Week 10 – Jane, Daka, and Alex posts

This course has set me out on a new spree of exploiting these networks and, I must say, I do admire these tools and the potential benefits of them.  They provide a great vehicle of communication as well as on sharing and fostering knowledge.

Hay Daka, I too still depend on e-mails a great deal when it comes to communication that matters.  I am a little skeptical on relying solely on these tools (Facebook, etc.) for stuff that I really want to get across to people; simply because, I am pretty sure that people check their emails on a regular basis, but when it comes to these community mediums – I have my doubts.

Though I have been on Facebook for sometime, not by choice but by requirement for another course, and have received a couple of wonky proposals – probably due to misinterpreting my profile, I have yet to experience the “soliciting” experience that you have mentioned. However, I too am not that crazy about expanding my online-acquaintances-network to people that I have nothing in common with.  Similar to Alex’s post, I have w….a…..y too many people on my Facebook account, and I have no idea who they are.  I certainly don’t want to how someone’s day was, when I have no idea who on earth that person is. 

Commenting on Jane’s and Alex’s posts, I totally agree with you guys on Willams’ article. People can and will abuse anything and everything. I just don’t get these educators that still keep hanging on to the boring traditional teaching methods.  I am not implying, in anyway, that technology should be the determinant of our future, but every good thing should be held up.  And, the Internet & Web are great spaces when utilized for the right purposes.   It is ironic that educators call themselves educators if they are suggesting putting a stop to advancement and blocking emergence of new knowledge is the way to go – weird isn’t it.   

With respect to “Identity Production in a Networked Culture”: are people really honest about everything they say on a public space?  There are two main aspects to this argument– deliberate and unintentional.  I think, the profiles might be distorted as users would deliberately leave out the bad-stuff – that is what I would do, but I do not understand the reason for publishing falsified information. 

I also read another blog that discussed the same phenomenon which led me to another study that looked at a different aspect of identities distortion on electronic spaces, which was unintentional on the users’ part.  I too, like Alex, never really gave much thought to this aspect of network culture.  However, I was dubious about what people say on Web.  

I am pretty sure there are many other facets to Web and identities than meets the eye.  Then again, when you really consider the whole issue of identities, isn’t the fact hidden and camouflage identities are significant reasons for people to be more drawn to Web-based communities, where they can express interests more openly, without inhibitions under their concealed identities.

And, as an end note, Yes Alex, socializing IS far more fun than school work.  I miss those days…..

 

Hi Amanda, I was just wondering, why the date is appearing as 14^th, when it is still 13^th.  I am not sure whether this has been happening throughout, I only noticed it today.

Week 8- Comments – Qingyi, Mike, Leah, and others

As mentioned by others – great post Qingyi.  Very clear, especially the table.

When I read through the comments and thoughts of the group, I realized that we all seem to share somewhat similar feelings about the topic and on the readings, though there were variations.

We all seem to agree on the advantages and the future of folksonomy and how much the contemporary e-reader relies on these tools.  We also seem to share the same thoughts on the limitations of the traditional categorizing tools and how these folksonomy mitigate these barriers through their flexible and democratic nature that was brought in by the user communities.  Some of the other predominant thoughts of the group were

• For Folksonomies no expertise are required
• The revolutionary of  Folksonomies
• Gaining insights to others thoughts and behaviors
• Leverage the “long tail – As mentioned by Mike and his argument on not everybody is on the web and into tagging.  However, though everybody is not an e-reader, similarly many of these non e-readers are interested in tagging or categorizing either.

 It is also interesting how the wisdom of crowds seem to have captured most of us, including Leah!

Week 8- Comments – Iris

As you’ve mentioned it is interesting considering the way Carol Ou discusses how folksonomy could be useful in categorizing e-journals. Categorizing e-journal otherwise could be a tedious job because their dynamic and fluid nature.

Daka’s post

Great thoughts!

I guess it is very difficult to hold a constant perception of these tools: folksonomies, tagging, etc.  I too seem to go back and forth; at times, I think the flexibility and the inherent characteristics of these tools are wonderful in terms of the booming web-information sources. However, I get really frustrated when I get lost amidst the pool of cluttered material, especially, when they are my own taggings.  As everything else, we have to start at some point and evolve……. probably these sources and tools will conform to best practices that are being proposed by the industry professionals, and provide us with more meticulous categorizations. 

Iris’ post

Very thorough. 

I agree with your comment on how everybody seems to have consensus on the problems of tagging and similar tools.  I wonder, why nobody has suggested a viable solution for these issues.  The piece by Carol Ou covers many understudied aspects of these tools and proposes possible actions. And, I was thinking, at least with respect to e-journals and similar sources, why not adopt a multiple faceted approach; for example, in my opinion, the information centers could make the best use of traditional taxonomies, and the general reader would benefit the most through informal tools such as folksonomies and tagging. 

Comments – Leah’s blog

I like Hammond’s article as well. I think he explains technical issues in a simple manner.  I particularly like the quote on his piece on tagging mentioned below.  It exemplifies the two edged nature involved with tagging and all other technological tools.

“Ontology is a good way to organize objects, [...], but it is a terrible way to organize ideas, and in the period between the invention of the printing press and the invention of the symlink, we were forced to optimize for the storage and retrieval of objects, not ideas.“