<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Does Video Twitter Make Sense?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/</link>
	<description>The Social Times covers news, analysis and insight pertaining to the social web.  Learn how to brand yourself and your company via the social web.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/#comment-1258</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2008 08:27:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/#comment-1258</guid>
		<description>I was at the http://www.webinnovatorsgroup.com/ conference and I bumped into Tom Boilard and he has created a photo Twitter application with http://moborazzi.com.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was at the <a href="http://www.webinnovatorsgroup.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.webinnovatorsgroup.com/</a> conference and I bumped into Tom Boilard and he has created a photo Twitter application with <a href="http://moborazzi.com" rel="nofollow">http://moborazzi.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/#comment-4609</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2008 08:27:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/#comment-4609</guid>
		<description>I was at the &lt;a href="http://www.webinnovatorsgroup.com/"&gt;http://www.webinnovatorsgroup.com/&lt;/a&gt; conference and I bumped into Tom Boilard and he has created a photo Twitter application with &lt;a href="http://moborazzi.com"&gt;http://moborazzi.com&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was at the <a href="http://www.webinnovatorsgroup.com/">http://www.webinnovatorsgroup.com/</a> conference and I bumped into Tom Boilard and he has created a photo Twitter application with <a href="http://moborazzi.com">http://moborazzi.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kosso</title>
		<link>http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/#comment-1248</link>
		<dc:creator>Kosso</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 17:30:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/#comment-1248</guid>
		<description>I can read a newspaper or a book faster than it takes to watch a video, but I still like them all.

Especially when they reference and connect to eachother's medium.

Kosso</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can read a newspaper or a book faster than it takes to watch a video, but I still like them all.</p>
<p>Especially when they reference and connect to eachother&#8217;s medium.</p>
<p>Kosso</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shane Vitarana</title>
		<link>http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/#comment-1247</link>
		<dc:creator>Shane Vitarana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:51:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/#comment-1247</guid>
		<description>The difference between text micro-blogging and video micro-blogging is that text can be scanned easily and processed very fast.  That is why Twitter works.  Voice and video require playing each one individually.  You can't scan ahead and process it quickly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The difference between text micro-blogging and video micro-blogging is that text can be scanned easily and processed very fast.  That is why Twitter works.  Voice and video require playing each one individually.  You can&#8217;t scan ahead and process it quickly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Keliher</title>
		<link>http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/#comment-1243</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Keliher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 15:15:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/04/does-video-twitter-make-sense/#comment-1243</guid>
		<description>Your criticism of Seesmic - that "it takes way too long to post a video and listen to a video playback then read a maximum 140 character message" - seems to assume Seesmic is supposed to replace Twitter or somehow be "like Twitter but in video!"

Sure, some people explain it like that because it's an easy way to explain what Seesmic is - roughly. But it's actually quite off the mark. There's a massive difference between interacting with people in short bursts of video and doing so in minuscule bursts of text. Comparing the two so directly isn't even like comparing apples and oranges - it's more like apples and cheeseburgers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your criticism of Seesmic - that &#8220;it takes way too long to post a video and listen to a video playback then read a maximum 140 character message&#8221; - seems to assume Seesmic is supposed to replace Twitter or somehow be &#8220;like Twitter but in video!&#8221;</p>
<p>Sure, some people explain it like that because it&#8217;s an easy way to explain what Seesmic is - roughly. But it&#8217;s actually quite off the mark. There&#8217;s a massive difference between interacting with people in short bursts of video and doing so in minuscule bursts of text. Comparing the two so directly isn&#8217;t even like comparing apples and oranges - it&#8217;s more like apples and cheeseburgers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
