<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1-alpha" --><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
<channel>
	<title>Library clips Comments</title>
	<link>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com</link>
	<description>sharing ideas thoughts and feedback</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:08:01 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha</generator>

	<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/LibraryClipsComments" type="application/rss+xml" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com" /><item>
		<title>by: James</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LibraryClipsComments/~3/W5PM-cXpzTw/</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 11:15:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2005/06/21/journal-database-folksonomy-add-on/#comment-33127</guid>
					<description>I saw http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2005/06/21/journal-database-folksonomy-add-on/ and wanted to mention a new site for biomedical research:

http://www.biomedsearch.com

The site is free, and perhaps the most comprehensive biomedical site on the web.  It has all PubMed and MedLine documents, plus mililons more (often in full text).

It also has account features such as portfolios to save documents, the ability to share documents (and comment on them) between users, and set up automatic alerts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I saw <a href='http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2005/06/21/journal-database-folksonomy-add-on/' rel='nofollow'>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2005/06/21/journal-database-folksonomy-add-on/</a> and wanted to mention a new site for biomedical research:</p>
	<p><a href='http://www.biomedsearch.com' rel='nofollow'>http://www.biomedsearch.com</a></p>
	<p>The site is free, and perhaps the most comprehensive biomedical site on the web.  It has all PubMed and MedLine documents, plus mililons more (often in full text).</p>
	<p>It also has account features such as portfolios to save documents, the ability to share documents (and comment on them) between users, and set up automatic alerts.
</p>

<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/lQc9NhJ-4WB7Cl3mu9ksbOA4fVM/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/lQc9NhJ-4WB7Cl3mu9ksbOA4fVM/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/>
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/lQc9NhJ-4WB7Cl3mu9ksbOA4fVM/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/lQc9NhJ-4WB7Cl3mu9ksbOA4fVM/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p>]]></content:encoded>
				<feedburner:origLink>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2005/06/21/journal-database-folksonomy-add-on/#comment-33127</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>by: John</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LibraryClipsComments/~3/pF2qO7kn8B0/</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 08:54:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/08/20/whats-the-difference-between-intranet-20-and-a-social-network-with-groups/#comment-33126</guid>
					<description>John, don't get me wrong. I absolutely love what Chris is doing with Thoughtfarmer and he'll be more than happy to read your appreciation :)

I just wanted to draw a growing connection between the old intranet and the new one, made up imho exactly by the new collaborative paradigm.

Thanks for your amazing posts</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>John, don&#8217;t get me wrong. I absolutely love what Chris is doing with Thoughtfarmer and he&#8217;ll be more than happy to read your appreciation <img src='http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/wp-images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
	<p>I just wanted to draw a growing connection between the old intranet and the new one, made up imho exactly by the new collaborative paradigm.</p>
	<p>Thanks for your amazing posts
</p>

<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/_7XstZ7z8Lc3K7y0DVlGQCYxO78/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/_7XstZ7z8Lc3K7y0DVlGQCYxO78/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/>
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/_7XstZ7z8Lc3K7y0DVlGQCYxO78/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/_7XstZ7z8Lc3K7y0DVlGQCYxO78/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p>]]></content:encoded>
				<feedburner:origLink>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/08/20/whats-the-difference-between-intranet-20-and-a-social-network-with-groups/#comment-33126</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>by: John Tropea</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LibraryClipsComments/~3/DEdTSEpXufI/</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 01:41:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/08/20/whats-the-difference-between-intranet-20-and-a-social-network-with-groups/#comment-33125</guid>
					<description>Thx for your comment Emanuele

I like how you dissected the Intranet into the 4 areas of content, communication, activities, and collaboration.

And yes, it's also depends on the business needs and goal.

I guess I was thinking from my point of view working in a global company with 5000-10,000 people

Something like Jive could not replace our Intranet, as we need profile pages for business units, etc as you see on traditional Intranets. But these traditional intranets do not offer communities, networking, collaboration.
It would be good if this was part of the Intranet, rather than another product...and as you say Jive SBS 4 is showing the step forward with integration into perhaps a tool like an Intranet.

Basically I envision our Intranet as being a place for information, and profiles for business units, but in a web 2.0 ways...and then also functions for social networks, and collaboration (groups, communities)...that's why I like the idea of Thoughfarmer</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Thx for your comment Emanuele</p>
	<p>I like how you dissected the Intranet into the 4 areas of content, communication, activities, and collaboration.</p>
	<p>And yes, it&#8217;s also depends on the business needs and goal.</p>
	<p>I guess I was thinking from my point of view working in a global company with 5000-10,000 people</p>
	<p>Something like Jive could not replace our Intranet, as we need profile pages for business units, etc as you see on traditional Intranets. But these traditional intranets do not offer communities, networking, collaboration.<br />
It would be good if this was part of the Intranet, rather than another product&#8230;and as you say Jive SBS 4 is showing the step forward with integration into perhaps a tool like an Intranet.</p>
	<p>Basically I envision our Intranet as being a place for information, and profiles for business units, but in a web 2.0 ways&#8230;and then also functions for social networks, and collaboration (groups, communities)&#8230;that&#8217;s why I like the idea of Thoughfarmer
</p>

<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/XbbemHOWAmYPY57ICh_FUEX4qmk/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/XbbemHOWAmYPY57ICh_FUEX4qmk/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/>
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/XbbemHOWAmYPY57ICh_FUEX4qmk/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/XbbemHOWAmYPY57ICh_FUEX4qmk/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p>]]></content:encoded>
				<feedburner:origLink>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/08/20/whats-the-difference-between-intranet-20-and-a-social-network-with-groups/#comment-33125</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>by: John Tropea</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LibraryClipsComments/~3/PM_Yr3x_sVs/</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 01:09:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/08/20/whats-the-difference-between-intranet-20-and-a-social-network-with-groups/#comment-33124</guid>
					<description>Hi John,
I've tried to comment on
http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/08/20/whats-the-difference-between-intranet-20-and-a-social-network-with-groups/
without much success from a train. Could you put the following comment
up for me?

Many thanks and looking forward to your answer.

Best,
Emanuele

-----
Hi John,
I was lucky enough to have personally worked on a number of Intranet
2.0 projects or into projects to strategically evolve the Intranet in
order to make it more relevant both to the business and the people.

Based on my own experience, the gap between old style Intranet and
Intranet 2.0 can be better imagined as a continuum with varied mixes
of 4 basic ingredients: content, communication, activities,
collaboration.

The social network is roughly connected to the last part but it could
also be the overall organizing principle for the entire intranet where
contents, company to employes communication, employees to employees
communication and self service functionalities can be embedded.

I think the right mix really depends from the business goals and the
people needs for which the Intranet 2.0 is designed. In some cases a
social network with basic document sharing and content management
capabilities will make it. Other times a full fledged and heavy
intranet 1.0 with strong process integration, workflows and minimum
social functionalities is much better.

To this goal Jive SBS 4.0 can now be integrated with content and
document management suites (Sharepoint being an example) and the same
could be said about Lotus Connections if you add Quickr and Websphere
Portal.

I think Oracle, IBM and Microsoft (and ThoughtFarmer and Liferay
Social Office) are the best suited to generally support an Intranet
2.0 project.

--
Emanuele Quintarelli</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Hi John,<br />
I&#8217;ve tried to comment on<br />
<a href='http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/08/20/whats-the-difference-between-intranet-20-and-a-social-network-with-groups/' rel='nofollow'>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/08/20/whats-the-difference-between-intranet-20-and-a-social-network-with-groups/</a><br />
without much success from a train. Could you put the following comment<br />
up for me?</p>
	<p>Many thanks and looking forward to your answer.</p>
	<p>Best,<br />
Emanuele</p>
	<p>&#8212;&#8211;<br />
Hi John,<br />
I was lucky enough to have personally worked on a number of Intranet<br />
2.0 projects or into projects to strategically evolve the Intranet in<br />
order to make it more relevant both to the business and the people.</p>
	<p>Based on my own experience, the gap between old style Intranet and<br />
Intranet 2.0 can be better imagined as a continuum with varied mixes<br />
of 4 basic ingredients: content, communication, activities,<br />
collaboration.</p>
	<p>The social network is roughly connected to the last part but it could<br />
also be the overall organizing principle for the entire intranet where<br />
contents, company to employes communication, employees to employees<br />
communication and self service functionalities can be embedded.</p>
	<p>I think the right mix really depends from the business goals and the<br />
people needs for which the Intranet 2.0 is designed. In some cases a<br />
social network with basic document sharing and content management<br />
capabilities will make it. Other times a full fledged and heavy<br />
intranet 1.0 with strong process integration, workflows and minimum<br />
social functionalities is much better.</p>
	<p>To this goal Jive SBS 4.0 can now be integrated with content and<br />
document management suites (Sharepoint being an example) and the same<br />
could be said about Lotus Connections if you add Quickr and Websphere<br />
Portal.</p>
	<p>I think Oracle, IBM and Microsoft (and ThoughtFarmer and Liferay<br />
Social Office) are the best suited to generally support an Intranet<br />
2.0 project.</p>
	<p>&#8212;<br />
Emanuele Quintarelli
</p>

<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/gIghTwY9T8KCzpZCneZQ1wCuBMc/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/gIghTwY9T8KCzpZCneZQ1wCuBMc/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/>
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/gIghTwY9T8KCzpZCneZQ1wCuBMc/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/gIghTwY9T8KCzpZCneZQ1wCuBMc/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p>]]></content:encoded>
				<feedburner:origLink>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/08/20/whats-the-difference-between-intranet-20-and-a-social-network-with-groups/#comment-33124</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Project Management Form</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LibraryClipsComments/~3/Hqd4kWdiA9k/</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 07:22:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2007/03/06/approver-blog-draft-collaboration/#comment-33121</guid>
					<description>Good review... thanks for the post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Good review&#8230; thanks for the post.
</p>

<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/1oqwUPCsN8MuVIgCyusK96UXUPM/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/1oqwUPCsN8MuVIgCyusK96UXUPM/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/>
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/1oqwUPCsN8MuVIgCyusK96UXUPM/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/1oqwUPCsN8MuVIgCyusK96UXUPM/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p>]]></content:encoded>
				<feedburner:origLink>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2007/03/06/approver-blog-draft-collaboration/#comment-33121</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>by: uberVU - social comments</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LibraryClipsComments/~3/dVnqpxj72BY/</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:43:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/10/30/the-unexpected-emergence-from-our-communities-of-practice/#comment-33118</guid>
					<description>&lt;strong&gt;Social comments and analytics for this post&lt;/strong&gt;

This post was mentioned on Twitter by John Tropea: Latest blog post: The unexpected emergence from our Communities of Practice http://bit.ly/31AvOm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p><strong>Social comments and analytics for this post</strong></p>
	<p>This post was mentioned on Twitter by John Tropea: Latest blog post: The unexpected emergence from our Communities of Practice <a href='http://bit.ly/31AvOm' rel='nofollow'>http://bit.ly/31AvOm</a>
</p>

<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/quNuT2_SnTuW2fWt5M5w3HGUCvo/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/quNuT2_SnTuW2fWt5M5w3HGUCvo/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/>
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/quNuT2_SnTuW2fWt5M5w3HGUCvo/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/quNuT2_SnTuW2fWt5M5w3HGUCvo/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p>]]></content:encoded>
				<feedburner:origLink>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/10/30/the-unexpected-emergence-from-our-communities-of-practice/#comment-33118</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Raj</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LibraryClipsComments/~3/xF_W0ak9_kY/</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:47:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/08/07/km-20-culture/#comment-33116</guid>
					<description>I agree with your comment that "the knowledge workers have to create the culture" but I find very few real KM platforms that enable this. Wikis and blogs are not really KM. The best tool I have found is Jumper 2.0 but that takes the right corporate environment for success.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I agree with your comment that &#8220;the knowledge workers have to create the culture&#8221; but I find very few real KM platforms that enable this. Wikis and blogs are not really KM. The best tool I have found is Jumper 2.0 but that takes the right corporate environment for success.
</p>

<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/xHwQD8GygykcbnLalAN4zQzvRSU/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/xHwQD8GygykcbnLalAN4zQzvRSU/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/>
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/xHwQD8GygykcbnLalAN4zQzvRSU/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/xHwQD8GygykcbnLalAN4zQzvRSU/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p>]]></content:encoded>
				<feedburner:origLink>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/08/07/km-20-culture/#comment-33116</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>by: john</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LibraryClipsComments/~3/JoglzN2HotQ/</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:45:15 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2006/03/09/the-aboutness-of-collective-tagging/#comment-33111</guid>
					<description>Nice post. You know there are programs that automatically pick out tags and keywords from an article. I wonder if they would come out similar to this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Nice post. You know there are programs that automatically pick out tags and keywords from an article. I wonder if they would come out similar to this.
</p>

<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/knOn_GJwgseGmHJJm8s30D9Uqlc/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/knOn_GJwgseGmHJJm8s30D9Uqlc/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/>
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/knOn_GJwgseGmHJJm8s30D9Uqlc/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/knOn_GJwgseGmHJJm8s30D9Uqlc/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p>]]></content:encoded>
				<feedburner:origLink>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2006/03/09/the-aboutness-of-collective-tagging/#comment-33111</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>by: software developers</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LibraryClipsComments/~3/PkNK9tsh5PQ/</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:16:37 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2005/07/12/rss-bandit-desktop-reader/#comment-33105</guid>
					<description>Quite inspiring,

RSS bandit is by far the best RSS reader that i have come across, thanks for the information...

Thanks for writing about it</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Quite inspiring,</p>
	<p>RSS bandit is by far the best RSS reader that i have come across, thanks for the information&#8230;</p>
	<p>Thanks for writing about it
</p>

<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/OwVkOxdcfM8OEZIlkovoWO-QntQ/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/OwVkOxdcfM8OEZIlkovoWO-QntQ/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/>
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/OwVkOxdcfM8OEZIlkovoWO-QntQ/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/OwVkOxdcfM8OEZIlkovoWO-QntQ/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p>]]></content:encoded>
				<feedburner:origLink>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2005/07/12/rss-bandit-desktop-reader/#comment-33105</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Rotkapchen</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LibraryClipsComments/~3/6eFKUUq4avc/</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:39:59 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/10/30/post-km-enterprise-20-facilitation-and-complexity/#comment-33083</guid>
					<description>John: It's time to break this one out again. Oddly, you covered the comeback I wanted to make to the post in your own comments.

Yes, per Bill Ives “The irony of enterprise 2.0 is that you actually get more control because the free form nature of the tools allow the business people to decide on where structure occurs, not the people who make the software.” But...there is micro and macro structure (and all sorts of stuff in-between. The technologies themselves are only the possibilities to address either, they are NOT either of these. There is still a need for someone (or a collective effort) to set up the macro-level structure that is specific to the business (this is the BIGGEST point of failure for almost every SharePoint implementation that is done).

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>John: It&#8217;s time to break this one out again. Oddly, you covered the comeback I wanted to make to the post in your own comments.</p>
	<p>Yes, per Bill Ives “The irony of enterprise 2.0 is that you actually get more control because the free form nature of the tools allow the business people to decide on where structure occurs, not the people who make the software.” But&#8230;there is micro and macro structure (and all sorts of stuff in-between. The technologies themselves are only the possibilities to address either, they are NOT either of these. There is still a need for someone (or a collective effort) to set up the macro-level structure that is specific to the business (this is the BIGGEST point of failure for almost every SharePoint implementation that is done).
</p>

<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/0R7fR9A0rOsOsIaVTEGXESfZ2CY/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/0R7fR9A0rOsOsIaVTEGXESfZ2CY/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/>
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/0R7fR9A0rOsOsIaVTEGXESfZ2CY/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/0R7fR9A0rOsOsIaVTEGXESfZ2CY/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p>]]></content:encoded>
				<feedburner:origLink>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/10/30/post-km-enterprise-20-facilitation-and-complexity/#comment-33083</feedburner:origLink></item>
</channel>
</rss>
