CATEGORIES
- WEB STARTUPS
- CONFERENCES
- WEB JOBS
- MICROSOFT
- INTERVIEWS
- VIDEO
- AMAZON
- ALL TOPICS
CONTRIBUTORS
Video: The Conversation – Centralization In, Decentralization Out
Last week I wrote about FriendFeed and why I think there are good and bad parts of the service. Today NYC venture capitalist Fred Wilson posted an article which is worth reading where he basically agrees with me regarding the centralization of the conversation input.
I’ve put together the video below to go over my thoughts on the topic. The bottom line is that there’s no reason why FriendFeed can’t aggregate the comments from all of the sources and then allow the conversation to remain on the content creator’s location. It doesn’t matter if it’s photos, videos, text, audio, whatever, the conversation should be "centralized in, decentralized out." Will this work in 100% of the scenarios? Of course not but it will work in more than any other and probably 90%+ and is worth discussing. This model doesn’t take any additional time over commenting in FriendFeed. Rather than go on here, please view the video.
Most importantly it allows everyone to participate in the entire conversation and when that happens, we all win.
Update: Fred tells me via Twitter that, “i am not totally in your camp. i am fine with comments happening all over the place. i’d just like a tool to grab them and bring them back.”
Thanks Corvida – I am totally for showing the comments on FF – just push to the source for adding. It’s really that simple.
Well said Allen! Awesome video and something that users of FriendFeed should really take into consideration. Not only that, the devs of FriendFeed should also take a look at this. While you can’t make everyone happy, you can do your part and help out. Thanks for posting this :D
I like what you said it works wonders in keeping everything centralized awesome post.
This sounds all well and good, but it reminds me of a discussion I had recently regarding the FriendFeed Comments plugin. The core of the issue is that everyone is not using the same platform to run their blog. This automatically multiplies the work the FriendFeed development team would have to do.
The only things I can think of that would serve to decrease the number of variables involved are assuming every blog runs Disqus or has a separate comment feed in place for each post.
Either way, I still don’t see why the burden is being placed on FriendFeed. Yes, they have provided a means for discussion to happen away from the blog. Readers apparently have found commenting in FF easier and more convenient.
Also, people are finding posts they never would have before. Why comment on the blog itself when you can leave a comment on the item left by your “friend” directly in FF?
Lastly, it appears that FriendFeed has provided an extensive API. I only looked over it briefly, but it seems to me they have provided the tools for anyone to do exactly what is being asked for any blogging platform in existence.
Maybe I’m missing something, but it appears they have done their part already.
spot freaking on.
Almost… but not quite… the comment being left at FriendFeed should be offered back to the source, yes, (the source might not always accept it), then the entire conversation brought back to FriendFeed, Digg, wherever… but if the source deletes a comment, or in some cases rejects the comment as not good enough to be displayed, then the user should still have a forum where their voice can be heard. Plain and simple. Even FriendFeed does not have this down perfectly… nobody does.
What you are suggesting is a move whereby users have to go and provide personal information all over the internet just to interact around content. (Or in cases of Flickr, or YouTube, etc., sign up for an account) It goes both ways as far as “trapping” things go… Many times people want to have conversations with their friends, not with some blogger they have never heard of, regardless of if that person wrote the article being discussed. Your idea is neat, but it’s more focused on an idealistic solution rather than a technical one. Furthermore, it’s one that risks attacking users for their willingness to engage something they find interesting based solely on the conduit with which they elect to do so.
Users/Readers are people; People have rights. Plain and simple. The rights to “own” their comments, the rights to leave those comments in places they see fit. I agree that an open dialogue is needed in this space, and that nobody has the perfect solution (not friendfeed, not favorit, not shyftr, not disqus, NOBODY)… it will require a lot of compromise by a lot of web services and sources working together for the USERS. Getting the source in on the party is a given, you’re spot-on about that (and a separate widget for displaying a services comments above or below a blogs comments is a far cry from a “solution” as far as I’m concerned). But what you are suggesting really abandons the user’s rights. If people had to give their email address out and continually fill out form after form of name, website, captcha, login, etc. etc. then the conversation will simply be stifled and die. I’m sure nobody wants that.
This video is a great contribution the bigger picture though! No doubt about that. But it still falls short of being “right”, in my opinion.
* UPDATE* : P.S. In trying to post my comment here I’ve been given a hard time by your commenting system already. It harks right back to everything I was illustrating about the conversation eventually being stifled… Note my inability to simply post my comment as “Matt”, cuz that’s my name, but heaven forbid the system think I’m trying to impersonate another “Matt”… lol. ;)