<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.blogher.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>BlogHer - In a flickr of the eye, it&amp;#039;s Simpy not the same - Comments</title>
 <link>http://www.blogher.com/node/6407</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;In a flickr of the eye, it&#039;s Simpy not the same&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>It&#039;s a Squishy Target</title>
 <link>http://www.blogher.com/node/6407#comment-5007</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;I was another one who got slapped by flickr&#039;s NIPSA designation when I opened a new Pro account to assemble a set of Second Life photos. I am adamant they are not screen shots in any way, and even found a Flickr blog entry with a SL shot they labeled as a &quot;photo&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But I love flickr. My personal site has several thousand photos, and it is still IMHO the best. They are not scrutinzing every picture and every account, but they do look more closely at new accounts. I&#039;ve read that they are eyeballing sites with more than half of what they designate &quot;non photos&quot;. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They are not restricting these images; what they are resticting is if accounts wiht large numbers of &quot;ahem&quot; non photos show up on their search results. I can still upload my SL photos, syndicate them to my blog, etc. They just do not show up in searches and public tags.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;You have almost nothing to worry about if you have an established account with mostly photos.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If I were to do this again, I would load up a new account with 100 photos of cats and plates and drunk partiers, let a week ro 2 slide by, and then start slipping in my SL stuff.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2006 03:26:07 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>cogdog</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 5007 at http://www.blogher.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>That&#039;s a good question</title>
 <link>http://www.blogher.com/node/6407#comment-4774</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;It seems to get down to creative judgment. Does a photo of a screenshot count? What about a screenshot of a photo? When computer screens and photos online are just so many pixels of color, where is the line drawn? I think that&#039;s a tough question for anybody, whether one is a lawyer or not.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Laura Scott&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pingv.com&quot;&gt;design&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://scatteredsunshine.com&quot;&gt;snap&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rarepattern.com&quot;&gt;blog&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.blogher.com/website-feedback&quot;&gt;BlogHer site admin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:18:04 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Laura Scott</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4774 at http://www.blogher.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Curious</title>
 <link>http://www.blogher.com/node/6407#comment-4764</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;I&#039;m curious as to what &quot;mostly non-photographic images&quot; means. Is it a certain percentage? Is it one? Is it twenty even if you have 498768709 photos uploaded to flickr? What about groups like &lt;a href=&quot;http://flickr.com/groups/flickrtoys/&quot;&gt;Link Text&lt;/a&gt;FD flickr Toys that let you &quot;manipulate&quot; a photo, or photos that are photoshopped to heck and back? These are not strictly &quot;photographs.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I, myself, have approximately eight &quot;non-photograph&quot; photos on my flickr. And then a handful or two of manipulated photos. When I was bebopping around flickr last week, I came across that &quot;rule&quot; and wondered about my few &quot;non-photos.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Jenna&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 14:18:08 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>JennaHatfield</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4764 at http://www.blogher.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>In a flickr of the eye, it&#039;s Simpy not the same</title>
 <link>http://www.blogher.com/node/6407</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;[Laura Scott also blogs at &lt;a href=&quot;http://pingv.com&quot;&gt;pingVision&lt;/a&gt;.]&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://flickr.com/photos/stijnvogels/74248749/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://static.flickr.com/36/74248749_29dc8602d7_m_d.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Rand computer&quot; title=&quot;Where the real meets the virtual&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;The virtual world of Web 2.0 may seem real enough to many, but a screen shot is not a photo -- at least so says &lt;a href=&quot;http://flickr.com&quot;&gt;flickr&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,71119-0.html?tw=rss.index&quot;&gt;Kathleen Craig reports reports in Wired&lt;/a&gt; today:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;At stake is a little-known Flickr policy of flagging accounts that contain mostly non-photographic images and preventing images from those accounts from appearing in public areas of the site, including search.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As a result, many screenshots on Flickr are AWOL -- at least as far as the general public is concerned.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Apparently bearing the brunt of the recently acquired Yahoo property&#039;s policy are virtual world &lt;i&gt;Second Life&lt;/i&gt; fans, who&#039;ve been posting images from their carefully crafted worlds.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://journal.kboan.com/2006/05/31/i-hate-flickr&quot;&gt;I Hate Flickr&lt;/a&gt;&quot; is the title of one blog post on the topic.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;OK, perhaps hate is too strong a word,&quot; poster K. Boan continued. &quot;I am disappointed with Flickr. I am confused by Flickr&#039;s policy/lack of policy (or murky policy) pertaining to non-photographic images.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But what about when virtual world meets real world?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;Flickr member &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.ericrice.com/&quot;&gt;Eric Rice&lt;/a&gt;, who regularly podcasts from &lt;i&gt;Second Life&lt;/i&gt; and covered the &lt;a href=&quot;http://flickr.com/search/?w=all&amp;amp;q=vloggercon%2C+secondlife&amp;amp;m=tags&quot;&gt;virtual Vloggercon&lt;/a&gt;, suggested Flickr&#039;s actions could have a detrimental effect on legitimate reporting. As of Monday, Flickr showed more than 1,600 photos associated with Vloggercon, but only seven screenshots from the virtual version of the event.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Wired reports that even the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wired.com/news/technology/1,70153-0.html&quot;&gt;Center for Disease Control&lt;/a&gt; is potentially affected by flickr&#039;s policy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://flickr.com/photos/jw_00000/99339138/&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://static.flickr.com/43/99339138_aea5cb4e27_m_d.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Simpy&quot; title=&quot;Like del.icio.us, but not Yahoo-owned ... or at least not yet&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;Another social media site in the Web 2.0 realm has also met with changes, but this time the issue being addressed is punctuation -- as in getting rid of it.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;By now, many of us have gotten used to where the periods go in &lt;a href=&quot;http://del.icio.us&quot;&gt;del.icio.us&lt;/a&gt; ... but what about &lt;a href=&quot;http://de.lirio.us&quot;&gt;de.lirio.us&lt;/a&gt; ?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Enter &lt;a href=&quot;http://simpy.com&quot;&gt;Simpy&lt;/a&gt; -- de.lirio.us&#039; new domain for its now-upgraded and delectable freetagging bookmarks service.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Existing de.lirio.us users can &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.simpy.com/blojsom/blog/news/2006/06/13/De-lirio-us-Migrates-to-Simpy.html&quot;&gt;migrate&lt;/a&gt; to the new system by visiting &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.simpy.com/3p/delirious&quot; title=&quot;http://www.simpy.com/3p/delirious&quot;&gt;http://www.simpy.com/3p/delirious&lt;/a&gt; and transferring their existing accounts. Don&#039;t wait! De.lirio.us is going away altogether in a month or so.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://www.blogher.com/node/6407#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.blogher.com/blogher-topics/blogging-social-media-0">Blogging &amp;amp; Social Media</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogher.com/topic/technology-web">Technology &amp;amp; Web</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:18:43 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Laura Scott</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">6407 at http://www.blogher.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
