Russell
I liked your post - but couldn't find the button to click to tell you! Lol
Rob
Sent from my iPad
> On 13 Nov 2014, at 23:20, "Russell Woodford" <> wrote:
>
> Someone on the Facebook discussion of this same topic said they didn't want
> their posts pushed to birding-aus. An interesting point. Facebook owns
> everything that is posted there, but as far as I can tell there is no
> *technical* barrier to taking a feed from a FB group to Birding-Aus.
>
> Anyway, I am not about to do this!!! The amount of traffic on B-Aus is
> about right, and I don't want flood subscribers with the conversations from
> Facebook. I like reading both forums, but I am glad I only have to run one
> of them (and Peter and Bill, the moderators, do most of that!) so I'm not
> about to hijack content from elsewhere.
>
> I agree that email is a bit of a generational thing (that's the polite way
> of saying it's for old people) and the new generation of bright young
> birders use social media instead. If I plan my exit perfectly, I should
> shuffle off this mortal coil at about the time that the few remaining
> Birding-Aus subscribers sit around in residential care wondering who Night
> Parr0t really was and thinking up some new comments about banding. That is,
> Birding-Aus and I should depart quietly together, by which time James
> Mustafa will be retired, and be the Australian record holder and the only
> one in the 1000 Club, and all the young birders of that age wonder why he
> STILL writes stuff on Facebook because nobody has used it for for, like,
> decades ...
>
> I really value this community, because it is only the people who contribute
> that give it any value at all - but while it is nice to have Birding-Aus
> now, it will probably lose its relevance or usefulness, just as Facebook
> might. How many of us still sit up all night reading Usenet newsgroups???
> Times change, tools and technologies change. People don't change that much,
> but they naturally adopt the tools that suit them best. I thought
> Gestettner spirit masters were the best thing ever for teaching when I
> started my career. But there is little point hanging on to a technology
> just because you like the smell of the printing fluid :-)
>
>
> When it's time to shut down Birding-Aus, there probably won't be any
> subscribers left to notify. I hope that isn't for a while yet.
>
> Russell Woodford
> Birding-Aus Founder
>
>> On 13 November 2014 20:16, Ashwin Rudder <> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Perhaps this is digressing from a birdwatching topic, however it's a
>> somewhat meta topic on the value of birding-aus in 2014 and probably a
>> discussion worth having. It's a fact that those following b-a alone to find
>> out about vagrants have been privy to a tiny fraction of the discussion on
>> the location of this dowitcher, its ID features, the photos of it (in fact,
>> you wouldn't have seen them at all). By the time the first post to this
>> page about the bird was made, the first car was already halfway to the
>> site. And the first post to birdline wasn't made until well over 12 hours
>> after the debate on facebook had started. Say what you will about facebook,
>> but it's now the premier place for these discussions, and the fastest way
>> of getting the word out.
>>
>> This is not to bad-mouth birding-aus. I think it's an invaluable resource.
>> It remains a far better place than facebook for trip reports (although
>> these seem few and far between now). But it needs to find a way to remain
>> relevant, and if that way isn't as a noticeboard for sightings, then it's
>> worth noting here that there are better sites elsewhere.
>>
>> Lastly, a brief note on advertising. Google is free. Gmail is free, Google
>> Maps, Youtube, and a series of other sites that many people here use on a
>> daily basis, are free. Probably about a third of people using birding-aus
>> use mobile phones running software by Google. All this is possible because
>> that company makes money by the shedload from selling advertising space,
>> and by knowing what you're looking at. Facebook is no different, but it
>> cops flak because the services it provides are not as fundamental just at
>> the minute as those provided by Google. In essence, not using facebook on
>> the basis of its data gathering policy, yet using Google-provided programs
>> is the same as vegetarians who eat fish.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ashwin Rudder
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Graeme Stevens <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Probably diverting now well away from a birding thread guys and the
>> debate
>>> about the pros and cons of the TwitFace era could get tiresome, but if
>> you
>>> recall, a lot of people paid very large amounts of money for Facebook
>>> shares when it floated and now those shareholders want and expect a
>> return.
>>>
>>> So where is that going to come from do you reckon? Advertising of course,
>>> and business analytics (knowing everything it can about its users to
>> sell
>>> to whoever can use the data and will pay for it) - and it's not alone
>>> there.
>>> It's a public company and aint no charity!
>>>
>>> That doesn't mean the functionality isn't useful - just keep the eyes
>> wide
>>> open?
>>>
>>> Graeme S
>>>
>>>> From:
>>>> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 18:26:32 +1100
>>>> To:
>>>> CC: ;
>>>> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Historic channels
>>>>
>>>> I just ignore the ads. Never seen anything that I am interested in, or
>>> really applies to me. I seem to be immune to advertising.
>>>>
>>>> Carl Clifford
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 13 Nov 2014, at 18:10, Martin Butterfield <>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It may be relevant to note that I read an article some months ago, in
>>> the finance pages that Facebook is now seen as an advertising business
>>> rather than a part of the IT industry. That is part of my reasoning for
>>> having nothing to do with them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thursday, 13 November 2014, Carl Clifford <
>> >
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Chris,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FB does not have to steal your content. By posting, you have given
>>> them permission to do what they want with anything you post. Anyone who
>>> complains is only welching on the agreement they have made with FB.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Carl Clifford
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 13 Nov 2014, at 16:47, Chris Sanderson <
>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Carl and everyone,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This gets trotted out pretty regularly as a reason not to post
>>> anything on a variety of platforms, including Facebook. I would suggest
>> the
>>> idea that Facebook has any interest in your particular bird photo is
>> pretty
>>> ridiculous. While a very loose legal interpretation might be that they
>> are
>>> entitled to use those photographs you post, this is mainly an
>> ass-covering
>>> exercise from a legal perspective, as they distribute your photograph to
>>> friends, friends of friends, or anyone who looks at it, depending on your
>>> security settings. You are essentially giving them permission to do this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now, I'm not saying that Facebook doesn't have privacy and data
>>> issues (they are known to sell your behavioural data to marketers, or
>> even
>>> manipulate your experience on the site for research purposes), however
>> the
>>> idea that they would risk a huge media blow-up over stealing someone's
>>> photos is, to me at least, stretching belief. They make money off people
>>> who use their site. If you stop producing content for them, or stop using
>>> their site, they aren't showing you advertising anymore, or aggregating
>>> your data to sell to marketing people. This is worth far more to them
>> than
>>> any photograph could be worth. I have no doubt I have earned Facebook
>> more
>>> revenue just by using it than I have ever made selling photos.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Having said all that, if you don't want to post photos on
>> Facebook,
>>> there's no reason you have to. And if you don't want to be on Facebook at
>>> all, that's fine too, that's totally your call. Just don't be too
>> surprised
>>> if you start missing out on the latest in bird news, since that seems to
>> be
>>> the way things are going at the moment here in Aus.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Carl Clifford <
>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>> Here is section 1. of Facebook's statement on intellectual
>>> property rights.
>>>>>>>> For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, such
>>> as photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following
>>> permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant
>> us
>>> a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide
>>> licence to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with
>>> Facebook (IP Licence). This IP Licence ends when you delete your IP
>> content
>>> or your account, unless your content has been shared with others and they
>>> have not deleted it. the full T&C can be found at
>>> https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would be very careful about posting anything, text or images on
>>> Facebook that you would want to possibly want to make money out of in the
>>> future. they can probably afford bigger and better lawyers than the
>> average
>>> FB user, and you would have to take them on in the US legal system.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Carl Clifford
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 13 Nov 2014, at 2:52 pm, wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That makes Facebook's alternative name "stalkbook" even more
>>> appropriate, or should that be "storkbook".....
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Doesn't everything that goes on facebook, including pictures,
>>> become the property of facebook and not the "owner" of the photos, etc?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I will stick with B-A, even though Rusty is a blues man... :-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yours in all things "green"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> John Harris BASc, GDipEd
>>>>>>>>> Director - Wildlife Experiences P/L
>>>>>>>>> Principal Zoologist/Ecologist
>>>>>>>>> Nature Photographer
>>>>>>>>> Wildlife Guide
>>>>>>>>> Croydon, Vic
>>>>>>>>> 0409 090 955
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> President, Field Naturalists Club of Victoria
>>>>>>>>> www.fncv.org.au
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ----- Reply message -----
>>>>>>>>> From: "Ashwin Rudder" <>
>>>>>>>>> To: "John Tongue" <>
>>>>>>>>> Cc: "" <
>>>
>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Birding-Aus] Historic channels
>>>>>>>>> Date: Thu, Nov 13, 2014 11:57
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Peter, and others,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> John is right, the majority of the discussion has happened on
>>> facebook.
>>>>>>>>> Increasingly I think, there is a shift away from birding-aus
>> for
>>> several
>>>>>>>>> reasons. An email list is a relatively slow way of
>> disseminating
>>>>>>>>> information (much faster than past methods, but much slower
>> than
>>> something
>>>>>>>>> like facebook). Most significantly, b-a suffers from not being
>>> able to
>>>>>>>>> handle image files. Almost all of the discussion on the
>>> dowitcher's ID has
>>>>>>>>> come from people being able to post photos, add pointers to
>>> them, and talk
>>>>>>>>> very quickly, in much more of a conversational style than b-a
>>> allows. A
>>>>>>>>> video or two has also been posted.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In terms of how easy it is to retrieve information on facebook:
>>> there is a
>>>>>>>>> search function that acts like a find tool in a Microsoft Word
>>> document (or
>>>>>>>>> similar), so it looks for any post containing that word, and
>>> then displays
>>>>>>>>> the entire thread. In essence, it is no different to searching
>>> the archives
>>>>>>>>> of birding-aus, although without any issues of having the
>>> subject line
>>>>>>>>> change halfway through a thread, which can make topics hard to
>>> follow here.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Obviously, the shift to facebook further fragments the
>> grapevine
>>> that the
>>>>>>>>> birding community relies on. However, increasing numbers of
>>> people, of all
>>>>>>>>> ages, have facebook and it really is very convenient. Birdline
>>> remains the
>>>>>>>>> premier rare bird telegraph page, while this page remains the
>>> best for in
>>>>>>>>> depth discussions. One of the great criticisms of facebook by
>>> social
>>>>>>>>> commentators is that it feed the instantaneous me-me-me!
>>> attitude of the
>>>>>>>>> yoof; ironically, this is exactly what's needed for rare,
>>> twitchable birds,
>>>>>>>>> and that makes modern-day social media the best spot for
>>> twitchers.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> Ashwin Rudder
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:37 AM, John Tongue <
>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Peter, et al,
>>>>>>>>>> There has been a fair bit of discussion on the "Australian
>>> Twitchers" FB
>>>>>>>>>> page. While people keep adding comments to a particular
>> thread,
>>> that keeps
>>>>>>>>>> it live and active. I'm not sure what happens to that info
>> some
>>> time after
>>>>>>>>>> people stop commenting, and how easy it will prove to be to
>>> retrieve.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> John Tongue
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 13/11/2014, at 7:16 AM, Peter Shute <>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Interesting comment below from Ashwin about where the
>>> discussion of
>>>>>>>>>> Victoria's Lake Tutchewop Dowitcher is taking place. I assume
>>> "historic
>>>>>>>>>> channels" means the birding-aus list?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Where else is discussion taking place? I've seen plenty of
>>> discussion in
>>>>>>>>>> the Victorian Birders Facebook group. Is there anywhere else?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Facebook has the advantage that photos can be posted, but I'm
>>> wondering
>>>>>>>>>> if there is any kind of archive being kept. I often can't find
>>> a Facebook
>>>>>>>>>> discussion just days after I last looked at it, let alone
>>> months or years.
>>>>>>>>>> Is there a way to find them, or is this stuff just getting
>>> lost? And does
>>>>>>>>>> it matter?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Peter Shute
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 13 Nov 2014, at 5:03 am, Ashwin Rudder <
>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't seen anything really up to date posted to b-a;
>> most
>>> discussion
>>>>>>>>>>>> seems to have happened away from the historic channels. In
>>> summary:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <HR>
>>>>>>>>>>> <BR> Birding-Aus mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>>>>>>> <BR> To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
>>>>>>>>>>> <BR>
>>> http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
>>>>>>>>>>> </HR>
>>>>>>>>> <HR>
>>>>>>>>> <BR> Birding-Aus mailing list
>>>>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>>>>> <BR> To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
>>>>>>>>> <BR>
>>> http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
>>>>>>>>> </HR>
>>>>>>>>> <HR>
>>>>>>>>> <BR> Birding-Aus mailing list
>>>>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>>>>> <BR> To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
>>>>>>>>> <BR>
>>> http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
>>>>>>>>> </HR>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <HR>
>>>>>>>> <BR> Birding-Aus mailing list
>>>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>>>> <BR> To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
>>>>>>>> <BR>
>>> http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
>>>>>>>> </HR>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Check out our site: http://www.bird-o.com
>>>>>>> Follow us on Facebook (Bird-O) and Twitter
>>>>>> <HR>
>>>>>> <BR> Birding-Aus mailing list
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> <BR> To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
>>>>>> <BR>
>>> http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
>>>>>> </HR>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Martin Butterfield
>>>>> http://franmart.blogspot.com.au/
>>>> <HR>
>>>> <BR> Birding-Aus mailing list
>>>> <BR>
>>>> <BR> To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
>>>> <BR>
>> http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
>>>> </HR>
>> <HR>
>> <BR> Birding-Aus mailing list
>> <BR>
>> <BR> To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
>> <BR> http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
>> </HR>
> <HR>
> <BR> Birding-Aus mailing list
> <BR>
> <BR> To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
> <BR> http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
> </HR>
<HR>
<BR> Birding-Aus mailing list
<BR>
<BR> To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
<BR> http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
</HR>
|
