Comments on: Weblogs, Date/Timestamps, and Time Travel http://www.contentious.com/2005/09/07/weblogs-datetimestamps-and-time-travel/ Amy Gahran's news and musings on how we communicate in the online age. Thu, 21 Aug 2008 23:18:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Counsel http://www.contentious.com/2005/09/07/weblogs-datetimestamps-and-time-travel/#comment-36489 Counsel Thu, 06 Oct 2005 15:35:15 +0000 #comment-36489 I think most of us do post dates/times for our posts (or our software does it for us). However, I was just trying to rationalize the thinking behind why some might disagree. I think most of us do post dates/times for our posts (or our software does it for us). However, I was just trying to rationalize the thinking behind why some might disagree.

]]> By: Steve Loszewski http://www.contentious.com/2005/09/07/weblogs-datetimestamps-and-time-travel/#comment-34528 Steve Loszewski Sat, 24 Sep 2005 16:02:33 +0000 #comment-34528 I don't see what the problem would be with putting a time stamp on every blog - even if it is supposed to be timeless. It's a good way to cover your bases, and make the information more useful to users. Let future users judge whether a posting from three months ago could still provide relevant information. I don’t see what the problem would be with putting a time stamp on every blog - even if it is supposed to be timeless. It’s a good way to cover your bases, and make the information more useful to users. Let future users judge whether a posting from three months ago could still provide relevant information.

]]> By: Counsel http://www.contentious.com/2005/09/07/weblogs-datetimestamps-and-time-travel/#comment-33976 Counsel Tue, 20 Sep 2005 16:21:45 +0000 #comment-33976 Dan: I have the same problem at my site. The ISP is looking to fix the time difference because the post states it was made roughly 12 hours after its initial posting (e.g., a post at 7pm shows up as being posted the next day at 7am). If anyone finds what happens on your site, please let me know. Dan:

I have the same problem at my site. The ISP is looking to fix the time difference because the post states it was made roughly 12 hours after its initial posting (e.g., a post at 7pm shows up as being posted the next day at 7am). If anyone finds what happens on your site, please let me know.

]]> By: Dan O. http://www.contentious.com/2005/09/07/weblogs-datetimestamps-and-time-travel/#comment-33943 Dan O. Tue, 20 Sep 2005 02:20:31 +0000 #comment-33943 I would add and request that date/time stamps state the timezone (and standard or daylight savings time also) and be reasonably accurate as well. My favorite blog allowing comments appears to be 12 hours fast (I have emailed the blogger but to no avail). With the internet breaking down geographic barriers, it is also important to state timezone rather than assuming all of your readers will be in the same time zone. I would add and request that date/time stamps state the timezone (and standard or daylight savings time also) and be reasonably accurate as well. My favorite blog allowing comments appears to be 12 hours fast (I have emailed the blogger but to no avail). With the internet breaking down geographic barriers, it is also important to state timezone rather than assuming all of your readers will be in the same time zone.

]]> By: Christine Halvorson http://www.contentious.com/2005/09/07/weblogs-datetimestamps-and-time-travel/#comment-33428 Christine Halvorson Fri, 16 Sep 2005 14:39:40 +0000 #comment-33428 A timestamp is a necessity for a business blog. The reader really wants and needs to know if today's rant is really relevant when he or she picks up on it 1 year from now. Remember, our entries are living forever in cyberspace now. Cut the reader some slack. A timestamp is a necessity for a business blog.
The reader really wants and needs to know if today’s rant is really relevant when he or she
picks up on it 1 year from now. Remember, our entries are living forever in cyberspace now.
Cut the reader some slack.

]]> By: Counsel http://www.contentious.com/2005/09/07/weblogs-datetimestamps-and-time-travel/#comment-33427 Counsel Thu, 15 Sep 2005 18:24:57 +0000 #comment-33427 I think you both have valid points. Although recent additions/postings that allow people to see how recently you have updated your site may be 'time sensitive,' some postings remain relevant many days/years past their posting. Posts regarding 'current events' like the release of the iPOD nano or another news-breaking story may be relevant for a short period of time because everyone quickly becomes aware of the issue/topic. However, a blog post regarding on-line anger and frustration and the causes of emotional outbursts where one or more parties get angry and become critical of others may remain valid many days/months after the date on which it was posted. Another example is one where a blogger is providing technical support. I have gotten tired of explaining how to solve a technical issue with the Treo 650--the phone continues shutting off, sometimes 4+ times a day. This Treo problem has been stated on several on-line forums. A post (way down on a page or archived away) might still be very relevant 3 months after the solution being posted because not everyone gets their Treo 650 at the same time. [The solution? place a piece of paper (folded up to to size of the SIM card) between the SIM card sled and the SIM card so that the SIM card remains in contact with the phone...] I think Dave might be saying that Bloggers (and blogging software such as Drupal, Wordpress, etc.) might should be able to keep certain posts 'active' (not archived) may days past the posting date since the topic is not a 'current event.' As web browsers who are used to the rapid dissimination of news and information, we may be placing to great an emphasis on WHEN a topic was posted on-line. As has been posted here, if a site doesn't have 'current' posts, people, such as Avneet and myself, do look to see when a site has been updated. If a site is not updated often or in the recent past, we might simply decide to view other pages and not read what has been posted. While the posting date or other 'update' date may provide information on how up-to-date a site might remain over time, the relevance of a given post may not be diminished even if it was posted 'far back' in the past. I agree that we might should place less emphasis on when a given post was placed on-line. I would hate to try and tell my mother that we should not have to study William Faulkner because his 'posts' are old and not up-to-date. Counsel I think you both have valid points. Although recent additions/postings that allow people to see how recently you have updated your site may be ‘time sensitive,’ some postings remain relevant many days/years past their posting.

Posts regarding ‘current events’ like the release of the iPOD nano or another news-breaking story may be relevant for a short period of time because everyone quickly becomes aware of the issue/topic. However, a blog post regarding on-line anger and frustration and the causes of emotional outbursts where one or more parties get angry and become critical of others may remain valid many days/months after the date on which it was posted.

Another example is one where a blogger is providing technical support. I have gotten tired of explaining how to solve a technical issue with the Treo 650–the phone continues shutting off, sometimes 4+ times a day. This Treo problem has been stated on several on-line forums. A post (way down on a page or archived away) might still be very relevant 3 months after the solution being posted because not everyone gets their Treo 650 at the same time. [The solution? place a piece of paper (folded up to to size of the SIM card) between the SIM card sled and the SIM card so that the SIM card remains in contact with the phone...]

I think Dave might be saying that Bloggers (and blogging software such as Drupal, Wordpress, etc.) might should be able to keep certain posts ‘active’ (not archived) may days past the posting date since the topic is not a ‘current event.’ As web browsers who are used to the rapid dissimination of news and information, we may be placing to great an emphasis on WHEN a topic was posted on-line.

As has been posted here, if a site doesn’t have ‘current’ posts, people, such as Avneet and myself, do look to see when a site has been updated. If a site is not updated often or in the recent past, we might simply decide to view other pages and not read what has been posted.

While the posting date or other ‘update’ date may provide information on how up-to-date a site might remain over time, the relevance of a given post may not be diminished even if it was posted ‘far back’ in the past. I agree that we might should place less emphasis on when a given post was placed on-line. I would hate to try and tell my mother that we should not have to study William Faulkner because his ‘posts’ are old and not up-to-date.

Counsel

]]> By: Andrew Mitchell http://www.contentious.com/2005/09/07/weblogs-datetimestamps-and-time-travel/#comment-32990 Andrew Mitchell Sun, 11 Sep 2005 22:34:27 +0000 #comment-32990 Right on Amy! I'd even extend the requirement for time & date stamping to ALL web content. Right on Amy! I’d even extend the requirement for time & date stamping to ALL web content.

]]> By: Avneet http://www.contentious.com/2005/09/07/weblogs-datetimestamps-and-time-travel/#comment-32713 Avneet Fri, 09 Sep 2005 12:15:10 +0000 #comment-32713 I agree with Amy. When I visit websites and blogs, I actually look for Timestamp to know when was it last updated. I wish not only blogs but even other sites gave more importance to 'the last updated timestamp' than 'current timestamp' which is more frequently displayed. I agree with Amy. When I visit websites and blogs, I actually look for Timestamp to know when was it last updated. I wish not only blogs but even other sites gave more importance to ‘the last updated timestamp’ than ‘current timestamp’ which is more frequently displayed.

]]> By: doug http://www.contentious.com/2005/09/07/weblogs-datetimestamps-and-time-travel/#comment-32623 doug Thu, 08 Sep 2005 18:13:25 +0000 #comment-32623 <blockquote>In a nutshell, Dave explained that he doesn�t like to feature a date/timestamp prominently on his weblog postings. He thinks that tends to diminish the perceived long-term value of the content.</blockquote> I actually think that he has it backwards... If I land on a blog and see that a still-relevant article was actually written two years ago I make a point of exploring the blog, since it is probably full of high quality content.

In a nutshell, Dave explained that he doesn�t like to feature a date/timestamp prominently on his weblog postings. He thinks that tends to diminish the perceived long-term value of the content.

I actually think that he has it backwards…

If I land on a blog and see that a still-relevant article was actually written two years ago I make a point of exploring the blog, since it is probably full of high quality content.

]]>