Thing 7 - Meebo and Twitter

Pardon the redundancy, folks. Obviously, we started delving into Meebo in the last Thing, but I think what sets the tasks in this Thing apart are the requests to experiment with Meebo Rooms and to explore embedding the MeeboMe widgit into library web pages.

Actually, I'd already taken part in a Meebo Room chat as part of RUSA outreach initiative aimed at soliciting input on boosting participation, and I felt that the platform was well-suited to that type of discussion. I could follow and participate in the conversation, submit questions without disrupting the flow of the exchange, and I was even able to send quick text messages to other participants outside of the context of the group discussion. I participated in a similar chat as part of a NoveList-sponsored exchange that sought input on upgrades to the database's interface. While face-to-face exchanges are preferable, Meebo Rooms offer a nice alternative when everyone can't be there or when you're dealing with a group that's dispersed all over the state and/or country.

The MeeboMe widgit is also cool, and I definitely think this is something MCPL should consider embedding in our catalog. Obvious spots include the "no results" page in the PAC, the "Research Tools" page, and on our "Help" pages (e.g. the Help page in the PAC and as an adjunct to AskUs).

Now Twitter is another story. This is a tool that I really see no redeeming value in whatsoever. Wow. I mean, there are Web 2.0 tools that are veritable wastes of time, and then there's Twitter. This thing, in my humble opinion, takes the cake.

I'm struggling not to say something extremely negative about Twitter (and failing) because I don't want to upset those who do like it. But I really don't get it. However, something that David Lee King said about Twitter in one of the linked web pages really struck a chord with me (and offered me a more diplomatic means of dismissing this tool). He mentions that some in the library blogosphere may be pondering the usefulness of Twitter. He states that if you're one of these people, then perhaps it's simply not the tool for you. And that really does hit the nail on the proverbial head--and is applicable to more Web 2.0 tools than Twitter.

I'm currently only up to Thing 7, and I've seen a few tools that have real library potential. Really cool stuff. But I've also run across a few applications--like Twitter--that seem pointless. And perhaps that what we as a library need to do: weigh the good and bad of these tools and then make a decision about which one's we'd like to experiment with. Honestly, is there a reason to try each of them out, or can we draw some conclusion via research and save ourselves the trouble of facilitating an implementation that only ends up wasting staff time and library resources? I'm inclined to think we can, indeed, draw reasoned conclusions without implementing each and every tool. In fact, all of this makes me think of an article I read recently over at Mashable.com. The question asked in the article is: can you join too many social networks? The answer, obviously, is 'yes'. These tools should boost productivity, not hinder it. This means we need to figure out which tools boost productivity; and if a tool has the potential to both boost and hinder it, then we need to figure out which features boost productivity and only use those features.

My two cents.

Thing 6 - Communication Tools

Ah, communication tools. I'm a real sucker for them because I'm a sucker for communication. It's up there with mastication, hibernation, and...well, you get the point. Anyway, communication tools. Good stuff.

The first "thing" I was asked to consider was electronic mail (i.e. email). I've experimented with all three: Gmail, YahooMail, and Hotmail. I started on Hotmail back in the previous millennium, and I've stuck with it 'cause I'm lazy. YahooMail, which I teach to the public in the tech classes, is just like Hotmail except you are subjected to a lot more advertising and logging in via the Yahoo! main page is a pain in the tuckus. Gmail is an entirely different animal, and, I must admit, I'm intrigued. The idea of organizing emails via tags instead of folders and managing back-and-forths as "conversations" is starting to grow on me, and I may eventually ask my friends to start contacting me there. What's especially appealing about Gmail is the fact that you can adjust your settings so that you are always logged in via a secure connection (i.e. https) and that any data you send is encrypted. No, I'm not planning anything illegal, but--call me crazy--I still value my privacy.

When it comes to email ettiquette (or, as I like to call it, e-tact), I think I do pretty good. When it comes to productivity, I probably do allow myself to get distracted by email. As such, I thought the productivity hints were good, though the only one that potentially applies to me is the need to ignore new messages as they come in and instead tackle emails in chunks. Yet, in IS, it's kind of a given that we keep up on incoming messages. I also subscribe to four listservs, and the volume of emails can overwhelm (I receive about 100 a day); however, one trick I've found for managing listserv messages is to set up filters that put them directly into folders other than my inbox. This is nice because in Outlook you only get on-screen prompts for emails that show up in your inbox, so the filters are working to reduce distractions.

I also thought the email ettiquette tips were good. At one point in time (that lasted all of three weeks), I did think it was "cute" to write in all lower case letters, but now I can't stand it (irks me almost as much as getting emails in ALL CAPS, which I equate with shouting). Email hoaxes and viral emails are another story. My mother is notorious for forwarding me spam/virus hoaxes, and I'm constantly emailing her back links to Snopes.com, which does a purty darn good job of debunking these things.

The next part of this Thing was instant messaging. This past week I experimented with IM'ing with some cohorts here in the library. The first thing we realized is that not everyone uses the same chat service. Some use AOL, some Yahoo, and some (like me) Google Chat. As such, we were forced to look into the IM aggregators. The first one we tried was Pidgin, but I had a tough time getting it just right and decided it wasn't for the casual chat user. Next, we gave Meebo a shot. This turned out well. It was very easy to use, and my only complaint is that there's no clean and easy way to leave it running in the background and get prompts when new messages show up without running it in Firefox, which requires users to download a plug-in. Obviously, I need to experiment with it some more, and I think more experimentation is warrented because I really do think that IM has potential not only as a means for enhancing reference service but also as a way for staff to contact IS (and, yes, I've been extremely skeptical of chat reference in the past--and I still am--but it's worth a try).

Ah, texting. That's how I'd like to introduce my examination of the third part of this Thing. Just a simple, "Ah, texting". Now that I've said something value-free, I'll remind all that I was (and am) skeptical of chat reference. I feel the same way about text reference--as long as it doesn't involve librarians staring at a 1 inch by 1 inch screen and tapping out answers on a keyboard best suited for Ken and Barbie's little fingers. If, however, it involves responding to texted inquires via a bona fide desktop computer screen and full-size keyboard, then bring it on. And, indeed, the Reference Librarian article did mention that there is an add-on that converts text messages to emails which can be responded to via email and then converted back to text messages. I say that we give it a shot.

The last part of this Thing is web conferencing. I'll say that I've had positive experiences with it, and I've had lukewarm experiences. The WebJunction article does a good job of encapsulating the features and drawbacks, and I don't have much to add there. I have taken part in a fair number of web conferences and such. We've hosted a handful of remote Polaris training sessions here at MCPL in which the speaker "pushed" PowerPoint slides and spoke through a phone line, and I've taken part in three chat-based NoveList training sessions with a pushed PowerPoint presentation but during which I wore a headset and participated via a chat client. I also partook in a RUSA chat-based conference with a group of younger librarians via a Meebo chat client. All went relatively well, but the real challenge is staying engaged. But isn't that the challenge with any type of learning opportunity? Granted, it's probably a bit tougher to keep folks involved when the "teacher" isn't in the room, but if you're passionate about the subject matter, then any opportunity to participate is a bonus.

Thing 5 - Online Image Generators

This was the lamest Thing so far. I want to apologize for that. However, I want you all to know that this Thing is a part of every other 23 Things initiative out there. Hopefully "things" only get better from this point forward.

Now that I have that out of the way, let me share my constructive thoughts on online image generators. The first thing I did was to take a look at the trading cards created by the staff at Carleton College. These are super cool (and I wish I had one to hand out), but I don't think they were created using any of the tools listed in the 'Resources' section of this Thing. I'm guessing that they were put together using either Microsoft Publisher or Photoshop. That said, I think they're quite nifty. Back when I worked at Janko's Little Zagreb in the late '90s, our Sisco rep, Birch, had a limited number of trading cards that he handed out as business cards. These were made to look like the classic Topps baseball trading cards of the 1970s and were tied to the Sisco softball team here in Bloomington. Like I said, nifty.

And that's really the beauty of the online image generators, they allow you to easily make eye-catching promotional materials like trading cards, motivational posters, faux billboard advertisements, and the like. But another thing that online image generators do is to offer inspiration. Yes, I was disappointed that the trading card template offered by Big Huge Labs looked nothing like that used by the Carleton College staff, but, given the resources at MCPL, there's no reason we can't simply use the ideas and templates on display via the online image generator websites featured in Thing 5 as inspiration for our own in-house creations.

Of the three resources listed, I liked Big Huge Labs the best. They seemed to offer a nice variety of templates, and the site was easy to navigate and use. I was less impressed with Image Chef. Yes, there's inspiration to be had there, but the actual site itself was a tad underwhelming. I wanted to create a book cover and a campaign button, but I just didn't have the control over text size and alignment that I felt was necessary to make creations worthy of sharing. Toon Doo is an entirely different animal altogether.

Toon Doo allows you to create single- or multi-panel comics. I can see this being a purty cool tool for promoting programs geared toward that sort of content and/or toward an audience attracted to the medium (i.e. tweens and teens). I did experiment with the site a little bit, but it seemed to require more time than I had at my disposal.

I did go a step further and explored the new ALA "READ" poster generator. Now this is cool, and I've already created three different posters of myself with three of my favorite titles (like the one of me here with my favorite Wilhelm Reich title). And maybe it's just me, but I'd love to see staff posters of this sort on display in MCPL. I mean, the Graphics Dept already owns the bells-and-whistles version of this software, so why aren't we putting it to use?

A final word on how these image generators can be used: PowerPoint. Yes, we don't all use PowerPoint in our daily lives, but I personally grow tired of Microsoft's clip art gallery, and these online image generators offer an alternative to that. Anything that presents an alternative to boring bullet points is worth a moment's consideration.

Thing 4 - Exploring Flickr

Lovecraft
Originally uploaded by jovike

I enjoyed browsing through Flickr. I must admit, I've maintained a Flickr account for a couple of years at this point and have over 1000 pictures posted (only two are public--which should give you an idea of how I feel about privacy), so I spent my Thing-time focusing on features I don't use (like groups). Groups seem to have potential, and I like that they can be public or private. I'm not sure what to think of how the Clemens and Alcuin libraries of the College of St. Benedict and St. John's University are using Notes to highlight books in shots of their displays. Seems like a lot of staff time to spend on something with minimal payback, but I do think Flickr does have PR potential in the public library. If nothing else, it's seems like it'd be a great way to keep track of and organize pictures taken internally. At MCPL, such photos could then be made available to staff on LInt. Just a thought.

I'm also quite insular when it comes to using Flickr, so I don't look at stuff posted by folks other than Friends and Family. As such, I took a little time this time around to explore, but I really struggled to find something I wanted to post to my blog. I've settled on an image of some old editions of works by H.P. Lovecraft. Yes, in case you didn't know, I love Lovecraft's short stories--especially those in the Cthulhu cycle. However, this shot wasn't my first choice. I looked at pictures of famous Diggers (like Emmett Grogan), pics of bands I enjoy (like Stereolab), historic photos of Bloomington, and tried unsuccessfully to find pictures of the Indianapolis Racers before settling on the picture you see.

I didn't go through every option in the challenges section, but I did think there were a lot of cool tools available through Big Huge Labs. I even made a magazine cover. Good times.

Thing 3 - Learn About RSS

I've been using RSS on my own for a while now, so this thing didn't present a lot that was new to me. That said, I still consider myself a relative late-comer to the whole RSS thing. At first, I thought it might be cool for keeping up with news, but I soon found that my Google Reader account was inundated with new stories on an almost minute-by-minute basis. After that, I decided to seek out feeds from sites that were only updated once a day or less.

I did take the time to set up an RSS feed for every weblog in the 23 Things initiative here at MCPL. It might seem like it would take a long time to do, but I got all 50 or so blogs set up in my Google Reader account within 15 minutes. And now I don't have to click through all of those links (although I do if I want to see all of the nifty avatars and such--like the three avatars I have on my blog).

Beyond that, I've actually found RSS feeds quite useful. I set up feeds for the Rory Litwin's Library Juice blog, Jessamyn West's Librarian.net, and Nora Rawlinson's Early Word blog. I also receive the WSJ book reviews as a feed. Going to one spot to check these is great, and I'm getting updates on the issues of relevance to progressive issues in librarianship, heads-up on new books and RA tools, and insight into library technology--including the new programming field of gaming in libraries.

But what I really like is being able to 'star', 'share', and 'tag' items. This allows me to keep track of really interesting posts, share them with the world, and organize them. Right now, I'm starring anything of interest. I have a link to my shared items via my personal blog, but as I use this new account, I may create a link to my feeds in my work blog. And I really like being able to tag the WSJ's recommended reads. Even though I didn't need any more books on my "to read" list, RSS is making the list grow at an exponential rate. Wowzers!

Thing 2 - Reading Up on Stuff

It's seems that 23 Things is off to a great start at MCPL. Today is the last day to register for Round 1 of 23 Things, and as of this posting we have 55 people signed up. Purty awesome.

I just worked through Thing 2, and it really got me to thinking. Each article/video offered a lot to ponder, but I'll limit my comments to a few points from the readings that really struck a proverbial chord:

• Teaching the Machine - Michael Wesch's video was well-done, but what really stuck with me was the idea of "teaching the machine". Being a sci-fi freak, I couldn't help but think of Skynet, the fictional computer system from the Terminator films that goes sentient and then decides humans are passé (HAL 9000, anyone?). Honestly, I'm not that worried about computers going A.I. and deciding to wipe humanity off the face of the planet (should I be). What I am worried about is rogue forces solidifying their grip on power. And that brings me to one thing that really concerns me when it comes to Web 2.0: privacy.
  
  As we rush into the technological wonderland that interactive computing offers, are we failing to consider the consequences of documenting many/all of our thoughts, tastes, preferences, positions, opinions, likes, and dislikes online via text and images? I mean, Google is tracking what searches we make, our email providers are keeping logs of interpersonal communication, our blogs are out there for the whole world to see, there are pictures of us and digital recordings of phone conversation, and voice and facial recognition software, and closed circuit video cameras in buildings and on street corners and, well, the list goes on. How long will this information stay out there? Who or what is collecting this data? Are the companies that possess this data willing to pass it on to other corporations or the government? If not now, will they at a future date when these institutions are under new management/administration? How are these forces using this information and how might it be used for nefarious purposes in the future? Are we setting ourselves up? Are those who shout warnings in the wilderness regarding the emerging surveillance society crackpots or prophets? Should we be embracing Web 2.0 with much, much more caution given what I perceive to be well-founded arguments against trusting corporations and the government? Or am I simply a paranoiac given that participation is not necessarily mandatory?



• Relevancy - John Blyberg's overview of Library 2.0 contained so much information that I wanted to stop after each paragraph and form a discussion group. Alas, I pushed through it instead--though I think it would be great to see a larger discussion of L2 at MCPL either as we all work through these "things" or after Round 1 ends.
  
  One issue that Blyberg brought up that I feel compelled to address is how public libraries will continue to remain relevant. Yes, there will always be persons who simply want to checkout books and DVDs and use our toilets and computers, but I can't help but wonder if there's more we should be doing. Do we really need to provide a balanced and comprehensive print collection when so much information is available online? Should we focus more on making the library a community hub and not place so much emphasis on traditional ideas of what a library is? How can we reach out to demographics who have embraced Web 2.0? Why is the AS readers blog is not open to all staff and the public? Is there a way to allow patrons to leave comments in the PAC like patrons in Hennepin County are able to? Is there room for gaming in libraries programming? Should we shift monetary and staff resources devoted to traditional reference services to tech support and programming and the creation of tools that guide patrons in the use of the "online social library" of the future? Me thinks so.



• (Books + People + Radical Trust) x Participation = Library 2.0 - While Blyberg's blog entry was the meatiest offering, there were a few points from the LTR article "The Ongoing Web Revolution that struck me. Of note is the equation in bold above. Yes, public libraries have books and people, and I don't think there's a single staff member at MCPL that isn't convinced that those two things are of crucial importance, but what about radical trust and participation? I'm not talking about task forces and committees and giving staff a voice in decision-making (regardless of whether its real, drawn only to bolster a pre-determined end, or illusory). I'm talking about Web 2.0 and the need for "radical" trust--allowing patrons to leave comments on the PAC, patron-driven blogs, a library Facebook/Flickr/MySpace page, et cetera. Again, this is why I think it's crucial that the discussion of Library 2.0 extend beyond the 23 Things initiative.



• Perpetual Beta - There were a lot of nifty ideas in the five essays I read on the OCLC.org site, but Michael Stephens' statement about not debating Web 2.0 endlessly before implementation but instead being in "perpetual beta" really resonated with me. I know we haven't gotten to these "things" per se, but why isn't MCPL using Delicious, Facebook, Library Thing, Blogger, IM, et cetera? I know we're very egalitarian and like to move forward from a position of consensus, but there are surely times when management has to prod and push to get tech-reluctant staff to give a new resource a shot. Hell, I'm as guilty of reluctance as the next guy, but I know that I've also learned to value things that it took tangible prodding to get me to use.

Anyway, I'm guessing that Thing 2 will be my favorite thing. I love ideas. For example, my love of science fiction stems directly from the fact that it's not formulaic drivel that sinks or swims on the ability of the author to create likable characters (and, to an even greater extent, on marketing pushes that attempt to convince that something that's total crap is actually the next big thing); it has to do with the fact that it's the genre of ideas and possibilities, of unrestrained conjecture and creativity. Anyway, Thing 2 is full of ideas. I worry that upcoming "things" will be less challenging intellectually and more focused on practical mastery of the tools. Alas!

Thing 1 - Setting Up a Weblog

Well, I'm set up and ready to rumble. I probably had too much fun creating my profile, but then I'm a sucker for that sort of thing. Speaking of tweaking my Blogger settings, I got in and added a few gadgets (listing labels, links, etc), uploaded my avatar from Yahoo!, and explored Feedburner and Sitemeter. I can't say that I'm really interested in adding either Feedburner or Sitemeter analytics to this blog, but I can see the advantage of using the for a library or business blog.

Anyway, just wanted to post a quick note documenting this momentous achievement. Next up, reading up on Web 2.0 and tackling Thing 2.