ZNet Articles
ZMag Articles
ZCommentaries
ZAudios
ZVideos
Blog Posts
Books
ZCom vs. Facebook
By Chris Spannos at Feb 05, 2009 |
|
[Below is an exchange between a ZCom user and myself about our facilities as compared to other social networking sites like facebook. His email was prompted by our mass email urging more users to participate.]
ZCom User: Hi Folks,
CS: Hi...
ZCom User: I really appreciate all the effort, and I am a prime candidate for someone that would like to be more involved. However the website, profile and community features feel very hard to use and I'm fairly proficient at computers.
CS: Okay let's try to address some of this...
ZCom User: When I click on "Edit my Z-Space" I get a page entitled Z Content, with an enormous list of Instructions and a huge number of links that don't make any sense at first glance.
CS: We are in the process of simplifying, but it is going to take some time. That said, there are sustainers who are very active, and it is not too difficult to use. It just takes a few minutes to get used to things, like anything else, and a few attempts to get things right. Soon after it will become familiar and we are currently trying to simplify it even more. We have also provided short video tutorials for using every aspect of the site which you can find here: http://www.zcommunications.org/zvideo/videoTutorials/
ZCom User: By contrast when I click on My Profile in FaceBook (since you mentioned it in comparison) I get a page with no instructions and a clean, very easy to edit interface that makes perfect sense without any instructions.
CS: And facebook has no doubt pumped millions of dollars into developing facilities that we are trying on a shoe-string budget, and a very small dev team.
ZCom User: FaceBook works because it is founded on finding people you already know then building out from there. Are there people I know on Zmag? I don't know, because there isn't a way to find out.
CS: Sure there is, search for other sustainers and members using the facilities designed for that purpose under the ZSpace tab: http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace
It is easy on facebook because there are millions of people already using it. But our objectives are different. Sure it is a bonus that people connect with people they already know. But we are trying to connect, not only people who know each other, but people who do not know each other, and here is the important part---in a non-corporate environment around shared political interests in changing the world. We are trying to build an online Left community and infrastructure that is not only consequential for personal relationships but movement building as well. This should be the appeal despite the need to iron out a few wrinkles in what may be an occasionally clunky user experience. The site has grown leaps and bounds over the past year, and we are constantly working to make improvements and are taking major steps in this direction over the coming year as well.
ZCom User: Do I want to approach strangers..not really.
CS: It is a personal choice if you want to meet new people or not. But beyond personal choices, I think this is a big problem on the Left more generally i.e. their ability and desire to want to socialize. The Left, until perhaps recently, and hopefully this is changing, is very inward looking and seems to have a phobia against meeting new people and changing attitudes and social orientation. This could be changing in large part to online networking making it easier for people, facilitating the process without much pressure. And this is very positive, however, where is the positive political consequence? It is the social and political mixing and mingling and relationship building, between individuals and groups, that is not manipulated by corporate interests, that we are trying to facilitate and I believe there is much value in that, and I think that others should see the value too.
ZCom User: Is there anyone interested in what I'm interested in; I don't know, how would I find out?
CS: Again, use the facilities designed for that purpose mentioned above. Admittedly, there is not millions of users like in facebook or myspace, so the pool is limited, but there are thousands already and getting them active in the facilities would enrich the experience many times over and provide an inviting context for many thousands more. That is what we have asked people to do. Get active. We need people to believe there is social and political value in this over the corporate alternative which thrives on capitalist objectives of profit making and selling its users to advertisers and selling its advertisers products to its users. In the corporate social networking environment we are all for sale.
ZCom User: The ZMag website feels like a gigantic beauracracy, meanwhile FaceBook which is probably much larger and IS a gigantic corporation, feels like a small intimate space where I can safely relate to my friends and build new friendships off of relationships with people in my friends group.
CS: This is revealing of our challenge I think. You are fully aware that facebook is a "gigantic corporation" designed to provide the feeling of an "intimate space" where you can "safely" relate to others. Well you are right, it is a "gigantic corporation" and although it does feel "intimate" and "safe" your interests and preferences are being used for corporate interests. And yet I don't need to tell you or others this. You already know it! So why do you and others go along? Well, it does provide a social benefit which should not be ignored, I don't think, which is a good thing, and is what is probably most appealing for people. We are not asking others to stop using facebook or other social networking sites because we understand this benefit.
However, given that we are trying to provide a Left alternative, why do people including Leftists (!) who this is even more true for, despite being fully aware of the corporate interests underlying facebook, myspace, etc., continue to use them and not an alternative? The reasons are probably two-fold and perhaps there are more as well. First, the predominant social networking sites are behemoths, meaning they, on top of their huge budgets which supply all the glitter and gold appeal, there are millions of people using them. They are the predominant offering and they are easy to use, and provide some use value. Okay, but then there is the second reason, that is probably less acknowledged and consciously thought about, but is probably in peoples minds none-the-less and is self-fulfilling---that is, people probably feel like it is futile to participate in an alternative with not as much glamour, not as many people, not as many facilities, and not as ironed out or as slick as the corporate offerings. They may think that they agree with our efforts and that is good enough, or maybe they'll even take the extra step to donate a few bucks as a sustainer, and think that is all that needs to be done before logging in to check facebook status updates and their friend activity. This orientation is easy to slip into and many people do including those on the Left. But just because it is easy or convenient does not mean that it works in their own interests and in the interests of Left communities they are a part of and care about, or the Left projects they support. Overall, the corporate interests are exactly opposed to their interests and in knowing this, especially Leftists, they should not give up the benefits of facebook, etc., but be more consciously active in the Left alternatives like ZCom, not by simply donating money, as much as that is needed, but by filling out their profiles, posting blogs, commenting on articles, uploading other content, connecting with other sustainers and writers, etc. Heck, an easy compromise, if they must, would be for them to upload content to ZCom and then post the link on their social networking site.
All this is easy to do if you spend just a few minutes trying. Not only are there links, video tutorials, and instructions to walk users through every aspect, but there is also what we have called "Quick Edit" which allows users simple access of the kind you mention you like on facebook. Is it perfect? No. Is it as good as it could be? We are trying and are taking concrete steps to make it better. Is it of any value socially or politically? Oddly, this is the part that is probably least contested, as I and most other Z Contributors obviously believe in. What are all these reasons then that people have for not participating despite knowing the benefits of the system we offer while at the same time being conscious of the costs of the corporate model? I think it is mostly an excuse to not take a few minutes to watch a video tutorial, or to experiment with something, or to ask for help, or to put up with a few kinks that may exist. Because the system is certainly easy enough to navigate and use if one uses it at least for a few minutes a day, or even per week, and that is certainly asking for less time than most people spend on facebook!
ZCom User: These problems shouldn't stop folks interested in the larger, more important issues from participating in this community, but the website doesn't make it easy for me at this point, which might mean it is also hard for others to use as well.
CS: Again, we know some aspects are clunky and need development. We are trying, believe me, very hard to make improvements. But we think the site is at a level of development that does not make it too difficult for users if they WANT to use it. Especially if they believe in the larger more important issues, as we both do. So I encourage you and others, not to give up your facebook interactions, but to try something simple to start with ZCom, like watching the video tutorial on how to post a blog, and then try! After, try it regularly... Once you get used to that all else will come much easier. The blog video is here and there are many others under the ZNet tab: http://www.zcommunications.org/zvideo/videoTutorials/14
ZCom User: Thanks for listening,
CS: Thank you...
Re: ZCom vs. Facebook
By Petersen, Leif at Mar 01, 2009 13:43 PM
I agree that the zspace is not a very good user interface, but it works.
When I think of what primitive tools earlier revolutionaries had, and the obstacles they were facing, I can live with zspace.
The main thing is that the right functionality is present, because people here are plenty ressourceful to use it.
Reply this comment
Go team!
By Lucker, Andy at Feb 23, 2009 12:50 PM
I just wanted to thank you for the QuickEdit feature. I didn't think editing was that difficult, but since the QuickEdit feature has come along, it seems SO EASY to edit my page. Thanks a ton!
Also, i think it was Carl Gunther; but someone on this thread said something about a clear listing of political organizations involved with the site. This could be very useful, but would, of course, require other groups getting involved. However, i think groups are reluctant to get involved if they have to donate money to another Left group (Z). I can't think of a good remedy for this though. Can you?
Reply this comment
Re: ZCom vs. Facebook
By Kreider, Aaron at Feb 22, 2009 23:56 PM
I think radicals can imitate the usability/design of websites like Facebook and remain true to our values.
In fact, I think imitating is essential to my value system since the goal is to reach the most people, including many people who aren't web developers or hard-core internet users and who will understand our website that best if it follows common practices.
We can also beat their design because we can do websites without the ads.
In the past, I spent a considerable amount of time re-doing the "Join" pamphlet for the Student Environmental Action Coalition. I replaced scrawly unreadible fonts, used bullet points, boxes, and replaced the organizational logo with a high quality one. This is exactly what a corporation would do - but it's also common sense. ZMagazine is a well designed publication, and the website should meet that level of quality.
...
I also think we should be thinking about subverting Facebook, by creating an activism application that pulls some of the 150 million Facebook users.
Reply this comment
Re: ZCom vs. Facebook
By Schindler, Jonathan at Feb 16, 2009 14:15 PM
I also should be finished with a rough draft proposal for a new menu scheme tonight. So, we could also discuss that as well.
Jon
Reply this comment
hi, interesting..
By Archibald, Mike at Feb 18, 2009 14:09 PM
Reply this comment
Re: hi, interesting..
By Schindler, Jonathan at Feb 19, 2009 09:54 AM
Reply this comment
Re: ZCom vs. Facebook
By Schindler, Jonathan at Feb 16, 2009 14:14 PM
Hey Chris,
I'm going to be in the chat room from 8-9pm CST tonight (2/16) It's mainly to bring members of ZCC together so we can discuss our concerns and figure out what exactly ZCC is supposed to be, but if you were available to chat, that might be a good time for you and Michael to join in. I'm not even totally sure that ZCC makes sense yet, so if you have negative reactions to it, those are welcome as well.
Jon
PS. I'm sorry for the negative tone of some of my comments to Michael. I will try to keep things light and positive tonight.
Reply this comment
Re: ZCom vs. Facebook
By Ji, Swaraj at Feb 09, 2009 02:14 AM
What makes a Web site a "community?"
An aggregate of persons who can interact with one another is not necessarily a community, since people do that at sports events, rock concerts and shopping malls. And, of course, Myspace.
For a Web site to become a community requires that its members cooperate meaningfully to create something larger than themselves, in a way that respects and fosters the unique ability that each individual has to contribute to that process.
Therefore, I would say task-orientation and task-centeredness would be key to making ZSpace a thriving community, and that tools for collaboration, both on and off site, would be the key facility needed to support that process. We can have 10,000 monkeys banging away on keyboards writing their individual takes on this suffering world until God (Karl Marx) pulls the plug on the Internet, and never get much closer to community, if none of them are working together on some larger project that breaks them out of their solitude and creates results outside of the virtual box.
ZSpace does presently support pages for networks, a category that appears to include activist groups operating in the world of physical beings. However, there do not seem to be any tools aimed at supporting such networks. For example:
1) A search tool that would allow an individual to find activist groups in her own area (e.g., through an area search by zip code) that are involved in certain kinds of activities
2) A listing of political organizations by category
3) More detailed descriptions of a member political organization, such as a place to display a mission statement, past, current and planned projects, collaborating organizations, similar organizations.
4) Ability to broadcast a new project to ZSpace members who might find it to be of interest
5) Ability of ZSpace members to sign up for a particular organization's projects
6) Ability to start a new organization on ZSpace dedicated toward a specific mission, and announce it to ZSpace members who might like to participate
7) Tools for linking consumers into consumer cooperatives and producers into producer cooperatives, and for helping consumer cooperatives find producer cooperatives.
This would make ZSpace a powerful organizing tool. There is a need for this kind of a function, and activist groups are already using commercial sites like meetup.com for outreach (check out, for example, http://www.meetup.com/FoodandWaterWatchLA/ ). But imagine an online study group starting up in ZSpace around a specific mission statement, meeting online for a while to refine an abstract organizing theory, then founding some specific project through which that theory can be tested, and finally, using ZSpace to recruit for that project. Theory and practice would thus meet as praxis.
By contrast, social networking sites like myspace give each member some multimedia tools with which to fashion a superficial identity around which an identity group of "friends" can be accreted. Members are encouraged to identify themselves by their association with an aggregate of cultural artifacts and commodities that have been alienated from their original organic contexts. If we define ourselves in that manner (even if we are associating ourselves with political views rather than with rock or film stars), then our ability to make unique contributions to the larger economic, political and cultural processes in which we participate will remain an unexplored area of individual identity.
Reply this comment
Replying to Carl's fine ideas!
By Albert, Michael at Feb 09, 2009 08:47 AM
Hi Carl,
I like your ideas - who wouldn't?
But I am not sure what they imply, or mean, vis a vis actual site offerings... because it seems to me much of what you suggest is already present...
> 1) A search tool that would allow an individual to find activist groups in her own area (e.g., through an area search by zip code) that are involved in certain kinds of activities
We have a search facility which lets one search in pretty much any manner one wants - but of course only for information that is entered. However this last is key. You can't find what isn't entered.
If I want to search for content of a type, or about a place, of a particular kind, I can - including by author, etc. And in that case, when I do it, I am actually searching the whole database of content because for each item in there, all the data is present - title, author, categories, type, etc.
Likewise, if I want to search for folks who use the site and live near me, I can do that too - but I won't find most of them, because most of them haven't entered their addresses, etc. so the search skips them.
Thus, technically being able to search via jobs, interests, or involvements means something only if folks enter the relevant information - and that is what is happening insufficiently, at least so far. It is a bit of a chicken and egg situation, I know - but we can't sensibly keep building more and more features that aren't used... we need to see considerable use, to know in what directions to build to benefit the users
If a great many people were entering searchable information and finding they wanted some new data to enter and access, then having folks enter new additional kinds of information would be a trivial matter...
> 2) A listing of political organizations by category
This would be a good project for someone, I agree. Indeed, there may already exist such lists, I don't know. It would be nice, certainly, to have a list of dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of progressive organizations, each with a very informative description, even with options to add comments and reviews, each with its locale, contact info, etc., perhaps list of program, and categories to aid in searching...sure. I agree.
If someone will assemble the information, or find it, we will build the apparatus for display.
> 3) More detailed descriptions of a member political organization, such as a place to display a mission statement, past, current and planned projects, collaborating organizations, similar organizations.
This exists. Suppose you are in some organization. If you want the kind of visibility you mention, you can create a group page for that organization, with other members of it as part of the group. You can post anything you want, there - have contact info, have means for people to join the group, have a collective blog, etc. All of it is entirely under group control, not ours.
> 4) Ability to broadcast a new project to ZSpace members who might find it to be of interest
This exists in a number of forms, doesn't it? People can have friends - and communicate with them if they wish the outreach to be limited. People can have groups, with group pages, and communicate with them and with those who visit the pages, again limiting to people with some interest. But people can also blog to the entire system... all at once, and as many times as they choose to.
> 5) Ability of ZSpace members to sign up for a particular organization's projects
This is obviously up to an organization - but if you have an organization and a project that you want folks to consider, say, you can create a group page which displays descriptive material, etc. - and it can also invite people to sign up. I agree with you that this ought to be a major resources - when you consider that hundreds of thousands of people are using the site...
> 6) Ability to start a new organization on ZSpace dedicated toward a specific mission, and announce it to ZSpace members who might like to participate
The current means to do this is the group or network pages - since we highlight them on the top page of the whole site - and since one can blog about them - one can clearly make them known widely...I would think. But it means, by the way, you can not only easily communicate with all zspace folks, but in many instances you are communicating to the wider user base, too.
> 7) Tools for linking consumers into consumer cooperatives and producers into producer cooperatives, and for helping consumer cooperatives find producer cooperatives.
Same idea... same tools. I have no doubt one could refine them, add additional features, etc. and if people were trying to do this and other things, and said, hey, we could use some additional ability - we would try to provide it.
I have no doubt, that we can improve and expand in all kinds of directions - but to do it sensibly with insight gleaned from practice, we need to see how what we have works, to hear from folks what they need - beyond what we have already put in place, because they are trying to use it and find things they would like to see added.
> This would make ZSpace a powerful organizing tool.
Well, I agree, except for one thing. I think the means to do the type of thing you are talking about already exist - so that the site is already (though we want to make it much better, of course) a powerful tool if employed. That is the locus, from our side - whether we are confused or not - of our concern. It seems to us that people just aren't into making use of these type tools... that the issue isn't the tools, but the motivation and inclination to use them.
> There is a need for this kind of a function, and activist groups are already using commercial sites like meetup.com for outreach (check out, for example, http://www.meetup.com/FoodandWaterWatchLA/ ).
This people do do - I agree - but Z won't be optimal for outreach to NEW AUDIENCES who are not particularly left and connected. For that it does make sense to use the largest sites like facebook, myspace, or whatever else. The ones where you don't have to be left to be aboard, of course. The audience is pretty seriously left, already.
The issue is not so much outreach to apolitical sectors - as whether a very serious and in depth site of political/social substance can serve a networking role - beyond just providing good content - which would be for joint work, debate, collective writing and assessment, exploration of ideas, etc.
Yes, we would like people in the Z Community to do the broader living life type things together, too - developing trust and enjoying each other, though not foregoing reaching out to new people in other venues. But insofar as Z is going to include rich networking, it would mostly be, we think, for serious enlargement of ideas, collective projects, etc. Not so much for announcements - the kind of thing facebook does well - as literally for thinking and working together.
> But imagine an online study group starting up in ZSpace around a specific mission statement, meeting online for a while to refine an abstract organizing theory, then founding some specific project through which that theory can be tested, and finally, using ZSpace to recruit for that project. Theory and practice would thus meet as praxis.
Exactlyl - this is what we too have in mind - but, very honestly, while we think and expect, that the tools we offer for accomplishing this type activity well can get much better - they are already present more than enough to get started. And that's why we are a bit frustrated. If you were saying, I tried to do this and the obstacle was that after I viewed the videos, etc., I couldn't do it, or I tried and it failed - okay - we would try to fix whatever the problems were. But if you say, wouldn't it be great if we could do this - and you haven't tried - well, what else can we do, honestly, than say - but we think you can. Go ahead.
> By contrast, social networking sites like myspace give each member some multimedia tools with which to fashion a superficial identity around which an identity group of "friends" can be accreted. Members are encouraged to identify themselves by their association with an aggregate of cultural artifacts and commodities that have been alienated from their original organic contexts. If we define ourselves in that manner (even if we are associating ourselves with political views rather than with rock or film stars), then our ability to make unique contributions to the larger economic, political and cultural processes in which we participate will remain an unexplored area of individual identity.
I think we already have, not perfectly, not as good as it will get, but still - that we already have what you are saying is needed - I just don't think, honestly, people are trying to use it. Maybe they just don't know it is there. That said, it may be a criticism of our ability to convey the options - or it may be a fact of life. Perhaps internet networking will be about chatting lighting, finding old friends, and having superficial groups - ala other networking sites - but not about serious collective production and action...
I guess we will see. We are still committed to trying.
Reply this comment
Re: Replying to Carl's fine ideas!
By Thompson, Zach at Feb 11, 2009 15:32 PM
Reply this comment
Re: Re: Replying to Carl's fine ideas!
By Thompson, Zach at Feb 11, 2009 15:34 PM
Reply this comment
Why pit FB against Znet at all?
By Ward, Peter at Feb 07, 2009 19:26 PM
I personally find facebook a handy form for bringing worthy articles to the attention of ones peers--i.e., I beleive that it has the potential as an effective propaganda delivery system. Additonally, it provides automatic reminders of important events, such as in my case, a recent Retail Action Project Meeting. Like YouTube, the website exists as a billboard, but its but users have suficient control over content to use it for basically any purpose, if they choose.
I find Zspace benificial when I want to preach to the choir (an act seriously underrated IMO) and use facebook to attempt to raise awareness of those not presently engadged (as well as to guilt people into taking action). And, in fact, I have made serveral friends there based on my political assertions. Therefore, I believe both can operate synergistically. In fact, one suggestion I have is that articles on Znet be composed so they achieve a 'teaser' function when published as previews on facebook.
I have to technical complaints to make (probably already know):
a) Pressing enter/return (in Firefox) while typing in a text field cause a page down jump.
b) That the formatting tools be removed from blog text-entry fields as they prevent my spell checker from working (something upon which I obviously depend!). That a blogspot style entry form be used and a link to a basic HTML tutorial be provided for users who want to include fancy formatting.
Reply this comment
Re: ZCom vs. Facebook
By Thompson, Zach at Feb 07, 2009 16:33 PM
Hey Chris,
Though I largely agree with the goals you've laid out for ZSpace and your aguments against Facebook for almost anything serious, I'm not convinced that the two really compare nor that adopting a MySpace model on Z is the right vehicle to achieve those goals. One of the many reasons I ditched my MySpace account years ago, after using it very little, is that it really didn't encourage interaction or social networking at all but was merely a unidirectional billboard for presenting oneself as an agglomeration of consumerism.
Facebook is better at the networking, but not much. I typically use FB for very little other than keeping in touch with old friends, occasionally finding out about local events, and essentially advertising what I consider good books, music, and solidarity groups via my profile. Who knows, perhaps one of my old acquaintances will see "Real Utopia" go by and pick it up, or click on that Rebel Diaz link, or look into why those "Greek Anarchists" are rioting. I can scan the statuses of my friends in few seconds, respond to any messages, and ignore all the crappy mob war requests and be done with the site in a few minutes. Though I empathize with much of what ZCom User said, I certainly don't agree that FB is "a small intimate space where I can safely relate to my friends." Having anything personal or serious in their logs is clearly asking for trouble.
Now Z, on the other hand, whether it's Net, Mag, or Space, is primarily geared towards dissemination of radical content and it does this exceptionally well. However, as far as interactivity or social networking go, commenting on an in-depth article is more akin playing chess by mail than sitting across the board from someone or even playing online. Not to mention that not everyone is interested in writing articles or blogging. I mean, after email, blogging is the most common form of pollution on the net. It seems like every account I have on the web has an option for blogging. Do I really need another? Moreover, along the lines of the intimidation factor that Jon alluded to, do I really want to invest a lot of time posting content in the shadows Chomsky, Albert, Abu-Jamal, Goodman, Castro, Chavez, etc., in the off chance that someone happens to browse to my ZSpace? Am I more likely to read or post information on local events on ZSpace where the community is geographically dispersed or in my section of IndyMedia where I can be certain that people for whom the content is relevant will get it?
What it comes down to is, with the limited resources of Z, why invest the time in (re-)developing tools that have proven to be virtually useless for developing community, organization, or real learning? Don't profiles and the ability to submit articles to ZNet already provide sufficient opportunity to have your voice heard while limiting the other garbage? If the intent is to have people "get active", participate, organize, and build a better future, why in the world follow in the foot steps of MySpace, Facebook, and the coutless blogs lying inactive? These just don't seem to be core competencies of Z's mission, either that or I've greatly miscontrued it.
How do we create working groups with explicit participatory goals where people can have ongoing involvement? Or facilitate bringing people together to discuss creating participatory businesses, communities, schools, etc.?
Reply this comment
Re: ZCom vs. Facebook
By Schindler, Jonathan at Feb 06, 2009 18:05 PM
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the article. I look forward to chatting. Just let me know when a good time to meet is. I just got finished slapping myself on the forehead, because I had no idea Z had a sitewide search facility. I think I overlooked it because the Search link doesn't have a search box next to it(which is something my brain is trained to look for), and it's formatted to appear like a heading for the things below it. It appears to be an in house solution. I don't envy the person that has to work on that. Have you guys considered an off the shelf solution like the google mini? http://www.google.com/support/mini/ I have no idea how many pages Z has to index, so I could be way off, but would 300,000 pages be enough? That may be a better approach, since designing a search engine is a very difficult problem. I know google is a corporation, and Z wants to keep control, but this might be one of those cases where it makes more sense to have a business that specializes in search do it until you have time to roll your own.
One alternative to searching is to do an excellent job of organizing things so that users can easily navigate to where they want to go. This would definitely be the easiest way to setup a meetup type facility. Just have users enter their location, and then organize groups and users under their respective location. If I want to see who is in the Saint Louis, MO, USA, just allow me click US, then have a page with a list of cities, and so on. Otherwise, we're stuck with what I'm seeing right now, which is random users posting under 'networks'. The problem with that, is that I have to know exactly what someone named something. For example maybe they name Saint Louis Participatory Society something like Missouri Parecon Club, in which case, I would completely miss it. On the other hand, if I can just look and see what's available in my area, then it would be relatively hard to miss.
I suppose my reason for using facebook/myspace, is that I've been taking a wait and see approach to Zspace. I also wonder exactly what is appropriate for Zspace. It's hard for me to figure out what I should put there. Do I treat it like myspace, and put whatever I want? Or, do I focus only on left issues? And, unlike myspace, I actually give a shit about what Zspace users think of me, which makes the hesitation twice as large (please don't underestimate this). That could be part of the problem. It's one thing to make an ass out of yourself on myspace, but quite another to do it on Zmag (not that it's ever completely stopped me. :) Also, it's one thing to cheer on Noam, but quite another thing to talk about oneself, with all of our flaws and contradictions.
Finally, as others have mentioned. Zmag is a total relief. You are doing great work and I think this is an extremely important part of making the world a better place.
Jon
Reply this comment
Re: Look around on the site
By Andrews, John at Feb 07, 2009 13:51 PM
Reply this comment
Never been to myspace...
By Cat, Tolstoys at Feb 06, 2009 13:23 PM
I am not a user of myspace. Went on facebook twice. (my uncle found me as soon as i signed up!) Not my sorta places. I wanted to get info about the Greek uprising.
I have to say, I too find Zspace extraordinary and wonderful. Still....the suggestions from Jonathan's blog post about the issue should be brought here, into this discussion.
Let me be the last to say that Zspace is anything but a fucking relief! Still. No one needs to be above criticism.
We want a fair world, yes? You don't get that by not criticizing! Not even with people you love!
:-)
That said...luv you!
Reply this comment
Re: ZCom vs. Facebook
By Schindler, Jonathan at Feb 06, 2009 10:53 AM
John,
It's not about it being too complicated to use. But, it may be too complicated from a sense of lowering the barriers as much as possible. Things could be done better, and obviously there are barriers that need to be lowered. I'm not sure whether the barriers are just community inertia, the interface itself, psychological barriers of some sort, or something else. However, my article was a sincere attempt to find those barriers. I also appreciate the amount of work that goes into a site like Zmag, so I certainly hope it didn't come off as, "That's easy, I could do it so much better". I'm not a web designer as someone thought, I mainly do backend programming (not interface). That being said, doing something professionally can make one a bit more critical, sorry if the criticism was overly harsh.
As far as why we're comparing it to facebook and myspace, I think the name Zspace begs for comparison. The goal of the site is to have maximum participation. It's successful to the extent that it's meets those goals.
Jon
Reply this comment
Re:
By Spannos, Chris at Feb 06, 2009 14:32 PM
Reply this comment
Re: ZCom vs. Facebook
By Shapiro, Tali at Feb 05, 2009 15:20 PM
When the onslaught on Gaza began, I went crazy. I started trying to talk with people on forums, post things on Facebook, Myspace, Youtube. Then I was called a peacenik, an anti-semite, a self-hating jew and told I should go live in Gaza if I like doing all that sexual stuff with Terrorists. Then I found Z and felt like I came home.
Granted I'm quite technically inclined, but that isn't the point. There's nothing out there like Z, people need it. And it's when they need it that they'll find it. And you, Chris, are extremly helpful on the technical side, so thank you :)
Tali
Reply this comment
Re:
By Spannos, Chris at Feb 06, 2009 09:19 AM
Reply this comment
Z-Net is my window on the world
By Andrews, John at Feb 05, 2009 12:35 PM
Chris
I have followed the recent blog correspondence on 'What is wrong with Z-Net....'. Personally, I find nothing wrong at all with the site and would offer the following comments:
I'm baffled how people can attempt to compare Z-Net with Facebook; am I missing something here?
Keep up the great work; Z-net is a wonderful resource put together by a few enormously dedicated people on, I'm sure, a shoestring budget.
Thanks
John Andrews
Reply this comment
Re: Z-Net is my window on the world
By Spannos, Chris at Feb 05, 2009 13:34 PM
Reply this comment