I’ve been experimenting with all sorts of tracking tools on my high school computer science blog. I’m learning a lot through this. Where people come from for example. Lots of schools, colleges/universities, state and local departments of education – my target audience. Visits come from all over the world which is very exciting. But the most interesting and at times the most frustrating thing is seeing what searches people are using that lead them to my blog.

Frustrating because all too often I can tell from their question that I can really help them but that they landed on a page that is either not at all helpful or not as helpful and something else I could tell them would be. I don’t have enough information to identify them and contact them. Of course if I did some would be more freaked out than happy about it I guess. Occasionally someone who reads my blog sends me an email (using the contact page on the blog if nothing else) and asks for more information. And that is great – it makes my day. But so much more often I feel like people are going to keep looking until they give up without finding what they need. That is frustrating because what I like best about my job is the freedom and ability to help people.

I don’t think there is a real solution to this. I try to just let it go. But in the back of my mind it motivates me to include more links, use better keywords, and generally try to make each post as useful as I can.

FWIW I don’t really track anything in the way of statistics for this blog. This is more a forum for me to get things off my chest. I have no real goals of attention for it. I am however very appreciative of both of the people who read it regularly (I think there may be two of you) and all of those who drop by from time to time. I am especially appreciative of those who live comments when the mood strikes. Thank you all.

I’m a big fan of Michael Hyatt who is the CEO of Thomas Nelson Publishing. The man knows how to use new media in ways that often seem surprising for someone who publishes books on paper. He has a blog (“From Where I Sit”), he’s on Twitter, he’s on Facebook, he shares things on Google Reader, he’s on Facebook and he’s on LinkedIn. I have been following his blog for quite some time and apparently it gets a lot of traffic. A trackback to a post he wrote on creating a blog in 2005 that I linked to still sends me traffic regularly!

His posts of Twitter humanize him in ways that one may not typically think of the CEO of a large company. And they offer insights into the day of as senior executive that would be very valuable to anyone who aspires to that role some day. Perhaps even more valuable to people who wonder just what someone at that level does every day.

But one of the things that he is doing that really impressed me with the idea that he really understands the way of the Internet is the new Book Review Bloggers program that he has had Thomas Nelson put together. He announced it in his blog (A New Book Review Program for Bloggers) and on Twitter. He’s doing a Q & A on his blog as well. How cool is that!

The short version is that bloggers who agree to read the whole book and write a 200 word review on their blog and post a review on Amazon can get free copies of Thomas Nelson books. They even send the blogger the first two chapters in PDF form so they can start before the physical copy gets to them. They’ll also make graphics and other resources available for free and they’ll show you some link love of their own.

I love this on so many levels. It leverages the power of online activists of course but it does so in a supportive “let’s work together” sort of way. Rather than sending lawyers after people who appropriate graphics and what not they supply graphics to make things easier for people. Again co-operation not competition. And it is win win. Thomas Nelson gets independents reviews and links – the program is not contingent on favorable reviews. And bloggers get books, links, and some minor bragging rights. (Yeah, the publisher sent me this review copy.)

I think this also speaks well of the company’s confidence in the quality of the books they are publishing. By not hand picking people and trusting that the work is good enough and being willing to accept the idea that not everyone likes every book this is an act of confidence (or courage?)

Do the words liberal and conservative really mean anything in politics these days? Or like words to the Mad Hatter do they mean what ever the speaker wants them to mean in a particular context? I really think so.

It used to me that a liberal wanted to change things while a conservative wanted to maintain the status quo. Or in some cases a conservative was someone who wanted to move things back to the way they were after they had been changed. In other words liberals had their eyes on the future and conservatives in the past. Over time in politics a liberal was someone who wanted to spend more money on social services and a conservative was someone who wanted to avoid that. Conservative in the vernacular thought social services were best left up to charity and religion. Note that all major religions have this notion of charity and taking care of the poor and unfortunate. So in a sense liberal meant changing how we take care of people while conservative meant keeping it the same.

Some of that is still true today but increasingly liberal seems to mean in favor of more government and conservative means less government. But by my reasoning that means that both major parties at liberal. Both want more control by government - they disagree on what things to control though. Both want to spend my money on their pet projects. Both want to stick the government's nose into things it may not belong in. Can you say "Iraq?"

The old joke is that the Republicans want to steal from the middle class and give to the rich and the Democrats want to steal from the middle class (and occasionally the rich) and give to the poor. So who you vote for depends on if you aspire to be rich or poor. Feels true a lot of the time but neither play directly on how I view the words liberal and conservative. They have no meaning in that joke.

For what it is worth I have concluded that the two parties are the party in power and the party out of power. Both the Democrats and Republicans seem to do largely the same things - disagree with a policy of the party in power and then try to implement that same policy if they make it into power themselves. Democrats started us in Viet Nam in a big way and Republicans started us in a big way in Iraq. Perhaps a Democrat will get us out of Iraq as a Republican got us out of Viet Nam? Over simplified? Perhaps but then most political discussion these days is so I'm in good company. (Or bad )

I can't deal with either conservative or liberal as labels for myself. I am anti-abortion and pro-gun which causes some to label me conservative. I am very uncomfortable with the notion of homosexual sex but want to see people in happy loving relationships have the same rights as heterosexual couples regardless of gender. Perhaps that makes me a liberal. But I have a notion of marriage and relationships that delegates sex to a very small role. (Please no jokes about that being because I have been married for over 31 years. Rather I think that placing sex in proper context is what makes a marriage or other relationship last.)

I believe in charity and taking care of people. I would prefer a faith-based way to do that because I think it involves more emotional support and less overhead. But at the same time I realize that that is no longer practical in our secular society. So I want to see government taking more of a role in health care and unemployment and some similar issues. I'm pro-choice on education. That's a very conservative notion these days involving things like vouchers, charter schools and other ways of providing government funds but less government control. But at the same time I support public education not only through taxes but though donations to public schools and making sure my son can continue to live a good life and afford to teach in public schools on a teacher's pay.  Liberal or conservative? Does it matter? Is the label helpful or distracting from the issue? I vote for distracting.

I want all men to be treated equally. I see that as a religious idea. Visit a Catholic church in an ethnically diverse area and the mix of people will amaze you. They do it better than most Protestant churches much to my sadness. Like wise the Moslem community seems to be able to ignore racial and ethnic divides at least among Moslems of the same sub faith. We need more of that between faiths of course. I see that as a conservative notion because it harkens back the the early church while some see that as a liberal notion because it is a change from the church of the last few hundreds of years. Does it matter which label one applies? Is it even healthy to the goal to apply a label? I think not.

Conservative/liberal & Republican/Democrat are tribal labels. We join (or are born into) a tribe and that is our name. The other tribe is wrong so using the other label on people in an attack. The worst of this is that it removes granularity. It blocks the possibility of ad hock groupings of people united for something that benefits everyone. If the tribe leadership decides something is good or bad the members have to put aside their own beliefs and go along with the leadership. That may have been appropriate at one time but clearly is not today. And yet it is the reality.  

But in a discussion those labels serve as a block to clarity and adds an ambiguity that is unhelpful. Ideas should not be seen as liberal or conservative (nor should people) but as what they are. Sure there is a context in society and I am not saying that ideas live in isolation. What I am saying is that those labels only detract from understanding and, dare I use the word, truth. I would prefer to avoid them when possible.

Periodically I get Facebook friend requests from people who were students of mine from when I was teaching. Today was one such day. I have to say that hearing from students really makes my day. As a teacher we see kids leave all the time and wonder what happens to them. It’s that old “I shot an arrow into the air” thing. Did we make a difference? Did students appreciate us or were we the ones they all couldn’t wait to get away from? When one gets back in touch you have to figure that at least the bad was not so bad and that over time they remembered some good. I count that as a win. :-)

In times past I suspect teachers heard from far fewer students especially more than a few years after graduation. The Internet changes that at least for teachers (or former teachers) who are available on the Internet. Frankly I think it is enough of a reason for teachers to make themselves available on the Internet. Feedback from alumni who have had some time to digest the lessons (intentional and unintentional lessons) can be hugely valuable.

And you know, I really miss some of those kids. A line once every so often to let me know they occasionally think of me is a huge moral booster. Although sometimes it really makes me think about going back to full-time teaching just to make more friends. One can never have too many friends.

I started blogging just over four and a half years ago at a site called theSpoke. That site has been dormant for a while and will probably  be going away completely at some point. I’ve been back and forth in my mind about if there are things there worth saving or not. Clearly saving things manually was just too much work. However today I found out about a backup/migration tool just for theSpoke blogs.

Tom Indelicato who also used to blog at theSpoke told me about it today. You can read about the migration tool over at the Channel 8 forums. Channel 8 is the new technology student portal that really replaces theSpoke in most ways. The tool itself is available at Codeplex and is called IntoSpaces. As the name implies it allows one to move their theSpoke blog to a new blog at Spaces. The source code is available so I guess if one were ambitious they could probably adapt it to copy to other blogging engines but I’m not that ambitious and since I have this blog I’m just moving those old posts here.

This brings to mind a question. Are blogs for all time or just for the moment? Most posts are probably of transient worth. Applicable for today and for a short time afterwards. Other items are or perhaps may turn out to be profound. And some posts by some people may turn out to be vignettes into how people live that will be of interest to historians in generations to come. But it’s all bits and bytes that is as erasable as letters in the sand. Well except if you want it to disappear when it will be in archives for ever and come back to haunt you. But that’s another story.

How many people backup their blog posts? Unless one runs blogging software on their own server probably not many. We assume that the services we use do so for us. But if they go out of business or close down then what? Should we care? I’m still processing that question. What do you think?

I love to read books. Always have. Fiction, non-fiction, history, thrillers, mysteries and most especially science fiction. But there are problems. Once I start reading a good book I don’t want to stop. I don’t want to work, to eat to sleep, or do anything else. I just want to read. At times my body rebels and I do eat or sleep because I have to. And sometimes self-discipline kicks in and I work or do other responsible things. But a good book, far more than a good movie or TV show, consumes my attention. And I love it.

Eventually the book is over and a feeling of let down ensues. The only answer is distraction or finding another book. Often when I finish it is night time and I am overdue for sleep. That is pretty much the ideal situation. I get to shut down and overnight my subconscious brain processes. It’s a good thing.

On the other hand sometimes I finish a book and there is more time in the day. If I have finished a book in a series and have the next book handy I can start reading right away. It’s harder though if the next available book in not in the same series or worse if it is a different genre. Somehow the context switch is, or at least can be, very difficult.

If I read a book that is the beginning of an existing series and I like it I try to buy the rest of the series right away. That works well. On the other hand today I read a book that is the first of a promised series but the next book is not out yet. I will probably have to wait a year for it.

I have two more books on my reading table and they are from series that I really enjoy. But both are very different in character, in venue, in time, and so switching is proving complex. The book I just finished "Dragons Wild" by Robert Asprin“ is more or less a fantasy. It is about dragons in human form. I have another dragon related book but those dragons are very much in dragon form. While one book takes place in modern times on earth the other one takes place in the distant future on a world very much unlike earth today.

So I picked the other book on my list which while it is in the future and on other worlds doesn’t really have a dragon in it. Well a flying lizard that spits acid but its not really a dragon. I’m still having trouble getting into it but I think I will be able to do so. And then I’ll have trouble putting it down when I should be sleeping tonight. sigh

When I am not reading a book, as for example when I went out with friends last night or shopping earlier today, my mind wants to process a good story. This is especially true with SF or fantasy where a different, imaginary culture or situation has been created for the story. I think about would the consequences of things would be in that culture. This ties in very well with my interest in sociology and anthropology so I have some training to fall back on. But still a good book, a well-written story is a mental workout. And that is probably why I like them so much.

A person comes across a man on his hands and knees apparently looking for something and asks him “What are you looking for?” The reply is “my cell phone.” “Oh well where exactly were you when you dropped it?” “Oh, I was around the corner.” “Then why are you looking here?” “Well the light is better over here.”

Usually people laugh at that story. How silly is it to look in the wrong place just because the right place doesn’t have enough light. But I see an analogy to a lot of web/Internet activity these days. Many traditional things do not scale well. Live, in-person training is expensive. Catalogs are expensive. Tech support is expensive. The answer many people are trying is moving things to the Internet.

Webcasts, online catalogs, online discussion forums for discussion problems and solutions are all less expensive than the “old way.” It’s a great idea and all it assumes is that your audience in “on the Internet.” But is that a valid assumption? I’m not so sure that it is as often as people using it would like.

I talked to a book author and educational consultant this morning. His name is Michael Sullivan and he’s got a number of young people’s books out. And he has a website and a blog. He has lots of great information including a long list of books for boys. But is his audience – librarians, teachers of reading, literacy specialists, etc – following him online? I’m not sure but I suspect that not as many as he would like are. And from what I can tell there are more librarians and that sort of people online than average for education. A lot of the people who would benefit most from what he is doing are not going to find him until they go looking for something else. (That’s part of the reason I wanted to link to him – to help him in search engines).

That doesn’t mean what he is doing is wasted. Not by a long shot. What he has is great stuff and people who are looking for it will find it, use it and appreciate it. But people are not so likely to subscribe to his blog as you might suspect. His audience has very little time that isn’t already booked. So while what he does is valuable and the people who do subscribe probably get a lot of benefit from it he still has to go out and do the traditional things. I met him at a book signing today. A few minutes of conversation impressed me more than reading his website alone would have. I have no doubt that the people he talks to at workshops visit his website more than people who visit his web site attend his training. I do suspect that he gets some speaking engagements based in part on his website though. More or less than from people who are impressed first with his books? I don’t know.

I suspect that he is getting a reasonable return on his investment from his online activity. I’m not so sure that is the case for everyone though. I worry that some companies who decide to move it all to the Internet and cut way back on traditional activities may not be seeing the ROI that they’d like. People assume that with millions, tens of millions, even hundreds of millions of people using the Internet that they can reach a huge percentage of their audience. If you have a million people who want to reach how many of them can you really reach? Are companies assuming that they can train more people with webcasts than in-person training? Sure they are. Are they right? Probably. Are they as right as they think they are (in other words will they reach as many people as they think)? I’m skeptical.

Dan Brown has sold millions of copies of his books. How many of his readers would find out about his next book if it were only announced on his website? Ten million, one million, a thousand? Would you bet the bank on reaching enough people that way? I would hope not. Now the theory of the Internet, especially the web, is one of multi-level marketing. A thousand people read Dan’s web site and each tell 100 people who each tell 100 people and soon the whole world knows. Nice theory.

In practice all pyramid schemes die out long before the theoretical maximum. Not everyone gets their book news online.  Not everyone wants to take an online course. Not everyone wants to look at a catalog online. Not everyone wants to read blogs regularly – many people are still buying magazines believe it or not! True. I saw lots of them at the bookstore last night. Oh, yeah, people are buying books still as well. Shocking but true.

I don’t think any business can afford not to be on the Internet these days. On the other hand putting too many of a company’s eggs in that basket is still “looking where the light is better” while not looking where everyone is. But boy or boy is the Internet approach easier!