Posts Tagged ‘opinion’

The Leadership Barometer

May 10th, 2005 by smp | Comments | Filed in smp

Skip Angel has a great post describing the concept of a Leadership Barometer.

The Low Pressure description is a very accurate portrayal of management climates I have worked in. A number of managers I have seen in action, in a somewhat misguided attempt to keep us informed, tell the team about the battles they have lost, the projects they have been forced to do, and share their personal opinions of senior leadership.

I don’t need to know this. I need to know how things are getting better. The battles we are facing. And how a manager is going to motivate us to achieve great things.

I want straight talk; but sometimes, I don’t need all the details.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

More on Ballmer’s Letter

May 6th, 2005 by smp | Comments | Filed in smp

Hey PR and News Media Folks: What’s your opinion on Ballmer releasing this letter on a Friday?

Isn’t that the day when old, MSM PR firms tell you to release unfavourable news so it gets lost over the weekend?

Guess they haven’t heard about the 24/7/365 media…

Tags: , , ,

Open Minds in Academia

May 4th, 2005 by smp | Comments | Filed in RANTING

The Dean of the School of Library and Information Sciences at Indiana University, Blaise Cronin, maintains an open mind about blogging. [here]

One wonders for whom these hapless souls blog. Why do they choose to expose their unremarkable opinions, sententious drivel and unedifying private lives to the potential gaze of total strangers? What prompts this particular kind of digital exhibitionism? The present generation of bloggers seems to imagine that such crassly egotistical behavior is socially acceptable and that time-honored editorial and filtering functions have no place in cyberspace. Undoubtedly, these are the same individuals who believe that the free-for-all, communitarian approach of Wikipedia is the way forward. Librarians, of course, know better.

Books are great. I still love to handle a book or magazine. But almost everything I have learned in the last 2 years has come from the Web. I have learned more about Sales and Marketing through blogs than any MBA program. I have learned how to quickly and clearly communicate complex ideas by putting my ideas on the Web for commentary.

Libraries will always exist; attitudes like Dr. Cronin’s will not.

Via Kevin Briody

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Blogger Relations

April 26th, 2005 by smp | Comments | Filed in smp

I’m with Dave Winer on this conceptUGH!

Just remember: My thoughts and opinions can be bought for the low price of a 17″ Powerbook. ;-)
Roland thinks this will fade away…

Dan Gillmor points out that this IDI has been a paid shill for major telecoms in their fight against muniWiFi.

Hey! The Blog Herald points out that they have their own site for Blogger Relations!

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Microsoft: Scoble Posts Ballmer’s Memo

April 23rd, 2005 by smp | Comments | Filed in RANTING

Scoble posts Ballmer’s memo.

That Microsoft has a legislative agenda scares me. That this bill wasn’t on it, and, as such, was then disowned by the company makes the scenario worse.

Steve Ballmer: You control the world’s wealthiest corporation. You say you are hardcore for diversity. Then you say:

It’s appropriate to invoke the company’s name on issues of public policy that directly affect our business and our shareholders, but it’s much less clear when it’s appropriate to invoke the company’s name on broader issues that go far beyond the software industry — and on which our employees and shareholders hold widely divergent opinions. We are a public corporation with a duty first and foremost to a broad group of shareholders. On some issues, it is more appropriate for employees or shareholders to get involved as individual citizens. As CEO, I feel a real sense of responsibility around this question, and I believe there are important distinctions between my personal views on policy issues and when it’s appropriate to involve the company.

You know how many of your most talented current, former and possibly future employees will see this situation. It is a black eye for Microsoft. It shows all of us, those of us who live in the US but are not citizens, as well as the 48% of the population who do not agree with the current leadership, that your compant lacks the moral fiber to take a stand.

I am ashamed to use Microsoft products, because now they aren’t about the people who use them; they are about the company’s shareholders.

Microsoft: Your money. Our profits. Our shareholder’s dividends.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Adobe Buys Macromedia: Bullshit and Dinosaurs

April 18th, 2005 by smp | Comments | Filed in RANTING

Kottke has a great summary of the links for the Adobomedia/Macrodobe story here.


In my opinion, this quote sums up what is wrong with this merger.

The combination of Adobe and Macromedia strengthens our mission of helping people and organizations communicate better. Through the combination of our powerful development, authoring and collaboration tools – and the complementary functionality of PDF and Flash – we have the opportunity to drive an industry-defining technology platform that delivers compelling, rich content and applications across a wide range of devices and operating systems. [here]

The Adobe and Macromedia Marketing/Press Relations teams need the help of the Bullfighter software.

Flash makes web products that are great for online games…and useless for anything else. Adobe makes a PDF reader, which I can replace with any number of free readers.

I can feel gravity dragging this merger into the pit of despair.

I agree with Om Malik and Russell Beattie — I vote “-1″ on this merger.

More here and here and here and here

Richard Koman says this is a good deal…Flash on Mobile devices merged with a lighter version of Acrobat.

Sramana Mitra says that Apple should buy Adobe now. [here]

Strategize says Adobe everywhere, all the time. [here]

Roland Tanglao quotes Marc Canter, who is happy to see Macromedia disappear.

More from Roland here.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wondering about the blacked-out testimony from the Gomery Inquiry?

April 3rd, 2005 by smp | Comments | Filed in smp

Ok folks, you’re sucking my bandwidth dry. If you would like to keep a US-based Canadian online and able to cost-effectively serve up publication ban happiness, please consider donating to the cause!

PayPal Donation link in the right-hand column!

Thanks!


Primary Source Verification of Brault Testimony.


GOMERY LINK BONANZA!

Link removed from origin site due to threat of legal action in Canada.


Shameless Plug!

High volume traffic from the home country. This means that potential employers may be reading this.

I am still looking for a position in Canada.

HINT! HINT!


Thanks to the The Captain’s Quarters blog, some of the secret testimony from the Gomery Inquiry is being published on this side of the border.

The Liberals are a bunch of corrupt gangsters.

The Conservatives are spineless rascists and theocratic demagogues.

The NDP…is nice but effectively useless.

Needless to say, my opinion of any and all Canadian Federal parties is extremely low. None of them deserve to run the country…well, the Natural Law Party had my vote for a while

Maybe it’s time for a REAL change!

Thanks to Bruce at The Autonomous Source.

Instapundit has more links for the curious. [here]

Jeff Nolan comments on using a gag order to prevent us from hearing about possibly criminal activities within the government. [here]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Weird threads on the VC Blogs

March 23rd, 2005 by smp | Comments | Filed in RANTING

Lots of inward-looking thoughts from some of the VC blogs that I read.

Jeff Nolan flames alarm:clock for claiming that VCs are greedy, soulless vampires [my paraphrasing].

A VC and Brad Feld comment on Paul Graham’s Essay, “A Unified Theory of VC Suckage”.

I wonder why so much attention is now being focused on the VC community? I kinda like them, as they have provided me with two very solid companies to work for over the last 6 years.

My opinion, not backed up by any facts or knowledge, is that there is a new bubble occurring, and people are already looking for someone to lay the blame on when it bursts.

The VC community, on the other hand, has learned a lot over the intervening years. To claim that they are going to let the madness that occurred 1995-2000 to occur again is highly unlikely. The bubble is occurring because there are smart companies driving smart ideas to people who are now ready to use them.

Now, whether the VCs will drive this bubble like they drove the last one remains to be seen. I think that the caution and conservatism (if that word can be applied to the VC community) that arose from the flame-out in 2000-2001 will see more firms driving their own success through the methods seen in Paul Graham’s other essay, “How to Start a Startup”.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In the interests of fairness…

March 4th, 2005 by smp | Comments | Filed in RANTING

A response to the FEC chairman’s C|Net interview, which I commented on yesterday.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Press Contact: Mark Glaze
202-271-0982

Statement of the Campaign Legal Center

Setting the Record Straight: There is No FEC Threat to the Internet

Washington, D.C. — In a recent interview with CNET, Federal Election Commissioner Brad Smith claimed that as a result of new campaign laws and and a recent court decision, online news organizations and bloggers may soon wake up to find their activities regulated by government bureaucrats. That would indeed be troubling, if it were true. Fortunately, Mr. Smith – an avowed opponent of most campaign finance regulation – is simply wrong.

The issue the FEC – and the courts – are grappling with is how to deal with online political ads by candidates and parties, and with paid advertising that is coordinated with those groups. As the Internet becomes a vital new force in politics, we are simply going through a natural transition as we work out how, and when, to apply longstanding campaign finance principles – designed to fight corruption – to political expenditures on the Web. Mr. Smith has advocated an extreme position that politicians, parties and outside groups can pay for Internet advertising with “soft money” - unlimited, unregulated checks from corporations, labor unions and wealthy individuals. A federal court rightly rejected that position, saying that the new ban on soft money in our elections obviously applies to Internet advertising, too.

These laws are decidedly NOT aimed at online press, commentary or blogs, and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 was carefully drafted to exclude them. The FEC has now been asked to initiate a rulemaking to work out how to deal with different kinds of Internet political expenditures, and there will be plenty of opportunity for public commentary. The Commission’s duty then will be to distinguish candidate and party expenditures, and coordinated independent expenditures, on the Internet (which should be subject to campaign finance law like any other expenditures) from activity by bloggers, Internet news services and citizens acting on their own that should remain unregulated, free and robust.

Mr. Smith’s comments are obviously designed to instigate a cyberspace furor to pressure Congress to reverse the court decision requiring that paid political ads on the Internet should be treated like any other paid advertisements. Mr. Smith has a right to try to win converts to his anti-regulatory philosophy, but he has an obligation to present the issues fairly and forthrightly, and his comments to CNET fail both tests.

For more information on why the sky is not falling, see a chapter on the history of the FEC regulation and deregulation of the Internet by Trevor Potter, former FEC Chairman and president of the Campaign Legal Center, in the Brookings Institution’s New Campaign Finance Sourcebook at http://www.brookings.edu/dybdocroot/gs/cf/sourcebk01/InternetChap9.pdf

For the relevant court decision, please check out the Campaign Legal Center’s website at http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/attachment.html/Opinion.pdf?id=1257

For information on the future FEC rulemaking, see the agency’s website at www.fec.gov.

# # #

1736 19th St NW
Washington DC 20009

T 202.232.6222
C 202.271.0982
F 202.232.3040

I post this verbatim. For more info, contact Mark Glaze

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

John Robb sees Auto-Link as a serious fiasco

February 22nd, 2005 by smp | Comments | Filed in smp

John Robb, one of the founders of the fine company that I work for, agrees with my opinion that Auto-Link is the final crack in Google’s “Do no evil” facade. [here]

It is also an issue that could see MSFT come out and stomp Google into a googol of tiny pieces.

Tags: , , , , , , ,