do rollups, dawg… by Dawg http://jimbanister.com/?p=180&cpage=1#comment-340 Dawg Thu, 23 Jul 2009 13:06:28 +0000 http://jimbanister.com/?p=180#comment-340 So what is your problem dawg? That you get something for FREE and don't care for how it is executed. Why don't you pony up some benjamins and pay the holder of all properties for data they hide behind a wall and is produced through black box technology (comScore) or you can take it for what it is, which if FREE. Stop you crying, dawg. If you want to sell ads to advertisers go to ComScore, pay them $50k and start selling. Can I get a witness? Hell Yes you can - don't be foolish and start being REAL So what is your problem dawg? That you get something for FREE and don’t care for how it is executed. Why don’t you pony up some benjamins and pay the holder of all properties for data they hide behind a wall and is produced through black box technology (comScore) or you can take it for what it is, which if FREE. Stop you crying, dawg. If you want to sell ads to advertisers go to ComScore, pay them $50k and start selling.

Can I get a witness? Hell Yes you can – don’t be foolish and start being REAL

]]> Comment on Low State Esteem? by Jeremy http://jimbanister.com/?p=119&cpage=1#comment-337 Jeremy Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:05:41 +0000 http://jimbanister.com/?p=119#comment-337 I think you nailed it. The institutions are ones that have the biggest hangups, hence all of the roundtables and forums and discussions I've been in where someone somewhere is asking the question like a broken record. Great post! I think you nailed it. The institutions are ones that have the biggest hangups, hence all of the roundtables and forums and discussions I’ve been in where someone somewhere is asking the question like a broken record. Great post!

]]> Comment on Credit Where Credit Is Due? by Mike http://jimbanister.com/?p=117&cpage=1#comment-330 Mike Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:03:31 +0000 http://jimbanister.com/?p=117#comment-330 With #1 you run into the possibility of the merchant rejecting your card for lack of a signature. The agreement the merchants sign say they will verify the signature on the back of the card and that putting "see id" in it's place isn't valid and technically they have to refuse the card. But there are very few merchants that check anyway so you'll only have this problem with the hard asses that follow the agreement to the letter to avoid losing any battles with VISA/Amex/MC/etc... With #1 you run into the possibility of the merchant rejecting your card for lack of a signature. The agreement the merchants sign say they will verify the signature on the back of the card and that putting “see id” in it’s place isn’t valid and technically they have to refuse the card. But there are very few merchants that check anyway so you’ll only have this problem with the hard asses that follow the agreement to the letter to avoid losing any battles with VISA/Amex/MC/etc…

]]> Comment on About the Blogger by Your Words « Taccuino di traduzione 2.0 http://jimbanister.com/?page_id=19&cpage=1#comment-258 Your Words « Taccuino di traduzione 2.0 Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:00:02 +0000 http://jimbanister.com/?page_id=19#comment-258 [...] Addictionaries è il sito di Jim Banister gestito quasi completamente da utenti interessati a coniare nuove [...] [...] Addictionaries è il sito di Jim Banister gestito quasi completamente da utenti interessati a coniare nuove [...]

]]> Comment on Menage “i” trois? by cynthia lieberman http://jimbanister.com/?p=83&cpage=1#comment-236 cynthia lieberman Sat, 28 Feb 2009 08:24:34 +0000 http://jimbanister.com/?p=83#comment-236 Jim!!!! I couldn't find your email on the site so I am commenting on this blog. How are you! I am at Sony now, but also going for a masters in Media Psychology and Social Change. Researching a paper right now and came across your WEBSITE! Utah! Wow. Call me? 310-244-3792 office or 818-416-6161 cell. Jim!!!! I couldn’t find your email on the site so I am commenting on this blog. How are you! I am at Sony now, but also going for a masters in Media Psychology and Social Change. Researching a paper right now and came across your WEBSITE! Utah! Wow. Call me? 310-244-3792 office or 818-416-6161 cell.

]]>