Successful Blog

Thanks to Week 42 SOBs

by

muddy teal strip A

Successful and Outstanding Bloggers

Let me introduce the bloggers
who have earned this official badge of achievement,

and the right to call themselves
Successful Blog SOBs.

I invite them to take a badge home to display on their blogs.

muddy teal strip A

They take the conversation to their readers,
contribute great ideas, challenge us, make us better, and make our businesses stronger.

I thank every one of our SOBs for thinking what we say is worth passing on.
Good conversation shared can only improve the blogging community.

Should anyone question this SOB button’s validity, send him or her directly to me. This award comes with a full “Liz said so” guarantee. It is endorsed by Kings of the Hemispheres, Martin and Michael, and backed by my brothers, Angelo and Pasquale.

deep purple strip

Want to become an SOB?

If you’re an SO-Wanna-B, you can see the whole list of SOBs and learn how to be one by visiting the SOB Hall of Fame. Click the link or visit the What IS an SOB?! page in the sidebar.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Net Neutrality 8-12-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Common Cause: Stop It With the Astro-Turfing

Common Cause has released a report on the incredible amount of astro-turfing that surrounds telecom reform legislation. Entitled “Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing,” the report is a follow-up to an earlier attack on these phoney “public interest” groups, which are, in reality, industry-financed fronts designed to mess with people’s minds.

The report eviscerates five groups: Hands Off The Internet, TV4US, netcompetition.org, The Future…Faster and Video Access Alliance. Common Cause reserves its worst criticism for Hands Off The Internet and netcompetition.org.

If there were an award for Astroturf lobby campaigns, Hands Off the Internet (HOTI) would win hands down. . . .

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

SOB Business Cafe 08-11-2006

by

SB Cafe

Welcome to the SOB Cafe

We offer the best in thinking–articles on the business of blogging written by the Successful and Outstanding Bloggers of Successful Blog. Click on the title shots to enjoy each selection.

The Specials this Week are

Bloggers Blog gives the complete rundown on who said what about the terrible possibilities that could have occurred in the air yesterday.

Bloggers Cover Liquid Explosives Terror Threat

Jamdo offers a unique look at names and search engine traffic.

Names and Search Engine Traffic

The Blogging Times introduces us to the Blogmobile, which somehow blogged its way here from the 60s.

Clear Your Mind wants us to do just that.

The Blog Herald gives us a CLUE about the election last Tuesday.

It Was the Bloggers in the Parlor with the Knife

Related ala carte selections include

The Business of America is Business hosts an International Carnival of spectacular proportions, showing that capitalists still believe that bigger is best. 🙂

Sit back. Enjoy your read. Nachos and drinks will be right over. Stay as long as you like.
No tips required. Comments appreciated.

Have a great weekend!

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Net Neutrality 8-11-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Net Neutrality: What Will It Mean to Web Designers, Marketers and SEO’s?

. . . As I read the comments and articles, pro and con, I keep wondering what this means for web design and SEO? Search engines are getting better at delivering results based on where you live and who you are. How would these changes effect how you apply SEO techniques? What does this do to marketing efforts on behalf of web sites? If Google Adsense Ads no longer reach EVERYBODY, what happens then? How does this work on an Internet where the consumer web site viewing choices are based on how much they can afford or what their ISP will provide?

We’ve been used to designing, optimizing and marketing for an International, fairly wide cross section of people. We know many of our efforts don’t get past Chinese censors. What will it be like if the “censors” are phone companies in the USA? If you incorporate video into sites, do consumers have to pay more to view the web site? What does this mean to sites built outside the USA, who are accessed by American users?

Here are some quotes to consider and links. What do you think about this?

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 8-10-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Could Lamont’s victory spell doom for Net Neutrality?

. . . The danger – as I see it – will be if the narrative that [Ned] Lamont’s victory occurred largely as a result of Internet activism becomes the conventional wisdom. If this misleading meme is allowed to take root and propagate, it could be used to conjure up the specter of the Net as an uncontrollable, anarchic force undermining the health of our body politic. Obviously, such a story-line could go a long way toward swaying some of the fence-sitters in Congress toward an anti-Net Neutrality position. It’s hardly inconceivable that they could soon develop a fear that with an unregulated Internet, [Joe] Lieberman’s fate may someday be their own. Worse yet, should the “angry blogger” narrative become entrenched in the public consciousness, these feckless “public servants” would be armed with the talking points needed to sell their anti-Net Neutrality stance to their constiuents.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 8-9-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Reader Comment on Net Neutrality (and My Rebuttal)

Reader Richard Bennett, whose own blog often articulates the telco point of view on Internet Neutrality more coherently than most telcos, posted a challenging comment to my post announcing that I’m speaking at the Berkman Center tomorrow. . . .

“* Do you believe that all applications have the same requirements from the network?”

. . . The reason we need an Internet which is network agnostic is because only an application-unaware network allows the kind of incredible innovation which has occurred on the Internet. David Isenberg (who Richard [Bennett] mislabels on his blog as a marketing person – David’s background is Bell Labs) explains why this is so brilliantly in The Rise of The Stupid Network).

My simplistic explanation is that a network which is built to be aware of specific applications may work well for those applications that the network designers had in mind but will inhibit if not absolutely prevent applications the network designers didn’t think of as well as the evolution of existing applications. The traditional phone network is a great example of that. Handsets on that network don’t even have the capability of cell phones because the network is optimized for voice and voice alone. I posted more on this here. . . .

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE