Scripting News for 7/4/2006

Chris Lydon’s July 4 special on Emerson. 

Erik Lundegaard: “It wasn’t until Superman came to television in the 1950s that the phrase became codified in the form most of us remember it: ‘a never-ending battle for truth, justice and the American way.'” 

It was great to see Paolo and Monica here in the US.  

I understand that the makers of the new Superman movie have changed his slogan to Truth, Justice, and all that stuff. Pretty lame, don’t you think. Sounds like a song from the movie Chicago. Couldn’t they have at least made the new ending rhyme with The American Way? Or made a new slogan for every culture, which leads me to the Jewish version which surely would have been, Truth, Justice and Oy Vey! Heh. Sorry. Anyway, with that in mind, happy birthday USA, you’re still the country of mine, even if Superman is too politically lame to stay on board.  

I wonder if it’s be possible for me to disagree with Randy Morin without getting flamed. I never said XML-RPC is better than SOAP or REST, or more perfect or pure, or better documented. I don’t care if the others have better websites, or more advocates posting on mail lists. The reason I advise would-be platform developers to support XML-RPC is because at least for some developers (including me) it’s so much faster to implement, so we spend less time creating glue and get to building applications sooner. I’ve learned that the sooner developers get to the fun part, the more likely they are to deploy. And if that’s the goal, why not support it? BTW, I never said they shouldn’t support SOAP or REST, in fact I often provide multiple interfaces to my would-be platforms, because I’ve learned that if you want uptake for new ideas, you shouldn’t argue over small things like this, you should say yes whenever you can.  

Richard MacManus says BloggerCon IV tended to favor the most vocal people. I agree, and this is not the way it’s supposed to be. I don’t think the DLs took the guidelines seriously in this area, and unless they do, the unconference format suffers. They’re supposed to seek out people, to interrupt repeating and droning. The guidelines don’t say the DLs “may” interrupt, they say “must.”  

At dinner last night a friend said the Wikipedia page about me is pretty horrible. As I’ve said before, I never read it, but I suspected as much. Every page I read that I know something about is controlled by a negative point of view that tends to promote certain things and be prejduiced against others. It’s relatively consistent. And these are the technical subjects that Wikipedia is supposed to be accurate about. However, I think it will eventually take care of itself, as it expands to cover subjects and people more people know about, they’ll see it for what it is, a place where the most persistent people with the most time to waste control what is said.  

5 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Tom on July 4, 2006 at 3:59 am

    Well, that’s pretty baffling, because I can’t see anything unpleasant about you on your Wikipedia page at all; the absolute worst thing is a generally positive quote from Tim O’Reilly in which he also says “I observe that there are many people and organizations who seem unable to maintain a good working relationship with Dave”, which seems reasonably accurate and objective, and even that is presented as a single (potentially) negative observation within a largely complimentary section. Oh, and it says you’re a “polarizing figure”, but that’s undeniably true too, wouldn’t you say?

    Maybe you *should* actually read the page, so that you can get all the facts and see for yourself that there’s nothing “horrible” there at all. (Or, rather, there isn’t at the time I’m writing this comment; perhaps that’s part of your problem with it.)


  2. Posted by Tom on July 4, 2006 at 4:02 am

    Sorry: Bray, not O’Reilly. The O’Reilly quote isn’t that positive, but it’s presented in its proper context (explaining that you and Tim have a rocky relationship) and more than balanced out by glowing quotes from Douglas Adams, Doc Searls et al.

    In fact this seems to be a textbook example of fair and objective coverage of a controversial topic, so if anything it exemplifies what’s good about Wikipedia rather than being some sort of embarrassment.


  3. I listened to all the audio and I don’t think it was that big of a problem, at least from a listener’s perspective. It’s almost unavoidable in what is supposed to be a closely lead, yet open (and pointed) discussion. I don’t think the DLs performed poorly in the moderation issue at hand, nor do I think that Dave is trying to say that they didn’t all do fantastic work, because it seemed obvious as a listener that good things seemed to spark @ BC4.

    I thought a greater issue was how the DLs seemed to really force the conversation one way or another. Shutting up developers in the middle of a user needs discussion, A++ Good work. Not allowing natural questions to be asked or expounded, not so great.

    What happened during the “Building Bridges” session was a bit disappointing. Very little work seemed to be accomplished, more of a bitch session honestly. It didn’t seem productive to take time at one gathering to explain and discuss another. I’m not sure any gathering so exclusive deserves the adoration or attention of those who wouldn’t be welcome. The word “contrived” really came to mind. That can’t be good. This is just one reason why it must be so damn hard to be a discussion leader. And why it’s such a huge job of the DL not to let their own opinion or agenda get in the way of where the discussion begins or ends. A publisher pimping her book doesn’t feel any different than a producer pimping her conference.

    All in all I have nothing but good things to take away from having listened to the whole uncon. I think having Dave, Doc and Sylvia always around was a great way to keep the honest people honest, in an open discussion with humans its kind of natural for more vocal people to be heard, perhaps quiet thinkers could write in real time about their thoughts and those could be displayed or read for others in the room? At some point, introverts need to speak up. Those are the people who’s ideas I didn’t hear, who didn’t seem (to me the listener) to add much to the content. All in all, thanks to everyone who put this event on and to all to participated and facilitated its greatness, I wish I could have been there. I’m telling everyone to listen because it’s some of the best audio content I’ve heard this year. Thanks again-



  4. Re “truth, justice and the American way””



  5. It’s not just that “Superman Returns” omits “and the American way,” the controversy is fueled by the dismissive way the script calls attention to the omission. Perry says, “Does he still stand for truth, justice, all that stuff.”


Leave a Reply to jack Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: