Mud's Tests

Newsgator Most Comments

2006-11-03T21:21:00.000-05:00

Newsgator Buzz reports blogs with most comments, and this (apparently) has nothing to do with the number of comments in Newsgator. At first, I though this notification referred to the "most comments" in Newsgator, but that's not the case. There are internal comments in the Newsgator system that other people can't read, unless they view your feed in Newsgator [My term: “NewsgatorOnline attached comments”]. [Unrelated: Newsgator added a new feature to old option]

Bug After selecting an item under, "most comments," I get the following: "Loading Post..." without any content. There's a workaround: You can subscribe to the feed, and then look at the content and comments, but get no information about the NewsgatorOnline-attached comments.

Suggestions: It would be nice if the "most comments"-feature had a third column: related to "most Newsgator comments in feed". Although I can see the number of comments in the Buzz Column, I'm unable to see the content of the original feed, or the content of the comments in Newsgator.

PubSub Data Entry

2006-09-25T18:35:00.006-05:00

Good old PubSub.

I don't know about you, but every computer I've ever used always deletes my entry.

I go to the pub sub entry field, type stuff in, and whoosh! It's gone. Have to re-enter the data.

What's up with that? Why can't I just enter it once?

-- This is the end of the content --

URI Update Notification Through Firewalls

2006-09-25T18:34:00.007-05:00

There was this tool that notified you of changes to a page. They never seemed to work. I've had things on a page that updated, and the URI didn't report anything back.

What I'd like is a tool that reports changes to specific content, but works with anything on the internet, even stuff behind a firewall.

That way the URI would include the access code, and send the change notifications through the firewall, and let me know when a privately-housed .pdf file got removed, updated, or was reformatted, downloaded, or someone was linking to it on an internal blog.

Then I could integrate this information with the site-stats info, and find out whether they're ignoring the information or paying attention to it, by page, and how long they were on each adobe page.

Can't XML be used to monitor Adobe document reviews: Popular pages, time spent on content vs page; and then analyze this and present it in an aggregator, and mix it up with other pages in a summary report, then recombine it for a final report?

-- This is the end of the content --

XML Footnote

2006-09-25T18:34:00.006-05:00

One thing that's overwhelming with all this XML-data I've acquired is how to quickly organize it. What if there was a way to auto-place supporting material in a presentation or blog.

Let's say you’re writing a report. You've got footnotes. You've got XML feeds and data in your aggregator. Wouldn't it be neat to quickly integrate the footnote information and format with the blog, and auto-place the footnotes, extract the references from the XML feed in the aggregator, and have this done automatically?

Just click on a reference. Have an auto-tool which numbered the content, created a footnote code, and then dropped the information and supporting material at the end of the blog or public document.

Consider a blog: We post using text. What if there was a way to quickly load a scrolling link-column, and that column auto-linked to flash-expanding windows. Every time I selected a window, it would open, and I could select from an internal blog, and auto-place content at the end of the blog, or create foot notes.

-- This is the end of the content --

Fantasy Aggregator, XML Tools

2006-09-25T18:34:00.005-05:00

If I had all the money in the world, this is the kind of aggregator I'd make:

If I make a comment in an aggregator, it self-reports to the original blog.

I would combine these features: When I add a feed, I would automatically include in that "add feed" space an option to create a new folder. I would not have a "folder creation"-tool in one place; and the "add URI" in another.

If I was able to edit the URI, I'd be able to edit both the name of the search name, and the URI Code; then when I changed the code in the editor, I'd have a self-check feature that would report a sample search to let me know whether my URI-changes were or were not correct.

I'd have a URI-creator inside the aggregator.

I'd have a time based hold on some feeds: If there was a holiday, or I didn't want to look at a feed for a while, I'd put it on sleep mode saying, "Don't show me results until after X-date."

-- This is the end of the content --

Interactive Landscape 3-D Feeds

2006-09-25T18:34:00.004-05:00

Ever notice behind large vans the TV displays passengers are watching? Some of them have games.

Then I got to thinking: What if the game could leave the screen.

Ever seen one of those head-up displays: They point to things on the ground. Same concept here.

For your son or daughter's birthday, they get an X-BOX-like toy, but instead of the toy moving around on the screen, the toy jumps around on your car windows. The driver can't see them.

But imagine this: Instead of just relying on the game developer's imagination, what if the game could actually appear to interact with the surrounding environment.

To your left and right are cow pastures. Then, on the horizon . . . there it is. A windmill. Your son or daughter directs the game-piece to race up the ladder of the water tower, then grabs onto the windmill, and gets flung into the sky, and then pulls out a parachute, and appears to land on the care on the other side of the freeway. Then the game pieces starts to jump from car to car, back toward your car, and climbs on the roof, and pokes its head into the window like Kilroy.

I don't know about you, but there are some really strange things you can think about driving across Siberia. It starts to looks the same, unless your games start making it look different.

The moutains are lovely.

-- This is the end of the content --

XML on GoogleNews Advanced Search

2006-09-25T18:34:00.003-05:00

You've probably noticed the GoogleNews Advanced Search. You can go back in history, not just a few months. I like it. Course, you know what I'm going to say: What about XML?

Google news Archive needs XML. Sure, history doesn't change, but MSN has an XML search button. That way, the aggregator could monetize the search: Use the aggregator as the platform to integrate with the search engine to report desired content in a specific format, product, way, or presentation.

The data and content is only part of the issue. I'd like the aggregator to take the search results and report it in a format, presentation, and do this without me having to do the work.

Custom aggregator displays, with an auto-integration feature with .XLS, .PDF, or whatever ACCESS file I'm working on. Key words automatically downloaded into my adobe-form.

-- This is the end of the content --

Fast Saving, Access To XML Data Content

2006-09-25T18:33:00.005-05:00

Have you found a search result, then had to spend time downloading a file, then lost track of what you were looking at?

I do that all the time. I'll be in the middle of downloading a file, and forget a key term and have to backtrack.

Here's an idea. If there was a way to auto-load the files at the URL to the file save location, which would be nice.

Rather than have to wait, and all other applications get stuck, it would be nice if the search engine could automatically do things for me, and auto-send files and URLs.

This is a little different than simply selecting a URI and saving it. This is letting the search engine auto-save the URI content, and then displaying it where I want it, either on the screen, in my aggregator, or combined with another channel in the same feed.

What I want is something that will work with the search engine, auto-load a file URL to:

A. a file save location.

B. To file save on Yahoo or Briefcase

C. To a RUI creator in aggregator; or

D. To a link.

I'm looking for a method to seamlessly integrate the search engine with the file-save tools that works with XML files, video, and audio files. I don't want to have to manually click through each step, nor do I want to have to interrupt my searching. My goal is to quickly extract interesting/related data, save it quickly, continue my search, and save the data in files that are useful, and I can later access and recombine as I choose.

Here are the steps:

1. Conduct search engine search

2. Select URI/file

3. Auto save file content by extracting the content at the URI

-- This is the end of the content --

Multi-Function XML Mouse

2006-09-25T18:33:00.004-05:00

I've always been fascinated with mouse pads and the mouse. There's alot you can do with it.

The other day, I noticed that a cell phone laser image device was very similar to a pocket camera, and this made me wonder: What if a cell phone could automatically transition and integrate with my computer mouse? Better yet, what if my mouse and cell phone were the same thing, along with my iPod: Kind of like have a universal remote for all those things, before TiVo made VCRs obsolete.

So I got to thinking about a multi-function mouse. What if there was a way to highlight and select a function with an auto-pre-select; or a way to select each time what I wanted to do.

That way, I could integrate the following tools and functions:

A. A mouse highlight tool for grabbing online content;

B. Link creator

C. URI creator

D. Adobe search

E. Load to aggregagator

F. Save to blog

This would be a multi-function mouse: I could create a link by highlighting text, extract that highlighted text in Adobe; and then take that converted text from Adobe, automatically translate it into an URI; then seamlessly with the same click auto-load that original text from Adobe as a saved search URI into the aggregator

Think of it as combining a mouse-highlight, with an auto-search, then a text to URI converter, with an auto-save feature for that URI, but being able to do this within the Adobe window. Right now, I have to transfer text from Adobe, place it somewhere else.

It would be nice if there was an Adobe-XML integration feature by simply highlighting text, I could auto-convert that text into a searchable URI that is ready to report search or prospective search results.

Imagine you’re in a place where you get a printed document; all you have is a laser scanner. What if there was a news release, you've near a fax machine, but you don't have a laptop or computer. What if there was a way to scan that document, get an output, mark the document with some special bracketing symbols, and then automatically send that scanned data to your computer which could be on the other side of the world.

Think of this as a remote access, but instead of accessing my computer, I'm extracting text data, and reformatting it, then sending the data as a single file, and launching it directly into my aggregator. I could do this real time, when I get home, I don't have to go over notes, and I can just look at my aggregator and see what there.

This would involve:

A. Integrating adobe files with XML;

B. Permitting fax machines to accept a special code;

C. Connecting a print machine to a remote computer

D. Allowing me to make handwritten comments on a document, and then have the results report in my aggregator

E. I don't have to carry any files, paper, or documents. I could do this without a computer

F. Then, when I get all my data transferred, my aggregator could automatically accept the data in file folders that are consistent with the pre-set templates in PowerPoint and a trip reports.

G. As I get new data, or hear new things, I can automatically send the data, and the aggregator will help to integrate my online tools, and then publish the final report, with charges, updates information, and import data from the Google spreadsheet.

This would save time on trip reports, presentations, and I could make my aggregator more like a workhorse to integrate publishing-presentation tools, with the status-reporting-monitoring systems with critical thresholds, and qu8ickly organize the data for an online presentation or real time integration with audio, teleprompters, or other integrated communication system.

Adobe XML Platform

2006-09-25T18:33:00.003-05:00

Ever noticed your PDF files aren't easily integrated with XML? I've found interesting data I'd like to convert to a feed in Adobe, but have too many steps to go through. It can be really time consuming, especially when all the steps are the same. You'd think the "someone" would've come up with an easier way to do this.

Think of this as an Adobe-related XML platform: "The Adobe XML Dashboard."

I. Here's the process: Convert terms in a PDF to a search in the search engine, and create URIs

A. Review database with search tool

B. Locate adobe.pdf or word-document

C. Highlight, copy content

D. Transfer to the Search engine the news, links, and aggregator

II. This is what the Adobe Dashboard would include:

A. Links

B. Search function

C. Interface with Blog

D. URI creator

E. One-click URI-correction tool to correct misspellings, or errors in the URI code

III. This is what would happen after I found interesting data:

A. Create new URI

B. Save links, create a note

C. Make a blog note, comment by the link, or flag some data in a teleprompter or data stream connected to an audio-visual file

D. Do a search on that flagged content

E. Save the results as a link, PDF-compatible document, then report the results in an index I can integrate with the aggregator, which will signal me at a specific time that something is ready, more data has been received, and we can proceed along another task.

-- This is the end of the content --

Comment Notification Feature

2006-09-25T18:33:00.002-05:00

How many of you lose track of sites you've left comments?

I do that all the time.

I'd really like to know if someone has bothered to visit the site, made a comment, and do this without checking.

Yet, the site isn't mine, and I can't make a code that is going to affect that site.

But I don't want to subscribe to the feed, I just care about a specific comment that I made, and want to know about that comment.

I'm not talking about reading the comment and people commenting on it. I'm talking about whether that comment even gets posted. Some bloggers (shocked, shocked) will modify or not allow comments!

What if there was a way that I was notified (as the commenter) that a specific comment I submitted did get posted. I don't want to monitor the comments, I just want to know when that specific comment that I submitted did or did not get posted.

What’s needed is a method to notify the poster when a specifically submitted comment was accepted, and posted; or if it was rejected. If i keep sending comments, but they're rejected, I might want to find another feed, and get rid of this one.

What this method would do is send a message with XML to the aggregator (along one of the channels) a notification that my comment posted; and attached to that notification is a link-URI for the comment; and then an auto-method to track whether anyone else is linking to that comment.

As it stands, I have to wait for the comment to get posted; get the URI for the posted comment; and then post it in my blog; then make a comment, "Look, here's a comment I made. And they're all talking about it. Wow, I feel special." Wouldn't it be nice to simply make a comment, and have the data related to that comment automatically got posted to my aggregator.

Also, if after a certain time, I would get a message or notification that my commented did not generate a post, there was no notification, and no URI. Ideally, when there were certain conditions met, I may have a feature in the aggregator that says, "Hay, if they've waited 3 weeks, and rejected it, I might want to send them a thank you note.’Thanks for taking three weeks to review my comment. I'm glad you carefully considered my views. Maybe next time, I'll be more succinct, and stay on topic. Sorry, things didn't work out. I'll try to stay within the rules next time. Please do not ban me."

[Blah, blah]

-- This is the end of the content --

XML Feeds For Online Spread Sheets, Critical Conditions, Audits

2006-09-25T18:33:00.001-05:00

If you've noticed Google spreadsheets, you'll see there are some XML opportunities. One of them is project management, and integrating the file-save feature with a calendar.

It would be nice if there was an aggregator that integrated with a calendar so that on a specific date I could be notified to revisit the data in the Googlespreadsheet, and see what's been changed. Perhaps one of my team members has a scheduled update or data-delivery, and I want that included.

I'd like for there to be a way to download, and integrate this datafile into the Googlespreadsheet, then export that data files as an XML feeds, and be able to integrate it with others things.

The trigger for this data delivery isn't necessarily time. Rather, when a key indicator falls below, or exceeds a certain threshold, I'd like the Feed to automatically conduct an online search, gather the updated information, then attached this new data to the existing feed, and then integrate the updates within the existing file.

Then I'd like to be able to confirm to the auditors that the message/file has done what is was supposed to do; and that the critical threshold has been noticed, and something has happened; and then be able to present to the auditor evidence that we conducted our review of that data, and can trace back to the documents and files that we took appropriate actions.

The final data file should show:

A. Here is the file

B. The re-visit date and links in the aggregator was successful

C. The new revisit date-condition is this.

D. A confirming message that the aggregator has been updated, the changes are ready, and the system is ready to monitor to the incoming data, and is still effectively integrating with the Google online spreadsheet.

-- This is the end of the content --

Site Stats XML Feed

2006-09-25T18:33:00.000-05:00

Site data can be interesting to look at. There are times when I'd like to format the data the way I'd like it, or quickly export it. Sure, I can save it as an .xls file. Why not make my stat counter something that targets specific types of customers.

Maybe I'm tracking a specific page, and I want to see if there's a specific link someone is or is not hitting. What I'd really like to know is whether the order of the content is working, and the layout is something the reader is noticing. What's the use of posting if the key link isn’t' getting hit. Do I need a better stats package? Maybe. Or maybe I need a way to extract my raw data, and inject it into a tool that I've created. Maybe it's proprietary.

What's needed is a way to commonly transfer stats data from the stat platform, and integrate that stat data with the aggregator, search tool, and URI generate. Here's what I’d like to be able to do: Turn the stat-data into search URIs. That way the stat counter will:

- Integrate with XML dashboards and create multiple-URIs from a specific stat-output, or search operation; and

- Convert the searches from incoming URLs to URIs with an auto-load to the aggregator.

-- This is the end of the content --

Multi-URI Search Tool

2006-09-25T18:25:00.000-05:00

Ever noticed how a search engine like Google or Yahoo spits out information?

There's just a list. Yahoo and AksJeeves have the option to sign-up feed with a click.

However, this can be kind of annoying: I'd rather skim through data, save links, and then later spend time doing the upload.

Ideally, what would be nice is if there was a multi-search feature which would automatically convert any URL I get in a search engine to a URI; and this could be seamlessly cached, then uploaded to the aggregator.

It would work this way:

1. Conduct search

2. Produce result

3. User does a mouse over, highlighting the URL, or simply click on a button.

4. Clicking on the searched URI would automatically convert that URI into an RSS-XML friendly URI, and then have it automatically integrated through the browser into the aggregator.

5. After I did that search, and select the items, I could quickly put them in a folder, name it, throw it into the aggregator, and then start searching again.

6. As I did other searches, I should be able to retrieve the original searches, reference them and either modify my subsequent searches; or retroactively adjust the saved-URIs so they are consistent with what I'm narrowing in on.

A multi search in a search engine should be able to convert search results into URIs, and I should be able to quickly save them with simply one or two clicks, then get back to searching again. Less time transferring URIs means more time creating new content.

RSS aggregator searching -- Body of knowledge

2006-01-03T21:54:00.000-05:00

Using aggregators and RSS for searching is different than a search engine. Self-evidently, RSS usually looks forward in time, while a search engine looks backwards.

[For clarity, I'll simply refer to forward-looking RSS-XML searches as an "RSS search" and a generic search using Yahoo/Google without XML as backward looking. However, in reality a search engine like Google and MSN do have quick ways to convert a search to a retroactive search, but that's outside this discussion.]

Sample things: Things that are missing and could exist

Before I go into the details, I'll illustrate the apparent gap in the existing body of knowledge. For starters, you'll get an idea of the differences in terms. Notice this search:

Teaching RSS searching; or

XML Searching Body of Knowledge.

It sounds simple enough, but nobody's used it -- they're probably using other terms, but what? That's where XML Thesaurus Comes in.

Now, think something more generic: Search tips: Brilliant 85 million hits.

But does any of it relat to searching with XML; or some nifty tricks on using prospective searches for searches?

Something more narrow is: RSS Search tips -- but it really doesn't give tips on how to integrate:

A. New ideas

B. New events

C. Potential blogs

D. Forward looking outlines

Also, RSS search tips are geared more toward providers/experts -- publishers and technology users -- not a content-user/searcher-focused, or "how to translate your ideas into effective RSS search requests".

Remember your user: SOlve problems, not burden them with technology details

Remember, I -- your user -- don't care about RSS, technology, or the syntax. I want to use RSS/XML searches to solve problems -- assess unfolding situations; know when I am in a poor position to make a decision.

What I really want is a guide on "how to effectively create RSS searches" -- and I want that methodology to integrate the prospective search feeds with the aggregators.

While you're reading the following, consider this perspective: "Set aside your blog for the moment, and focus on an outline in your RSS-XML aggregator." The goal of this approach is to make better use of the future information, spend less time blogging, and more effectively manage/organize/structure the incoming information before it arrives, not wade through the mess as it arrives.

Body of knowledge

After working with RSS search for over a year, I can see that blogging, search engine searches, and RSS searches overlap, but they are different.

Specifically, the problem we run into with a prospective search is "our phrases" we may use to describe a future event [ and hopefully future hit] will not necessarily match what others use.

There's a trick to using RSS feeds and searches. If you have a blog and have "new ideas" about "things going on," rather than blog about things [and producing a rant], you can save yourself alot of time by doing something else.

That's where the body of knowledge comes in:

A. How is a prospective RSS-search created differently than a generic Google-Yahoo search;

B. How can a blogger's "blogging time" [time spent blogging ideas] be reduced;

C. How can time "spent on blogging" get translated into more effective RSS searches?

I do not claim to have the answers, but I define the answers as the "RSS Body of knowledge" in terms of "how will people come to use/apply RSS searches" and "how will RSS searches reduce the time spent bloggging."

In short, the "way we do a Google search" has specific tricks. It's not just in the terms, but in knowing how to quickly translate a search requirement into terms. This is based on "knowing what could be out there".

The same goes with RSS searches: How to forecast what will "likely be out there" . . . even though the issue, words, or RSS-searches may not exist.

In other words, why bother to blog, when I can find "what everyone else is saying" that matches an outline I'm developing?

Rather than blog, it may be more useful to create a template or generic outline, where the RSS feeds can be entered into the aggregator, and the outline -- not the blog -- becomes the means of organizing information.

As time passes, and the issues get fleshed out, "it would be nice" if this vertical outline, could expand to the right, and create a schedule, whereby the more sophisticated, and in-depth answers to these issues appears: Either in terms of concepts; or in terms of answers to questions earlier posed; or in terms of detailed discussions of the subsequent discussions.

Think of the GMail e-mail weaving option: You can have the information time-based, so that the answers to original e-mails are linked to the subsequent answers. The Aggregator-model would have the same thing: You would like the original RSS concept, with the idea, with the subsequent answers, and then the detailed information.

Think of this as an expandable link/answer/response. If I have an original question, issue, or idea, then associate this with a range of answers; I can visually show how the original ideas [not blogged] are graphically-logically linked with the subsequent arguments/discussion/responses.

Then comes the next phase: Whereby the responses are then compared to the original questions; the arguments/points/discussions are organized into logical arguments; and then the overall schema created.

The schema for organizing this information may or may not exist; it could be compared to a generic template; and the differences between the emerging pattern and the original template could identify new patterns.

The point would be to clearly identify a priority to the issues; and then identify "which concepts/arguments/ideas" should be showing up; and then comparing with what is actually showing up. Some of the "actually stuff others are using" may not have as much strength/weight, so it would be nice if there was a way to assign some waiting to the desired search results.

If our rating goes from 0 to 100, and the "desired hits" are arbitrarily put at 50; but all we're getting are 10s and 20s -- this is a good idea that "our original list of desired hits" is above and beyond what people are talking about.

At that point, it may be useful for the blogosphere to "learn about these other views" that tend to have more weight, validity, importance, than the apparent lesser valued items at 10-20.

For those of you who are lost -- that's the point -- RSS searching and blogging are related -- the trick is to know when it is time to listen, how to listen, and how to translate "our ideas" into effective RSS-search terms. This is known as the "body of knowledge" related to RSS-searches: Tricks on how to more effectively create RSS searches based on what we might have blogged.

Maybe it is emerging, but all of the above is what I've learned in "how to make RSS prospective searches" more useful in identifying trends, gaps, and what is a "value added blog" or something that merely repeats low-value content.

I'd say more, but why give away the juice on how to do this better than others?

Wish list

Using a prospective search tool -- Once the XML feed/subscription is in the aggregator, it would be nice if . . .

A. There was a flagging system: "Hay, I was supposed to have had a hit/positive result by this X-date, but have nothing. . . what's up?"

Sometimes even though the RSS-search produces no result, it would be nice to know, "Even though by X-date, we should have had something, we have nothing. . ." -- that it itself is useful to know, and may trigger other search requests, or hunting with other terms.

B. Some sort of flexible tool that allows one to keep fast notes, notice patterns, but isn't a public blog.

Something that makes it easy to quickly

A. Document new information
B. Rotate the information into new patterns
C. Translate the new pattern/ideas into a prospective search
D. Translate the newly-recognized pattern [that has no information, just vague ideas] into something that is a specific request for future content
E. Translate the RSS-feed into an outline
F. Adjust the outline into a new pattern
G. Recognize the value/scoring of the returned content
H. See which content is or isn't stacking up against the proposed pattern
I. Adjust the outline so that more attention is put on the valuable searches, that still await content
J. Rank the value of the content [based on factors I choose, not necessarily what others are using] so that I can see which discussions/arguments/factors [are/are not] getting filled/satisfied/discussed.
K. Translate the vertical-outline [2-dimensional] into a third-dimension [horizontal, using weight factors related to time, expected responses]

Next Step

Each of the templates or checklists for the event could either be manually created, or imported from a generic list of template-checklists. The searches could be assigned to the existing template; or the template could be adjusted based on the content.

Based on a few indicators, I could import generic checklists/templates, automatically created RSS searches, and wait for the actuals to show up. The approach would identify what was occuring; and compare them with what I/the outlines forecasted.

Also, simulation data could be imported to track the expected times; and the duration of a particular news-event cycle: Then compare the forecasted times with the actuls -- using that information to forecast other items: Delays, cost overruns, actual time/budget to accomplish an objective.

If I had a discrete number of indicators, I could automatically create forward searches based on the expectation they are related to a specific checklist, pattern, or cycle. Over time, I would be able to monitor whether the actual events occurred along the expected/forecasted RSS feeds.

-- This is the end of the content --

Workaround on PubSub Naming Problem

2005-12-22T17:35:00.000-05:00

As a holiday gift, we thought we'd tell you how to correctly name your PubSub subscriptions.

As you can see, if you enter the updated name for your subscription, PubSub doesn't work.

Here's how to work around this error:

1. Enter your subscription search terms ["Subsription 1"]
2. Change the title -- the title will not take, but not to worry
3. Re-enter your PubSub subscription terms a second time ["Subscription 2"]
4. The second entry on your subscription list will have the "Renamed Subsription Title" from the first entry/update from Subscription 1

In short, to get your PubSub subscriptions correctly named, you have to double-enter your search terms, and ignore the repetition.

Merry Chirstmas, Eugene -- you're still an asshole. And a Jackass.

A special note for those of you who are confused by or have questions about this holiday greeting: Click here.

-- This is the end of the content --

Newsgator: Nice job

2005-12-06T22:35:00.000-05:00

Newsgator's made some really nice updates to their menus: Easier to read, select, and search. You can make things go away.

I like the search-capability, that is really neat. Thanks.

I had a couple of thoughts:

A. Feed-menu priorities

What if there were a way to "change the priority" of the displayed items simply by clicking on the content, and floating it around in the menu [like the method of moving a favorite to the browser menu with a single click and drag] . . . as opposed to going to a new screen, then doing the click-move-change option.

B. Browser interface with Newsgator

Also, you know how "sometimes people like to make their browser window smaller to fit in a corner of their screen, but still keep it open" . . .

I was thinking: What if there were a "compression capability" ... so that even though Newsgator was compressed to a small browser, the various menus, and displays neatly overlapped so they were still readable. Right now, they words in the top menus on the right [search] will overlap with the other menus to the left.

Think of it as "Newsgator Compressed".

C. Aggregator Icon Standby Mode

Sometimes its nice to know, without opneing Newsgator, that there's an update, what kind it is, and whehter its an urgent, or a low priority feed.

What if there were a way to "signal to the user" that they have new feeds, but do so without having to send a special message? Here's how: If they have their browser in the "compressed mode" or as an icon, what if newsgator flashed "Updates: #" with the number of new feeds. Maybe the user could select a personalized message depending on content, type of feed, or targeted-search words when things appear in the aggregator. Ideally, this would be a simple, short message we could have automatically posted to the browser-icon.

-- This is the end of the content --

RSS Community's "Use our service, put up with our insults"

2005-11-11T18:32:00.000-05:00

A nice concept, but flawed in execution.

I've noticed this with TechnorHiding: They promote to no end, and have their logo on magazines like NewsWehuk, but when you verify whether the XML-feed is actually working with your content that comments on that original material, things don't show up.

I noticed this problem with PoupSoup: They lay it all out, what they're doing, but if you notice a problem, suddenly they throw it back on the customer.

Well, Blogher's doing the same: They have this spam-detection system which identifies blogs which have [wait for it] . . .

A. alot of words [someone who is thinking] or

B. duplicate content [BlogHer's coding error].

We've previously identified this in May 2005, but the feature continues despite the manual logins and the public e-mail availability. What's up with that?

Not only can anyone spam my blog [and claim stupidity about it], but when I post content, the blogher reports the content as spam, and requires the "manual override feature." Whatever.

What makes it worse is that the "word verification process" jams up the letters and the c's, l's, and d's appear the same. Maybe you should issue us a magnifying glass with our sign-up; how abput this: Send us an advance payment through paypal so we can buy a mantifying glass, that way we can use your system . . . and maybe have ads.

Develop-lupies

Word to the wise: If you're going to go to the trouble of producing an XML product, the last thing you want to do is to blame your customers or make it more difficult for them to do the job.

Not only does your product not work 'the way I want to use it,' but when I do use it the way "most people use things", we get it thrown back in our face.

Not impressive, but we wouldn't expect anything else from the crappy XML developers.

Here are the details:

Comment on the Blogher Anti-SPam Spam:

Perhaps if blogher had an automated code-correction feature, we could remedy the duplicate posting of content.

Why does BlogHer allow the duplications of the text below?

We have no idea.

It would be nice if there was an automated feature for the public to find out which kind of blogging software has automated-blog-spam-detection that is faulty.

Maybe BlogHer can improve their blogging-filtering system so that, unlike other blog software, we do not have to have someone "review" the content before posting:

Spam from BlogHer

Your blog requires word verification

BlogHer's spam-prevention robots have detected that your blog has characteristics of a spam blog. (What's a spam blog?) Since you're an actual person reading this, your blog is probably not a spam blog. Automated spam detection is inherently fuzzy, and we sincerely apologize for this false positive.

Before we can turn off mandatory word verification on your posts we'll need to have a human review your blog and verify that it is not a spam blog. Please fill out the form below to get a review.

Find out more about how BlogHer is fighting spam blogs.

Remove word verification from posts

Word Verification:

Type the characters you see in the picture below.

Ref: This link below:

About Spam Blogs

What Are Spam Blogs?

As with many powerful tools, blogging services can be both used and abused. The ease of creating and updating webpages with BlogHer has made it particularly prone to a form of behavior known as link spamming. Blogs engaged in this behavior are called spam blogs, and can be recognized by their irrelevant, repetitive, or nonsensical text, along with a large number of links, usually all pointing to a single site.

Spam blogs cause various problems, beyond simply wasting a few seconds of your time when you happen to come across one. They can clog up search engines, making it difficult to find real content on the subjects that interest you. They may scrape content from other sites on the web, using other people's writing to make it look as though they have useful information of their own. And if an automated system is creating spam posts at an extremely high rate, it can impact the speed and quality of the service for other, legitimate users.

BlogHer: "What We're Doing About Spam"

Needless to say, we do not approve of spamming here at BlogHer. Below are some of the things we've implemented to remove and reduce spam on our service. We will update this list as we continue our efforts.

Automated spam classifying algorithms keep spam blogs out of NextBlog and out of our "Recently Published" list on the dashboard.

The same classifiers are used to require an extra word verification field on the posting form for potential spam blogs. This makes it harder for spammers to set up automated systems to do their posting, since a human needs to complete this step.
The Flage as Object-shutup-able button in the NavyBarroom lets you notify us of problem blogs that you find, so we can review them and take appropriate action.

You'll notice the content duplicates below: BlogHer-spam-detection is unable to figure out that it's own software is duplicating the content.

Isn't that interesting: The system that "detects spam" can't figure out that it is creating spam.

Why is that?

"Don't notice what is going on, just nod your head and repeat, 'XML Is the best thing ever'."

Whatever. I think it's alot of crap.

How are those profit margins?

"Now that we've developed all this XML-stuff, how are we going to make money at it?"

Gee, why didn't you idiots think about that before you started spending money?

Duh.

-- This is the end of the content --

XML Concepts: Tag Extraction from OPML

2005-11-11T16:18:00.000-05:00

One thing I've noticed with a list of links, is that the links are interesting, but they really don't help the reader.

For example, suppose you run across a list of del.icio.us links, or a webpage with links to "recommended reading".

What do you do to quickly find what the good stuff is?

Ideally, what would be nice is if there was a way to automatically dig into the linked content, find the material, organize it, and then extract summary data from the content at these links, and then showcase it in a summary format.

Bluntly, I don't want to review 100 links individually to organize the data; nor do I want to tell a webmaster to "better organize their list of links". They don't care what I want; and I don't care how they organize it.

So here are some thoughts on how this could be done.

First, I'd like for the aggregator to find a single webpage.

Then, I want the aggregator to dig into the tag-related data for those links and webpages, and return them. I want the aggregator to search across the RSS platforms and find out who has commented on that piece, how they've tagged it, and then have the RSS tool dig into the original content and find the key concepts.

Then, I want the aggregator to extract these tags, organize them, and create a meaningful arrangement.

Finally, what I want by each summary tag is a pop-up window that lets me choose from the original list, the items related to that tag.

I'm looking for the following

A. A way to quickly summarize and organize not just the link-names, but the embedded content at that link

B. A method to summarize the content below/embedded within the link in some meaningful summary tables

C. A method to take a list of random, disorganized links, and then extract a summary organization that allows be to find what is most useful without me having to dig into each item separately

D. A method to apply this summary-organization tool to either a singe webpage, a blog, or a table

I do not care whether the summary data is in a table, but I would like to see a three-dimensional floating-tag-display, and something by each tag that pop-up to show me a menu that displays the detailed links related to that particular tag.

I'd like to be able to move the 3-d image of the tags around in free space either by manual or auto-rotation

I'd like to be able to include new webpages within the original so that as I add new webpages, I can see how the new links at that second webpage add or adjust the original three 3-rendering

I'd like to be able to see a comparison-feature so that as I add new lists of links from OPML, I can see by summary or individual level how a particular web-page-link or OPML is adjusting the tag-pattern.

I want to be able to take an OPML, list of links, or a list of RSS-returns from a XML feed subscription and see the embedded details within that in free space, not simply as a list in an aggregator.

-- This is the end of the content --

Blog Aggregator

2005-11-08T16:58:00.000-05:00

Aggregators take information out of blogs and the net, and post them.

But what about the opposite: What if there was a way to use a blog, and extract information from an aggregator?

I'm talking about the settings in the aggregator, and including them as specific functions within the blog.

Then I can say, "I want to post all the content in my blog related to my aggregator selections."

Sometimes people say, "We can already do that." Small problem: There are some restrictions on spam.

So, I got to thinking: What if, rather than fighting spam, we use spam-like-features, and then use that to our advantage?

That way, like the MPAA and the relationship with music downloads, we can "use what people are doing," rather than trying to make them do something else.

I'd like to be able to use the blog as a platform to read the aggregator selections, and then apply these selections so that spammers [who have content that I want] will know to drop their content in my comments. IN short, I'm already telling my aggregator what I want; why not tell the world and the spammers [who may also have stuff I want] the specific codes on how to spam my blog [and give me what I want?].

I'd also like to be able to look at a map, and notice which geographic regions are not getting my content. Why not have a blog that allows the spam to be targeted based on the content, topic, novelty, and size.

Then I can look for geographic camps in the downloads and spam, and identify which areas I want to focus on "using other methods" to get content.

This would be like giving the audience the choice on which content they want to get spammed with [if that's what they want].

Also, I'd like to be able to do RSS searches in particular PDF-formatting, not just a generic pdf-extention. I'd like to be able to have a tool that can read the layout codes, and then organize the results into specific folders based on style, color, layout, length, novelty, tone, and other parameters.

I'd also like to be able to take blog content, and auto-format it to a pdf.layout. I'd like to be able to include simple commands in the blog, and have as a draft in my blog, a visible pdf-like rendition of the content as it would appear in a pdf file including color and formatting. I'd like to be able to publish the content as text; but have my readers/aggregators display the output as either text or a PDF in the aggregator, depending on what the reader wanted to see.

I'd also like to see an RSS download monitor. I want to know which geographic regions the content is downloaded, and have this in a summary chart that is in the aggregator: This would be an RSS-data flow between the blog, site stats, and the aggregator. I want to know which of my content is getting downloaded and then I can tailor content that is similar to that to that specific reader, and then adjust my content codes so that I can identify which of my readers has a "give me spam like this"-command in their blog-comments. Then, I can click a few tic boxes to update and have my content automatically tailored to the updates in their "give me spam"-commands.

I'd like a capture command that not only identifies the style of words about specific subjects, but captures the original quote/comment and posts it to the blog in a pdf compatible format. Also, the reverse would be true: I'd like to be able to do a search with the RSS-tool, identify key comments or phrases, and then have my aggregator find which blogs have a "give me spam command" [a permission to make a follow-up to that quote] so that with one simple approval, I can have a permission-based-spam sent to those who want it. Yes, spam can be annoying; but I'd also like to be able to send with one message a quote or comment to many blogs who are saying the same thing, and have also stated in advance that they want spam-like-mass-blasts from people like me who they want to hear from.

I would like to have an aggregator that searches for key words within the content and posts them to a screener. I'd like to be able to with one click auto-post this selected content to a blog.

I'd like to be able to have a search command in the aggregator where I can look for a specific phrase, reports this output to a central registry, create a message for that content, the system would verify the permission and post the content to that blog, and then allow me to follow-up with that content. I'd like to be able to link to follow-up messages, post one message in my blog, and have an auto-publication feature so that many blogs [who want to get spammed with this desirable content] get the message.

I'd like to have a prospective search platform to schedule time to do tasks and searches. It would show my search plan, and show the results of the searches in a horizontal program-like schedule, and track the %-complete on my research topics. Then I can identify which searches need additional work or variations. I don't want to make the aggregator simply lists of content; but a platform to monitor whether I'm achieving my research objectives. Ideally, it would be a "schedule planner combined with an aggregator." Ideally, I'd like to have words in a search showing how the request fits in with the overall research; while at the same time showing how the RSS-results compare with the overall research plan.

I'd like to have a feature in RSS-subscription URLs that allow me to maintain an existing URL-XML-subscription, but modify it so that I can block or ignore certain types of URLs or content publishers. I don't want to have to remember the details of the original publication; nor do I want to go back and individually update each XML-URL subscription; rather, I'd like to have within the aggregator a simple tic bock by each result that gives me the option to "ignore this source" and have the aggregator automatically exclude future results related to that subscription. Whether the actual XML-URL is modified, or whether this is a separate step within the aggregator is of no consequences; I just would rather have a fast way to exclude content from trashy-sources, rather than rework in my mind "which steps, commands, and phrases" I had in the original URL request, and then redo the XML-URL update.

I'd like an aggregator that formats content like a mini-internet. I'd like to be able to still scroll through my content results as if I'm looking at them as I would a search engine. I'd like to be able to have a "Google-Yahoo-search" like feature within my aggregator so that I can "surf my aggregator content" and "do some focused searching and link analysis on the aggregator results." This combines the features of a search engine with stats and linking analysis with the aggregators so that I can prioritize my reading, and narrow in on recurring themes, as opposed to simply scrolling through reams of aggregator-listed-content-results.

-- This is the end of the content --

XML Concepts: E-mail desktop

2005-11-04T20:48:00.000-05:00

Have you checked you e-mail in box lately, but had a hard time comparing messages?

Sometimes, we get updates, but we lose track of the original questions.

There's some talk about using a discussion-group-like formatting to let your e-mails weave their way: Your outgoing e-mail responses will get weaved with the incoming e-mail replies.

Brilliant.

Then I got to thinking about something: Suppose your "chat conversation order" is, well "out of order".

Or, suppose you're jumping back between documents and e-mails that aren't logically connected to eachother?

Here's what I thought would be nice . . .

"It would be nice" if I could go to my e-mail in-box, and then have a horizontal scrolling ability: So that I can horizontally scroll and see all the relevant documents.

That way, I could attach this RSS-feed of my selected-e-mails; and attach them as a single element to my e-mail, either as an attachment, or internally within the e-mail.

Then, when I'm pointing to various documents, I can more easily throw down all 5 documents and highlight each of them in a single box and simply say: "Hay, see document 5, notice the highlighting, we've got a slip-up here in the response from document 1, 2, 3 and 7."

Rather than having to copy each of the segments or copy from each original e-mail, all I'd have to do is simply throw down the e-mail, and let the reader [you, a person looking at my e-mail] and look at them as if you were looking at a number of documents on your desk top.

-- This is the end of the content --

Blog URL auto-redirect log

2005-08-17T08:46:00.000-05:00

Have you ever changed a blog title?

If you have, you know that some of your readers can't find your content: Your URL has changed, but the original feed has the original URL.

Some of the feed readers use the original URL. If you make an update to that URL, the original feed doesn't necessarily change. Rather, the original URL may still be available or floating around. What's worse: When you've got a spelling error, and months later, you notice it/change it, but the world is using the old URL.

What to do? It would be nice . . .

If there was a way to have an auto-redirect capability. But not just that, but a way to automatically allow users the option to have this auto-redirect on or off. That way, if someone makes a change to a URL, and doesn't want anyone to link back to the original content, then they can turn it off.

Here's what I see happening:

A. Someone publishes content

B. They make an update to the blog URL

C. There is an auto-redirect from the original URL to the new one

D. The users can turn the option on or off.

E. There is a log or central registry in a blogger's account for all the auto-redirects. If there are changes, or content is deleted this would show up as a "permanently deleted" as opposed to a "redirect"

That way:

We can publish once, and then have updates to the URL automatically linked from the original Feed URL to the subsequent changes.

If we publish an XML feed, and the URL changes, the feed-readers will be able to link the original feed URL with the updated URL and still be able to link from the first version of the content to the latest URL.

We would have an auto-link between the new and old URL with all versions of the blog title in the XML feed.

Ideally, this log or auto-link function would also apply to all internal-blog-references of that particular URL. We may have entered in the HTML code the original blog-URL, but the auto-redirect would automatically update and index both versions of the URL in the blogroll, archive, internal blog links, and the XML tags.

-- This is the end of the content --

Sign-in error, Newsgator Online, 9-Aug-05 UTC 11:37:56

2005-08-09T10:33:00.000-05:00

Got this while attempting to sign-in to Newsgator Online.

Unable to sign-in.

Newsgator Online Error Message

Server Error in '/' Application.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Runtime Error
Description: An application error occurred on the server. The current custom error settings for this application prevent the details of the application error from being viewed remotely (for security reasons). It could, however, be viewed by browsers running on the local server machine.

Details: To enable the details of this specific error message to be viewable on remote machines, please create a <customErrors> tag within a "web.config" configuration file located in the root directory of the current web application. This <customErrors> tag should then have its "mode" attribute set to "Off".



<configuration>
<system.web>
<customErrors mode="Off"/>
</system.web>
</configuration>

Notes: The current error page you are seeing can be replaced by a custom error page by modifying the "defaultRedirect" attribute of the application's <customErrors> configuration tag to point to a custom error page URL.



<configuration>
<system.web>
<customErrors mode="RemoteOnly" defaultRedirect="mycustompage.htm"/>
</system.web>
</configuration>

-- This is the end of the content --

PubSub employee identified as blog spammer

2005-07-11T11:41:00.000-05:00

Summary

Mud's Tests is pleased to report we have identified the spammer. His name is EUGENE Y. JEN and he is an EMPLOYEE of the PUBSUB Incorporated company.

Some talk about blogging ethics. When the developers comply with IEEE requirements/ANSI standards and ACM standards, maybe I'll believe they're serious about following blogging ethics. I remain unconvinced they want to be held accountable to any standard; rather, developers want the public-cusomter to comply with some illusory "performance standards" not applicable to developers. Absurd!

PubSub recently combined forces with GEOMETRIC GROUP to create Monitor110 a search platform for investment banking companies and hedge funds.

Free Spam!

PubSub also provides search support for RSS and Atom feeds on the internet. Part of PubSub's job is to set up peering relationships. Eugene's job was in part to establish these connections using a T1 account.

Eugene Y. Jen spammed this blog less than 6 months ago. Keep in mind, at the very time that he was spamming this blog, Wyman and his "friends" at PubSub were feigning shock about the problem with spam.

Is it not ironic that at the time there was a spam summit, the one person who was contributing to the spam problem worked for PubSub?

Also, isn't it curious that the spam occurred just as WYMAN was denying there was a problem with PubSub?

Later, we find out that the denials were worthless: PubSub in fact corrected the code [that they said there was no problem with] and it was shown that Wyman's PubSub platform was not actually working as advertised. There were problems.

And these problems showed up during the December 2004 Tsunami in Asia. Alerts didn't go out. Those who had signed up with the PubSub system, if they had used some of the RSS options, were unable to get the information they wanted.

The problem continued to occur during the subsequent Alaska Tsunami Tests.

Eugene Y. Jen is a known blog spammer. Beware all! PubSub likes to hire people who, in my personal opinion, want others to be quiet about problems.

Spamming is not a good thing to do.

To be clear, we are not accusing EUGENE of a crime; only reporting that we found out who spammed this blog; and the curious timing this spamming had in relationship to the SpamSummit and various PubSub technical challenges indepdently reviewed and reported.

Has PubSub recently been jilted?

Who was behind the action to spam the blog?

What could PubSub theoretically do to make problems go away? Maybe they have some ideas.

PubSub Employee Spam Policy for Peering Requirements

Does PubSub have a spam policy; also, is that spam policy not enforce, contrary to some peering requirements?

Public Relations

When did CooperKatz no longer consider PubSub a client?

Good will

Are others no longer working with PubSub?

Scope and terms of ongoing relationship

Is there evidence that despite "no longer having a relationship with the advertising agency," various employees were still having some sort of interaction electronically with their old public relations firm or employees, despite apparent public statements to the contrary?

Reasonable public conclusions about the relationship ending

If the formal relationship between the advertising agency and the primary client is not longer viable and has "ended," would it not be appropriate to expect that there be no contact between [a] PubSub and [b] the prior client, its officers, employees and the intellectual property, pamphlets, personnel associated with the advertising agency?

Could the former advertising agency please describe the terms of the "we no longer have a relationship": Was it 100% "no contact," or was there a period of time that information would continue to flow back and forth between the client and the agency?

When does the advertising agency expect the data transfer and clean-up issues following contract-termination will result in 100% "no contact" between the agency and client?

Mixed signals: More credibility problems?

Why would some publicly assert "there is no longer a relationship or interest" but the employees were still going to the site that "they no longer had a relationship" with?

Post-Relationship Conduct is curious

Does this mean that the relationship really isn't over; or is that the relationship was suddenly terminated without warning; or is it because they want to monitor what a previous partner is now saying?

See the pattern? Someone gets banned, a relationship is severed, or there are overt and clear signals that things are no longer the same, but they keep coming back to monitor the situation.

What's up with that?

It's kind of like they don't like it when someone comes to a conclusion or reaches a decision: They come back to monitor what is going on. That sounds like they're emotionally attached to a situation, yet they've taken action that would send a signal that the relationship is "over."

Indeed, the relationship is over, but only on their terms. Aha! To what do we enjoy having this rather arbitrary standard imposed? Oh, will we have more denials:

"I didn't do it . . . " or "It wasn't me . . . " or "we never agreed to actually end the relationship in that way . . . "

Indeed, their personal take clear actions that would send a clear signal that they no longer desire to have a civil interaction; but when their conduct is called on the carpet for all to see, they deny it thinking that nobody would dare believe those who question their veracity.

How long has this been going on?

How many people in a similar situation have been ridiculed, then efforts were made to apparently deny what was actually done?

Does someone have such a "high standing actually made out of illusions" that they are insecure with themselves to simply "let go" of what is no longer an interaction?

It is as if they want to impose "their discipline" on those who dare say what is self-evident, but when it comes to having some sort of accountability for that conduct, they turn to their chorus of enablers who do not realize they have been deceived.

Yet, despite the initial conduct that would warrant an immediate end to the interaction, they then turn around and closely monitor the words and actions of those who dare speak.

Quite a mixed signal, especially when they take bold action to send a clear signal they are not civilized and have no regard for a relationship; but when a decision is made to end the relationship and contact, they take it upon themselves to continue to monitor that which dared to challenge the inappropriate conduct.

To that end, they have many denials and excuse. Plenty of stories. Do you plan to scream loudly; do you plan to threaten others; do you plan to track them closely as they go about their business?

Why, if the public is led to believe that the interaction no longer is based on a formal contract does the interaction, monitoring, and surveillance continue?

If someone says this is "obviously" a "non-issue" are you going to believe them?

This is what [ he says ] . . . but what does he do?

Note

Feel free to disclose your "attorney-client" agreement authorizing you to act on anyone's behalf to issue statements as to whether the concerns outlined below have or do not have any merit.

To be clear, no one has been authorized on behalf of anyone to assert "this is a non-issue" or "the issue is over". Such statements are not appropriate for they are not a party; nor have they been given any approval, authorization, or consent to act as either a mediator or adjudicator.

Regardless their jurisdiction, it would be appropriate that anyone asserting that "this doesn't matter" would appropriately review the legal foundation upon which you are publicly asserting that this conduct deserves not scrutiny. If the issues do not matter to you, then perhaps you may wish to explain on your own blog why the conduct "doesn't matter". Indeed, if the conduct "doesn't matter" why so much energy spent on "that which doesn't matter"? Ah, no answer: The strange disconnect between what one spends their time on, versus what they publicly assert is "not an issue."

Why the inconsistency?

Why spending so much time on an issue that "doesn't matter" or is "over"?

Surely, if there were questions about the mental capabilities of those who dare notice reality, why would you continue to be worried about what is or is not here?

What will happen if the issue doesn't end and the discussion continues?

Or are you saying that it would be more appropriate that one keep silent about matters of public interest related to corporations engaging in commerce, transactions, public discourse, and public behavior?

What kind of reward, favor, benefit, profit, reward, financial award, or other valuable consideration [if any] are you provided in order to induce others to believe that someone's personal opinions based on findings of fact are without any merit?

Perhaps, inter alia. . .

* Perhaps you live in a land where your arrogant leaders talk about the freedoms you fight for or have enshrined in your Constitution; but you agree only with that right to expression and use of information technology when that conclusion is consistent with what you desire, not necessarily with reality;

* Perhaps it has grown into fashion where you reside to only agree to the exercise of those freedoms when that opinion and conclusions are consistent with what you have been told or want other to believe;

* Perhaps you only speak out when the conclusion is contrary to what you want others to believe;

* Perhaps many of your kind continue to assert conclusions without regard to the subsequent evidence which show your initial conclusions were not only flawed be devoid of reality; and/or

* Perhaps despite admissible evidence which may be the fruit of electronic discovery, you continue to assert your preliminary conclusions despite admissible evidence to the contrary.

Indeed, you may wish to disclose the basis upon which you are asserting that the issues are not to be considered; and certify in writing that you are not in direct or indirect receipt of any financial or other valuable consideration for any statements suggesting that a valid concern about unusual PubSub employee conduct need not be discussed, reviewed, or publicly examined.

Not to worry, for it is indeed curious how quickly raise the siren to shriek that something "doesn't matter," yet they are not a party. You are irrelevant the louder who dare to speak of an issue to which you are not involved. But you continue to speak as if the world cares. They do, for it would appear they have been fooled that you are someone to be taken seriously, when you have not apparently taken the time to review what you have asked for.

Curious.

For would we not expect the requisite level of evidence to change once again when the initial conditions were met? Indeed, such would appear to be the case. But why expect anything else from those who initially deny that which they believe no one can prove.

A small error.

You would be wise to review your appropriate jurisdiction's legal guidance on attempting to mediate or act on the behalf of another without your having been adequately certified by your jurisdiction's legal oversight.

You will cease and desist to assert affirmatively that the concerns outlined below do or do not have any merit. Rather, you are to state that those conclusions are simply your personal opinion and are not intended to provide legal advise nor any comment as to the legal merits of the issues outlined.

If you do not understand what this means, then it would be appropriate for you to seek the advice of legal counsel. Nor should the following information be construed to be legal advice to any party. Rather, it is a personal opinion which may or may not be widely accepted, endorsed, or believed.

If you do not understand that this is a personal opinion and have not discussed the following issues with a certified, trained, and licensed legal professional in your jurisdiction, then stop reading.

PubSub's problems

What apparently prompted Eugene to spam this blog was a public test result that was contrary to PubSub objectives. In short, various different subscription methods created RSS feeds that produced different results. At worst, some subscriptions produced no content while other subscriptions worked.

Some of the results were desired; and other subscription methods produced no results. This was a problem. However, Wyman asserted on Jeremy Zawodny's blog that there was no problem or delays.

I countered with the test results showing otherwise. The issue wasn't simply a delay, but that content would never show up unless corrected, and Eugene then showed up spamming my blog.

Curiously, since then we now know that the problems continued. The results in subsequent tests during the Alaska Tsunami tests showed that not all the feeds were correctly reporting. How this was actually corrected, you'll have to talk to WYMAN.

The point of the matter is that there was a legitimate difference between what PubSub management was asserting as their capability and the independent test results.

The reason for exploring the issues with PubSub is that PubSub forms a baseline with which to compare the Monitor110 performance. The concern is that if the initial platform cannot work properly [PubSub], then whatever inherent coding issues are in the PubSub backbone would reasonably be expected to continue in the Monitor110 development and success.

Is this a matter that warrants public scrutiny? Sure, because many firms are planning to invest considerable funds in technology to monitor public discussion of their firms. However, the problem we run into is when we compare the apparent QA methodology of the Geometric Group and compare it with what was going on with PubSub, there are a number of questions:

Why was PubSub still having problems after the transition and combination with Geometric Group?

What is the nature of the QA testing behind the PubSub effort; and how are the results in the Monitor110 going in comparison?

If there are problems with the PubSub baseline platform, and the QA efforts did not catch things, is there a reasonable chance that the same management and development-approach when applied to Monitor110 would have the same problems?

How do the actual management plans in place to address the Monitor110 development efforts compare with the actual management plans and performance in the PubSub-analogy?

These seem reasonable questions and issues to explore. It is a separate matter whether PubSub likes or dislikes the conclusions.

However, my concern is that at the very time that these issues were getting raised, Eugene Y. Jen shows up and starts spamming my blog. Not very nice, very disruptive, and raises a number of other questions.

For we know that management assertions from PubSub have not compared favorably with actual PubSub performance as independently checked. Did management not like the questions being raised at the critical juncture of ramping up for the Monitor 110 development and final sales plans?

It remains a matter of evidence and law whether the US Government seeks to review the matters.

What's up with that?

Of immediate interest, however, to the day to day user is something called FeedMesh. This is the idea of having blogs and websites simply ping one service, and then all the services will communicate with each other.

Small problem. Apparently people are suggesting that the services are working and that FeedMesh is working fine. My tests show otherwise.

In short, the issue comes down to credibility. What I find disturbing in the PubSub, Monitor110, and FeedMesh issues is that there is a common element: Bob Wyman. He says one thing, but when I go check things out, there seems to be a number of exceptions. I don't the patience with someone who says one thing, but my reviews come to opposite conclusions.

Am I calling Wyman unreliable? I'm still in the "I would check everything that man says"-mode. I'm this close to simply saying, "Anything he touches, run away from." I haven't done that. Why? Because eventually things work, somewhat.

Which brings us back to Eugene and his blog spamming. It's been 6 months since he did this. I find it curious that someone would do that. I suspect without evidence that Wyman and he agreed to do what they had to do to continue a favorable public relations effort.

So that got me to checking. And what I found with the peers and the PubSub data performance in Asia raised many questions in my mind. I noticed a number of errors and dropped feeds. Unusual error rates. Sure seems, after looking at the NTTP peering data, which the performance levels were far below those of the overseas competitors in Asia and Europe.

So what's going on with PubSub, Monitor 110, and Geometric Group? I would encourage the analysis to dig into the performance data; and get a good feel for what did or didn't happen during the pre-Geometric area; and come to an understanding of what did or didn't happen during the PubSub QA testing/how they missed stuff; and then at the same time I'd encourage the analysis to look at the effectiveness of management in translating these lessons learned into a better Monitor 110 product.

But here's the problem. Let's say the analysis, who are supposed to "analyze" these products actually aren't independent. This is to say that if you take a step back at the issue: Aren't the very customers of the Monitor110 product the same firms that are financing the development and deployment?

If that's true, then I have no confidence that there's legitimate market forces competing to ensure that the financial side of the investment house [the ones hoping to make money] are going to press the analysts side for the straight scoop on how much things will cost, potential schedule delays, or overruns.

Does this have anything to do with Deutsche Bank? I have no idea. I suspect that it does.

Which brings us back to the blog spam. If you wanted to shut someone up, wouldn't you spam their blog hoping they would shut down their site or dissuade public discussion?

I have no idea. Let's look at the blog spam with Eugene.

Details

Eugene you shouldn't really have left your name on your blog all this time.

The IP number has been traced to an E-mail with your name on it.

And the comments you left in the blog have brought discredit upon not only yourself, but PubSub and Geometric Group.

Wyman

So it's been all this time and we find out that the piece of employee that you have named EUGENE Jen is the one who has been spamming this blog.

He runs his own private blog.

Here is his e-mail Eugene Y. Jen.

What I want

A public apology;

A clear statement of what you're going to do to get him to stop spamming the blog;

An independent review of all his private e-mails and blogs that he's posted;

A complete discussion with all other members of the public who have had their blogs spammed by anyone of the PubSub employees;

A discussion with the Board of Directors of Geometric Group to explain why EUGENE was given free reign to spam others blogs;

A discussion with your PUBSUB peers to discuss with them whether the conduct of EUGENE Y. Jen raises doubts about PUBSUB ability to conduct its affairs as a peer;

A discussion with the peers within the RSS community such as the fine people at Technorati and David Sifry to explain what PubSub is going to do about EUGENE Y. Jen's blog spamming;

A complete account of all access EUGENE has had to PUBSUB commercial and intellectual property so that the entire world knows what kind of access he's had to your files, including dates, times, and locations;

A credible public statement to the RSS community, David Sifry, and other professional XML developers who carefully planned and successfully ran the Spam Summit, that answers the following question, "Why is your employee spamming the public blogs on company time?"

Again, to the same RSS community who successfully hosted the Spam Summit a reasonable explanation that responds to the following question, "Why is your employee using PubSub resources to spam public blogs?"

An appropriate notification to the public that all employees at PubSub are familiar with reasonable and appropriate standards of employee conduct; that such conduct shall not include blog spamming; and a certification to be made to the RSS community and David Sifry [who is the best RSS CEO, in my opinion] that there has been a reasonable discussion of the matters and that PubSub has adequately reviewed the material and employee standards of conduct and have appropriately ADMONISHED Eugene Y. Jen for his inappropriate comments made in a blog.

A reasonable statement of apology within a reasonable amount of time. I leave this up to the RSS community and the XML community and the Search Engine Optimization community to decide how long something like this will go without a reasonable CEO statement that the matter has been reviewed and there will be no more problems. I think a reasonable amount of time would be 30 days, but I am not holding you to any deadline as I have seen over the past year that you have a glacial response in responding to reasonable requests for responses to software errors on your site. Your responses have simply been one of denying the problems existed. That is not impressive.

A thorough review of the peer operational requirements by a party outside PubSub and some sort of credible certification that PubSub remains in good standing with respect to the following requirements:
- Personnel have adequate ENGLISH speaking skills;
- determination whether this type of blog spam by a peer amounts to network abuse; a review whether the peer's conduct has occurred elsewhere on the net;
- and an appropriate review by NDSoftware who QUOTE "reserves the right to modify, replace, or nullify this document at any time without written notice". RefENDQUOTE

Issues

I find it outrageous that BOB WYMAN has preached about the benefits of RSS, but when his own company produces a product that doesn't work properly, and the public provides evidence that the RSS feeds have a problem in them. . . what happened?

Apparently, EUGENE decided to spam this blog.

Well, guess what! We no know about EUGENE and it remains a matter for the courts to decide whether the spamming was done at the time that PubSub was hoping to get VC funding.

Too bad the public found out about Eugene's spamming.

How many VC personnel inside Geometric Group have bought IPO shares of PubSub on the hopes that the product could be sold to investment banking firms?

Wyman, you have done a very nice job at hiring someone like Eugene.

At least you owe it to people like David Sifry who stood up for you: they stood by you while your product was questioned.

Now we know why there was such an outburst about blog spamming. Their own employees were doing the spamming.

It remains to be understood whether this was an orchestrated effort to distract attention from the needed product reviews going on at the time that the VC funding were taking place.

Oh, indeed, it remains a reasonable question whether the blog spamming from EUGENE Y. JEN at PUBSUB was related to an effort to dissuade public discussion about the apparently flaws in the PubSub coding at the very time that VC funding deals were being negotiated.

Was this material information? I think so, and it remains a matter of law under Rule 10b-5 whether this blog spamming was an effort to dissuade a reasonable inquiry into product ability, defects, or the suitability of get well plans.

EUGENE! Did you actually believe you were going to get away with this blog spam?

Daily NonSenses

1. Eugene Has a blog

Eugene's blog.

2. Technorati captured Eugene's admission that he made rude comments.

The spamming occurred 172 days ago. And here's the fatal admission where Eugene admits that he was being rude: look at his blog.

Eugene then confirms that he is the author of the comments here and conforms that the comments were deleted.

Eugene has admitted that, inter alia:

A. he made the comments;
B. the freely chosen comments were not appropriate for a professional employee;
C. there were multiple comments;
D. the pattern was no isolated;
D. the current comments were from his blog;
E. his DailyNonsenses blog is his blog;
F. he was in control of that blog;
G. the comments he is making on the DailyNonsenses blog are specific to unique and particularized comments on another blog that he knowingly made comments on, and did so willfully.

It makes no sense that he'd be talking about "someone else's comments".

Why would Eugene make a comment about his comments being deleted unless he made the comment?

Why would Eugene be upset that someone deleted his comment?

Why would Eugene publicly confirm that the comments "may have been rude" unless he made the comments [plural]?

Why would Eugene talk about the "importance" of maintaining blog conversations unless he was the one making the comments in the blog?

Conversely, if he had "made no comment" why is he publicly making a comment and offering an apology about "a comment, comments, or spam he supposedly never made"?

Why despite the above admission that he was rude [as he recorded in Technorati], would EUGENE then say otherwise and assert he never spammed the blog; and

Why would others dismiss this as a "non-issue" . . . despite Eugene publicly asserting and recorded on his own blog in January 2005 that the comments were not appropriate?

How many multiple-matching comments in a blog are required before someone is reasonably held accountable for blog spam?

3. On Eugene's blog is listed public his email; this account is also cross referenced and mentioned in Chinese.

Eugene has publicly provided his E-mail on CPAN.

Here's the link between Daily Nonsenses and Chinese Language.

You may wish to discuss Eugene's use and/or connection with this Chinese site.

If you wish to go back through the entire archive of this site, you can find the intersections of Eugene's postings and his IP address. Look for the following four codes for the intersection between Eugene's PubSub Address, his name, and his DSN locator information that is only available by using a PubSub computer. Here are the search parameters for discovery going back 5 years on this site, to confirm:

Parameter 1: &file=M.1078297670.A [file reference]
Parameter 2: 的大作中提到 [Cross reference, Chinese]
Parameter 3: Eugene Jen
Parameter 4: 1078298644.A&num=6284 [Message number]

Alternate search string to confirm IP match: file=M.1078298644.A&num=6284

When you do this search through the archives, discovery, or other methods for cross referencing, this is the message you will get. This message confirms the IP is associated with JEN:

----------------------

•¢ÐÅÈË: eugene@pubsub.com (Eugene Y. Jen),

ÐÅÇø: cnAdmin

±ê Ìâ: News feed wanted -- New York, NY, USA

•¢ÐÅÕ¾: http://groups.google.com (Wed Mar 3 15:06:03 2004)

×ªÐÅÕ¾: SJTU!
news.ccie.net.cn!
news.zixia.net!
newsgate.cuhk.edu.hk!newsfeed.medi

³ö ´¦: 64.81.193.23

----------------------

ALLEGATION: On or about March 3 2004, Eugene Y. Jen did post the above message which you can subpoena from the original site.

Translation this is the article which confirms JEN is linked to the above ISP, where to get it, and how to confirm that he is in fact, the one that is associated with PubSub at that IP address.

4. We also know where Eugene Lives and this favorably compares with the IP address of PubSub

Here are all the Chinese restaurants around Eugene's home; you can check his credit card purchases on the dates around 165-175 days ago and see that he was still making purchases around the IP number at PubSub.

Here are the video camera locations in Chelsea near where Eugene lives. Notice that these tapes can be reviewed by anyone who has access to Echelon, GCHQ, or NSA. These tapes are located in back-up locations outside the American's control.

5. Eugene's G-Mail account is listed on Daily Nonsenses

Here is his g-mail account http://tinyurl.com/9j7qf.

6. Eugene is listed in NYC

Here is his public address in NYC and his phone number.

7. Eugene has a problem with English

Eugene has a very distinct problem with English. He makes errors. Here is a sample linking his identity, to PubSub, and his original e-mail and IP. Here is an archived version of that posted information from 2004.

Notice in the e-mail at Technorati, the title: "Deletion of Comments considers harmful". This is the same type of English-error listed on his public peering comments.

Also, note the same type of error in this version. It's not SPAINish. It's Spanish.

And he's also posted on other Spanish cites. Notice the grammatical error called, "interesting". This makes no sense.

8. There are other public e-mails that have both Eugene's IP address, his pubsub e-mail account, and his interest in PubSub peering

If you would like message traffic going back two yes, the following files can be subpoenaed. It is an account in Chinese where Eugene has posted peering information and can be linked to PubSub, Eugene's name, his sign-in times, and also the PubSub peering computers. That information is available here.

9. Eugene made comments about blog spam

What kind of credibility is that if he's going to spam other blogs?

10. Here's the link between the PubSub IP DSN and Eugene

The IP numbers match PubSub origin.

As confirmation of this IP number, here is the cross index to the PubSub main hub here.

Further, as confirmation of his link to NNTP here is the RFC code linking Eugene to the PubSub nntp peering efforts here.

But if that doesn't satisfy you, we still have another way of linking Eugene to this particular IP: Look at this confirmation: 05:36:51 64.81.193.23 dsl081-193-023.nyc2.dsl.speakeasy.net from 2003

Here is Eugene's personal code for the network: EYYJEN.

11. Eugene has publicly listed his PubSub e-mail address and his EYYJEN code

Here is a sample from 2004 archives. Notice the pubsub e-mail address under his name.

Also note that the "news feed wanted" terminology matches that which is at the Chinese site, message referenced above, dated Wed Mar 3 15:06:03 2004.

12. Eugene's PubSub time records also match

You can also subpoena the access codes for PubSub the following days to see that PubSub employee EUGENE Y. JEN did have access to the facility and was using the computer assigned [64.81.193.23] to him on these days:

2005 04 02
2005 04 01
2005 03 31
2005 03 30
2005 03 25

Translation: He was assigned to this computer on these days; the IP numbers match the access times; and he was using the computer on those days. He was getting paid to use that IP number and that IP number can be shown to have been accessed by him, and only him, on those days.

Conclusions

Technorati data shows us that Eugene Y. Jen did confirm that he made comments on a blog.

In his Daily Nonsenses blog he left his G-mail account; this G-Mail name matches the name for the public employee information which Eugene freely left in the public and also all the CPAN index files and pubsub account codes..

Public information shows us that Eugene Y. Jen has left his IP number and linked it publicly with the PubSub company.

Eugene Y. Jen is an employee or has been an employee of PubSub engaged in various efforts.

Eugene's name, confirming IP, and DSN information that are publicly available all point to the same computer in PubSub.

PubSub is also associated with all the IP numbers and DSN information which Eugene used when making public statements about PubSub, the peers, and other goods and services provided by PubSub.

Eugene also has demonstrated an interesting habit of making recurring grammatical errors. These IP numbers and names also occur on the same public news peers Eugene has publicly posted using his open e-mail, his open information, and his information linking him to PubSub.

Eugene has done nothing to hide his relationship with PubSub; nor has he done anything on his personal website that would ensure there was no way to link his website to him as an employee of PubSub.

Peers

Now that you know who Eugene is at PubSub. You're probably wondering what he did there.

Eugene's job was to find peers for PubSub to download and connect with. Here are some sample printouts of the peering problems PubSub was having.

Notice as you go through the data that PubSub's performance levels are not all that high. here are samples of the printouts.

It appears as though Eugene's job was to improve market share.

In other words, despite the problems PubSub was having without heir code, and Eugene still being busy with his peering connections he not only had time to spam blogs [how many others I have no idea], but he still had time to travel from PubSub, visit a Chinese restaurant in Chelsea and snuggle back down to his home. Here is the map from Eugene's house to PubSub. It looks as though he takes the Number 4 to the south end of Manhattan where he goes to the place he likes to spam blogs from: PubSub.

Here is another sample of the usenet requests which Eugene sent out using the computer he likes to use to spam blogs.

Here is another account you can subpoena to get additional T1-request information related to PubSub, Eugene Y. Jen, and his computer used to spam blogs. Here.

Source Forge

While all the above was going on, Eugene still had enough time to work on independent projects. He has an account through source forge and this is the project he had listed at one time. Note the names of the people on the project: They are also associated directly or indirectly to PubSub.

Here are the names that you can cross reference if you want to get more information about the friends of someone who likes to spam blogs:

Malcolm Pollack
Duncan Werner
Bill Lovett

Werener and Wyman are linked through First Rain:

Here is the address which links Wyman to Werner, and indirectly includes Eugene through the Source Forge:

Bob Wyman firstRain, Inc. 134 West 29th Street New York, NY 10001
US Phone: +1 212 616 8700 Fax: +1 212 290 2734
EMail: bobwyman@firstrain.com URI: http://www.firstrain.com

Duncan Werner firstRain, Inc. 134 West 29th Street New York, NY 10001
US Phone: +1 212 616 8700 Fax: +1 212 290 2734
EMail: dwerner@firstrain.com URI: http://www.firstrain.com

Some of the people used to work with WYMAN before he created PubSub.

Is Eugene that "not busy enough with duties at PubSub" that he has time to go over the Source Force accounts?

Clearly, he's got his priorities in question. Does this mean there's a management problem at PubSub; or are their employees using computers without adequate supervision; or are we to believe that someone broke into PubSub's account without Eugene Knowing about it . . . ?

Curious, all these questions and nobody has answers. But why expect anything else.

Eugene likes to spam so that the tough questions don't get answers.

Got any more blogs to spam as a diversion from other PubSub Problems?

Who cares, now the world knows.

Have a bad day, Eugene. You're an idiot.

Disclaimer: Mud's Tests is not affiliated with PubSub or their employees like Eugene Y. Jen who spammed this blog.

Denials admissible when contrary to interests

Go back to the Technorati feed: Why would he admit just after the event "that he may have been rude"; but then later deny having spammed the blog?

He denied because he didn't realize there were copies of his spam still available.

Was the reason he wanted the material "reposted" so that he could get access to the content and delete it? I think so.

The only reason he denied it because he didn't know the evidence was available. He thought that the information was gone.

Adequacy of management oversight, supervision, and training

In light of the actual conduct that is contrary to the denial, there appears to be some actual, tangible perceived consequence or cost to the employee and/or others should the allegations prove true.

What perceived consequences did EUGENE and/or others perceive were possible if the allegations were true?

Conversely, if the employee did not understand what they were doing was inappropriate, why did they later apologize?

Did the employee perceive that he did or didn't do something?

Did the employee engage in conduct that he does not remember?

How frequently does the employee engage in similar conduct that is treated as if it "doesn't matter" or "isn't worth remembering"?

Does this show a pattern of behavior that suggests there is a problem with the employee’s ability to understand what they are doing?

Is this a timing issue in terms of having some sort of ebbing and flowing as to their understanding of issues: That on some days they recognize conduct is not appropriate; while on other days the same conduct is perceived to be "not a problem"?

Is there some sort of issue, problem, or oversight issue which needs to be addressed?

Are there actual risks of real consequences if the employee engages in this apparent "selective memory problem" when representing various financial interests, corporate officers, or others in the business community?

Is it appropriate for them to have unsupervised access to technology?

Basis of denial

In other words the "review and investigation into Eugene's spamming" was not a review of any electronic data, nor any review of any electronic information. Rather, it appears management simply relied on the initial denial.

Rather, they simply looked at the denial and took it at what the employee wanted others to believe, not what the employee actual did.

This is the wrong question: "What is the employee saying, not what is actually going on."

The correct question is: "What is the employee saying; what actually happened; and is there any evidence that warrants continued confidence in this employee’s verbal/oral statements?"

Looks more like the PubSub way of doing things: Listen to what people say, and ignore what is actually going on with their equipment, capabilities, and actual performance.

We seeing a pattern here?

Out of court statements and denials are admissible as an exception under the hearsay rule. Moreover, when the information in the denial is proven to be false, the denial can be used to impeach the witness before a Grand Jury.

We know that the denial was freely made, under the false assumption that information did not exist; all the while that the actual conduct being denied did occur.

Allegation: The denial was communicated freely, knowingly, and willfully with the intent that it be relied upon, knowing full well that the asserted denial was false and the actual conduct did occur.

We also know that the denial was communicated, in electronic format, is recorded and has been relied upon by others. It remains a matter of law to what extent the original denial [without knowledge of the existence of the evidence] was materially relied upon by third parties.

Specifically, it remains a matter for the court to decide to what extent, if any, any outside individual relied on the initial denial as a basis to disregard the indicators of the employee conduct, or raise questions about the management at the PubSub Corporations.

Were the denials material; what management, hiring, retention, or other contract considerations or other business decisions were made and secured based on this denial?

Were the denials relied upon?

Have contracts been secured, retained in place, or have other financial indicators warranting an increase in audit scope per SAS99 been dismissed when they should have been increased?

Did management, when given the information, appropriately investigate the claims independently of the employees denial?

Has the employee been inappropriately supervised?

Has management failed to appropriately review the initial denial?

Have outside business partners, associates and other financial colleagues continued to rely on the verbal statements and, in doing so, have been dissuaded to review the matters or other wise cancel contracts that can be terminated for cause or on the basis of morals issue?

Does the initial review of the information by management show that they have inappropriately reviewed the matter?

Does the management approach to information and problem solving and indicators of problems with both products and employee conduct amount to negligence?

What damages and/or economic losses have others incurred as a result of relying on the initial denials that have been shown to be contrary to the actual conduct?

Details on the Spam

At this juncture, what do we have? Eugene somehow believes that all the evidence is gone. That there is no record. That all the comments are no longer traceable.

There's one small problem.

Guess who has a parallel comment feed? That's right. This site has a multi-channel comment line.

This is another way of saying that there's a ghost comment thread that exists, but you cannot see.

When you overlay the new comment feed on top of the old one, all the old comments disappear, but there's still archived and still available for the court to get access to.

This has been Eugene's fatal error. He didn't realize that the original spam that he left still exists in electronic format.

As you go over the detailed spam that Eugene left, consider the following:

A. Notice that the posts are duplicate to the original message

B. Notice that the posts are repetitive in both comment-content and structure

C. That the posting in the particular blogs is not sequential. This is to say that he's not simply going back incrementally, but he's jumping around forward and backward [in terms of dates in the blogs he's commenting to]; but he's making the same comment over and over again.

Review of the evidence

What you're going see below are the copy-paste versions of the spam-comments which Eugene left on this blog. They are the versions which show that Eugene made comments in here that were repetitive; unhelpful; were substantially unrelated to the original blog-content; showed no regard for a logical progression; nor did it substantially contribute to the discussion.

As you read the comments below, review what Eugene said in his blog about keeping comments as part of a "community" record. Oh, isn't that sweet.

Surely, why would anyone put a standard on someone to "maintain" a record of their blog spam for all the world to see; while at the same time laughably having others believe that the retention of those comments would contribute to anything substantive related to RSS, this blog content.

Rather, we are far more persuaded that the comments are nothing more than an effort to harass, annoy, and otherwise dissuade discussion and public comments.

Moreover, it appears as though the blog spamming was more designed to dissuade keeping the blog-comments open. Rather, it appears as though the actual intent of the blog spamming wasn't to engage in any dialog [As Eugene Might wish some to believe], but the actual motive appears to be the contrary: To spam the blog, generate enough annoyance to shut down the comments, and dissuade a substantive dialog related to the PubSub technical issues.

Going forward

You can be the judge. But I find it particularly interesting that at this juncture the comments are not one that recognize the details of the comments; nor have there been any admissions that the blog spamming was inappropriate; nor has there been any real discussion about the real objective of the blog spamming.

Details

Here are the details. In here you'll see the repetitive nature; the multiple dates; the duplicate content; and the recurring comments.

Keep in mind, what he’s doing is posting all this on the same day. He’s going backwards in time. Making posts in blogspots that have nothing to do with the original content; and in dates that have nothing to do with the original post date.
Watch as he goes backwards in time.

Notice he is skipping blogs.

I see no useful purpose to this.

Moreover, notice that the message is the same: It continues to repeat the same content. This shows that not only is he simply pasting the content, but providing no reasonable comment that is linked to the particular post that he is posting to.
Who’s being childish?

Note also the time sequence. The times are not sequential. Meaning that on the day that he is spamming the blog, he’s not going in any sequential order. Rather, he’s just randomly picking dates, jumping around, and throwing down blog comments.
What is the basis for picking the particular blog? Random: That is spam.
What was the basis for selecting a particular time? None: That is spam.
What was the basis to choose a particular blog over another? None: That is spam.

Strike 1: Impeaching a Witness

Notice the contrast between what he says; what he does:

Here are two comments on the blog dated the 16th. Notice the time is just prior:

Exhibit 1

Posted to Blog Dated: 16 Jan 2005

1 COMMENTS:

Nonsense Master said...

Please recover my comments in http://mudtesting.blogspot.com/2005/01/technorati-can-search-your-tags-pubsub.html.
It is not right to delete the comment from others. For integrity sake, please recover them.

Comment Time: 7:14 PM

POST A COMMENT

Here are two postings in the same blog [blog dated 13 Jan 2005]. Notice they are a duplicate not only in time but in content.

Strike 2: Impeaching a Witness

Notice the contrast between what he says; what he does:

Exhibit 2

Posted to Blog Dated: 13 Jan 2005

2 COMMENTS:
Nonsense Master said...
Please recover my comments in http://mudtesting.blogspot.com/2005/01/technorati-can-search-your-tags-pubsub.html.
It is not right to delete the comment from others. For integrity sake, please recover them.

Comment Time: 7:11 PM

Nonsense Master said...
Please recover my comments in http://mudtesting.blogspot.com/2005/01/technorati-can-search-your-tags-pubsub.html.
It is not right to delete the comment from others. For integrity sake, please recover them.

Comment Time: 7:11 PM

POST A COMMENT

Strike 3: Impeaching a Witness

Notice the contrast between what he says; what he does:

Here’s another posting on the blog dated the 13th:
13 JANUARY 2005

Exhibit 3

Posted to Blog Dated: 13 Jan 2005

COMMENTS [NONE YET] REFERRERS [NONE YET] [?]

1 COMMENTS:

Nonsense Master said...
Please recover my comments in http://mudtesting.blogspot.com/2005/01/technorati-can-search-your-tags-pubsub.html.
It is not right to delete the comment from others. For integrity sake, please recover them.
7:14 PM
POST A COMMENT

Strike 4: Impeaching a Witness

Notice the contrast between what he says; what he does:

Here’s one he posted during the same shot-gun-sequence, but this one was posted to the blog dated the 11th:

Exhibit 4

COMMENTS [NONE YET] REFERRERS [NONE YET] [?]

1 COMMENTS:
Nonsense Master said...
Please recover my comments in http://mudtesting.blogspot.com/2005/01/technorati-can-search-your-tags-pubsub.html.
It is not right to delete the comment from others. For integrity sake, please recover them.

Comment Time: 8:34 PM

POST A COMMENT

Strike 5: Impeaching a Witness

Notice the contrast between what he says; what he does:

Here’s one on the blog associated with the 10th:

Exhibit 5

Posted to Blog Dated:

COMMENTS [NONE YET] REFERRERS [NONE YET] [?]
1 COMMENTS:
Nonsense Master said...
Please recover my comments in http://mudtesting.blogspot.com/2005/01/technorati-can-search-your-tags-pubsub.html.
It is not right to delete the comment from others. For integrity sake, please recover them.

Comment Time: 7:12 PM
POST A COMMENT

Strike 6: Impeaching a Witness

Notice the contrast between what he says; what he does:

Exhibit 6

Posted to Blog Dated: 9 Jan

COMMENTS [NONE YET] REFERRERS [NONE YET] [?]
1 COMMENTS:

Nonsense Master said...
Please recover my comments in http://mudtesting.blogspot.com/2005/01/technorati-can-search-your-tags-pubsub.html.
It is not right to delete the comment from others. For integrity sake, please recover them.

Comment Time: 8:35 PM

POST A COMMENT

Strike 7: Impeaching a Witness

Notice the contrast between what he says; what he does:

This was posted to the blog dated 7 Jan

Exhibit 8

Posted to Blog Dated: 7 Jan

Nonsense Master said...
Please recover my comments in http://mudtesting.blogspot.com/2005/01/technorati-can-search-your-tags-pubsub.html.
It is not right to delete the comment from others. For integrity sake, please recover them.

Comment Time: 7:13 PM

Strike 8: Impeaching a Witness

Notice the contrast between what he says; what he does:

Exhibit 9

Posted to Blog Dated: 4 Jan 2005

Nonsense Master said...

Please recover my comments in http://mudtesting.blogspot.com/2005/01/technorati-can-search-your-tags-pubsub.html.
It is not right to delete the comment from others. For integrity sake, please recover them.

Comment Time: 8:36 PM

Review

Above, you can see that the comments were repetitive, duplicative, and show not linkage to the original blog content. Again, notice the contrast between what he says; what he does in the above comments.

Also, keep in mind what Eugene is publicly saying. It would appear that his comments are related to his incorrect assumption that the blog comments have been deleted and no longer exist.

But there you have it above: The multiple blog comments.

As you review Eugene's public statements in the revelations about what was actually done, keep in mind:

Has Eugene shown real remorse?

Has Eugene made statements that accept full responsibility for what he actually did?

Did the public statements and or private discussions with peers include statements that were based on Eugene's apparent incorrect assumption that the actual original spamming content no longer existed and would never be seen again?

I think 10-plus comments would credibly be called spam. Especially given the lack of relationship between the comments and the substance of the blog EUGENE was posting to.

Based on the initial "responses" from Eugene, is this someone you want to have your products associated with?

Does PubSub management encourage its employees to spam blogs to get comments shut down so that the public cannot easily compare notes in public about the issues related to PubSub?

Is PubSub management getting a credible response from their Employee on what they actually did as evidenced by above; or are the employee responses to date more consistent with an employee who incorrectly believes that the original comment-spam no longer exists and will never be seen by PubSub management?

Some might suggest that the public association that certain products may or may not have with Eugene is immaterial. If this is true, why would Firefox go out of its way to include Eugene's name on the list appearing in the NYT?

It would appear that Eugene's public standing is important; and that his relationship and proximity to the peering community, PubSub and other RSS-related products warrants sufficient public regard that his name [when placed on the Firefox ad] would generate substantial good will.

Surely, if he had no standing, there would be no reason to include his name. Or are we to believe that the "list of names" on the FireFox site is "just a name" and nothing more?

Then if that's true, then having "one's name listed on the Firefox Ad" surely isn't something to boast about. So it remains unclear:

Is Eugene of sufficient importance to PubSub and Firefox that his name generate some sort of public importance and avenue to persuade others to choose Firefox over competing web browsers?

We can only wonder.

Translation

I don't want a trivial "response." I want an apology for what you have done. That means in your blog comments don't simply say, "response" but put "I apologize" in the title of your blog.

Also, I want you to get back with your friends, management, and peers and make any appropriate changes or modifications to any electronic information you have sent out.

To the world and especially RSS-users, I encourage you to review the above information, the specific blog comments, and ask both WYMAN and EUGENE: Are you still able to stand by your original statements about what you did or didn't do?

Furthermore, those who are reading the 'responses' from WYMAN or EUGENE on their blogs, are you satisfied that their statements are made consistent with the reality that these comments were made?

Or are you left with the impression that their current statements are based on the assumption that the original blog spam will never be seen by anyone else?

Has WYMAN's or EUGENE's public statements that they have made to date been consistent with what actually happened; or are there statements consistent with what they believe you will be able to find out happened?

In other words, after you have reviewed the above 9 exhibits [10+ comments ] showing in detail what EUGENE did do, and after confirming messages from WYMAN and EUGENE that they have read the above content, do you notice any change in the comment, tone, or statements that they have made either orally or in writing?

Is the fact that the actual spam-content is now available change or adjust your perception of whether their initial public statements were consistent with what happened?

To the peers: Based on the initial statements EUGENE publicly made in "response" to what he did, are you satisfied his initial responses were consistent with what happened, or were they statements that were made on the assumption that you would never have the chance to compare his statements in the spam to what he now is saying happened?

To the members of the RSS community, SpamSummit, search engine companies, and other interested personnel in the XML community: Are you satisfied with the responses you are getting; are you satisfied that the communication between EUGENE and WYMAN is based on what actually happened; or are you more persuaded that the initial conversations were based on the assumption that the original blog spam no longer existed?

If you are to ask either WYMAN or EUGENE to make a public statement on the status of management actions, progress, oversight, employee discipline, are you satisfied that they will look into the matters independently; or will they simply ask the employee who has engaged in spamming "whether they did it," and rely solely on the employees statements without regard to actual evidence contained in the PubSub IT?

In the future, based on what you have seen in re WYMAN and EUGENE's initial responses, are you satisfied that if there is a problem it will be thoroughly and timely looked into; will the fact finding be based on actual data that is recoverable; or will personnel rely on perceptions and memories; or will management oversight occur simply on the basis of concurring with what is denied, not what is actually going on?

Fantasy Media Interviews: Do not attempt this, you could get into trouble

Can you imagine what the 1930's Bob Hope-Bing Crosby musical-version or ABC afternoon special version of this adventure could be like?

Let's fantasize what that might be like. You are a member of the PR community. Your goal is to monitor how effectively corporations are in responding to public relations problems.

You're living in a world where totalitarianism and corporate bullying exists. Where management and government go out of their way to deny problems and pretend the cardboard you're eating is sugar.

What do you do?

Imagine the following types of presentation scrolling across your screen. . .

[Flashback -- Wavy effect, this is a sign that you are entering the Chelsea Zone ]

For those of you in the PR community that would like to interview Eugene, you're probably wondering how to find him. Well, even though he might have a certain "issue" with various communication methods at this juncture, there is an interesting problem that Eugene currently has.

At some point, he's going to have to go to the bathroom. Why? Because he's eaten food in the last few hours. What does that mean?

Well, after he relieves himself, he's going to have to think about what? That's right: More food.

He's got three options: He can either go to a Chinese Restaurant; sprint to a grocery store, or run as fast as he can to the ATM machine and get some cash.

Well, in the event that Eugene isn't able to give you a straight answer to some very simply questions, as a courtesy to the media and my desire to facilitate a free and open communication and dialog on this issue, I present to you a list of the ATM machines around EUGENE's house.

All you have to do is spread out, have the entire New York Media machine agree to wait by the ATMS near Eugene, and one of you will eventually have the opportunity to ask him some questions.

Oh, but wait. Maybe you're wondering which ATM machine he likes to go to? Well, all you have to do is subpoena the CCTV tapes from the various institutions in Chelsea and they'll be glad to tell you which ATM machine Eugene "really likes to go to."

Here are the ATM machines around Eugene’s house.

Here are the Chinese restaurants around Eugene's current address.

And as a kind reminder, it is only 6 miles from PubSub to Eugene's current address. As a courtesy to the media here is a map showing how a non-drunk crow might fly after dropping a load of shit on PubSub's building and then flying north to Eugene's current address, and then returning to drop more shit on WYMAN's head.

But let's pretend you don't have alot of time, and want to go to the most probable location where Eugene will be having an evening meal. I would encourage you to call the management at this Chinese restaurant and ask them whether they have seen Eugene lately. It's Lin's restaurant in Chelsea, fairly close to both Eugene's house and sort of convenient if you like to walk around Union Square. That is, if you have alot of gas you want to get out of your system, if you know what I mean.

FYI: This is just for entertainment purposes. Do not approach or follow Eugene. Do not do anything that might alarm him.

Remember, you are not encouraged to call, communicate, follow, or otherwise have any contact with Eugene. Remember, if you attempt to interact with him or engage in any kind of inquiry you may be subject to some sort of sanctions.

Remember, this is not legal advice nor a solicitation for you to take any action which might alarm, annoy, or otherwise directly communicate with Eugene.

He's a known blog spammer. There's no telling what he might do next.

Is the media ready to capture him on video?

Let's hope Eugene wakes up from . . . the Chelsea Zone.

Then again, why not leave him there, so we can have some more entertainment.

Beware bloggers who spam. Beware bloggers who get spammed.

Eugene made a poor choice in choosing which blog to spam.

Bad dog, Eugene! You've been a very bad dog!

The real surprise

Now, let's think about where we've been. PubSub was having some issues. Eugene spammed my blog.

At this juncture, it is clear that Eugene provided public responses to the above comments without knowing that I had the original comments.

Well guess what's happened? WYMAN and EUGENE have shared notes, and talked. So, now they have a new position.

Did you think that I was going to stand by and let them talk without some additional commentary? Oh, you are surprised.

Because, guess what! This blog has a second ghost feed. That's right. The above comments that you've read is only one section of the comments.

This means that at this juncture WYMAN and EUGENE don't know what is on the second ghost feed. I'm going to show you what else is there. And as you read this version, I hope you can appreciate the nature of the comments that Eugene Makes and take carefully note of his use of profanity.

Ask yourself:

A. Based on the initial responses WYMAN and EUGENE posted on their blogs, how does their final position stand?

B. Do you believe that these kind of comments are appropriate for an employee of PubSub to make about a public blog?

C. Given what you know about the issues with PubSub, Monitor110, and the potential financial benefits to be accrued should the platform be deployed and IPO stock possibly being issued [even if there are problems], are there issues of materiality that should be known to the various investors in the various hedge funds and investment banks?

D. If you are doing an outside audit with the SEC Enforcement Division or doing a SAS99 review, how would you review the following comments: Do they amount to abusive management behavior that hopes to dissuade reasonable inquiry into matters?

E. Is the pattern of conduct indicative of the types of responses various auditors, investment bankers, or members of the SEC enforcement staff have been faced with when discussing issues with various investment analysis?

F. With respect to materiality and rule 10b-5 of the Securities laws and SAS99, is it material information for the investing public to know that there are potential management issues that warrant outside oversight and understanding?

G. Are the requisite management systems in place to ensure that employees are property trained, supervised, and that responses to simple questions are based on prudent management fact finding; or are the responses disconnected with actual employee conduct?

I leave it to the investigators to follow up.

Let's take a look at the types of comments that were left on my blog that are part of this second-ghost-comment-feed. Again, note specifically the use of words that are profane, derogatory, and appear to serve no legitimate purpose other than to annoy and to dissuade public discussion of matters of public interests.

Also, note that the comments are made publicly, without qualification, and that they were freely made. It appears as though the person making the comments appears to not believe that their connection with Pub Sub can be traced.

Is that the kind of company you want to be associated with?

Is this the kind of conduct you want to expose your capital to?

If you have a questions or an issue how easy will it be to get answers?

If there are issues that warrant investigation, are you going to be satisfied with the answers and have reasonable assurance that the responses are related to actual evidence, or merely associated with employee denials?

Let's take a look at the details of 6 Comments.

In this one, notice the familiar language problem. The type is choppy, it doesn't flow well.

Also, notice the last line using the terminology on someone else's blog: "Jackass" as in, "You sound like a Jackass".

Thank you! I like being called assertive, especially when there are issues related to investment banking, rule 10b-5 and allegations that management is blowing things off that otherwise deserve appropriate attention.

Is it appropriate to delete someone's comment that calls you a "jackass"?

Actually, someone that likes to let the SEC know about arrogant management likes to let others believe the comments are gone in order to see what you will do.

Thanks for walking into this one, Eugene. You exceeded my wildest expectations.

Mind you, remember as I was initially reading these comments, I had no idea who this person was, or whether they knew what they were talking about. They never identified themselves formally as being an employee of PubSub.

Now we know.

Exhibit 11

Nonsense Master said...

1. I don't think pubsub search embedded tags in the xml feed.

2. If the blog hosting service does not provide feed autodiscovery link inside the page. PubSub will not spend time to find the feed. Then the blog is never matched. No matter how long will it take. This is to help the blog community to follow feed autodiscovery standard.

3. You are really sounds like a jackass. BTW, do not delete my comment.

Time Posted: 01:29

Above, notice the grammatical error in line 3, common throughout Eugene's public postings as a peer-setter-up-guy: "You are really sound like a jackass" would be more effective in the delivery if it were rewritten to read,

A. "You really sound like a jackass," or
B. "You are really a jackass" or
C. "You sound like a real jackass."
D. "You are a jackass."

Perhaps with some management guidance we might have some additional enlightenment as to what Eugene is attempting to say. It's all so confusing, open to speculation, and uncertain.

Further, I'm not really clear how "the above response" necessarily addresses the issues raised in terms on "failing to provide consistent subscription feeds," but I explain that away as a "language problem" with someone who is more familiar with Chinese than English.

Distraction

One thing people like to do when they're under the gun is get people distracted. You'll notice in this comment Eugene suggests I go read something.

Later, he complained that I never read it. Not really clear what that has to do with PubSub's inability to provide consistent feeds, but I'll put this in the category of "Failed effort to distract attention from PubSub's subscription problems.

Nice try, Eugene. BTW: If you had a good aggregator like Newsgator you'd know whether or not someone had discussed an issue related to your area of interest. Based on your later responses, it appears that you do not have a good aggregator like Newsgator that tells you this information.

I'll put that in the category of, "Not realizing the full potential of Newsgator to do amazing things." Your loss.

Exhibit 12

Nonsense Master said...

By the way, did anyone in Google and PubSub claims they search all the information? Please go to http://dailynonsenses.blogspot.com to read Search with uncertainty and think about it.

Time Posted: 01:34

Next Phase

At this point, it looks as though Eugene's real goal at this point is to start pointing out problems on this website in order to send the message, "Hay if you're going to point out problems with PubSub, I'm going to do the same with your website."

Wow! To think that "public comments about a public RSS system like PubSub" would attract such special attention.

And to think that I use this blog just to blog with. How many other people are afforded such special attention?

Does Eugene give other lovely comments like this?

It's almost as if fine Eugene is showing up to provide "such useful information" to distract attention from the apparent real problem: PubSub's problems with the subscription feeds.

Gosh, you don't think that this was the area in PubSub that the QA area signed off and said, "Good to go" and a certain person named EUGENE had something to do with?

I can only speculate.

Exhibit 13

Nonsense Master said...

Blogspot has a problem is that when you publish a new article, Blogspot's changes.xml may drop your site. I met this problem before and my whole post was dropped before without any matching or indexing in PubSub and Technorati.

Welcome to jackass world of blogging.

Time Posted: 01:36

The above comment doesn't really flow all that well. At first blush, I catch the gist of what you are saying, but that last line, "Welcome to jackass world of blogging" could be rewritten. I would encourage you to resubmit your comments for WYMAN's approval and suggest you rewrite the comment in one of the following ways:

A. Welcome to blogging-world, jackass

This approach tends to downplay the jackass emphasis-word, and creates the impression that the "blogging world" is one of a right of passage. As if one, to be truly liberated, must be compelled to "understand the true nature of blogging" -- that if one to make a comment about a platform, this subjects the public to spam blogging.

Such a construction would appear to be consistent with the paradigm that one is forced to be subjected to arbitrary levels of statements that have nothing to do with the original subject of discussion: The performance of PubSub relative to management assertions.

B. Welcome to the world of blogging, jackass

This construction is more general. It doesn't imply that blogging is necessarily a universal construct of existence. Rather this approach suggests that blogging and "the real world" are two distinct realities.

However, this construction is not consistent with the above conduct which would appear to suggest that anytime some dares comment about substantive management issues, then they are likely to be subjected to real retribution.

IT remains a matter of evidence to discern whether the above construction is a signal for SAS99 audit scope increase. If, in fact, as this construction would appear to communicate, it suggests that the "rules of SAS99 that we thought world apply to management statements" are not applicable when it comes to the internet.

However, PSRLA 1995 clearly proves this conclusion is absurd in that all public statements and conduct, however communicated, are subject to oversight. Thus, this construction fails.

C. Jackass, welcome to world of blogging

This construction appears to be stronger. Notice at the beginning of the statement, the "Jackass" tends to stand out. Some might suggest that that is not consistent with the original intent of the writer. For had EUGENE actually intended there to be a "Jackass" at the beginning of the comment then he would have put it there.

Thus, this construction, although more forceful in delivery may not be consistent with the later and arguably foreseeable approach that is more cordial. Yet, it is curious that despite the intermediate effort to be cordial, the later spamming [Exhibits 1-10] show a reversal.

At this juncture, it appears as though there are issues with narcissistic behavior. This is another way of saying that when someone knows that they've gone to far, they then show up with some nice comments. This is classic abusive behavior. It remains a matter for others to evaluate to what extent, if any, EUGENE engages in similar conduct.

I sense this is a good sign, though. Because what EUGENE is actually doing is testing his boundaries. I sense that he has had some very challenging experiences, and for the most part surmounted them. But at this juncture, the task seems a little overwhelming. Understandably, he might get annoyed.

This is not to suggest that EUGENE is suffering from a mental disease, as such as statement is DEFAMATORY. It may be true, but it is not appropriate to say that.

However, the issue comes up: What is to be said of someone when faced with more difficult challenges; are they going to flip out under the weight of greater responsibility.

At the other end of the spectrum, we could speculate that the real reason for the use of "Jackass" was that EUGENE had been delegated the task of "taking care" of this blogger [Mud's Tests], but was somewhat limited in his effectiveness.

Hay, but if you can't get someone to be quiet, you can always spam them and call them a "jackass," right EUGENE?

Well, now you know that doesn't work either. What are you going to do now?

D. Jackass, welcome to the blogging world

This one is actually nice sounding. It's kind of like being given a lovely gift. Imagine yourself entering an amusement ride, but it's in the middle of Nigerian village.

There you are, your land rover has broken down, and out of the middle of nowhere someone who does not speak English very well, and has been taught that "Jackass" is a sign of respect, hails a mighty welcome, "Jackass, welcome to the blogging world!"

I like that. It makes me feel inspired. As if we could run up another hill, full gear, and then leap off a tall building.

E. Welcome to the jackass blogging world

This construction would suggest that the "blogging world" is full of jackasses. I agree. And it would appear there are many of them working on Fulton Street.

Overall, I like the sound of D, the most, but I think the actual "best way" of saying this is to say, "Hay, Jackass...welcome to blogging!"

Distraction

Keep in mind that what is going on [that I don't know at the time] is that apparently an employee has spoken to his boss about the blog comments in Mud's Tests about Pub Sub, and the goal at this point is to distract attention from PubSub and put attention on the Mud's Tests.

Well, there's on small problem. The proposed "solutions" below have nothing to do with Mud's Tests. We can only wonder why Eugene wasn't good enough to blog about these comments and provide a special ping to "Technorati" in sending a lovely message to the outstanding CEO David Sifry so that he might provide a special visit to Eugene's blog.

But did that happen? No, Eugene as you can see appears to want to shift attention from the PubSub and mandate a solution that an RSS-user [customer] "should be doing".

In light of our understanding of what Eugene's real job is at PubSub [peering networks and setup], we can only wonder if this is how PubSub employees are trained to speak to peers?

It appears they show quiet a bit of disdain for customers; but what is to be said when outside investigators show up?

You know: Those guys from the SEC Enforcement division who are smart enough to carry guns under their belt because they might be approaching someone who is a little, how shall we say it, tense that their message traffic has been intercepted and we now know their IP numbers and e-mail accounts and times they were assigned at work?

Seeing how this is Eugene, it didn't have to come to this: But you freely chose to spam the wrong blog. It was your choice!

Exhibit 14

Nonsense Master said...

please fix the technorati search box in your blog. given a keyword and select "at this site", the result returns all blogs contain the keywords in whole blog universe Technorati indexed. Please check your form to make sure it only returns result from your blog.

Please don't delete this comment.

Time Posted: 01:51

Time hack

Yes, the next comment is really interesting. As if it really matters what the time is. What do you believe is the reason for putting this here, Eugene?

Exhibit 15

Nonsense Master said...

It is funny to see the time stamp on your blog is 1:45 but I started to received your post from PubSub since 1:21, Did you notice the time stamp on my comment is inconsistent with your post?

Time Posted: 01:55

Jackass Comment deleted

This comment below is related to the Technorati problem. Note however, that the solution had 100% to do with the outstanding David Sifry and his fine, polite, professional and responsive staff who clearly stand head and shoulders above their peers.

So, Eugene if you want to thank anyone, thank David.

Exhibit 16

Nonsense Master said...

Thank you for reading my comment, You fixed the Technorati search box.

Time Posted: 08:18

Post a Comment

At this point Eugene then spammed the blog with the above 10 Exhibits. Wow!

To be clear, Exhibits 11-16 were the initial hits; then Exhibits 1-10 were the shot-gun-spamming.

Let's consider the Spam Summit. And review the problems personnel were discussing. Then contrast with what was going on on this site.

Consider what's more absurd, someone:

A. Using in appropriate language;

B. Complaining about their inappropriate language being deleted;

C. Believing that inappropriate comments with fowl language should be retained;

D. Could spam a blog with 10 rapid fire comments and have no accountability;

E. Who is an employee of PubSub would use a private blog to spam another blog; forget to remove their identifying information linking their profanity, spamming, and absurd conduct to PubSub; and do this as a SpamSummit was either in the planning stages or was being publicly discussed; or

F. Who is an employee of PubSub would spam a blog, believe the target was intimidated to be silent, convince them to shut down the comments, believe that the comments were not retrievable, then deny the conduct occurred on the false assumption there was no record, and then look like a moron when the actual record of the conduct was waved before the world after the admissible denial was transmitted, recorded, and relied upon by third parties?

I'm not accusing anyone of a crime; I am stating flat out -- I've identified the person who has spammed this blog.

What we know

The conduct occurred

Denials have proven baseless

Strategy of the blog spammer

The following is rather curious:

Shifting the responsibility

If you're going to spam a blog, then others need to know about that. It's not appropriate to change the subject from your conduct to blog management decisions. There is no basis nor legal foundation for you to succeed on the following claims:

- absurdly require rude remarks to be retained;
- demand that rude remarks be reposted in some specified order

We see before us no statutory framework nor legal construction that shifts the blog management decisions from the blow owner to the blog spammers; nor has anyone pointed to a specific legal construction that any court would find credible as a reasonable basis to assert that a blog management function is up to the discretion of the public, or that responsibility shifts to the public.

Rather, what is going on is some have absurdly asserted that the blog spamming initially didn't occur with a denial; then when given additional information, they then diverted with the absurd distraction that somehow the comments needed to be posted in a particular order.

Sounds like someone has a hard time understanding what the definition of "stop spamming this blog" means: Quit changing the subject; quit shifting the attention from your conduct; and give the public a credible reason to believe that you're going to wake up to what you're doing.

It appears, and we have no evidence to the contrary and we can only speculate to the following:

A. You appear to be not happy for whatever reason;

B. You appear to do things that you do not remember;

C. You appear to post things that are rude and absurdly demand that others retain that content; and

D. You appear to rather enjoy shifting attention from your conduct onto some illusory standard that you arbitrarily impose on others.

Excuses: Why it was "OK" to leave rude remarks;

Blog owners retain sole discretion and power over everything here; there is no obligation to explain, justify, or get any consent from anyone on what content is retained, removed, or posted.

Some are confusing blog spam and blog maintenance. If you do not like the content of this blog or how this blog is run or maintained, that is no excuse to spam this blog. If you're not happy with those decisions, that's your issue.

If you have a personal problem or desire to call other people names because you disagree with the blog content, then that is your problem.

If you desire to define an issue as being "over" or a "non-issue" then that doesn't signal an understanding of what is in this blog. You'll have to find someone to explain that to you.

If you do not understand that issues remain open until I decide they are closed, then that is your problem. As you well know blog owners can narrowly define the topic; if you do not agree that the issue warrants attention, then you are free to find blogs more amenable to those types of philosophical pursuits.

Software testing

We are not here to be dissuaded from discussing an issue. That is a blog management decision. If you have other views on the performance of various personnel, software networks, or other data showing the actual conditions were otherwise, you are free to discuss that.

However, we've seen nothing before us to suggest that there is any claim that the tests have or have not been fabricated; or that the results have been misleading or were other wise contrary to actual test results. The results and reports stand on their own for others to review, attempt to replicate, correct, or otherwise ignore.

We are not in a position to assist others in understanding the difference between test results and blog spam. You'll have to talk to your own attorney on that or a paid professional.

Irrelevances: Why comments should or should not be retained.

The issue is someone has spammed this blog. It is a distraction to debate whether the comments should/should not be retained; preserved; or reposted. There exists no legal construction that mandates that content be retained, removed, and preserved at anytime. There is no legal relationship nor is there a contract between anyone on the content retention or non-retention.

I cannot help you if you are having a hard time differentiating between blog spam and blog management. Feel free to find somewhere else to discuss your concerns, comments, or views on how a blog should or should not be managed.

This totally misses the point as to what, if anything, is being done to adjust their attitude/conduct about comments.

Red herrings: Whether it is appropriate to remove spam

Feel free to discuss what legal construction affords a blog commenter any "right" to have their content preserved or not preserved when that content is removed.

We see nothing before us in any statute, case law, nor any hypothetical legal foundation or construct that affords a cause of action to anyone for having a comment removed for whatever reason; nor is there a requirement to disclose that the comments may or may not be removed.

Moreover, we see nothing before us that suggests there have been quantifiable economic losses or damages as a result of taking action in deleting content. On the contrary, there are others who may or may not have been induced to continue having faith in a product where there were legitimate questions, but as of this moment we see nothing before us in terms of specific claims or non-speculative damages.

Thus, even assuming there was a contract [which there is not] that required a blogger to do X for the blog spammer-Y, we see nothing before us that would suggest there is a specific construct term or clause that would require, mandate, or cause any remedies to occur for a decision.

Again, there is no contract that exists, thus there is no basis to assert one does or does not have the right to assert a claim that certain content be posted in a certain form or manner.

If you're not happy with what is on this blog, then why do you continue to read it?

Hypothetical assertions that there may be a "problem with content" or a theoretical flaw with "blog management" are irrelevant to whether you are or are not understanding blog spam; and moreover a distraction from the larger issue of whether or not there exist appropriate management responses to public feedback to comments to their products.

Absurdity: Whether it is appropriate to ban

Public comments about products are what they are. You have other issues besides whether you are banned or not. Whether you deal with those or not is up to you. Whether one's "decision about a ban" is something you agree or disagree with is a separate matter from whether or not you have spammed; or whether you disagree with what you have done.

At this juncture, it appears that you're still in denial: Attempting to shift responsibility for the "path going forward" onto others. That's not impressive, but is evidence that you're missing the point. That's something you'll have to resolve on your own.

Whether you do or do not recognize the issue is "blog spam," we are in no position to assist you in comprehending that issue; nor can we offer any suitable guidance as to what would successfully clarify the subtle distinction between blog spam and blog management. I do understand that it may be confusing.

The big mystery

How much energy might some expend to distract attention from the initial comments about software platform performance?

Is there any interest shown in saying, "We recognize that we did not take the initial feedback seriously?" I do not see that.

How many other people who provide comments and feedback have their comments ignored?

How much energy will be spent distracting attention from the original public comments about the software product?

What is the relevance to software upgrades to various blog comments posted? we see none.

What relevance does a test report have to a side discussion of whether there should or should not be a preference for having blogcomments retained when they fowl language? Again, there is no relevance.

What relevance does the initial test report have with the subsequent arbitrary and unfounded standards that blog management must or must not comply with various retention standards? We see no caselaw before us that would shift that requirement onto the public.

What is the relationship between a software test report and calling someone a jackass in their blog? Again, we see no relevance.

What is the relationship between a software test report and a decision to discuss/not discuss details related to issues that are a diversion from the original test report? Again, we see none.

What is the relationship between a software test report and a separate issue of whether comments on an unrelated issue are or are not retained? Again, there is no relevance.

What relevance or relationship is there between a software test report and the separate issue of hypothetical .xml/W3 standards imposing illusory requirement on the customer to retain/not retain comments? Again, there is no relevance.

In short, it would appear that all your public statements in response to the original blog comments are not only unrelated to the original test reports; but when confronted with your conduct you appear to continue to shift the attention from your software and your conduct to the public.

This would tend to tilt the scales to the side of, "They're not quite getting the point". Again, if you do not understand the linkage between the original content, your software product; and the disconnect between the blog spam and the subsequent irrelevant issues, then you appear to have far larger problems on your hands than the original spam.

And to think that he was once really "polite."

In my universe that's a real problem. Especially when you later find out that the person who was doing the spamming was an employee of PubSub whose management was continuing to say things are "just fine with their product" but the test results show otherwise.

Damages

World, what are the quantifiable financial damages, economic harm, or losses you can quantify in terms of your:

A. being induced not to review the matters; or

B. being induced not to increase audit scope; or

C. being induced not to compare the conduct with various insurance, employment, and contract terms in various agreements, officer liability, or loan/banking covenants?

Causation

World, can you show that the conduct above is related to other conduct that should have been looked into, but was not;

Is there a nexus of activity going on that warrants increased audit scope, but there has been an effort to create the illusion there is no link between management/employee action/inaction with the financial damages or losses you suffered;

Can you show that the types of management or employee conduct that occurred above is related to other conduct that a reasonable person would conclude directly affected and caused you to suffer a quantifiable financial loss or some specific damage to your financial interests?

Can you show that the above conduct is related to other patterns of conduct that precluded you from taking action; or induced you to not act when a reasonable person, when given full knowledge of the facts would have made an earlier decision to either not engage in financial transactions, or were induced to accelerate or adjust financial agreements you would have otherwise not engaged in had you know the scope of the management and employee conduct?

Summation

At this point, it is clear that certain employees have been linked with PubSub and various comments, incorporated by reference above in Exhibits 1-16.

However, the larger issue remains to be understood by the outside media, analysis, auditors, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, plus the Inspector General at the Department of the Interior:

Are the above spam comments part of an orchestrated management effort to suppress unfavorable information about the management practices and credibility in re Monitor110 representations to Hedge Funds on payoffs associated with investments? This is a matter of fact for investigators to assess.

Have the markets been unfairly corrupted by dissuading public review of the matters in re rule 10b05 prior to the investment decision? This is a matter for the SEC enforcement to adjudicate.

In re materiality and rule 10b-5 and SAS99, do the above comments and conduct warrant an increase in audit scope? In my personal opinion, yes.

Recommendation

Increase audit scope of financial transactions related to RSS feeds. Pay particularly close attention to the Morgan Stanley statements on RSS feeds; compare them with the pubic statements by XML CEOs on the progress of their platforms; then independently compare the auditor results with your independent testing.

At this juncture, it appears the gap between what the CEOs are asserting are their capabilities and what the products do is wide.

Buyer beware!

Disclaimer: The above comments should not be construed as recommendations to either buy or sell any security. Per the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and the SEC rules on analysis, I am obliged to disclose any positions I may have in the underlings.

As a full disclosure, I retain no positions in any hedge funds, investment banks involved in the Pub Sub Monitor 110 partnership; nor do I retain any financial positions in either Morgan Stanley nor Deutsche Bank.

The above comments should not be construed to be a comment that is associated with the SEC Enforcement Division; nor is it a statement as to whether PubSub, Montior110, or Deutche Bank are currently under SEC Investigation.

In general and by no means should this be construed to imply that PubSub or its officers or staff are involved in allegedly criminal activity, the above information is simply provided for your information.

As with all ongoing criminal investigations the proper response is, "It would be inappropriate to comment." Is there a problem at PubSub? Ask the SEC.

Going forward

See? Wasn't that easy?

All you had to do is apologize.

As far as the other bullshit going on in your organization: What the hell are you doing?

People show up, use your product, provide you feedback, and what do you do?

You deny the problem.

Here's a clue: Why don't you simply just listen. Just list. Quit your bullshit games with people.

You act like nobody is going to do anything.

Well, surprise. You spammed the wrong blog.

And next time you do anything, guess who's going to be riding your ass?

That's right: All the people who are reading this blog.

If you have a problem with what someone is saying about your product maybe you should do what David Sifry does: Check it out.

But what does PubSub do? They throw crap around. They spam blogs. They deny there's a problem.

But lo and behold: We look into the information, do a few little checks, and find out there's a pile of crap there that you haven't cleaned up.

Is that how you want to run your business: Leaving crap for others to explain away. You know how software development works. You've been doing this for years.

You've been doing jabber. Your colleagues in CPAS and all around the globe know that you can do this stuff. So what are you so arrogant to think that if you can pull some bullshit like this, that the problem is going to go away?

Here's a hint: The people that show up, make comments, and give you feedback on your products: Are trying to help you out.

But what do you do? You throw it back in their face. What kind of crap is that?

But here we are.

What a lovely day.

If you ever have a problem with what I'm saying, then get on you blog, blog about it, and don't you dare leave your shit on my blog.

I can do with this blog what I want. But don't be so stupid to come on this blog, leave stupid comments, and then whine on your blog about some "Stalinist" state stuff.

Huh? You're the one who's being the Stalinist-idiot. You're the one who wants to get access to stuff and then pretend the problems aren't there.

You're the one who wants to get access through NNTP servers, but your performance is below your peers.

Your own data says it.

Thank you for being the catalyst for me to learn that my initial impression was correct: That your talk on your blog about the "great benefits" of RSS are just that: You like to talk about the benefits, but when someone shows up to talk about a problem, what do you do?

You shit all over them.

Jesus! And to think that for anyone to get you to simply look at your own product, they have to go through these Herculean effort, do this much research, and then throw it back in their face.

Hello! What a waste of your time. You could have simply taken the information back in December when the problem was first identified, and recognized what the issue was.

And it was free feedback! That is what is more amazing. And what do you do on your blog: You get up there and talk about the "great benefits of RSS" and "how great bogging is".

Huh? Great for whom? As a selling point to customers? That's a crock of bullshit. It's actually just a "faster way" of finding out who is talking about you so you can put out the spin and keep it quiet.

Nobody should have to go through what people have to go through in order to get you to listen.

You "should" simply take the comments, and thank the public for their free feedback, and then outline a plan to fix the problem.

Not spend 6 months spinning in your wheels.

Next time

If you have a problem with what I say, then you get your ass down to the US Attorney's office, bring 4 witnesses with you, and I expect you to sign under penalty of perjury every accusation you want to make about me, any blogger, or anyone else who dares to provide you information that you want to deny.

When you post a copy of the video tape, plus a signed statement by the US Attorney, and the other FBI agents who are going to be witnesses to what you say, then I might believe what you're saying.

And then, I'll show up with my evidence and show the agents which files to get the information so they can subpoena your ass, and haul you before the grand jury for perjury.

That's where things are at. Next time you have a problem with what I'm saying: You have the obligation to go through some Herculean efforts to prove to the world that what I'm saying is false.

I want video tapes; signed statements under penalty of perjury; and multiple witnesses from the US Attorney's office and FBI/DOJ that will witness what you are asserting.

Then, at that juncture, I'll show them exactly what they need to look at to prove that you're lying.

If you want to play this game of "we're not going to listen" or "this guy can be blown off" or "we'll just shut this guy down" with whatever bullshit game you want to play: Fine.

Go ahead.

Because now, the world knows: What you do, what you are capable of doing, and how much bullshit you throw before people before you'll even admit that possibly someone has noticed something that you missed.

If I ever hear that you're treating one of your employees in a rude, disrespectful, condescending, or arrogant manner, you're going to have to explain that to me.

We've had a very nice conversation. You and I have enjoyed our little talks. And you and I are going to become very familiar with each other: You are the expert; your job is to do our job; and it is my job to trust you.

But the second that you dare give me bullshit, that trust is out the window, and I might as well find someone else to work with.

But you don't seem to have gotten that through your head. You get paid alot of money; you do fine work . . .eventually, and your peers also recognize you for your contributions.

Your job is to live up to the expectations that the public has been led to believe; if you can't do the job; or you're not sure; or you're given new information that isn't matching what you believe, back off! Don't continue to assert something that you're not 100% sure about.

And in this case: Time and time again, the public has been told one thing, but independent checks show otherwise.

I'm not expecting miracles. But I am expecting that if someone like you that works for a major corporation, or interactions with those on Wall Street, that you take your public standing seriously: People look to you as a solution.

What I've seen on your website has been phenomenal. You do outstanding work.

But your customer relations and how you interact with employees sucks. And that's what makes interacting with you detestable.

If given the choice between your firm and another, I would tend to side with the opportunity to work with someone who is responsive, not arrogant, and simply does their job, and provides me with reliable information, even if the information is bad or not what you originally told me.

But to find out this late in the game that what I've been let to believe doesn't match up to what is actually going on -- that is a major credibility issue. Especially when it comes to schedules, timelines, and the decision to choose between competing firms.

I would rather have it later, reliable, and working at a little higher cost, than be given something that I'm told is working, and then I have to spend time going over the product, work out the bugs, and have the feedback thrown back at them.

That's utter non-sense.

Next time you put on your blog that you "value" something: At least have the courtesy to take that input, use it.

I don't care if you ignore the comments. But don't throw up your hands and say, "Oh, that's not important" or "There is no problem."

Obviously, the fact that someone has taken the time to come to you with some information is a good thing for your firm: But what do you do? You throw it back and turn a gift into a large pile of shit.

Crap! This is my way of saying, "Thank you for helping me realize that when you're up against an asshole like you, you better be prepared to fight all the way."

And I am. You're an asshole. And next time you have a problem with what I'm saying, I expect you to put that in writing, under penalty of perjury, and get some witnesses to attest to what you're saying.

If you don't want to do that, then your word is worthless.

Either way, I'm going to win and you're ultimately going to be shown to be a complete idiot for having dared to challenge someone who thinks highly enough of you that they would approach you with some information.

At this juncture, I could care less what you do, what happens to your firm, or whether you dare to challenge me again.

But I can assure you, next time you hear from me you need to listen. If you want to blow me off, think about all the other people who have given up trying to discuss issues and concerns with you.

If you don't want to publicly assert to the veracity and truthfulness of your statements, then we are not going to have any more interaction.

I have no confidence in your statements. And I also do not trust you to actually do what you need to do to get your job done. It requires too much work to both monitor your performance, while at the same time knowing more about your system than you do.

That is not efficient use of scarce capital resources. And I would hope that the Wall Street Analysis carefully review the difficulty with which it is to get straight answers to very simple questions.

Buyer beware if you're working with PubSub.

Watch out. You have other options and I encourage you to carefully review your alternatives, and dig deep into what they are saying.

The other issues

Your job is to set this right with your peers. We've just had a spam summit a few months ago.

You need to touch base with those you made promises to and show that you're taking this in-house situation seriously; and that you are applying these lessons and the conclusions out of the spam summit and applying them.

Also, I expect the peers to get a courtesy call. You need to let them know that you've got an issue; what impact it may have; and what you're doing about it. I expect you to use this situation as something that is to your advantage. meaning: communicate!

Tell people what you're doing about this. And use it to show that you're applying the lessons learned to not simply talk about solutions, but actually improve your service to reduce the error rates.

I don't are how you do that. That's why you get paid.

As far as who you talk to: You owe it to your own employees and coders around the world who work for your company to have a heart to hear with them.

For example, your distance employees in India who are doing development work: Just, for the moment, put everything I've said aside, and simply communicate with them as if you were starting fresh with me.

Just listen. They have ideas. They may not work. But they are testing you to see if they can trust you to at least consider new ideas.

Your approach is too narrow minded: You have your own view of "what is possible," but when someone else shows up and discuses an issue, they're not asking for help; they're asking to see whether you are safe enough to share their insights about the other things they've been thinking about.

That's why you have a company. So that people can come together, share ideas, and build new things.

The feedback I get, is that it's stifling. You have this gray cloud that is hovering over you and it is dampening on the spirit.

Maybe that's how you want to get people to produce. But is that how you want to be treated?

Apparently so.

So get off your ass, don't you ever do the bullshit that you've done here, and get with your board of directors and put together a really good story to explain why the public should have confidence in this Monitor110-beat when the platform that you're working from apparently has a number of holes in the QA system.

I also expect you to touch base with the SEC and appropriately inform them of any issues that may be relevant per rule 10b-5; and that you voluntarily do so immediately. If there are no issues, then certify that in writing. And you’ll be glad to know there are teams waiting to prove otherwise.

Do not hide. If you want to play games, or make up bullshit, or pretend things are just fine and you’re making up crap, I can assure that there are plenty of other people who are far more adept at gathering information in discovery and making this little chat seem like a love letter.

They don’t screw around. They put people who fuck around like you do in jail. And they’re with the Department of Justice.

They get rewarded on how many people they put in jail. Please give them an excuse.

And they’re the good guys. They carry guns because of weirdoes who do strange stuff just to avoid being accountable for their misconduct.

It is time for you to choose: Do you want to be on the side of the good guys; or do you want to be on the side of those we don’t trust?

It is your choice.

So quit your bullshit. And sit down with your General counsel and come up with a plan to get your shit together.

Got that?

Do I have answers to your problems? Of course not--that's why you get paid. Go figure it out, and don't be such a jerk to people.

There's no telling how many great ideas you stifled simply because "your way" was the way that Wall Street trained you.

Get with Sifry. Take some time off. Live around his aura. He's got his shit together, and so can you.

Next time I see you on the internet, I'm gong to kick your ass.

Get your car keys, and make a trip to the US Attorney's office, get those affidavits, videos, and signed statements.

That's your problem. And the burden of proof you need to show me before I will believe you.

You brought this on yourself.

The list above

You know what you need to do. Your job is to get out of your "whatever bullshit state your in" and solve your credibility problem.

You know what I want.

The world is watching.

What will happen next?

Note: This is how much hassle they put customers through. Imagine what they'll do when faced with some credible allegations.

Is it worth the energy and financial costs required to double check?

Do you want to spend this much time and energy checking everything?

If there is a problem, who are you going to rely on?

If you find a problem, will you believe their statements?

Have they shown a pattern of denying things that actually are real?

Are these the kinds of people you would want to sit down with, negotiate contracts with, or hire in exchange for you transferring money to them and you getting the above kind of non-sense?

Are there more reliable, responsive, and accommodating counter parties whom you might interact with to achieve you financial and business objectives?

Spam PubSub

Make aggregators integrate with external software

2005-07-09T10:17:00.000-05:00

One thing I've noticed about aggregators is that they're just aggregators. You can't actually do much with them after they aggregate.

Think of a car. It's just isn't to burn fuel. It is to take you places.

Like an aggregator, the goal of a car isn't simply to take in fuel and then call it success.

Rather, for an aggregator to really work well, you have to be able to do something with that new information.

That's why I'd like to see aggregators actually integrate with software products like Excel and Powerpoint.

That way, I can use my aggregator as something that will find information, and display it in meaningful summary charts and data-bases in these external software products.

Right now, aggregators just collect information. The next step is to take that collection capability and create an integration function with these other software tools.

When aggregators can link with Excel and other products like Access, you might get me interested in taking RSS seriously. Right now, all I have is a large collection of data that isn't organized.

I really want a search-engine-like tool for the aggregator that is going to take the incoming data, find an external tool that will help me organize that information, and then create a method to integrate the aggregator outputs with this to-be-defined external platform.

Hay, it's all XML. Why not make the tools integrate, not just the feeds?

-- This is the end of the content --

Reader-defined custom feed

2005-07-08T09:25:00.000-05:00

As a publisher I can define the parameters of my feed.

But as a reader, I don't have that option. I have to take the feed as it is.

However, I would prefer to be able to tweak an incoming feed.

I want to be able to highlight the incoming information in a way that I like it.

I want to prioritize the elements in the feed.

I want to be able to highlight certain elements in an incoming feed: Key terms; unusual terms; and have certain terms stand out.

I would like to be able to block non-priority information an individual news item and make the most important information stand alone.

I would like to be able to index incoming feeds into pre-defined groups.

I want to be able to associate content with other incoming information.

I would like to be able to move each incoming news-item into a new pattern and associate it with new information, my ideas, or other contexts. I would like to have the incoming feed more fluid in that I can move it around and have the aggregator do this for me.

I would like the incoming feeds to be aggregated into a single image like NetNewsWire does: I would like to see a larger single-image approach to my feeds

-- This is the end of the content --

RSS Emergency Button

2005-07-08T09:16:00.000-05:00

The London Bombings made me notice how difficult it can be to quickly get helpful information.

Specifically, when you're in a smoky carriage the last thing you want to be doing is fumbling around for directions on how to escape.

Rather, it would be nice if there was a single button we could push: EM.

That would connect me to the localized-emergency-information.

My cell/wireless using GPS would figure out which localized emergency was where I was, and instantly connect me to all the relevant information:

What to do if stuck in a smoky carriage

Directions where to travel

Warnings whether the third rail was or was not energized

Escape and safety tunnels in the tube

Estimated time for safety and rescue personnel to arrive at my location

Also, I'd like to be able to have instant-access with this EM-button the option to connect to others in the same situation; set up an umbrella-wifi whereby we could talk back and forth.

Whether this is something RSS does or Winksite does is irrelevant. What is known is that this type of functionality could be also used at sporting events or other public venues where similar people in a single location could quickly connect with the touch of the button.

There are tag groups; but I'd prefer more of a single-button access to the centralized system and a quick way to connect in real time to the important information and the others in the same situation.

If I'm in a situation like that and it is my last moments on earth, the last thing I want to find out is that the others on the side of the window got out simply because they had a better wireless.

Here's what I'm looking for

I want access to analogies and other similar situations. I want to get quickly connected to similar situations so that I can adapt the lessons learned from another situation to this new situation.

If I have smoke in the carriage, I want to be advised where the smoke is coming from, what type of smoke it is, the likely chemicals, and what I need to do: Do I simply cover my mouth; are these toxic; do I need to break the window to get away from this smoke; or am I just find as I am.

I want a diagram of the tunnel I'm stuck in.

I want to know whether it is advisable to break the window or leave it close.

I want to be connected to local informatin with one single EM-button.

I want to make sure that if I'm in the emergency, I have priority.

I want to get acces to informatin related to this specific event.

I want to get advisories on what to do.

-- This is the end of the content --

Browser command

2005-06-25T12:12:00.000-05:00

Summary

This tool identifies content changes in blogs and integrates the content updates with background images and templates you like.

Details

Have you ever visited the same website or blog, but are not sure what's changed? You get a message in your aggregator that something is changed; but you want to see exactly what is changed. . . but can't find it . . .?

Think about this: Your aggregator keeps giving the same content you've re-read, but what about the original page?

One thing I've noticed about browsers is that they show content, but they're not showing changes.

I'd like t system that integrates my browser with the websites and blogs, and has a way of not just detecting changes since the last visit, but in reorganizing or showcasing the changes since my last visit.

What I'd like to be able to do is jump from my aggregator to a page or blog that I've already visited in the past, and have this tool showcase the new content.

I'm not talking about simply pointing to the content. Rather, I'm talking about actually re-shaping the content to meet my interests.

I'd like to have my own system of highlighting, coloring, and emphasis applied to these familiar webpages so that I can format the content into patterns and a layout that is useful for me.

Maybe this means designing an interface between my browser and the webpages.

Here's what I want:

A tool that records when I last visited a particular blog on my aggregator list;

A system that compares the visit-vies; if there is no change since the last visit, it says that;

A system that will showcase new content on that page since the last visit to the blog;

A system that changes colors, formats of a particular website-aggregator result.

A system that customizes the color, format, too showcase new content since the last visit.

If stuff is buried at the bottom of the page, but is new, I want this tool to kick the new stuff to the top where I can quickly find it.

Then I want to be able to hit a toggle-switch to look at the existing content in the original-actual content that the publisher provides.

I want the option to have all the changes in a particular color, in the original position.

For example, I'd like to be able to hit a button, and have all the old stuff [things that already was there on the page at the last visit] to disappear [go to a color-choice that matches the background] and then leave all the new content that has been added to get changed to a new color that flashes in a certain way.

Maybe the new content gets aggregated to some video-like streaming content. Rather than have to read it in text, I'd like to have that content streamed into a video feed so I don't even have to stroll or read. It gets auto-scrolled in a running feed on a video display with colors and text-speeds that I like; and is in jected into spinning templates and color designs that are pre-integrated with my favorite flickr images.

Hay, just because someone makes content and puts it on a boring webpage or blog, doesn't mean that I can then have an aggregator or browser tool that integrates their content into something that I like to look at.

How's that: An aggregator that takes content and throws it into templates and video feeds and combines it with images and themes that I like: Color and formatting templates that are like my favorite powerpoint slides or video images form my favorite mp3 or download.

-- This is the end of the content --

Research aggregator

2005-06-25T12:01:00.000-05:00

One thing I've noticed about aggregators is that they're just lists of bookmarks and content.

What I'm really looking for is something that integrates a research-plan, a scheduler, and a place to store research results.

What I'm really looking for is a multiple row device that has on each row the task, objective, or question that I'm working on; and then to the right a place to show a project schedule for that particular research plan.

What I'd like to be able to do is create a PERT chart for my research tasks; a place to provide answers; a place to think/blog my thoughts on research questions that could be best answered with a URI-search; and then a place in that row to do a screen-preview of the various content and research responses to that research question.

Essentially what I want to be able to do in each row is have a place that identifies the objective and question of that task; and organizes the information in that particular research topic into groups that are linked with the aggregator.

Big picture-wise, what I want is a single snapshot of all my research-web searches that I'm engaged in. And I want to be able to quickly look across a horizontal bar [time=based] to see what tasks I could be working on and researching to make progress on many research areas at the same time.

At a given point in time, I want to be able to know what tasks I need to work on [because they are behind the horizontal bar], and what tasks are upcoming [that I could work on to get ahead].

That way, I can see if I'm keeping on schedule, or adjust my focus to put more effort into finding links-URI's in the areas where I'm not making progress. I can use the tool to see what additional prospective searches I need to concentrate developing, or adjusting my research approach to answer the question.

Even though I'm working on many different projects, I'd like to be able to jump back and forth between projects on a given day, and make incremental steps along each row.

I want to be able to see the research plan and schedule and show the steps and tasks to accomplish my research objectives.

-- This is the end of the content --

Aggregator Hacker

2005-06-25T11:56:00.000-05:00

Want a tool that fixes your aggregator?

Imagine you have a very special requirement. But your aggregator doesn't do it. Do you create your own aggregator?

How about a tool that does this for you. It's a device that customizes your aggregator.

Here's an example. Suppose your current aggregator has limitations: You keep getting the same content that you've already read.

The aggregator-hacker would be a tool that would recognize what you want, and would suppress the content.

IN other words, the aggregator-hacker would interface with your aggregator, but it wouldn't be something that changed the aggregator.

Rather, it would be an interface system between you and your aggregator. It would be like a streamlining or hacking tool that would customize your aggregator.

Got a list of things you want in an aggregator, but the features aren't there? This tool would act as the interface to provide those features to you.

-- This is the end of the content --

Unlinked entry, Technorati, 22-Jun-05 UTC 12:43:06

2005-06-22T11:37:00.000-05:00

Summary

Content entered into Technortai search box disappears when toggling back and forth between search- and tags-tabs.

Details

I was doing a search in Technorati for Feeddirectory. There were no results I wanted.

So, I thought I would see if there were some existing tags/blogs.

I had hoped that I could simply hit the "Tags"-tab, and have the "feeddirectory" entry from the serach, automatically get loaded.

That didn't happen.

When I pressed "Tags-tab," my typed-entry disappeared.

I had to retype the entry.

What I would prefer: If I enter a term or string once, then I could hit any of the tabs, and have that entry remain in the search box.

Would make it easy to toggle back and forth between all the tabs and options.

Thanks!

-- This is the end of the content --

Site unusable, Feed Directory, 22-Jun-05 UTC 12:31:17

2005-06-22T11:27:00.000-05:00

The Feed-Directory.comproblem persists: Unable to do any search or use the site to find feeds. All the links take me to the error message below.

Suggestion: Someone else might want to e-mail you. There's no e-mail in the "mail to" link under "Technical Staff". Maybe others having the same problem don't know how to contact you?

We'll see how long it takes after a blog-posting that things get fixed.

Feed Directory Error Message
There seems to have been a slight problem with the database.

Please try again by pressing the refresh button in your browser.

An E-Mail has been dispatched to our Technical Staff, who you can also contact if the problem persists.

We apologise for any inconvenience.

Unretrievable URL, Technorati 22-Jun-05 UTC 11:55:52

2005-06-22T10:54:00.000-05:00

See Comment below.

Ever gotten content in your aggregator, but you have no idea where it's from? Sometimes PubSub will give you a return, but there's no link to the original content.

Lately, I've been taking quotes from the returned content, and throwing that into various XML-feed-search-tools.

You'd be surprised at the results. Not all the content that is showing up in PubSub is indexed at the same time by the other services. Makes me wonder about the Feedmesh.

Technorati Test

Given PubSub doesn't give links to some content, I've loaded to Technorati some known content that shows up through the feeds.

I get an error, telling me that even though PubSub is delivering the content, that the FeedMesh is not making sure all the services get the same content.

Not only do I have no link to the original content; but it doesn't appear as though FeedMesh is pinging all the services; and on top of that I can't get Technorati to give me a return on content that is getting delivered through feeds.

Curious.

From the error message, it's not clear whether the link is valid or not; whether the content is there or not; or whether the glitch is on the blog or Technorati.

It would be nice if got a green-screen that simply said, "No results" as opposed to this error report:

Technorati Error Message

ERROR

The requested URL could not be retrieved

----------------------------

While trying to retrieve the URL:

The following error was encountered:

Zero Sized Reply
Squid did not receive any data for this request.

Your cache administrator is noc@technorati.com.

----------------------------

Generated Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:52:01 GMT by www.technorati.com (squid/2.5.STABLE7)

-- This is the end of the content --

JS Buttons -- Neat!

2005-06-18T19:31:00.000-05:00

I came across a new button : JS.

They work! Green button, lower left near the XML-buttons.

It's like a combined MyStack or Newsgator-like URL for a custom list.

They're called JavaScript Feeds.

-- This is the end of the content --

Viewing RSS Feeds in Browsers

2005-06-14T15:32:00.000-05:00

I wish . . .

When I found a feed, that I could put the URI in my browser, and the browser would automatically give me a browser-friendly version of the feed.

I don't like to have to load up a feed-URI to my aggregator just to skim over the feed to "see if I like it".

Sometimes, I come across a feed that "I don't care about" . . .but there's something in there that I want to skim over quickly . . . not because I want to be a subscriber, but I'm trying to get a flavor of the content or the types of information coming from that source.

A browser-feed integration tool would help make the information easier to skim over and read.

It would be nice to simply click on an XML-orange button in the browser to look at the feed in a readable format.

-- This is the end of the content --

Clipping Index, Newsgator, 9-Jun-05 UTC 11:56:26

2005-06-09T10:56:00.000-05:00

Greg,

I'm getting something strange with the Newsgator Online Clip file.

Normally, when I click on the save-icon, the clip-index appears just fine; I can toggle down and throw the item into the folder without any problem.

But something strange is happening.

Now, when I click on the save-icon, my browser shoots down to the bottom of the page inside Newsgator.

In order to see "the box of the clip files" [that I want to toggle to to place the item in the folder], I have to then scroll up to the original RSS feed-item.

Bingo! The clip-file-box is right there, at the original save-icon sign.

This is really strange: I'm not sure if this is an aggregator issue or something with the browser-aggregator interface with IE 6.0.

Ideally

What' I'd prefer is to simply click on the save Icon, and have the box appear and then slide the mouse into that folder.

But what's happening is that the box disappears; I get taken to the bottom of the page; and it took me a while to figure out what was going on.

I'd like to be able to click on the item without getting lost; and have the box appear right by the icon [as it does] but without having the aggregator-browser-view shoot down to the bottom of the list of RSS items.

Update

Now the box is no longer near the icon. It's at the bottom of the list of RSS feeds, totally unrelated to the content.

Now there are two problems:

1. The box isn't located adjacent to the saved-icon

2. When I click on the icon, I get taken to the bottom of the list of RSS feeds, but the while-clip-box-with-files-of-clipped-content is not located either at the bottom [where I got taken] or at the orignal RSS-feed item; it's now in a middle location floating around.

To be clear, once I find the box, and slide my mouse to the desired file, I can place the item. But it's not clear that 'something else" isn't happening or getting in the way of linking the clipped item and placeing that content in the folder I select.

It might work, but with all this jumping around, I'm not sure annd will have to double check. I liked the old way [box right by icon without the skipping] because I was reasonably sure that the clipped file was still connected to my mouse-placement, and it was going int the file.

Now, I'm not sure.

-- This is the end of the content --

FeedMesh: PubSub returns are problematic if trying to get to original content-sources

2005-06-09T09:10:00.000-05:00

Finding the original content can be difficult.

I've been getting info through PubSub on targeted topics.

Small problem, as I've already stated, is that I have no way of going back to the original source. There's no link in the PubSub list. Ideally, PubSub could include a link in the title.

No evidence services are sharing content info

However, my real concern is with FeedMesh. I'm hearing Rumblings that "things are going well" and "the services are exchanging pings" and "the Feedmesh is working."

Small problem: Given that I can't find the original content-link in the PubSub returns, I've been taking the quotes I do get and throwing them into Technorati, BlogDigger and google.

Guess what? I don't get a return. Which tells me: Either PubSub isn't talking to the other services; or the FeedMesh really isn't exchanging Ping.

Either way, you can talk all you want about RSS, FeedMesh and some sort of "service exchanges" . . . I can't use the outputs to go back to the original source.

How long do you want me to wait to "eventually find this stuff" . . . RSS was supposed to expedite the communication, not create a bottle neck and require me [the researcher] to then go back and wait some arbitrary time to then review the material.

In other words, instead of having to "check the website over and over again" [the selling point of RSS], now I have to check the "clips from the RSS feed" and then take that and try to find it in the original content over and over again.

Alternatives

Wow! Maybe this is an enterprise opportunity:

Develop a system that will "automate the back-search from a PubSub output, find the original content, and then deliver those with the original RSS feed; or

find the original links, and then marry those up with the outputs; or

how about a system that the user can click on content, and then the aggregator takes that content-clip, creates a retroactive-search, and throws it into a "pending file" and then when it finds the original content it shows up. No more searching!

In practice, it would be "simpler" to just include the link in the PubSub output. That is, unless you want to use XML to do retroactive searches with auto-links and injection into the aggregator. Remember XML was supposed to solve this, not self-evidently create more content that "only XML can solve.

-- This is the end of the content --

Ping Message, PingOMatic, 4-Jun-05 UTC 15:53:40

2005-06-04T14:51:00.000-05:00

Seeing something strange. When the services respond, not all of the come back with a conformation message.

Two came back with just a blank. They listed their name, but there was nothing to the right of the content saying what happened.

There were no messages next to either of these services:

NewsGator results: [ blank space ]

Blogdigger results: [ blank space ]

Unclear:

- Is the service not getting the update?
- Is FeedMesh sending information anyway?
- Do I reping to just these two?
- Can I get away with "just pinging one" and then FeedMesh will then transfer the pings to all the other services?

In other words, I'm not sure if this is really a problem: If just one of the services get pinged, and assuming FeedMesh is working [that one ping to one gets shared with all], then maybe I should change my list of services to ping and simply ping only one of them.

How about something in the blog letting us know when publishers can simply ping a single FeedMesh point, as opposed to pinging many of the services?

That way, if just one ping goes through, I'll know when to update my auto-ping, and simply ping only one service and let FeedMesh take care of the rest.

However, in the future, if I only ping one spot, how will I, as the publisher, know that the FeedMesh is actually working. Will there be a system in place for me to auto-check whether FeedMesh is actually forwarding the ping; and that the other services are really responding/getting notified as I'm told?

If I have to spend time checking to make sure the pings got shared, then we don't need a FeedMesh. I still have to ping them all and track the ping-status.

-- This is the end of the content --

XML Concepts: Updating common blog content

2005-06-04T14:09:00.000-05:00

Want to make the same update to many of your blogspots? This is an idea how to do it quickly. Kind of like a ping-trackback, but internal to your own platform.

This concept isn't about RSS for a blog. Rather it's about an internal communication system across your blogspots.

This system allows for single point entry for comments or data, and multiple blog-spot updates for your blog-feed readers.

This system would be integrated with feeds so that feed-readers would have updates of these comments in the aggregators.

Details

I was thinking about RSS and XML feeds for my own blog. Not for you, the reader; but as a blogging tool to update blogspots.

Have you ever wanted to make an update to many blogpages at the same time? Let's say you have a special code, link, or comment you want to add to your blogspots.

Currently, [it appears] users have to open each separate blogs-spot to have that content update.

You might think "hay add it to the template." Small problem: Not all the blogspots have the same change to make.

What about tags? That's for reading and searching, its not all that useful to solve this problem.

I can tag comments for publication; but tags don't help me publish specific content to specific blogs; nor can I use tags to quickly make single-entry updates to many publication points.

XML Targeted Content

Single step update to common blogspot content

What if there was a way for a blog-publisher to have a special RSS-feed for these set comments.

I imagine an array or matrix like Excel where comments get loaded; and then on the right side there's an RSS feed-URI.

When someone posts that URI to their blog, the comments [associated with that URI] then get published.

However, this doesn't solve the "multiple blog problem." Meaning: I still have multiple blogs to now add this code.

How to add the code to many blogs [not all] at the same time?

This is the "targeted" URI injector system. I do a search for a key word in either Yahoo/Google, come up with a list of all the blog-spots that contain "the desired target", and boom!

With one click, I send the comment-URI to all the targets at the same time.

Think of this as being kind of like a ping cluster or a multiple 3-D ping-cluster in an aggregator.

But instead of finding and communicating with many blog-publishers who are commenting on the same original blog, this approach would be tailored to my own blog, but have an interface system between my blog, the search engines, and the covering array system.

Module Recap

1. Start: Create phrase

2. Output: Generate URI

3. Scan: Type in key words to target specific blogs

4. Send: URI injected into each blogspot desired

5. Time passes . . .

6. Change: Update phrase from step 1; all blogspots with that comment get updated because they have the same URI from step 2.

7. Refine Target List: Can change which URI-targets get included. Can keep the original; include some; or create a new list.

8. Display

System would keep track of the following types of data:
[a] which URI's are associated with
[b] which comments [not blog comments, but comment linked with that URI put in the blog];
[c] the comment version; and
[d] which blogspots these URI-comments are located.

Ideally, the results would then be incorporated into tagging and clustering tools that could show the common content.

-- This is the end of the content --

Ping, PingOMatic, 4-Jun-05 UTC 14:56:31

2005-06-04T13:48:00.000-05:00

Error message, yet pings confirmed/reported to all services without problem

Doesn't appear to be an impact.

Matt,

This is a first. I've never seen these kind of error displays in IE. They were right at the begging of the printout on the service-stats, at the top of the page.

The error message bled through: some of the error message was above the webpage-blog-start for PingoMatic; and then some of it actually spilled into the PingOMatic page.

Curiously, although I've been having problems with the weblog.com [no confirming message back, just listed], this ping actually went though to all the services, even weblogs.com.

Curiously, it looks as though this is a new error message.

Error Message

Database error: [Can't open file: 'pom_blogs.MYI' (errno: 145)]
SELECT blog_id FROM pom_blogs WHERE domain = 'XXX.blogspot.com' AND path = '/'

Database error: [Can't open file: 'pom_blogs.MYI' (errno: 145)]
INSERT INTO pom_blogs (blog_name, blog_uri, domain, path, rss_uri, last_updated, interface) VALUES ('XXX', 'http://XX.blogspot.com', 'XX.blogspot.com', '/', '', '', '' )

Database error: [Can't open file: 'pom_blogs.MYI' (errno: 145)]
SELECT * FROM pom_blogs WHERE blog_id = 0

Ping-O-MaticHome About Blog Stats Contact Ping-o-Matic resultsÂ
Database error: [Can't open file: 'pom_blogs.MYI' (errno: 145)]
UPDATE pom_blogs SET last_updated = '2005-06-04 XX:XX:XX', domain_resolved = 'X.X.X', interface = '1' WHERE blog_id = 0

Database error: [Can't open file: 'pom_blogs.MYI' (errno: 145)]
UPDATE pom_blogs SET hits = hits + 1 WHERE blog_id = '0'

-- This is the end of the content --

RSS Comics

2005-06-04T13:44:00.000-05:00

Dave Winer will like these insights.

Thanks for the warnings on Calcanis. I was just going to send him . . . LOL

Yahoo Mindset

2005-06-03T10:24:00.000-05:00

Researchers: Mindset filters out garbage. Good!

I've compared the search results with Google. The quality improvement is noticeable.

Even when Google has no "shopping" stuff, the quality of the Yahoo results was superior.

-- This is the end of the content --

Prospective search support in wordprocessors

2005-06-02T15:43:00.000-05:00

Idea

It would be nice if there was a right-mouse-command that allowed users to take strings of words and automatically convert that list into a URI that would be automatically added to the aggregator.

This approach would combine word-formatting "search and replace command" with the prospective search tool.

This goes through the steps currently needed to convert a long list to a list of items that include quotations and OR-commands for a prospective search tool.

We then conclude with a self-evident request that this be streamlined into a simple process: A one step click to convert a list to an aggregator-search-URI that is then automatically loaded to the aggregator.

Details

If you have a long list of discrete items, it would be nice if there was a quick way to:

A. Include all the items in quotations; and
B. Place standard "OR" terms between the items

Right now, I can go to special command, find the whitespace or paragraph return, and manually click through the list.

Would be nice if there was an option to find "long spaces" and then enter a new term; and then continue with the list.

The problem is if I have simply copied and paste a list, the search tool doesn't see a 'white space' as something to recognize in the "find an replace."

And it also doesn't recognize a list as including many paragraph-breaks. Nor does the special search too recognize a list as including manual line breaks.

Solutions

Use the paragraph-mark [^p] for the search; this will allow you to find the end of each word or item in the list; in the search-change command enter the following:

find what: ^p
replace with: OR ^p

This will allow you to find the line break; insert an OR sign; and then maintain the line break.

Adding quotations to each item

Now you have a list of items with the "OR" command after each of them. The trick is to now add quotations to this list.

Find what: OR ^P
Replace with: " [insert space] OR ^p

Problem: the quotes end up being backwards at the end.

How to add an opening quote at the start of the word; and a closed quote at the end of the word.

Look for a line break

Manual line break command doesn't work: ^l

Here's what to do:

You have a list of words. Your goal is to put quotations around each item.

Find this: ^p
Replace with "^p"

What this does is inserts quotes just before the return [at the end of the first item]; and then adds quotes after the return [at the beginning of the next item].

Small problem: When you use this command the quotes don't face the right way.

Also, this includes a space before the quote.

To fix that, simply add a space before the first ^p

Find this: ^p [include a space before the ^]
Replace with "^p" [do not include a space before the first item.

There you go! Now all the quotation marks are the right way.

Doing it all at the same time

Here's how to enter both the quotations and the OR command to a single list:

Find this: ^p [include a space before the ^p]
Replace with: "^p OR "

This will put the OR at the beginning of each term.

Integration with PubSub

Here's the trick. PubSub has a problem with ordered lists and the OR command. It gets confused if you have a list of words in a vertical column.

The trick is now to remove all the paragraph breaks, and simply run the list through PubSub as a single line of data, not a list.

To do this, you have to then reverse the above process:

Find this: "^p
Replace with: " [remove ^p, but in * insert a space; this takes out the ^p-command but will leave some separation between each element in the new list.]

The next step is to simply reduce your list-length until PubSub supports that consolidated blog. In other words, if you have a list of 500 items that you're looking for, you have to break that list into separate chucks of something on the order of magnitude of 50-75. [I'm still not sure what the boundary is yet, but it's not as high as I had hoped.]

Cleanup

After you auto-replaced the format and have your search commands added, take some time to review the final result.

Your original list may have had some formatting problems; or some funky codes that got in the eh way of the manual additions.

Be sure to review your final list and see if there are some quotations or line breaks that have not worked out. There may be missing quotes.

Summary

This will solve the problem. But it would be nice if there was a faster way to do this; and so that the "find and replace commands" in the search tools were updated so that URI-prospective searches could be quickly converted from simply lists into something that can be quickly loaded to a prospective search tool.

The next trick will be for the prospective search tools to be able to handle very long lists. I've already maxed out the lists.

Also, it would be nice in the search simulator, if we could get an idea of 'where the list we just entered" actually got cutoff. Right now, I can only guess which terms have actually been accepted into PubSub.

In other words, even though I have a long list [that's been smashed together into a single chunk by removing line breaks], I now have to un-smash that list, so I can track 'where I stopped adding content.

Not all lists are alike. Some lists have more or less commands. I'm not sure if PubSub limits the input based on commands, content, line number, or the number of total characters. This is kind of hit and miss for each different list entered into a prospective search.

Translation: It would be nice if this was more of a "one step" process -- simply highlight a list of terms in a list, and right-mouse-click on "Create URI list" and it's all entered with a single URI, preloaded to the aggregator printing out content. None of this formatting and manual-adjustments needed.

-- This is the end of the content --

Weighting assigned to RSS search elements

2005-06-01T16:25:00.000-05:00

I thought I would pass on an observation. It has to do with searching, RSS, and search engines.

Have you ever noticed in a search engine that the list of returns is very long?

Sometimes, the list is so long, that all I have to do is add one variable, and the results get very small or go to zero.

Also, I've noticed that sometimes when I add new elements to the search string, that I'd still like to keep the "minor items" associated with the "less known variables" highlighted/showecased at the beginning of the search-results, but then dovetail the two results into a single search.

This is another way of saying, "even though I've added a new variable, and this new variable tends to overshadow the old results with many returns, I'd still like to get some better visibility to the returns associated with the variable that originally generated a very short list of returns."

In case you missed it: I'll say it another way:

Let's suppose you have a search routine with the word, "Rock 44" in it. [I'm just making it up].

Then let's suppose you have an idea: You want to tweak those results, and add a new variable "just to see what you get". So you throw in a very broad term like "Yellow."

Now, suppose you do a combined search with "Rock 44" [narrow] and "yellow" [broad]. what shows up first?

That's right: Yellow-related returns.

But that's not what I want. I want the two search-routines interwoven but I want to ensure that the 'really specific stuff with Rock 44" gets more weight, and jumps to the head of the list.

I've been thinking about this, and have an idea.

What if there is some weighting in the variables. What if I could assign a precedence to the search results so that even though I add a very broad term, my very narrow term still sends these related to "rock 44" to the top of the list.

Because that's what I really want: Rock 44, but with some new shading. I still want to see the Rock44 outputs, but I also want to see which of the Rock 44 elements have Yellow in them. Conversely, I don't care about Yellow, and I don't care that many people are talking about Yellow.

So I want to see something that allows me to define the order of the results in terms of weights; and I want to be able to make the order of the search string important.

This sis to say that if I put "rock 44" before "yellow" then my first interest/first mentioned word should "have the option" to be placed first on my search results.

Again, that most people are talking about yellow and linking to yellow is irrelevant to my interest and focus on Rock44.

All I care about is getting something that highlights what I want, not highlighted what everyone else thinks is important.

Thanks for the link ranks anyway.

-- This is the end of the content --

Ping time, PingOMatic, 31-May-05 UTC 16:42:04

2005-05-31T15:41:00.000-05:00

PingOMatic has a long hang time. Meaning: Instead of showing the progressive progress as the services are pinged, PingOMatic will simply appear to be spinning with a blank-white screen.

Then, all of a sudden, the entire list of services will appear, and all will be pinged. Boom: Done!

While PingOMatic is cycling through, it can be confusing -- it's not clear whether PingOMatic is working, spinning, or whether the site is blocked.

The pings go through just fine. Users just need to know to wait, give it some time. Don't wait for a message on progress.

What would be nice: A message that shows progress or something that indicates the ping went through OK, just taking some time to ping all the services.

Delivering Dave Winer's sushi

2005-05-31T15:23:00.000-05:00

Dave Winer compares RSS to a sushi bar: "I'd like a little bit more of that."

To realize Dave's dream, we spent some time creating this idealized Sushi-bar-like RSS support system.

Here are the results.

First, to actually be a system that lets users "ask more of that," users need to have some indicators and tools right in their aggregator.

The current method is far too cumbersome. [I'll spare your the details.]

What's needed is a simplified approach. Every feed-result should have a simple color-wheel-like-star which parameters along the spokes.

Users should be able to toggle the spokes to adjust the outputs.

Specific spokes would have names like "concepts," "names," "Key words" and "display options."

Ideally what should be happening is that as the user gets new content, they would adjust the java-like spokes to adjust the parameters. Boom! Instantaneously, they would actually get new content right before them, not have to mess with changing codes, uploading new URIs, or creating new search strings to load into a prospective search tool.

Ideally, the new information and result would get assigned the code based on the position of the user-controlled toggles.

To actually get "more of this" would need t select the parameters that are "associated with what they like" and then have some searches conducted real time.

Ideally, those feeds could be added with one click, kind of like the Newsgator buzz-button.

As I change the options, I would change the list/result. Also, I should be able to combine searches into a simulators to get real time toggling of the content changes.

I'd like to be able to change the result display; and also change the results with some simple tweaks.

Some examples on output are: A9, Clusty, and Gizmodo. By adjusting the color-wheel, I'd have real-time updates in content.

Until that happens, I still have to visit the Sushi bar to request home delivery.

I like Dave's idea. I look forward to getting served and enjoying the Sushi in the restaurunt right before the chef.

LEGAL NOTICE

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

You may not copy any of this work to promote a commercial product on any site or medium in the universe.

If you see this work posted on a commercial site, it violates the creative commons license; and the author does not endorse the commercial product.

Free to use for non-commercial uses. Link to this original blogspot and cite as Mud's Tests.

-- This is the end of the content --

Newsgator: UTC 1543 hrs 29 May 2005

2005-05-29T14:40:00.000-05:00

Newsgator Online appears to be inaccessible through normal channels on both IE and Firefox.

In some cases, able to reach the site as the site is still up, but unable to get through or sign-in.

Unable to use the service. This has been going on for approximately 24 hours.

-- This is the end of the content --

2005: PubSub parameters exceeded

2005-05-28T17:29:00.000-05:00

Yes, Ladies and Gentlemen. PubSub has limitations.

You were warned that the search strngs would be getting complicated. I entered a seach string containing over 100 different parameters, elements, and operands.

Error Message

Your query is too complicated. Please try a simpler query, or contact us for help.

But I don't want to do the "simple" search. If I "wanted" to do that I would have done that. LOL

Now we have two problems:

No ability to test the search string with a simulator; and

The platform's dsign features have been exceeded.

It's only 2005. What's going to happen when someone decides to really do something complicated?

Like next week?

-- This is the end of the content --

Ping, PingOmatic, 26-May-05 UTC 11:18:04

2005-05-26T10:16:00.000-05:00

Matt,

Here's the error message. Unable to ping. I don't use Wordpress, but blogger.

I tried to ping again, and still didn't work. Using IE 6.0

Ping Error Message

Error establishing a database connection! This probably means that the connection information in your wp-config.php file is incorrect. Double check it and try again.

Are you sure you have the correct user/password?
Are you sure that you have typed the correct hostname?
Are you sure that the database server is running?

WordPress Support Forums

Ping-O-Matic; PingOmatic; Ping.O.Matic

-- This is the end of the content --

Customizing Google search with custom images

2005-05-21T23:37:00.000-05:00

Tired of the plain skin? You can move this here.

Here's another example with details.

What would be nice is a simple way to:

Enter a search term

Chose an image/ or have it randomized

Combine the search URL with the image URL

Going further than having a custom topic-specific-searches like Gigablast, also have a custom search platform that is truly customized in tone, feel, apearance.

Ideally, there would be many different kinds of skins>, or boxes that could be customized as well with varieties of:

Colors, tones, feel

Ability to adjust the size of the various elements

Change the search box to a search-circle with rounded edges, and shading

Also, it would be nice if there was an easy way to integrate RSS-feed-content into the browser-URI so that users could have access to both the platform and the information. Users would be able to see

Content: Scrolling feed URI in the search platform-URI

News alerts

Flash alerts from their aggregator that important content has arrived

In other words, rather than placing the Google search-chicklet on my site, why not let me import to the Google platform all my desired elements and let me customize the Google search platform simply by adjusting the URI. Imagine being able to create a custom Google platform by simply adjusting the URI to add the following:

Favorite colors

Preferred images

Important information

Alerts from my prospective search

Flash warnings when e-mail has arrived

In other words, use the Google platform as a browser-within-a browser; don't make these features something that have to be downloaded or posted on the computer desktop, but put these as open elements that can be seamlessly added to the URI.

-- This is the end of the content --

Chopsticks or fork?

2005-05-21T22:55:00.000-05:00

Ever noticed your mouse? It's just for one hand.

What if those who designed human-computer interface had, rather than using forks, been using chopsticks?

Could there have been a two-handed interface with your computer?

What would it be like to interact with your computer using both hands?

How would the internet and computers have evolved differently?

What changes would there be to Webdesign, HTML, or aggregators?

If things might have been different . . . ask yourself ... would it be a better experience if we created those features, but made them workable with a single mouse?

-- This is the end of the content --

Floating aggregators

2005-05-21T21:59:00.000-05:00

Think of this as being a more fluid integration between the aggregator, the browser, desktop workbench, and the prospective search URI-generator.

Information waterfall

Information bursts. Amazing how an obscure topic can suddenly have massive numbers publications.

I did some prospective searching and "search engine searching" at the same time. Despite an obscure topic, I've been finding that alot of content will come flying in.

For example, I did a very isolated search for an obscure search-string, and within seconds I had 50 stories show up; I don't want to have to wade all the duplication. I want the information once, and I want the unique aspects highlighted for me.

But there are subtle differences in the stories in the feeds.

Managing data repetition

When I do a prospective search based on information I find in the search engine, I only want to read the news story once; and I don't want to keep re-reading the same information from different sources.

I may have two different elements with substantially the same content, but the second feed-item will strip out the duplication, and highlight that which is different, novel and unique.

Ideally, what I'd like to see is the duplicate information in the different feed-items stripped out so that I only see the information once; but I still want to have the links to the full spectrum of content-feed-sources.

Said another way: I'd like to have the duplication in the content eliminated; but I still want the full spectrum of sources that show the subtle nuances not covered elsewhere.

This will save me time.

Fluid-like aggregator desktop

Then, once I have all the distinctive-novel information, I'd like an easy way to move it around. What I'd like is a way to quickly move these incoming feed-items around on my aggregator.

What I'm really looking for is a wordprocessing-like tool that lets me convert new concepts and words into prospective searches; and at the same time let me move the incoming content around so that I can find the newest information.

I'm not interesting in copying the content to a wordprocessor; rather, I'd like to keep the content where it is, within the existing platform. In turn, what I'm hoping for is that as I move this content around, I can start to find some new patterns.

That way, as new feed-data shows up, I can quickly integrate this new information into my new structure and cumulative list of novel information.

Then I want to be able to reorganize all the distinctive elements into my own pattern. Ideally, there could be automated structures created so that I could apply externally generated templates and structures to this new data; and then identify the gaps or where I need to do some other types of searches/digging.

Here's what I'd like to see

A platform that lets me:

click on a feed-item, and let me move it to a working portion of the aggregator.

move the individual data elements around on this aggregator platform.

click on the new information to create a prospective search and have these URIs automatically loaded into the aggregator for more searching.

-- This is the end of the content --

Gingerbread crumbs

2005-05-21T20:32:00.000-05:00

I've been thinking about URLs, bookmarks, tags, and organizing systems.

Gingerbread Doll

When searching and sharing links, there's an analogy: I as the advance gingerbread doll am lost in the forest; meanwhile the rest of the gingerbread dolls are back at the village.

My job is to leave crumbs so that I can find my way back, but then be able to go from my trail, in the reverse direction back to where I am, but without the drunken-sailor approach.

Rather, I would know the most efficient line tracing me current position, through the breadcrumbs, back to the objective. This means eliminating the paths that go in circles, and connecting the best crumbs in the best way. All this without having to guess, but be told by some outside guiding force.

Village

What I want is a way to leave little crumbs along the way so that I can retrace my steps, but then have an automated way for those crumbs to find the minimum distance between them.

What I'm looking for is a quick way to tag my way along the path, but then have my "system" [whatever that is, think enterprise] automatically log my path, then find the shortest distance between the juice and where others might want to start.

What I'd like is a fluid way to then move these item-paths around so that I can quickly create a roadmap for others to follow. Think of this as kind of like having an automated site-map, but it applies to my adventures on the web.

Most people don't want to read lists of links. What they want is context to those links. But I'm having trouble with these tagging systems. They're just more links.

What I'd really like is an overarching organizing method that extracts the linking systems and will more seamlessly create a meaningful structure that I can send as a single packet of information.

LP: Optimal path

That's right: Once all this data gets thrown into a single package, I'd like to export this information along a feed and then the next person can quickly follow my specific path to the destination, but go directly along the most efficient route, as opposed to retracing all the dead ends or distractions.

Ideally, I'd like to do more than simply ship links; rather, I'd like to be able combine the activities from different days-searching into a single concept-related group; and then quickly export this.

In other words, as I dive into the forest, leave crumbs, I don't want to have to make everyone else follow each link that I've saved. I want a faster way for others to see the structure of what I've found; and then I want to be able to apply my future-findings to this idealized structure.

In turn, in the future, as I go new places, and find better ways to organize these routes, I want the future "better patterns and organizing" to retroactively apply to my previous links-juice.

Summary

Suppose I'm the gingerbread doll-lead of the gingerbread village. What I want is to be able to leave crumbs as I walk. And then someone who follows me [and me not talking to them] would be able to see the entire train of crumbs, and then know by looking at those crumbs which is the good stuff, which is not; and then be able to convert my wandering path, into something that is more efficient.

Tree markers updated

As I continue in advance, then return to the village for more feedback, what I want is for these crumbs to retain their position, but have their meaning and context updated in terms of feedback that I get form the other gingerbread dolls.

All my crumbs stay out there. But I can inform others which crumbs to look at; which to follow; and which to ignore. And this happens in the future, and applies retroactively to the crumbs I've already left in the distant path.

In other words, as I drop new crumbs, individually they may not be all that meaningful. But in the future as I learn more and can see the whole picture, I'll have a better idea of what is really important, and which of those crumbs that I've left would be most helpful for purposes of

making a map;

sharing an organizing structure; or

most effectively organizing others to most quickly understand how I got to where I currently am.

-- This is the end of the content --

XML Concepts: Aggregators with color coding signals on feed popularity

2005-05-21T19:44:00.000-05:00

I've got an idea for aggregators and feeds.

Have you noticed how some feeds [content-wise] start to diverge from the "reason you really signed" up?

Sometimes publishers get into a funk, or they start publishing stuff that I'm really not interested in.

Do I want to delete their feed? No.

But what I'd like is a signaling system so that I don't keep reading their garbage while they're "going through what they're going through."

Namely, I'd like a way to say to the aggregator, "Hay, this feed is starting to annoy me, how about not bothering me for a couple of days."

Then, the feed slides into the "probation" status, and when I see it next, I don't see content, I just look at the color of the feed and say, "Do I want to see it, yet?"

If not, I can extend the deadline and the feed will disappear for a while longer.

The next time it comes back, it has a different shade of the color, corresponding to "how long it's been since I last looked at the feed."

Here's what I really want

A way to "not read content in feeds" but still stay subscribed

A way to not hear from a feed for a specific period of time; and have the option to toggle the feed-alerts so that even though I'm not monitoring the feed, I can still get caught up at a later time. Namely, even though I'm making all my feeds "read," I can still quickly get access to this particular feed and "get caught up" when I decide to start monitoring it again.

I'd like to see some sort of sliding movement-option in the aggregator-feed list. Namely, if I have a feed that is "less popular", I'd like to have the option to change the display of my feeds from a simple list in the files to something that ranks the feeds based on my interest.

For example, Yahoo has this buzz-alert system based on content-key word searches. Notice how there's an up and down arrow system by the key word. I'd like an option on my feeds to do the same so that I can track and more quickly have "to the top of my list" those feeds that I really find interesting.

After a while, if feed is "below some level that I decide" I'd like to have the aggregator flash-signal me and say, "You're subscribed to this feed, but it is below your threshold. Shall I delete the feed?" I'd like the option to adjust these signaling devices; turn them off; or override them.

Not all feeds are alike. But most of all, just because I'm subscribed to a feed it doesn't mean that I want to continue having the same priorities given to feeds that are less interesting, but something I still want to monitor.

Also, I'd like a faster way to mark "all the content read" in a given feed, as opposed to having to click through each page. My feed may spill over to three pages in the aggregator; I want the option to click "read all" with one click, as opposed to visiting all the pages.

For example: Suppose I've read over a blog, find it's feed, and then subscribe. Guess what? All the stuff shows up as new content, even though I've already read it.

Also, there are times that [for whatever reason] a feed starts reporting "new content," but it's the stuff I've already read. I don't want to scroll through all the content again saying, "read this" when I've already said that. Would prefer "one click" and also a quicker signaling system back to the aggregator of saying, "Hay, you keep sending me this 'new stuff,' but it's old. What's up with that?"

The aggregator is supposed to make my searching-reading easier, not more annoying.

-- This is the end of the content --

Tip of the day: Wrap commands

2005-05-20T17:03:00.000-05:00

You've got a long URL to place in blogger.

You also have some code called a "wrap command":

<pre style="OVERFLOW: scroll; WIDTH: 100%"> CONTENT TO WRAP </pre>

Tips

Here are some tips on making that code actually work:

1. Adjust percentages

Adjust the default-percentage to your blogger column width; 70% works well with this one.

2. Connect: Make sure the first line of code is in a single line, without any line breaks.

3. Return: Leave returns after the first line of code.

4. Space: Place the final pre-command [ </pre> ] after a hard return; leave some space.

Right: Single line for code

<pre style="OVERFLOW: scroll; WIDTH: 100%">

YOUR CONTENT HERE

</pre>

Wrong: This wraps the first line of code to the second line

<pre style="OVERFLOW: scroll;
WIDTH: 100%"> [ < -- Should be one line, without a return]

YOUR CONTENT HERE

</pre>

Messes things up: If you place the code inside a table, the code will not integrate, and the wrap command will fail.

Don't try this at home

<pre style="OVERFLOW: scroll; WIDTH: 100%">

If you add the wrap-command inside the code for a box, it is a mess.

</pre>

-- This is the end of the content --

Feedburner: What's worse than an error message?

2005-05-20T16:46:00.000-05:00

An error message that auto-displays a password and sign-in ID in the URL!

Condition: Normal sign-in; IE 6.0

Error Message During Sign-In

Internal Server Error

The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.

Please contact the server administrator, webmaster@feedburner.com and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.

More information about this error may be available in the server error log.

---------------------------------------------

Apache Server at www.feedburner.com Port 443

Then I noticed this in the URL:

URL Displaying Sign-In and Password



https://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/loginSubmit?userId= [ OOPS ] &password= [ OOPS ]

Given the reality of Spyware and Desktop monitoring, I would prefer that the URL not contain a password; or if there is data shown, that it be encrypted; and that others using the same URL later will not be able to simply click on the link to read the access code.

-- This is the end of the content --

Clustering individual webpages or data streams

2005-05-18T21:40:00.000-05:00

Clusty and Grock can create maps and patterns of content.

But what if the user could then apply this grouping-feature, but look at a specific page?

Then, what if the user could then take those Grock-Clusty-created-groups and then move the content around.

It would make the content on a given page more malleable. The reader could tailor it to their own needs, strip things out, or make new patterns.

Then, the user could make a feed of that newly-created pattern and save it for later, or move it around based on new content and inputs from other websites, other feeds, or tools that allow the reader to combine these patterns into different clusters.

Search Engine Customization

2005-05-18T21:32:00.000-05:00

They've got search engines for different countries and languages.

Why not have a search engine for:

cities,

continents,

dialects within a major language,

career fields,

technical languages?

Meaning: Allow users to tailor their search to choose from specific geographic regions, not just countries, but also cities.

Or: Just as we can have a language-specific-search, so too could there be a specific-city-focused web-browser-search-engine.

Or: How about a feature that allows users to build their own search engine, to tailor the commands to their field, or the way that they search.

Example quirky search features to place in a user-specific search engine:

X-number of words must/may separate/fall between the target words

Words fall within a specific order (Ex: [cat dog house] is different than [house dog cat ])

Ability to find a bridge between two different/unrelated search concepts, and find all the content that links these two different concepts

How about a search tool that allows users to focus not on the popularity of the content, or the words, but on how well the arguments are put together. [They have essay-grading tools; apply that to search engines to find/rate quality of logical arguments]

Encarta

2005-05-18T18:23:00.000-05:00

Have you ever used Encarta? It really saves alot of time.

For example, suppose you're hopelessly lost on a task. Like giving a presentation.

Encarta gives you some handy checklists.

I've looked at it and thought there could be an improvement.

My overall beef with Encarta is that, despite all the information, there's no quick way to use the site to save my information.

Rather, I have to copy the checklists to a second platform like .word or .excel.

What I'd really like is two additional platforms within Encarta. The first one would be a way of providing my answers to the checklists. That way I can simply use Encarta to do the project.

Second, I'd like for each task or checklist in Encarta to have a schedule. Not a calendar, but the type of horizontal schedule you can see on the timelines.

What I'd like to be able to do with Encarta is read a checklist, post my responses, and Encarta would flow out my task-related-milestones so that I would know what I need to get done.

Of course, I want all this combined into a single XML-feed so that I can get access to the information no matter where I am.

PingOMatic and Userland error messages -- huh?

2005-05-18T16:03:00.000-05:00

I don't use userland, I use blogger.

But I pinged into PingOmatic and got two strange messages, one of them is the following:

Error Message in PingOMatic

Weblogs.com results:
Something went wrong - 7 : Can't find a sub-table named "C:\Program Files\UserLand Frontier\Guest Databases\apps\Tools\ping.root".

Go figure.

Blogger: Link to update blogspot connects to wrong blog-content

2005-05-18T15:57:00.000-05:00

Blog updated icon: If you click on the small-pencil for an update, you get taken to the wrong blog-entry.

Until this is fixed, it's a waste of time to click on the icon.

Currently, have to go back to the main menu, re-open the blogentry.

For repication, troubleshooting: This error is not occuring across all blog entries.

XML: The Game

2005-05-14T20:59:00.000-05:00

XML CEOs: Do you see your company featured on this game about blogs?

I like the sound of "BlogOpoly" . . .

Using Anime to promote XML feeds

2005-05-13T19:00:00.000-05:00

Out of the blue someone walked into my life. We had an interesting conversation.

I thought, "It would be really interesting to read their blog."

A blank, "What's a blog?"

They said they were very interested in learning things, and I asked, "Have you ever heard of XML?"

Another blank.

"It's kind of like combining e-mail and webpages. But instead of you having to visit the webpage, the content comes to you."

They mentioned they like to learn things.

I thought perfect, "Someone who wants to learn something, who doesn't know about either blogs or XML, I could show them in minutes . . ."

Their concept of a blog was from their own experience. When I mentioned an online journal, the first thing they thought of, "Someone is going to share their problems, and I don't want to deal with that."

When I explained various types of research, content, or prospective searches they could get

Sometimes people talk about "wanting to learn" as more of a conversational piece, but when given the door way they're not ready to walk through and enjoy their Anime cartoons.

But I learned something new.

I didn't ask them what they really wanted to do: Watch TV.

Their idea of "the internet" was a way to get e-mail. Nothing more.

At first, I thought they weren't really interested in learning new things. Just talking about learning things. Then I realized my approach was wrong.

What I learned

I need to really understand where someone is coming from, whether they're really open to new ideas. Most people are if they are presented in the right way.

XML feeds would be interesting if they could provide live-action anime. Not things that are standard icons, but real-live feeds from the production companies.

But they're not necessarily something that can add color to words. For some, the images are the entire story, and they don't want to read.

If I had simply pointed to some live-anime feeds that might've done the trick. No need to mention blogs, aggregators, or XML.

Let the tools show case what they're interested in.

Post script

Now, we'll see how much they want anime: A quick search of the hits doesn't really give much quality content or images. Just people talking about . . .

Anyone out there know of some really good blog-feeds with 100% anime pictures?

The list of quality Anime feeds

[ Check back -- coming soon! ]

Tests

IceRocket anime-search-to-feed doesn't appear to work.

Category: Interesting, but not XML

Johnny Appleseed

Category: No comment

Looking for Animen?

Sign me up!

Newsgator Online: Language screening capability

2005-05-12T15:05:00.000-05:00

Would like a language filter on feeds; and/or option to auto-translate an incoming feed to my native language.

Some key words have multiple meanings in different languages.

I get content I can't read in the aggregator;

I have to do a manual-cut-and paste to a translator;

In the meantime, I'd like to be able to auto-exclude content that is in the language/using the term that I don't want.

XML Concepts: BBC user feedback on products they'd like

2005-05-12T14:41:00.000-05:00

BBC has a prototype section for XML feeds. Many interesting ideas from readers on what they'd like to see in XML feeds.

It looks like BBC could end up being an online aggregator tool that would compete directly with the the existing readers.

I suggest tracking this closely:

Know the new products and services that the consumer can visualize themselves using;

Know what your end user really wants;

Spot fresh ideas on products; and

Plan to make your platform a credible competitor.

XML feeds for volcano monitoring

2005-05-12T14:33:00.000-05:00

I see a time when XML feeds will be part of Volcano monitoring and alerting system.

Blogger introduces security feature

2005-05-12T11:33:00.000-05:00

Apparently in an effort to combat blog-spamming, blogger has instituted a new feature.

When making updates to content, users are asked to enter a security code. This feature is across all blogs.

Users are prompted with:

Word Verification:
Type the characters you see in the picture below.

The code changes each time.

If there are errors, users are given a new code. Bloggers cannot publish unless the code is entered.

Subsequent sign-ins and content-changes do not request this authentication.

It appears this security feature is a one-time validation to ensure the blog is connected to a real-live person, not a bot.

Statcounter

2005-05-10T13:57:00.000-05:00

Ever wonder what those codes mean? Improbulus explains the following:

lockedReferrer

No referring link

And others!

Tip of the day: How to find Newsgator e-mail

2005-05-10T13:29:00.000-05:00

Quick tip The e-mail is here

Newsgator has an e-mail system. It's incoming, meaning you get an e-mail account, and can get e-mail delivered to you on an RSS feed.

How to find your Newsgator e-mail account:

A. From home

B. Select Newsgator manager

C. Choose add a feed

D. Select smart feeds

E. Select e-mail feeds

XML Concepts: Highlight copy and paste data to create a browser-linked pseudo-feed

2005-05-07T22:50:00.000-05:00

I was working on a project where I was taking live streaming updates from one browser, and then combining the data with two other data feeds.

Small problem: Nothing was XML.

I got to thinking about this "cut and paste" exercise and thought it would be nice if there was a simpler way. [There actually is: There are java-tools which allow for auto-centering from NSLS.]

Getting back to my streaming-data on the browser: What if I could simply highlight the text-data from the first webpage, and then the receiving platform would know to continue to extract data from that point-source.

All this without any coding by the user, just highlight, copy, paste once and then the platforms would then follow that original data, and keep taking it.

Also, I thought it would be nice if there was an auto-update-refresh option in the browser. Meaning: If my incoming data [not on an XML feed] is streaming live, I don't want to have to sit there are refresh it every x-seconds to see if something new has showed up.

I'd like for the browser to automatically do this: Simply have a timer in the auto-refresh; when new data shows up, then the tool would take the data [using the browser-highlight-paste feature] and throw it into the transformation platform, function, or what have you.

Ideally, what I'd like is to be able to highlight text, throw it into a different platform like Excel, then have this same feature also link other platform streams [also not on XML], and then have a way to automatically link the browsers to this final platform.. . . just with a click, highlight, and paste option.

Then I'd like to know that this platform can integrate the data streams as the data shows up; and have transformation functions easily applied to this incoming data.

I'd also like to have confidence that these pseudo-feeding approach would let me quickly see new patterns, and give me a way to highlight new or incoming data that I might want to include in new transformations.

I may have only selected one data-set from the first webpage, but I'd like the tool to be able to tell me that there are some other interesting datasets on the same page that I may want to focus on [even though I haven't pasted it].

Ideally there'd be a roaming function on this browser-data-search approach, and the platform would automatically look at all the data available, not just the ones I selected.

Clearly, it would be nice if I could turn this off if I wanted to focus on one thing.

Summary

I'd like to be able to copy-create an integrated platform feed from many sites. I want to have real-time updates in my browser without having to click manually to refresh. I * like to have an auto-refresh function to see the new data.

Also, I'd like a way to maintain the browser settings, so that when I do refresh, I do have the option to maintain the vertical-horizontal settings, but the only thing that would refresh is the data, not the browser location.

Also, even though there is new data showing up, I'd like to have the option to have a command that requires the user to input. That way, if I'm working on the existing data [and don't want the new data yet] I don't get the new data when I'm not ready.

I also want to be able to capture the incoming data by simply highlighting it; and then have the tool aggregating the incoming data into a third platform like Excel. This would be like creating an aggregating function in a non-XML aggregator.

PubSub Feed Generator Missing ~link to original content~

2005-05-07T22:40:00.000-05:00

I'm seeing "no links" in the PubSub subscription feed [ PubSub Feed Generator ]

Some content has links, but there's no link from the PubSub index back to the original content.

Unless the content has a link, I have to research for the content using non-PubSub-tools in order to get back to the original content.

Is the aggregator stripping out the links? I don't think so. Because if the aggregator was at fault, I'd have all the links stripped out, not just the ones with PubSub.

Is PubSub just providing content without a link back to the original content? Yes. And I'm not clear that PubSub only wants to give me a sentence, but wants to give me a way to get back to the context of that comment.

Do users of Monitor 110 want the same thing? If yes, say nothing; if you want links, need to let them know during beta: Need to have links from Monitor 110 generator to the original content.

Search Tool Benchmarks

2005-05-06T17:25:00.000-05:00

FYI: April 2005 Study.

XML Concepts: Prospective search simulator

2005-04-30T19:14:00.000-05:00

This note outlines an approach to adjusting prospective search URIs. The tool would run simulations against the URI to ensure validity against intended content and possible future related search results and terms.

Think of the simulator as a tune up for your subscription list in either your OPML file on your site, or in your subscription list in your aggregator. Users would be able to take URI OPML lists and adjust subscription syntax to improve likely search results.

The simulator would help ensure prospective-search-users, despite a valid prior-intent to monitor a likely future publication or triggering event., would not have to wait and wonder, nor be surprised when their search string failed.

The tool could be useful for the Intellectual Property Practice Group in monitoring similar content deliberately obfuscated to avoid unauthorized disclosure. Proprietary information could be loaded the simulator, and the URI could be created and modified to capture terms not yet envisioned but directly related to the trade secret.

Discussion

I’ve noticed that I’m getting into more specific areas, that my terminology isn’t matching what others are using.

This can be problematic when I’ve hardwired a prospective search-URI with a specific phrase, but [unknown to me] the majority of the universe is using another term.

Mud’s Observations on
Prospective Search Syntax and URIs

As searches get more narrow, the chances for novel words and phrases increases.

As content increases and cross-disciplinary communication grows, the probability of publishers using novel terms increases.

As subscription commands get more focused and the number of terms and syntax in the search command increases, the chance of error increases.

As OPML lists grow longer in aggregators, it takes longer time to manage changes to the subscription lists.

Not all my searches are for things that exist right now. Rather, I’ve got phrases set up that are scanning for the first use.

Prospective Signaling device in
2001:A Space Odyssey
If you recall the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey, there was a large black obelisk on the moon. The thinking was that when man [or something] uncovered this obelisk, there would be a signal to others that man was taking a leap in terms of technology and sophistication.

Some look at this obelisk as an early warning detection. Not that something was actually in your backyard, but that there was some future event that was likely, and when it occurred, a signal would go out. I look at prospective searches the same way.

Small problem. Given the complexity of the phrases, and the novelty of the words, I’m not 100% confident that my very focused-complicated search commands are correct or will work.

The last thing I want to know is, despite my correctly forecasting a proper signaling word, that my search command is incorrect, and that I’m the last person to realize the signaling event has occurred. There I am, oblivious to reality simply because a syntax error.

Well, lately I’ve noticed this problem and thought, maybe there’s an enterprise opportunity.

What to do?

Imagine if you will, a prospective search platform that doesn’t simply let you load up your search command and give you a URI, but a platform that lets you run simulations on that search command-string, and lets you verify that what you hope you’re going to get, is actually what you’re most likely going to get.

What I’d like to see is a system that

Lets me load up a desired search, and then takes existing content, and throws it at that search, and gives me back a trial run of my search string.

Show me what content is going into the URI-screener, and what got hit, and what didn’t.

Shows me options on the words that might be more appropriate to use.

Shows me what I’m entering in the search string [column one] side-by-side with the trial searches [column two] the actual search results [column three], and a list of options on how to adjust my search-syntax so that I get the desired output [column four].

Example Prospective Search Simulator Steps

Let’s run through a sample.

I create a search string. It has many commands. I have an unknown error. Or my word is not correctly spelled. Or the phrase is actually never going to get hit because of my error.

I enter the search string into the subscription simulator.

The simulator grabs content that contains the words, and uses multiple variations. The simulator takes letters out of the key words, and also uses synonyms

At the same time, the simulator uses the input stream and refers to the Yahoo Y!Q similar search tool, to find similar content.

The simulator shows this similar content as content that wouldn’t get hit, but may be similar or more appropriate. The simulator shows me how to adjust my existing search string to hit these types of similar searches.

Also, the simulator takes the words I have and searches on Technorati tags for related tags. It shows me what terms I’ve entered, what types of content I would get, and then shows me the types of content-results that are similar, but would be excluded.

The simulator then shows me how to adjust my existing search string to capture these analogies.

Review

The simulator would do a number of things. It would take content that already exists. It would also create false content that deliberately contains or does not contain the target words.

The simulators goal is to act as a final check for the more complicated search strings. The idea is that users [using very novel words and phrases] would:

A. Have simulated content slapped against that search string; and

B. Then see whether the intended content is actually captured, or whether there are known problems with the existing search strings that could be better tweaked.

This type of search simulator is very focused and probably tailored to a very narrow audience. However, I do see a time when people could have very narrow search-requests, and want to get a more immediate sign that their prospective search is going to work.

Also there are times when someone may generate some novel terms, but these terms never catch on. However, the phrasing or similar phrases used could trigger some search results in the Y!Q search request.

In these cases, what I would like to see is an ability for the prospective search simulator to look at the general phrases used, and then find analogies, and similar content, not only in the existing searches, but also look forward in time and make some guesses at what other analogies and words others might be using that could be set today.

Ideally, it would be nice if there was a way that as new words and terms are added to the lexicon, these prospective search tool-phrases in the URI could be updated and tweaked real time.

I see there being some sort of real-time bot-like tool that integrates with Y!Q. This bot would finds similar search-results, and then uses a thesaurus or some related tag-type tool.

The bot would then automatically adjust or refine the terms embedded in that URI. The prospective search would get updated in the subscription list, and also in my aggregator list. The search-URI remains viable going forward despite shifts in folksomy.

Beta testing approach

Overall, I think it would be neat if there was a separate platform similar to a "Technorati tag creator" to test out the PubSub prospective search. With time, after this platform-tool had proven itself, this separate tool could be integrated with the PubSub platform.

FeedMesh and targeting specific user-aggregators

PingOMatic and the FeedMesh would support this tool, not only in finding content, but in highlighting for the services those URIs that are related to which tools.

The services would know which prospective searches are out there, and would be in a position to target-ping those aggregators with similar-tag-phrases when the new content emerges, and the publishers ping the FeedMesh with the content.

Ideally, this system would monitor the OPML lists within a user’s aggregator-platform and then ensure that the prospective searches and external services were aware of these changes and updates to the URIs.

Integrate simulation with similar searches

I would like a system that does what Y!Q does in that it finds related terms, and then integrates with this tool to update and refine the terms embedded in that prospective-search-URI.

As time goes on, I would like the Y!Q-like took on similar searches, to also take existing content that gets generated in the future, and match the new output with similar prospective-searches, and alert URI-holders [those who are using a URI with embedded terms] that similar content is showing up that would trigger a response, but it currently doesn’t match exactly. Do they want to adjust their terms automatically; would they like this type of content to be reported?

User requirements and philosophy in re prospective searches

I want to know in advance that the subscription syntax for the URI is valid. My real goal in creating this prospective search is to provide a signal that there’s movement, discussion in a specific area that is related to what I’m interested in, even though my terms are not matching exactly.

I want to know that the prospective search that I’ve created today will work, even though:

A. the terms that I’ve decided to use may never actually get used;

B. the terms are unfamiliar to others; and/or

C. the actual event and discussion goes off on a tangent, but is actually related to my intended search objective

Ideally, I’d like to be able to throw a prospective search request into the simulator, get back some content, and be able to click on some groups or types of content-clusters, and have the code automatically updated so that this type of content would be included/captured in the prospective search.

User Objectives
User wants confidence that:

Today’s very narrow search with unusual and non-used phrases is gong to trigger an appropriate signal to me in the future, when others use similar phrases.

The prospective URI-code works without the actual event, triggering device, or comments actually showing up.

The terms that I have randomly chosen to explain my concept are still viable triggering words, even though the majority of humanity is using something else in the future.

User wants a tool to

Test out the validity of the prospective search in situations where I’m using novel terms, or very complicated search terms that narrows my content.

See how my search results would compare to monitor tweaks in the code; and I would like to see, my simply clicking on some of the outputs, how my search string might get updated.

Integrates with the major search platforms so that it then can use this external content as part of the body of work/content that gets selectively applied, adjusted and tweaked relative to the search simulator.

Thoughts on how to approach the problem

This tool would take content from existing pages and search tools. If the terms are not there, the simulator would auto-generate combinations, errors, and similar words to show options.

The prospective search toll would be like a dry run on the search command. It would clearly show which content and terms would get hit.

The simulator would show options on other outputs: Users would easily change the codes by clicking on the desired terms-results that they like. Simply clicking on the simulated output would allow users to quickly tweak the search command.

Once the final search string was created, the system would then do a final check and simulation to show the outputs and get final approval for that search command.

Users would then have greater confidence that the terms, syntax, and scope of terms was adequately captured, and have grater confidence that although no current content is expected to exist in the near future, similar words and phrases would get captured.

Enterprise: Intellectual property practice group

I see this tool being useful in exploring whether there are have been leaks from intellectual property discussions. Also, in cases where personnel are discussing issues and concepts in round about ways, this tool would identify and map clusters of discussion that appear to be related to other private discussions.

Ideally, the outputs of these reports could be in such a form that the courts would readily understand them and see that there was a linkage between the initial protected-confidential-discussion and the subsequent external discussion to open sources not bound by confidentiality agreements.

This tool would integrate with other tools like Y!Q. Similar searches would be done on the simulated content to verify the output captures those terms that most likely would be desirable.

Users would be able to do a similar search based on many words, and automatically create a focused PubSub subscription.

Feature: Syntax simulation

Tool would suggest alternatives when a desired search should be included in quotes; or that the number of likely hits will be broadened if I put in quotes certain phrases; or adjust the search quotes from double quotes to single quotes.

Feature: Adjacent instructions

The instructions for the commands would be immediately adjacent to the simulator. There would be scrolling instructions in a side-by-side menu; and as users made changes, the directions would be adjusted to guide the user in how to make the changes.

Feature: Instructions tailored to individual search request

The tool would be similar to an idealized Winksite set-up, or like the current YahooIM download approach: Users would be given instructions as they were working through the steps, rather than having to refer to external pages or other parts of the site for guidance.

The guidance would be tailored to that specific search. It would not be generic guidance based on hypothetical words or phrases. Users would have very specific instructions tailored to the exact phrases. The platform would not simply offer generic or general suggestions, but specifically tailor the platform directions and guidance to the actual commands, words, phrases, and possible future terms the user is actually using.

Feature: Click-on-simulated-output to adjust URI

Think synchronization between simulated output, user controls, and final command. This tool would focus more on identifying the range of possible outputs Rather than require users to type in text, or make manual tweaks; the tool would go the next step.

Users would simply see a list of possible outputs, and simply click on those outputs that they liked, and the code and text would be automatically updated to capture.

Feature: Adjust external or new URI

Ideally, this tool could be applied to existing URIs. Users would be able to take a list from an OPML file, run a simulated search against all these prospective search tools, and then be able to adjust each or all of the subscription URIs using this tool.

No longer would users have to re-enter a search requests from square one, or try to guess what terms were in their original request. The tool would clearly show what the title of the search request was; give it a suitable name that reported to the aggregator; and then show in the simulation box the range of text, syntax, and simulated output that is associated with each URI from and OPML list.

Feature: Custom output report

This feature would take embedded commands from the URI, link them both with the aggregator display, and then upload these command to the printer. No longer would users have to have a standard-display for all prospective searches.

Rather, each search-report could be tailored to a specific management objective, presentation style, or audience.

Ideally, the prospective search tool could:

[a] integrate different color-commands into different aspects of the search results to highlight them in new ways;

[b] create tables and integrate with future [not yet developed] templates that regulatory agencies may require; and

[c] display the results in a custom format that meets the statutory requirements.

Demonstration

Now that you’ve gotten this far, click on the Yahoo related search and find out who else is talking about this topic, and what terms they are suing.

Wouldn’t you like to know about those search results in a prospective search, long ago, when you originally created your URI?

-- This is the end of the content --

XML Concepts: Wifi umbrellas

2005-04-28T15:51:00.000-05:00

During the Papal conclave, the Vatican set up a security umbrella. The idea was to keep eavesdroppers out. Cell phone signals were jammed in a defined space.

It’s like a wifi, but rather than sharing information, it does the opposite: It blocks information.

Put that aside for the moment.

Think about the last conference you went to:

How long did it take to get a transcript of the proceedings?

How difficult was it to get lecture presentation material from a meeting or training program you just happened to wander into?

Would you like to have what that person is pointing to on the screen on your own laptop, and get a copy real time?

I’ve noticed during presentations, that sometimes publishers rely on readers reviewing advance copies. Still requiring the audience to download paper copies of ppt slides.

Seems like they could create a wifi umbrella. All those computers in one area could easily get all the ppt slides sent to them.

All you’d have to do is show up with your laptop, adjust the range of your wifi-umbrella, and all the people around your conference table would have access to each other’s information.

No outside wifi for quick conferences between people in a confined space.

What I’d like to see is a way to electronically transmit slides without disk; have real time access to information; not require a visit to the copy machine.

I want to see a rapid dissemination of lecture notes. If a new speaker shows up with powerpoint slides, I don’t want them to have to worry about integration, link-up, or connectivity issues.

I want all participants in the audience or at the conference in that defined space to have access to the contents of that presentation without later transcription.

I want the real-time-translation-tools to also link with this wifi-umbrella so that the members of the audience can also have a copy of the real-time translation scrolling across their own screen, not just on the main screen.

I would like to see a simple platform that integrates the many pieces of this wifi umbrella, with pre-set options. All the audience would have to do is simply say, “Accept wifi umbrella” and they are connected to all the other members of the umbrella.

The Vatican can create umbrellas to keep out eaves droppers. Why not do the opposite: Create a fast way for a local-area wifi to get up and running, and quickly transfer presentation material to anyone falling within that umbrella.

A wifi for your conference. And a separate, secure wifi for your team’s conference table.

What better system to manage this umbrella: Winksite.

XML Concepts: 4-D Aggregator clippings storage

2005-04-28T15:44:00.000-05:00

Aggregator clippings folders are nice for storing interesting content. I like the clippings feeds. I wish they could be tailored to each sub-folder. Last time I checked, although the clippings-URI file code was different for each folder, I was still getting all the content from all the clippings.

I’ve been thinking about clippings folders. And I’ve thought back to the days before there was paper or papyrus. That’s right clay tablets.

Long ago, the problem with the clay tablets was that they would break. So people made safe places to store them. Carefully stacked.

I think the current file-management system could break out of this. Especially in the world where we no longer are confined to 3-dimensions.

Files in a menu, as they are currently designed in an aggregator, are simply a stack of folders. One on top of another.

But we don’t have to do it that way.

Rather, when a reader-user is looking at information and saving it, they don’t necessarily save the information or think of it in terms of a stack of information, or one dimension.

Rather, they may have a 2-dimensional view of the information: As in putting that file into a list or existing template.

Rather than have to individually create each folder in that template, it would be nice if we could simply upload a template, and then be able to assign information to that array, index, or piece of paper.

For example, if we have existing procedures and checklists, we don’t get all the information in the order of the checklist. Rather, we get the information as it shows up, and then we assign it to a particular item oh that checklist.

What if the aggregators allowed reader-users to upload these 2-dimensional checklists; and then as information comes in it was either manually saved as a clipped file and assigned to this 2-dmenstional list; or automatically assigned.

That way, we would have the existing standards on one side of the screen; and then to the right we’d have the available information and clipped files.

Ideally, what would be nice is that there be a visual display between the “full, 100%” for each category, and we’d be able to see which areas need more attention or focus.

Again, moving away from clay tablets and words, it would be nice if we could simply look at a graphical representation of a checklist, and quickly see the available clipped files, and then with some sort of colored line see those checklist-items that were low, needing attention, or fully completed.

Going further, from the 2-D approach [of a simple two-column array], a 3-d approach would be a schedule.

Again, the clipped files do not necessarily have to be assigned to a particular item in column 2; rather, the more appropriate place might be to assign it to a later task, say in column 15.

This is kind of like a spread sheet. But it is more fluid.

Think of Powerpoint. We can simply type text where we want it. But what if there was a way to quickly upload these schedule-like-3-templates to a clippings file; and then have the system structured so that saved files could be quickly assigned to a visual representation of a schedule.

We’d quickly see how our tasks were stacking up against the available information.

The gaps might trigger some automated search commands or bots that would find this information based on custom feed URIs, and then we could have the information show up, and assign it where it fit in the schedule.

My overall point is that we need to think of saved-clipped content as more than something than an individual item that gets saved to a stack of folders.

Rather, we could look at it as a piece of a puzzle that could fit into a checklist or something time-phased like a schedule.

What I would like to see is a more fluid approach to content in the aggregators. I would like to move away from the strict foldering-approach, and have a more power-point word-processing approach.

Meaning: I’d like to be able to place the saved content-file to an unspecified space on the workspace, and then with time, be able to circle and group these files into new patters.

I’d also like this system to synchronize with the blog-spots. This is to say that unlike current blogging software which is also a stack-like system, I’d like to see something that is also time phased.

This means that as the 3-D schedule was getting assigned incoming-content-from-the-saved-aggregator-content, we could see where the incoming clipped files compare with our future planned blog spots.

Summary

I’m looking for a faster way to upload pre-defined templates, multi-column arrays, and schedule templates to the aggregator.

I’d like to have a way to assign saved-clipped-files in something more fluid than a stack of file-folders. I’d like to be able to assign content to specific checklists [2-D; multi-columns]; or a time phased schedule [3-D; multiple tasks up and down, with incremental time units to the right].

I’d like to be able to individually group the clipped files into new groups which I can assign to a separate feed. That way, Team 1 could get just the clipped files associated with their tasks; and the upper management could have all the task information if that’s what they want.

Also, as Teams 1 – 7 are approaching a major milestone, I’d like to be able to zoom into a specific milestone success criteria list, and then quickly see how my clipped-saved-content matches with the success criteria along that list, not just simply a 2-colum comparison using a checklist, but something that indicates the percent complete and level of effort required to close out that particular task and meet that milestone success criteria.

In short, what I’m looking for is an aggregator clipping approach that better synchronizes with existing templates-checklists that I might upload, and better integrates with an existing schedule and program schedule.

I’d like a way to quickly upload predefined templates, checklists, and schedules.

I want to see a macro view of the progress toward program objectives.

I want a fast way to upload a hierarchy or 3-D foldering system.

I want to be able to highlight incoming content in the folders to identify, and create new groups, associations, and then assign content in the future to this new group.

I’d like to be able to take a checklist, agenda, or some list of requirements, assign my appropriate content and clipped files to that list, then export those items as a new agenda, presentation, checklist-completion-certification, or a separate feed which shows the multiple columns.

I’d like the output file to be something that could easily be imported from Excel; and have the outputs of my multi-column displays easily exported back into Excel or another column-schedule architecture associated with program management.

I would like the option to have a pre-defined 2-D or 3-D structure already available, and a method to quickly move around these templates in a plasma-jello-like way, not something that requires typing or inserting commands like .Dos commands, but something I can simply point on, and move without any effort like WYSIWYG, and then have the final rendering, adjusted template, or new structure saved, and then others can easily export their clipped files into this new architecture within the aggregator.

I want to be able to move the saved contents to any location.

I want to be able to choose how I associate content. Sometimes, I might want to point and click to create a circle, and then I want to be able to quickly assign different content based on tags to a particular circle; sometimes I might want to simply find a new term, quickly assign that term to specific content, and then quickly get all the content to adjust to that new group.

Also, I’d like to be able to keep all the contents in a random pattern; and then have the visual display simply change links. Rather than moving the clipped content, I’d like for there to be a way t simply show different colored links, groups, or highlights for each of the groups I say.

Perhaps some content would get brighter, change color, or get showcased in a new way.

Perhaps the similar groups would physically slide across the screen into a new place; and then when I click a new group, the old group could get saved in a real-time aggregator-saving tool that recorded my steps [kind of like a wiki-record or a word-processing-undo command].

I’d like a replay option so that I can take snippets from each group, line them up in a photo stream or presentation, and create a top-level view to share how the new groups were created or what other decisions were made along the way so that others might be able to recreate the steps in creating this new architecture.

I would like to be able to quickly assign new content and feeds to the new structures and 3-D templates-schedule that I make.

I want the ability to quickly toggle back between a 3-D schedule, and a 2-D matrix for a particular task. I want the option to look at a macro view of the master schedule; then a way to look at each individual task, and see how my incoming-saved-clipped files compare with the success criteria for that given task, milestone, or decision point.

I’d like to see an actual 4-D approach to this. Whereby just as we can see a DNA helix floating in free space, and rotate it, then use that model to assign tags, I’d also like the option to rotate in 4-D space the master schedule, so that I can look at multiple programs as the same time from the reverse angle, different perspectives [either top view, going forward, or a back view].

I want the outputs to be so structured so that I can quickly export them to a blog-publishing tool that is also time phased. With time, I could see how my planned blog content compares with my clipped files, and identify new areas that I need to focus on, research, ignore, or defer others to more appropriate content.

-- This is the end of the content --