The Reality of Donald Trump

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Conception or Inception?

Internet users are sperm in search of a suitable egg. Conception takes place when positive interactions happens. How rich it is, is not up to anyone else but the participants who score. It's pure and real social and electronic birth. Why change that? Why make money on it? Who should have the right? Is this person or entity worthy?

Do we need government agencies making decisions on how we interact on the internet and open a hell's gate on billings to users?

Here is a story on it today.

Yet, another view -

Here's one for you deep readers -

Sunday, January 30, 2011

Will Facebook Get Better or Worse?

Facebook and Me

By Norm Richards

If you send a request to a stranger, it will be considered spam and your friend request will be blocked temporarily. Please only send this request if you know this user.

The aforementioned is a phrase created by Facebook (FB). It got me thinking. I wonder if FB is doing the right thing creating the phrase for 'Users' who appear to be well known publicly? What motivates this decision to make this phrase available for use?

I began using at FB some time ago. I joined when it was new and interesting. I also wasn’t sure it would take me anywhere. It began during a period when I was writing a book and a few screenplays. I was in search of different ways to promote and expose my book and writing to the public and be on-line with friends at the same time. My school alumni were hardly interested in their own school’s web site. Why would FB be much better? I wondered. It turned out, it was. It reached more people and quicker. Vancouver Film School was not attracting many followers as far as I could see except those who were part of the school. I’ve stuck with FB through many changes. Now, I’m questioning their moves to exclude rather than include.

I think things got out of hand having an open policy while managing the friend or fan file. Well known personalities began inviting fans as friends since it could be done. Yet, FB made a distinction. You weren’t told once you reach an arbitrary count of five thousand fans you were no longer able to continue. Friends were lost! Even if the personalities wanted to continue interacting and remain networking, things changed. Some discovered a place called “Like” page so they went there. But that was not the same as being open to interact. I noticed that some came back by using an altered but familiar name to some who knew them. Or maybe it was just self invented since interacting was as important as having a presence on The Facebook web site that seemed to be growing in leaps and bounds. I think a nice mix of friends, fans and others is not so bad. Why not? What harm is there in that?

I’ve been very public and open. I’m a known writer with a track record as a producer and a performer. I play drums, I‘ve acted and enjoyed being a personable performer wherever I‘ve been. I was a hometown amateur and later, I became a professional. I’ve worked in radio, film and television. Yet, I love the craft of writing over other professional endeavours. I found social networking serves my needs well. I’ve grown to expect social networking to keep me in-touch with a public and make possible for anyone world over to respond. That’s fair and open interaction with no limits and impediments. Writing for the media has never been interactive like social networking. When performers are brought together to raise money for good causes they are asked to leave ego behind and participate. I think the same decorum should be assumed when being social on a site exposing you to five hundred million people around the world in real time. I think FB could sort spam from friends in better ways, don't you think?