Mashable - The Social Media Guide - Latest Comments in Blogburst – Your Blog in the Washington Post, Sorta

Re: Blogburst – Your Blog in the Washington Post, Sorta

Evis — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 09:41:51 -0000

Cool.

Re: Blogburst – Your Blog in the Washington Post, Sorta

ballsack t-bagger — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 07:07:21 -0000

How about we all just "blog" about how each and everyone of you fucks eat shit out of my mother's asshole;) tasty,ehh?!

Re: Blogburst – Your Blog in the Washington Post, Sorta

Eric Newman — Wed, 22 Feb 2006 19:31:39 -0000

This is Eric Newman, also from Pluck. You can see some comments regarding BlogBurst compensation on Rubel's blog too, but the bottom line is that we are figuring things out right now in the beta. We plan to work through compensation models to get the right one in place for both bloggers and publishers once we have a chance to see how the the whole things works dynamically, but the goal here is to help everyone win.

In the mean time, sign up and enjoy the exposure and incremental traffic as we roll out the first beta deployments on publisher sites.

Re: Blogburst – Your Blog in the Washington Post, Sorta

Pete Cashmore — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:44:14 -0000

David,

Thanks for the comment. I just subscribed to BurstBlog - you guys are doing some great stuff!

Re: Blogburst – Your Blog in the Washington Post, Sorta

davidnunez — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:30:18 -0000

I'm on the editorial team at Pluck. The invitation process right now is a way of throttling in the MASSIVE interest we're seeing. Bloggers are into this. So are spammers. The second that the publishers can't trust the network is the second they stop wanting to include blog content in their publishing.

Re: voting and community evolution of editorial control. We hear you. All I can say is lots of very innovative stuff coming.

Our lighthouse partners represent 17.5 million visitors a month. For free, if that kind of traffic potentially finding, subscribing, and clicking ads on your site does not impress you, or if getting advice and insider information on what publisher editorial teams are looking for is not all that exciting, or if simply getting bylines on these papers does not interest you, then BlogBurst is probably not a good fit for you and vice versa.

We're simply dealing with the influx of invites right now, but you can expect the editorial process to have excessive transparency longterm.

Please visit burstblog.com

Re: Blogburst – Your Blog in the Washington Post, Sorta

Pete Cashmore — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:34:15 -0000

J-Fleaux,

Having worked with these voting systems myself, I can say that your point about voter manipulation is exactly right. There are many technical solutions to the problem, but beyond that it's often wise to let the community police itself.

Yep, an editorial layer on top of the voting system is a possibility.

Re: Blogburst – Your Blog in the Washington Post, Sorta

J-Fleaux — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 22:58:13 -0000

Pete -
I definitely hear ya regarding wanting to make the voting system digg-like, but the usual problem of voter manipulation presents itself. I think it would be pretty sweet if they allowed users to vote, a la digg, and then they used that information when selecting blogs AND displayed the results to the end user. So for instance, out of the top 100 user-voted blogs, maybe 90 would actually make it to their publishers after blogBurts uses their journalism knowhow and connections to determine which blogs would fit into mainstream media.

Just a thought!

Re: Blogburst – Your Blog in the Washington Post, Sorta

Clay Cook — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:40:44 -0000

Pete - totally agree with your comments - they should share the revenue - otherwise they are just using other people's content and displaying it elsewhere.