Blogging Best Practices

1. Be personal, but don't share personal information that will put your safety in jeopardy.
This means sharing things about your life, connecting with your audience - helping them relate to you. Do not however put up information that could be used against you. Addresses, phone numbers, Social Security Numbers. Remember this is the internet and anyone can look at your blog, not just those you want to.
2. Encourage participation from your audience.
A blog without audience participation is boring. Ask questions, start discussions and make new friends.
3. Be engaging and interesting.
Nuff' said.

http://www.echoditto.com/blogging

Blog Pedagogy

I looked at blogs from the perspective of the usefulness of a blog in the world of Public Relations. I examined PR squared ( http://www.pr-squared.com/), PR in your pajamas ( http://prinyourpajamas.com/ ), and Bethesda Blog ( http://www.bethblog.com/). The first two are blogs dedicated to the field of Public Relations, the last, Bethesda Blog, is an example of what a blog can be to help a company connect to it's users. The first two really show the usefulness of a blog in sharing information in a field that makes such wide use of social media. The last is an excellent example of what a blog can do for a company. It does not have the heavy handedness of an advertisement, chasing people away with obvious over the top advertisements, yet maintains a positive view of the company. Almost brings Bethesda down to earth, as it were, makes them seem real and genuine, not a large corporation bent on taking your pocket book. Which is what PR is all about really.

Valve's Employee Handbook Leaked

                Earlier this week, Valve’s 56-page employee handbook leaked onto the internet. You can read it here. The handbook is given to new employees on their first day, and outlines the company’s basic business model, which is far from normal.

                The handbook outlines the company’s command structure, which is decidedly unique. The handbook states “…we don’t have any management, and nobody ‘reports to’ anybody else. We do have a founder/president, but even he isn’t your manager. This company is yours to steer—toward opportunities and away from risks. You have the power to green-light projects. You have the power to ship products.”

                This unique way of doing things has been met with skepticism in the business community. David Herrmann, business operations professor at Utah State University, said that while software companies are known for doing things a little differently, he believes that, “Somewhere there’s gotta be some central people.”

                In addition to employees being able to begin or end projects ad nauseam, salaries are based on co-workers’ ratings of each other’s performance. The handbook said “Over time, compensation gets adjusted to fit an employee’s internal peer-driven valuation. That’s what we mean by ‘correct’—paying someone what they’re worth (as best we can tell using the opinions of peers).”

                “I agree with the principle,” Herrmann said, “within some bounds. For example, how does an engineer determine the worth of a marketer? I do something similar in my class with group projects. You will get two sides, where everyone is so nice in their reviews it’s ridiculous, or they all did a great job, but they hammer on each other. Then it’s like, ‘so, who did the work then?’ I don’t see it working on a large scale.”

                Cassandra Sherwood, a graphics design student at USU, said she was unsure if she would want to work under a system like that.

                “If everyone liked me it would be great,” Sherwood said. “But imagine how bad office politics would be if promotions and salaries aren’t just in the hands of your boss, but your co-workers as well. If you disagree with someone, or make a mistake, that could have a real impact on your salary. I’m not sure I would want that.”

                

Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut Announcement Met With Mixed Feelings

                On April 5, BioWare announced the creation of the Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut DLC, responding to disappointment from fans over “lack of closure” in the games ending. The DLC will be a free download for anyone who purchases the game before April 12, 2014. It is scheduled to be released this summer.

                “Through additional cinematic sequences and epilogue scenes, the Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut will give fans seeking further clarity to the ending of Mass Effect 3 deeper insights into how their personal journey concludes,” BioWare said.

                BioWare said they will not be adding additional endings to the three available at the end of the game franchise. The DLC will expand on the endings that already exist. This is because “BioWare strongly believes in the team’s artistic vision for the end of this arc of the Mass Effect franchise.”

                The announcement was met with mixed criticism in the gaming community. Many people were hoping for an entirely new ending, not just a revision of the current ones.Andrew Quebbeman, a computer science major at Utah State University, said he wished the ending had just been done right when it was released.

                “It’s good that they are going to release it for free. But they should have designed it better to begin with,” Quebbeman said. “I know a lot of people that stopped playing because of the ending. They had a good game with good replay value that got ruined because most people got ticked off.”

                Christopher Brau, a researcher for Fisher Scientific, said that in addition to giving the community what they asked for, Bioware is rewarding those who actually buy the game, as opposed to playing a pirated copy.

                “A major issue in the industry is piracy,” Brau said. “Steam goes a long way to providing the level of security to computer games that consoles enjoy, but requires an internet connection. Free DLCs put a positive spin on actually purchasing a game.” 

Microsoft Faces Potential Import Ban on Xbox 360 Console

                On Monday, U.S. International Trade Commission judge David Shaw ruled that Microsoft was infringing on four Motorola Mobility patents. The infringements involve the wireless connectivity and video compression technologies on the Xbox 360 console. The ruling is subject to review by a six person ITC commission, which plans on delivering a decision by Aug. 23. If Shaw’s ruling is upheld, Microsoft will be forced to either pay a 2.25% royalty to Motorola on all sales of infringing products or cease U.S. import of the console.

                “Generally, imposing bans on imports is always a bad idea,” said Diana Thomas, assistant professor of economics at Utah State University. “What it essentially does is drive up the price of competing products that are still sold in the country.”

                Thomas said that if Microsoft gets cut out of the market, Sony and Nintendo will try to increase their output to fulfill consumer’s demands for a console. This will drive up the price of their products.

                “That’s bad for consumers,” Thomas said, “and good for the producers who are still allowed to sell.”

                Xbox 360 owner Andrew Quebbeman said that Microsoft really only has one option available to them if Shaw’s ruling is upheld.

                “They would have to pay. They couldn’t miss out on the huge profit of the 360,” Quebbeman said. “It would destroy the console, and give all their sales to the PS3, or so help me, the Wii.”

                Thomas said that whether Microsoft chooses to pay the royalties or accept an import ban will depend on economics.

                “It totally depends on where their profit margin is right now,” Thomas said. “If they can continue to sell the Xbox and pay the royalties and still make a profit, or at least break even, they should still sell it. It would make economic sense.”                

Norwegian Retailers Stop Selling Some Video Games

 Anders Behring Breivik told a Norwegian court Thursday that he used Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 to train for his attack on Oslo last July that resulted in 77 people dead. That announcement prompted Norwegian retailers Coop Norway and Platekompaniet to quit selling 51 video game titles in their stores. The titles dropped included Call of Duty and World of Warcraft.

Breivik played World of Warcraft for 16 hours per day during a year-long sabbatical in 2006 because he “felt he had sacrificed a lot.”

“Because of that, I felt I deserved to take one year off to do what I wanted,” Breivik said. “Some people like to play golf, some like to sail, I played WoW. It has nothing to do with 22 July. It’s not a world you are engulfed by. It’s simply a hobby.”

However, Breivik said he used Call of Duty as a “military simulator” to familiarize himself with the use of a holographic sight which is “built up in such a way that you could have given it to your grandmother and she would have been a super marksman.”

“It’s designed to be used by anyone. In reality, it requires very little training to use it in an optimal way,” Breivik said. “But of course it does help if you’ve practiced using a simulator.”

While Breivik did admit to using Call of Duty to train for combat situations, Megan Roach, a graphic design major at Utah State University, said it was “ridiculous” that Norwegian retailers would stop selling the game.

“It’s not the responsibility of the corporation to regulate these games,” Roach said. “It’s the responsibility of the individual, or the parents. Video games don’t cause violence, and without access to video games people with violent tendencies would just read violent books, or watch violent movies.”

Kerry Jordan, a psychology professor at USU, said there is clear data that watching violence can lead to an increase in aggression, regardless of whether the violence is a video game, TV or a movie. Researchers have been unable to prove that video games cause violence due to an inability to do research in a real world environment.

“We can’t expose a group of kids to violent media,” Jordan said. “That would be unethical.”

This inability to test causes “third variable” or “directional” problems when trying to prove that video games cause violence.

“It’s a case of causation versus correlation,” said Jordan. “In [Breivik’s] case, it could be his violent temperament that led to playing violent games, not necessarily that violent video games caused his violent temperament.”

However, Jordan said that video games could be used to learn practical lessons about warfare.

“We know that video games improve visual perception,” Jordan said, “and could potentially be used to learn the logistics of war.”

Coop Norway and Platekompaniet have not announced when or if they will sell Call of Duty, World of Warcraft, or the rest of the games in the future.

DOTA 2's Free-to-Play Announcement Has Students Worried

                Gabe Newell, the co-founder of Valve, told Seven Day Cooldown in a podcast last week that DOTA 2 will be free-to-play “with a twist.” Newell said that Valve would not be following the free-to-play model of any previous game – including League of Legends, a Massive Online Battle Arena based on the original Defense of The Ancients, which as of November 2011 had 32 million registered users.

                “I haven’t even played League of Legends,” Newell said.

                Newell was not specific about what form the model would take, but said that they are “…trying to figure out ways so that people who are more valuable to everybody else are recognized and accommodated.”

                Some students at Utah State University said they would prefer to pay than have DOTA 2 follow a free-to-play model.

                “I would rather pay money,” said Sean Hunt, a physics major. “I know I’m gonna like it, because I like the beta.”

                Jonathan Alan, a mechanical engineering major, said he “would much rather pay $60 for it,” than have it be free-to-play.

                Many free-to-play games use a system of micro-transactions to make a profit. Both League of Legends and Heroes of Newerth – MOBA games like DOTA 2 – use such a system. Hunt said that the downside of a micro-transaction system is that “as time goes on you either spend money or fall behind.”

                “I would just like to buy it once and have all the stuff,” Hunt said, “as opposed to constantly paying to keep up with everyone else.”