At work, our team once had no skills or capability to produce media.  For less than $100, we were able to produce video and audio.  We’ve taken that train as far as it goes, and leaders grew discontent with the quality of the audio and video we could produce.  Still, we kept doing it.  Why? Because they didn’t care enough to want to pay for something better.

I’ve spent the better part of two days re-evaluating the tools we have and what capabilities they provide for our team, in terms of media production.  When we began building E-Learning content ourselves, there was no budget and no appreciation for media, so everything had to be guerilla-style.

What is guerilla-style multimedia? It’s multimedia production on the cheap. I selected a small, $40 FlexMic (from MacMice) that was a USB condenser microphone, which provides better audio quality than the unpowered microphones that plug into your Audio-In port on your computer.  We put a pop-screen together out of a coat hanger and panty hose (I read that one online a few years back). For video, I picked up a Flip Camera (which ended up getting adopted throughout the organization where people wanted to do video).

When we had no media capability and no business case to make, this gave us a set of tools which enabled only so much.  I’m now proud to say that our leadership is demanding better quality audio and better quality video, and that after two years we’re now easily making the business case it will take to significantly advance our ability to produce such multimedia in-house.

Sometimes to please people, you have to make them aware of the pain their own lack of investment causes.  You must withstand the countless retakes someone will make you do before a leader realizes that it’s the quality of the tools you’re using that prevents desired results. You must be ready with a plan to improve (and you must deliver on that plan).

Many organizations tend to value the diving catch; they should be valuing the people who prevent the need for diving catches but it’s largely not in our nature.  Designers, by definition of wanting to design the “right” experiences, tend to fight this head-on.  As a disruptive practice, I advise leveraging this cultural moray. Do the best job you can with the tools you have and continue to work on the plan to level up.  That way when the idea to improve becomes a leader’s idea, you have a solid plan to help that leader execute flawlessly.  You can make the diving catch.

Related posts:

1. What Makes Great Apps

The problem I run into more often than anything is that I don’t seem to have a lot of friends.  More to the point, despite how many hundreds of actual friends I have, we never seem to be online, playing the same game at the same time and aware of each other so we can play together.  The exchange of friend codes on the Wii is so ridiculously complicated, I imagine that it is so much better on XBox because of all the Microsoft integration, allowing you to port friends lists in and out of the platform.  I love the Wii for so many things, but the amount of work some of my friends put into manually managing their friends in each game, and scheduling times to play with each other online… it seems like a lot of work and I wonder how often it actually does work.

While there’s no consistent friend management on the iPhone, most online multiplayers I’ve installed hook up with Facebook Connect to put you in league with friends.

That still is a limiter, however.  Case in point? Scrabble, which has a pretty clean and obvious multiplayer component using Facebook.  You can play Scrabble on the web, through Facebook, or on the iPhone; both methods are portals to the same game which is what I’d expect to happen.  Compare this setup to Mafia Wars, which has a web-based portal outside of Facebook, a web-based portal in Facebook and the iPhone application — at least the iPhone and the Facebook portals have no means of playing the same game.  So my 147th level Mogul? Completely inaccessible to me on the iPhone, where I needed to start from scratch — which is why I uninstalled Mafia Wars not two seconds after figuring that out.

Unfortunately, even though I know a lot of Scrabble players, we’re never playing together at the same time.  Scrabble at least can hook me up with someone on Facebook that *is* playing when I’m playing (at the moment of starting a game), but that’s the only point of shared awareness.  If my opponent makes her move, I still need to either launch Scrabble to find out about it or launch Facebook to get the alert (or get the alert texted to my phone, etc). Unless there are several of us playing the same game on the same WiFi network, Scrabble can’t find anyone playing right nearby me, which is something I might prefer.

I deconstruct this part of the multiplayer experience in games to highlight one common gap that BAQON is intended to solve.  Gamers benefit from having location-aware and situation-aware services that connect them to their friends or potential friends nearby them, regardless of how they’re accessing the same (or similar) game.  It seems to me that if I’m limited only to playing with people on my wifi network OR people with Facebook accounts OR people playing on iPhones — that’s still not nearly as many candidates for meaningful connection or competition as ALL of those people, plus people who are playing the same game in the same place but through their cell service AND people who are playing the game who don’t belong to Facebook AND people playing the game on anything but an iPhone.

So, it’s not obvious for people who know me now as opposed to 9-10 years ago, but I used to build web-based games for kids 6-12.  I was producing them (writing up proposals, managing the project) and developing them (coding in ActionScript, programatic animations, architecture in Flash).  I worked with a team that produced the media and handled the server-side code and database layers.  This was my first job after teaching, and I loved it.  Making games was fun and I was very good at it.

There are many ways in which developing games is easier now.  For one thing developers now have frameworks to employ, like OpenFeint to handle high score boards, username, in-game purchases, unlockable items, etc.  On the other hand, games are so much more complicated now.  There’s more competition, your user base is savvier and likely more casual and definitely more interested in connecting with their friends and competition — all things you need to design and develop for.  You’re still largely responsible for maintaining or paying someone to maintain a backend to the game you want to build and that takes a huge chunk of resources to accomplish.  You’re nailed if you build a game no one wants to play, and you’re doubly nailed if you build a game that becomes so hot that you can’t handle the scale of adoption.

If you’re going to be building a game that touches the internet, I think you’re going to be interested in BAQON.  BAQON will provide your players with the ability to connect with each other based on location.  The intention is that BAQON will work with identity services like Facebook Connect or Google or MSN or… pick a service.  What we’re hoping you won’t need to do anymore is deal with is all the effort it takes to deal with your own backend for highscores and multiplayer awareness.  BAQON is not a socket server, but it should make it much easier to create interoperable real-time gaming experiences.  In that respect, I think it’s going to accelerate a lot of game development.

For one thing, if you’re a game developer and you don’t have to worry about maintaining a back-end system to mitigate your high scoreboards, even that by itself, probably saves you a huge boatload of time, money and resources.  This allows you, as a developer of a small game to focus on the actual game — not the servicing of things that aren’t the game.

If you’re a game developer with multiple titles, the ability to create an entry parlour where players can get line of sight into who’s playing what games of yours locally should help to expose new players to your other titles.  After all, as gamers are becoming more social, gamers will want more gaming experiences they can actually share with each other — almost impossible to do that right now, even with the emergence of location-aware gaming devices.  Now, people playing a game in one location may have line of sight into all the games being played in the same location.

By abstracting out persistent gaming information, you can enable multiple points of entry into shared game experiences.  This means you can potentially build games on multiple platforms and it’s all the same game.  When World of Warcraft launched, it was revolutionary because Macs and PCs could play with each other.  How many of the thousands of game titles around allow users to play with each other across platforms? It feels like it’s mainly the web-based titles, and as I use the iPhone I see that the stovepipes are still around. I believe we’ll help solve for it.

My question for you: if you’re building games and/or are gaming actively, what am I missing?

Related posts:

1. What BAQON Enables: Public Services Applications
2. What About BAQON?
3. Gah!!!!! the gPhone is not the gPhone!!!!

What we’re looking to do is to accelerate development of a new generation of applications for collaboration, communication, information exchange, learning and gaming where experiences can be persistent, interoperable and still contextualized (// vision). Our plan is to enable such development through a well documented and open (// free) set of web services or APIs that can be replicated on any server (// mision).

Making this functionality available as a set of web services enables the kinds of “combinatorial” innovations that can only happen when you mash things up.  Take for example the LETSI Run-Time Web Services. From a learning perspective, the ability to create an AR app that also can be tracked in an academic or corporate LMS?  I think that’d be pretty sweet, as well as the converse: making performance support content available through Augmented or VW space.

Our total scope is very bold, but we’re starting with a practical set of services that will support location-based experiences.  The goal for our initial set of services is to accelerate development of a variety of Augmented Reality (AR) applications, collaboration tools, learning transfer mechanisms, games, and the like. When the community organizes to help us improve and extend it, we’ll do it together as the source will be shared and open.

There’s probably some questions of timetables, so let me try and address that now. We’ve locked down our initial requirements set and begin development of the web services this weekend. The plan is to have a stable public release of the web services in December (if it’s clicking along, we’ll release it sooner).

BAQON in its first incarnation

As the idea guy and the evangelist for BAQON, I’m getting ready to architect out the website (baqon.org). I need your help. What do you want to know? What would help you prepare to build a web or native mobile or desktop applications (heck, even embedded applications)? How can I connect you to the people or resources you’d need to make your application idea happen?

Please use the comments below, but obviously feel free to contact me or hit me on Twitter (@mrch0mp3rs).

Related posts:

1. What BAQON Enables: Public Services Applications
2. What BAQON Enables: Gaming
3. Curriculum is Not the (Whole) Problem

I spent a decent amount of time this afternoon drafting out a chapter of the Star Wars Management Guide.  I’m hoping by having something up there for people to poke a stick at, it encourages the dozens interested in contributing to start fleshing it out some more.

To read what’s in this chapter, take a look here.

The basic structure of this chapter and any chapter written like it will look something like this:

• Background – this is situating the reader to the part of the movie in which the quote is pulled from. This is the context.
• Lesson(s) –  There must be one lesson as a takeaway from this background scenario, but there may be more than one lesson to be drawn, or the context that the lesson is addressing may be different as well.  This is the fun part, where several people have eyed up the same quote — one way you can approach it is to build out your own lessons (each); the other is to actually write collaboratively.
  • Each Lesson should have one or more Activity(ies).  These will direct the reader to the actions they must take to reinforce the learning.

You should not feel constrained to the structure I’ve put in place (okay, the Background is necessary, but this is a work that will be authored by multiple people).  In fact, I would like to ask you to take a stab at improving this first chapter so it can be a model to base the other chapters off of.

If you want to drum up support for the chapter you’re specifically interested in, by all means, blog or tweet away about it.  This effort is just as much yours as it is mine.  It’s your party.  I’m just the host.

Please use the comments and let’s get some questions out of the way!

Related posts:

1. The Star Wars Management Guide
2. How Change Changes You
3. Curriculum is Not the (Whole) Problem

The banquet I attended was filled to the brim with CIOs and technologists from around the Chicago area.  Thing that surprised me? The real innovators were i.c. stars themselves.  I admit I went into the banquet with no grounding or expectations.  I was invited about two days before and didn’t have a guide to situate me on what I was doing there, what the group was about, etc.  But there were a couple of takeaways I didn’t expect out of this conference:

• Culture is a process; the filter through which you see the world.
• A “Community Leader” is someone who creates sustainable opportunities for others.
• Who is witnessing your change? If you’re a tree, who is noticing your bark? Those are the people you need to keep close to you, as they’re your guides.

My first thought about some of the people attending the event were: these aren’t particularly innovative people.  I typically think of innovators along Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation curve:

Rogers' Diffusion of Innovation

Most people reading this blog are in the Innovator/Early Adopter camp.  We seem to reinforce each other (you and I).  I have a hard time considering myself an Innovator, because in my mental model of innovation, it requires Bloom’s “Synthesis” and for all the ideas I can generate, I wonder how many of them are truly original.  Maybe that’s too high a standard; we can discuss it.

To be clear, Roger’s Diffusion of Innovations Theory isn’t about making vs adopting — it’s all about adopting.  You can tell who the innovators are if they’re first.  Period; as Wikipedia defines:

Innovators are the first individuals to adopt an innovation. Innovators are willing to take risks, youngest in age, have the highest social class, have great financial lucidity, very social and have closest contact to scientific sources and interaction with other innovators.

If you and I are innovators in learning technology, chances are we have our fair share of challenges getting the buy-in.  That’s why we have our communities of practice (#lrnchat is a CoP); some of us have our quasi-secret -societies.

What was interesting to me about the i.c.stars event was more to the point of how many people are buying into how the group was innovating.  Although the attendees I met were pretty distributed in age, they met all the other qualifiers, handily (though my own financial lucidity and wealth aren’t exactly present). The i.c.stars approach at innovation is an inclusive one; very key to adoption.  There were a few attendees and volunteers in the organization that I was able to connect with (note: I wish I knew more about telecommunications for broader conversation opportunities); the graduates from the i.c. stars program had a real light inside.

Every graduate I met from the program, working as webmasters or founding interactive startups — these guys were really interesting people.  They are bringing something new to the idea landscape.  Their experiences and backgrounds are just different from the Innovators, as wikipedia defines.  I met at least four graduates of the i.c.stars program, and each one of them were the kind of person I’d want on my team to start cranking out code, content and ideas.  Why? Two reasons: a) They show up; b) They’re different from me and everyone I work with.

Each graduate had someone who pulled them into this program from an environment where their out-of-school earnings would be 25% of what they were making after leaving i.c.stars — a 4-fold difference in income changes lives and the lives that surround them.  They had to show-up every day to stay in the program (not just “attend” but be “present”), but each participant in i.c. stars has literally a community around them to support and encourage them on their journey through the program.  They have people who are appreciating their change; supporting it.

So, my brothers and sisters who are innovating for your organizations today, I want you to think about this… who’s noticing your evolution?  If you’re leading, how are you creating sustainable opportunities for the people around you?

No related posts.

When the desktop application for Tweetie came out, I was extremely impressed with the simplicity of the design, and when I was researching how Tweetie came about, I came across the atebits website, which was elegantly designed by Tim Van Damme.  I dug down into Tim’s site which was a business card and was really blown away with his whole aesthetic.  Clean, but not sterile — Tim’s designs offer a certain blend of sophistication and play that really appeals to me.  I signed up for Readernaut, which is the kind of social networking site for reading I’d imagined wanting to join — another plus.

The New Look

When I found out a few months ago that Tim was working on developing a lifestream-style theme for Wordpress through Woo themes, I all but vowed I’d switch to it.  Once the screenshots were available, I knew I would.  And when I Logan and Evie woke me up this morning at an ungodly hour, I couldn’t fall back asleep.  Happily, I discovered in my 4am browsing that Woo Themes had finally released the Antisocial theme, and I didn’t hesitate for a second.

Related posts:

1. My Social Workflow…
2. I know I said I wouldn’t do it…

Harold’s thesis, to me, at its core is one of how to manage the knowledge. He’s throwing it all in the same sink, which is fine at a high level, but when you get down to it there are deeper dives. Harold’s right on the money with how to deal with the challenge; I posit that the deeper dives are where we find bigger, fundamental challenges.

“Content” is one of those closest to the surface, and it’s the most obvious way we can talk about what’s not right with our struggles with the abundance of knowledge in the world; we all have the most experience and comfort with content. The last ten years have made it faster, cheaper and easier to creating good content. Filtering content is improving, and that’s in large part because aggregating relevant content before/after filtering is solid.

As one large human network, we’ve developed better-than-primitive tools (like sticks and stones turning into hatchets) to do these things for us (there’s my shout out to @moehlert, @dennisschleiche and other cultural anthropologists).

“Content” only presents one perspective. What about “community?”

We have constructed only primitive tools when it comes to managing knowledge, in terms of our relationships with people and the communities that form out of disparate (or even conjoined) networks of people.

We’re definitely aglow with the egalitarian nature of 140-character limits because it gives us a common perspective with which to observe the merits of connecting to other people, but Twitter is still about the content at least as much as it is about the people.

Facebook can connect you to your first kiss back in Kindergarten (Holly Konopka, btw) — but Facebook can’t connect me to sociologists who happen to have experience turning big-picture visions in my head into business capabilities (as an–ahem–example). To find such a person, he/she needs to be a friend of a friend (community) or they need to have published (content) stuff that would identify them through search engines.

We have workarounds, which may eventually help us in solving this problem, but these indirect means bypass people who don’t publish much (so SEO never picks them up–BRITNEY NAKED), or are otherwise inaccessible to me because I only know academics and nerds who have no business sense (present company excluded, of course).

We have primitive means of filtering and almost no means of aggregation of people.

So even with content and community, there’s potentially still ANOTHER view of the problem with “curriculum” Harold identified, which is that in addition to not being able to handle all the content and communities that exist, we also have no way of dealing with all the “context” needed to situate an understanding, individual or communal.

I mean, we don’t even have the primitive tools for this yet. Take for example this very thread of discussion: Harold presents one point of view regarding what he sees as a root cause to a problem (I’m paraphrasing here):

“Curriculum, as a concept feels outdated… why?”

I’m now presenting a potentially more complex point of view on the issue.

There are derivatives to be drawn from even what I’m presenting to you (remove comma?) as a reader and possible participant; yet you must manage all these perspectives, including Koreen Olbrish’s and Mark Oehlert’s and Clark Quinn’s perspectives on this same issue. There are some tweets on this topic, and you can throw those in the mix.

You might be reading this and have the full advantage of being situated already in this discussion with an ample handle on context. What if this post is where you first jump in? What does anyone need to do to catch up to the discussion if you want to make sense of what Harold, Koreen, Mark, Clark and now I are all talking about?

Now go a step beyond: what would someone else, other than you, need to do in order to get themselves to a point where he or she could take these ideas and run with them?

We have difficulty in making context sharable in and of itself. Because of that we have almost no way of aggregating contexts let alone filtering them. We can only imagine what that would be like. Science Fiction (or even the last ten years of online search capability) models that if we can capture things, we can make them available in lots of ways. I can recall movies like Dreamscape and Brainstorm that deal with capturing and sharing experiences, but we’re a ways away from the Matrix style of downloading that degree of context.

Besides, the hard-line transfer mechanisms are awkward or look damn uncomfortable in The Matrix.

So this brings me back to the wall Harold alludes to. I believe the scope of the problem is more dense than just that there’s so much more to “know” than we can possibly ever learn. These statements are, if you connect the same dots I’m connecting, supported by Harold himself (thanks for the link, Harold!) in “What is Weighing Down Learning“:

• There are so many more people to get to know than we can possibly ever build a relationship with;
• There are so many more experiences happening in a single day than any one of us can possibly participate in, given a lifetime!

Our notion of connecting to each other is rooted in metaphors based on connecting to content. We need to flip this on its head. So what do we do about THAT?

Well… I had an idea (// @z_rose @timpmartin).

One possible solution that some friends and I are actively working on is, at a very high level, to use the Internet itself as a giant database (rather than putting data in stovepipes like actual databases) to assign data to people, instead of digital artifacts. We think we’ve found a way to enable more complex social networking than we can currently accomplish under the conditions that networks are based solely on who you currently know and by extension through friend-of-a-friend relationships. If we get that right, we think we’ll be able to enable sharing contexts.

For future reference, we’re calling our solution a Brokered Anonymous acQuaintance Open Network, or BAQON for short.

Related posts:

1. Catching Up
2. What About BAQON?
3. How Change Changes You

So, now I’m thinking a bit more broadly and openly.  What if a broader community of geeks, engineers, MBAs and the like were to put together a business book based on lessons learned from Star Wars?  Call it a management guide — heck, even an instruction manual for socially awkward nerds in a non-nerd workspace.

Context

A few weeks ago, I tweeted the idea and was immediately presented with enough response to outline thirteen possible chapters (all from the original trilogy, I’d add).  I’m not the purest I once was, though I would be surprised to mine wisdom out of the prequels.  At any rate, here’s a list of the chapters suggested almost entirely from the feedback in the beginning of August:

• Chapter 1: “Stay on Target”
• Chapter 2: “Watch for Enemy Fighters”
• Chapter 3: “There Will Be No Bargain”
• Chapter 4: “I Find Your Lack of Faith Disturbing”
• Chapter 5: “Do or do not. There is no try.” chapter on increasing productivity?
• Chapter 6: “A Small, One-Man Fighter Should be able to Penetrate the Outer Defenses”
• Chapter 7: “These Aren’t The Droids You’re Looking For”
• Chapter 8: “Never Tell Me The Odds”
• Chapter 9: “Search Your Feelings; You Know it To Be True.”
• Chapter 10: “IT’S A TRAP!”
• Chapter 11: “What I told you was true… from a certain point of view.”
• Chapter 12: “Traveling through hyperspace ain’t like dusting crops, boy”
• Chapter 13, “I Know.”

Additions…

• Chapter 14, “This deal is getting worse all the time.”
• Chapter 15, “He’s no good to me dead.”

Plan

If there is some initial interest, I’ll set up a wiki on my gen1.us domain to let a first set of writers in, and then open it up/expand.

Not that I want to force a hand in the communal/creative process, but I’m trying to put enough boundaries to help move ideas forward and eliminate distractions.  I’m completely open to doing this in different ways.

Example: if I was writing a chapter myself, I’d expect the structure to look somewhat like this:

• Title of the chapter is the pull quote.
• First section of the chapter describes the scene in which the quote takes place.
• Next section of the chapter relates it to one or more workplace scenarios where the scene in Star Wars is a metaphor (or an anti-model)
• Pepper this with citations from other literature, preferrably non-fiction experts like Covey, Collins, Pink, etc, but not exclusively non-fiction experts.  Any relevant genre to enlighten the point you’re trying to make with the quote would be fine.  Point being: I don’t want to illustrate lessons from Star Wars with lessons from Star Trek.  I’d rather use lessons from Senge than Ferengi (har har).

…but I’m also flexible on this, too.

Goals

I have very few goals I want to get out of this, for me.

1. Have fun without working too hard (*critical success factor).
2. Build relationships beyond my normal network (*big personal win here).
3. Have a site that actually has to go down for maintenance (*still nostalgic for an organic Digg effect).
4. Get it done 100% community effort (*I don’t write more than one “chapter” worth of material, if that much)

Next Steps

If you’re in, comment below.  If I get more than six comments expressing interest (from six different people), I’ll set up the wiki and we’ll go from there.

Related posts:

1. Star Wars MG: Stay On Target
2. Identity, Participation and Social Learning Implications
3. Curriculum is Not the (Whole) Problem

“The mechanisms for social networking were never designed for security and filtering. They make it way too easy for people with bad intentions to push malicious code to unsuspecting users. It’s just a fact of life,” says a source at Stratcom, which is responsible for securing the military’s “global information grid.

Price Floyd, the military’s new social-networking czar, said no final decision has been made yet regarding a Web 2.0 block. “An analysis is being conducted,” Floyd told Danger Room. (Source: Milblogging)

I really don’t think “malicious code” has anything to do with this. I think the issue is much more nuanced and highly more politicized.

I’ve heard stories (I wish I could find them in the small time I have to research this) that the problem isn’t so much the blogging or microblogging by individual soldiers… most of our uniformed bloggers are following the rules. There is a set of rules, or Operations Security (OPSEC) instructions that guide what soldiers are allowed to share.

Interesting thing (at least as of 2007), these OPSEC rules are (or at least were) on the Army’s restricted knowledge base on their intranet — meaning contractors and family members would have no access to the file. Truth be told, I’m not a person who reads such rules if they don’t apply to me, and I’d guess that even given the opportunity to review the document, there’s really very little that the military can do to stop Army spouses and family members from blogging whatever they want to blog about.

So…. the story I heard is that there’s this base in the Field that was kind of an ad hoc base — a small security force to guard the base because its security was that no one knew it was there. Soldiers on the base would blog about their daily activities, being fairly mindful of their OPSEC instructions. Their spouses, being somewhat in the dark about what their soldiers were doing and where they actually were, started co-blogging to exchange information and piece together where the soliders were, what they were doing, etc. And they figured it out, which then freaked the DoD out.

With the traceability of information known to link back to the sources — the soldiers on that base — the community around them was able to aggregate and piece together some critical information intended to be kept a secret.

Now that’s what I’ve heard. I don’t know how true it is, but since I haven’t seen this discussed elsewhere, it makes me at least assume it’s truthy. It’s highly contentious to point the finger at military family, which I can see why the DoD would go out of their way to not bring that into their argument for blocking social media.

It would also make sense that with this “warning order” a whole other part of the DoD, starting with Price Floyd, is looking to collect opinions on this. Because it’s a double-edged sword. The military is going to have a hard time recruiting soldiers if they can’t use the tools they want to use in communicating with friends and family abroad. We’re not writing a lot of paper-based letters anymore, where it was easy to monitor what was being said — and because it was paper-based, it was at least another step more difficult to share that information in a globally-viewable way.

I welcome any thoughts or expansions to validate or dispute this post in the comments.

Related posts:

1. Identity, Participation and Social Learning Implications
2. How Change Changes You
3. Curriculum is Not the (Whole) Problem

To move an organizational mindset from information lockdown (”need to know”) to collaboration (”need to share”), you can probably start by evangelizing a culture of capture.

Basically, if you can “capture” information — be it a screen-capture, a screenshot, an audio capture, an mp3, a text clip, a link, a tweet, etc — you have effectively captured something that can be described (keywords, folksonomy) and then shared. It’s not a tech thing — there’s really little to nothing needed in terms of software or hardware acquisition to do this. This is quite simply boiled down to a behavior: capturing information. Sharing information can be nebulous — I think a lot of people probably look at the “need to share” idea as a great philosophy, but when push comes to shove they don’t have an idea of how to actually do “sharing.”

Perhaps the abstract of “sharing” merely needs something concrete to get it started: “capture.” Brooks Andrus (@babarakus) responded to my original tweet with the following chain, which very clearly applies the notion of “capture” in a variety of ways:

Again, I don’t know if this is an intentional contribution into our shared lexicon, but I think Masie really nails it with this quip.

Related posts:

1. Catching Up
2. A Knowledge Exchange Strategy for Enterprise
3. Stop, Collaborate and Listen