Doc also mentions in his COMDEX report Johnathan Peterson's annotated archival criticism of Peter Chernin's keynote. [The Doc Searls Weblog]
Johnathan asked me to participate in the original criticism and here's how I replied 23 hours later:
From: Marc Canter Mon 11/25/02 2:37 PM
To: Johnathan Peterson
Whew! Coming up for fresh air!
You seem to have generated some flow from your post. Sorry I didn't give you any input - but maybe we can solve that dilemma thusly...... This is exactly the sort of 'multimedia conversation' I'd imagine our new tool could 'host'.
The usage scenario sequence would have gone something like this:
- a) somebody transcribed the speech, you found it - whatever - somehow some 'conversation germ' was generated. This typically would have come from an email interchange. This might also have been a captured IM or chat session or something right off of traditional discussion boards, Usenet or on-line community boards (Slashdot, Metafilter.)
- b) You (or some editor) would have added your 2 cents. This annotation could itself be an IM or chat session - or just plain text and/or web links, but the 'comments/leave behinds' can also be media, scripts or what we call 'licks'. Each node of a conversation would be associated with a particular 'place' or germ of the conversation (which is itself really just a transcript/archive.) These nodes are convenient/natural places for threads to start - as usenet, discussion boards and 'commenting systems' have done for years.
- c) And when I say node - I'm refering to the fact that the tool that creates and maintains these conversations acts ALLOT like an outliner (homage to Mr. Winer.) What a more natural way to create and archive a discussion, than with an outliner?
- d) But now the discussions can use media. Someone could post a picture, somebody else could respond with some music or a clip from their favorite movie. Each piece of media is associated with a particular node of the conversation. Notice how effective it is when Dave Winer adds a 'song for the day' to his text? It completely changes the nature of a day's posting. Now imagine how cool it would be - if you were actually hearing the music he wants associated with those words?
- e) The folks who create the source conversation in the first place are called 'conversationalists', while the first people who take the raw conversation and annotate it are called 'originators'. Each succesive commentor, attachment placer or media annotator is called a 'contributor'.
- f) Conversations can now come to life. The images, sound, video and animations that get attached to nodes (or places) in the multimedia conversation - can easily be turned into interactive slide shows, family albums or any sort of 'micro-content'. Certainly blog posts.
- g) Encapsulated interactive sequences (licks) can also be attached to any node as well. These licks can be as simple as polls - enabling readers to vote on particular issues or 'take sides' - which would then all become part of the conversation. Or the licks can be more sophisticated types of interactivity - such as a game, interactive cartoons, dynamic code or web service or even a separate 'on-line community' itself - complete with it's own rules, members and storage facility. Check out Mikels' Nuggets idea [above.]
- h) the idea is backed up with the fact that (let's take your Chernin speech 'conversation' as an example) - you spent a bunch of time posting comments to that speech and others are now joining in the criticism. But all those comments are either in a separate commenting system or at completely different web sites! Wouldn't it be cool to host them - at BOTH? Or at some place that we all could rely upon and utilize together? A public 'conversation repository'?
- i) I myself didn't have enough time to read, comment and post on the Chernin post until now - 24 hours later. But I WANT TO NOW! In fact we should be able to embed NEW conversations inside of an existing conversation node. Could you imagine the possibilities?
- j) We have to time stagger this interactivity to stir the fires and keep the flames burning longer. Archiving and enabling non-real-time commenting is crucial. Especially when I can make those comments with media! And real-time code (licks)!
:-)
