Comments on: LE1600 lust

By: Robert Scoble

Robert Scoble — Sat, 22 Apr 2006 08:59:17 +0000

Probably.

By: cord

cord — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 17:45:07 +0000

but can her boobies
save my soul?

By: DeanG

DeanG — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 22:13:30 +0000

What does it mean “blog for Microsoft”?
I believe he denies that it’s part of his job at Microsoft.
But then again..
http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/2006/04/19/please-send-me-stuff/
Would Microsoft fire Scoble if he stopped blogging?

By: lmb

lmb — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 19:21:19 +0000

Hugh,
in any case, I’m rather happy that you are drawing again! That declined for awhile while you were busy don the Hugh Train — now that, too, was great, but your art was what originally drew me to this site, and still is the reason why I keep coming back.
And, even though it’s no longer as minimalistic, it’s still “your” style — the “predator of human energy” for one is great. Keep that slightly cynic attitude going!
(If the trend with cool motives continues, I might have to buy new blog cards or shirts.)

By: shoelover

shoelover — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 13:15:16 +0000

Forget about working for Motion.….……you should work for Playboy.….…you and your fancy drawing.

By: john

john — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 03:03:15 +0000

Clearly you’d be a good candidate as both a blogger and someone who uses the product in their blog.
That got me thinking. For how many products/services could you effectively blog? Is there a law of diminishing returns in respect of exclusivity? I’m not sure there is. It’s another case of blogging capitalising on maximising productive time. Time which in a corporate setting would be wasted on office politics and meetings.
On the creative level, I think the question is slightly different. Can the Hugh Macleod (or anyone else’s) blogging voice bestow an imprimatur of quality and renown on a series of unrelated blogs or does there come a point where a company rightly or wrongly says we don’t want to be another Hugh Macleod (or anyone else’s) blog. Any thoughts?