I don't believe for a second that you'll read this response to your latest ramblings and I'm keenly aware that, by replying, I'm just "feeding the troll" (to use an old internet expression).
Having read interviews you've given in the past, it's clear that you are obsessed with your many blogs and how highly they rank. And, I'm sure, if I too were to spam every library email list if I could find with messages that seem to do little more than contain links back to my blog (known in the trade as "link spam"), I too could dance with Leprechauns and achieve a high Technorati rank. Personally, I don't believe for a minute that you have as high a ranking as you claim -- anyone who has had the misfortune to browse one of your blogs will know that your posts rarely attract any comments. It's perhaps worth noting that the most respected library bloggers out there (I'm thinking here of people like Michael Stephens, Sarah Houghton-Jan, Jenny Levine, Jessamyn West, et al) don't feel the need to behave in the way you do.
Like others, I wonder if you really have a day job? I also wonder what your colleagues and bosses think? From what I gather, they choose to turn a blind eye to the hours you spend sending out link spam to mailing lists.
Like all prolific spammers, you work on the assumption that by spamming thousands of people, you might (purely by chance) make a connection with a couple of people of are genuinely interested in what you have to say (and they probably subscribed to your blog anyway). And, like all prolific spammers, you care not for the majority who regard your ramblings as a nuisance. Seriously Gerry, is your Library Messiah Complex so far advanced now that you believe the onus is on us to find new ways of blocking your emails? Those who have been trying to do that for years tell me that you frequently change your email address.
You claim to be "contributing" to the dozens of email lists that you spam? I'm struggling to recall any instances of you actually contributing to a discussion on a mailing list -- and sadly, the rare occasions when you do, it's to insult others, e.g. http://bit.ly/cAM3By
You claim to only posts things that you believe are relevant? I see very little evidence of that. In fact, I believe it is one of the primary reasons why you have been blocked from so many email lists. Did you honestly believe that the email below was so extra relevant, so incredibly important, so "stop what you're doing and listen to me" that you had to post it twice just to this list?
There was a time when I wondered if I was alone in finding your emails irritating and a complete waste of my time, but not now. Gerry -- if highly respected UK academics and librarians such as Dr Charles Oppenheim, Prof Bruce Royan and Brian Kelly were asking me to stop posting to the lists that they contribute to, I'd seriously rethink my actions. In fact, I'd be genuinely embarrassed.
Speaking to others, I know of at least 20 instances of librarians choosing to unsubscribe from mailing lists purely because they are fed up of reading your sprawling, incoherent emails (if we apply the 90/9/1 rule here, then I suspect the true figure is in the 100s). I used to subscribe to dozens of library mailing lists myself (including many of the JISCMail lists), but the daily ritual of deleting dozens of duplicate copies of your spams became too much -- I found that unsubscribing from those lists entirely was a much more productive use of my time.
I only recently rejoined LIS-WEB2 because I believed that you'd been blocked from this list. I've been around a bit (over 15 years as a web developer within a library environment) and I like to feel that I might know some things that could be of help to others on LIS-WEB2. However, I have no interest in ramming things down people's throats -- I'm happy to wait until someone asks a question that I feel I can answer. However, if you intend to start spamming LIS-WEB2 again, then I'm afraid it'll just end up being another mailing list that you've forced me unsubscribe from. But, I doubt you care -- as long as you keep getting a small trickle to people clicking through to your blog, you can continue to claim that you're important, that you're special, that others look to you to be their guiding light in these dark and dangerous times.
So, Gerry -- a personal plea: please take a long holiday, please re-evaluate how you choose to conduct yourself in front of your peers, and please stop spamming the few remaining email lists that I subscribe to :-(
Library Systems Manager
University of Huddersfield
From: Web 2.0 use in libraries [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of gerrymck [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 20 August 2010 00:17
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: The Universe Is Not Flat >>> Let The Conversations Continue >>>
In April 2005, the first edition of The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century >>> "... an international bestselling book by Thomas Friedman that analyzes globalization, primarily in the early 21st century [was published]. The title is a metaphor for viewing the world as a level playing field in terms of commerce, where all competitors have an equal opportunity. As the first edition cover illustration indicates, the title also alludes to the perceptual shift required for countries, companies and individuals to remain competitive in a global market where historical and geographical divisions are becoming increasingly irrelevant."
While some may concur with Friedman, the World and the Universe Is Not Flat, As They Say In France >>> Au Contraire >>>.
The World And The Universe At Any And All Levels and Dimensions Exhibit Dynamic Variation / Diversity / Etc. ; It /They Are Not Monolithic Or A Single Dynamic Phenomenon >>>
The Well-Known Bell (And Others) Curves Graphically Represent The Wide Variation in Nature >>>
"In probability theory and statistics, the normal distribution, or Gaussian distribution, is an absolutely continuous probability distribution whose cumulants of all orders above two are zero. The graph of the associated probability density function is bell-shaped, with peak at the mean, and is known as the Gaussian function or bell curve."
The Red Line Is The Standard Normal Distribution
As In Life, As There Is (More Or Less On Ther Internet/Web), There Are Some Individuals That Are More Active/Engaged Then Others >>>
Jakob Nielsen, The Smartest Person On The Web, In An October 2006 Alertbox Posting Documents What Many Have Probably Observed >>>
Participation Inequality: Encouraging More Users to Contribute
In most online communities, 90% of users are lurkers who never contribute, 9% of users contribute a little, and 1% of users account for almost all the action.
All large-scale, multi-user communities and online social networks that rely on users to contribute content or build services share one property: most users don't participate very much. Often, they simply lurk in the background. When you plot the amount of activity for each user, the result is a Zipf curve, which shows as a straight line in a log-log diagram.
In contrast, a tiny minority of users usually accounts for a disproportionately large amount of the content and other system activity.
User participation often more or less follows a 90-9-1 rule:
90% of users are lurkers (i.e., read or observe, but don't contribute).
9% of users contribute from time to time, but other priorities dominate their time.
1% of users participate a lot and account for most contributions: it can seem as if they don't have lives because they often post just minutes after whatever event they're commenting on occurs.
In A NutShell > A Few List Members Contribute Most Of The Postings To Any Given e-List
AND I Am Among Those Few >>>
Indeed > Overall My Blogs Are Ranked In The Top Five (5) Perecent And A Few In The Top One (1) Percent And Higher (Based On Technorati Rankings)
BTW: Traffic On My Blogs Is Much/Much Greater Than SiteMeter Indicates >>> The New Blogger In Draft Stats Document Significant Visitation >>>
For Example >>>
Since June 1 2010, There Have Been More 140,000 Collective PageViews Of Postings On My _Spectrum > Mobile Learning, Libraries, And Technologies_ Blog As Of Today (08-19-10)
Please Don't Diss Me For Being Actively Engaged >>> Or Because I Have Broad Interests
Believe It Or Not > I Do Only Post Items That I Believe Are Relevant Or Could / Might /Should Be Of Interest To My Colleagues
It's Not About Me : Many Of My Posts Highlight The Work Of Others >>>
BTW: While The Percentage Of Our Colleagues Who Read E-Lists Is Declining, In Favor Of Social Media >
WebJunction Survey > Library Staff Report Their Use of Online Tools > 2009 vs. 2010 > Academic vs. Public
A Significant Portion Continue To Do >>>
If One Does Not Wish To Receive My Posting, There Are Several Options As I Note In A Previous Post
DeDup > Removal Of Duplicate E-Mail Postings > An Idea Who Time Has Come?
[ http://ref-notes.blogspot.com/2010/08/dedup-removal-of-duplicate-e-mail.html ]
While I Do Believe In Leprechauns [:-)] (And Actally Did See Their Houses On Inishmore, The Largest Of The Aran Islands, One Of The Island Groups Off The Coast Of County Galway, Ireland, In 2009), I Don't Believe In Silos.
Let The Conversations Continue >>>
[ http://bit.ly/9BkgWt ]
Science and Technology Librarian
Iowa State University Library
Ames IA 50011
Follow Me On Twitter > http://twitter.com/GMcKBlogs
"It's Not About Publication; It's About Ideas"
[ http://bit.ly/bb6uW7 ]
This transmission is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you receive it in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and remove it from your system. If the content of this e-mail does not relate to the business of the University of Huddersfield, then we do not endorse it and will accept no liability.