Wow: QTVR Gettysburg Panoramas at VirtualGettysburg.com. History buffs, beware. Your next 30 minutes are blown.

(via: Coudal Partners)

Dilbert insights: Scott Adams’ new blog is killing me.

Why I won’t be blogging this weekend: If you’re into real country music, this weekend in Nashville is made in bluegrass heaven.

So, let those popified-country folks head to Manhattan.

I prefer authentic.

Seems to me: Really. After almost 30 tropical storms and hurricanes this season, they shouldn’t have to be beta testing a new one.

I think a more “Web 2.0″ way to do this would be to start the alphabet names all over again: Arlene 2.0, Bret 2.0

Doc on magazine websites: (Scroll to last paragraph of his great post.):

The Forbes website, even for subscribers (which I am…. that’s how I got inside the paywall for those excerpts), is slow beyond endurance. I don’t know if publishers (Forbes is hardly alone in this regard) think overcomplicating their pages with a zillion promos and javascript out the wazoo actually attracts (much less retains) readers. Do they ever try to open these pages themselves? Good lordy, it’s an awful “experience” (as the site designers like to call it). Get over it, guys.

Hmm. Doc’s a blogger. He’s “attacking” Forbes. I wonder if they’ll follow their own advice on how to “fight back.”

Oh yeah!: I’ve figured out how to get mentioned on a Gawker Media blog. Blog about a questionable practice by Weblogs Inc.

By the way, my question, “Is Weblogs Inc. splogging?” was answered by Weblogs Inc. CEO Jason Calacanis in the comments of my first post:

“Come on… it’s obviously not a splog. It’s an archived site that we’re not updating any more. The best of WIN goes out each week and some of the ones that are archive blogs get the posts… but there is nothing SPAM like about it..”

Okay. Whatever. But an “archived site” that stays alive with with Google-juice promotional posts unrelated to the topic of the archived site is, well, nothing personal, but “obviously” is not the adverb I’d have used to describe what it is, or is not.

Judge for yourself. (See update.)

For the record: I love Weblogs Inc. and Gawker (except the p*rn stuff) and I think everything about both companies and anyone associated with them are (is?) just dandy.

Update: Well, the “archived site” is now gone, so, well, it’s moot.

More on Web 3.0: Back in September, Josh already provided the pathway to a web with fewer cracks, more taste and less calories.

Men and magazines: (From Time Inc. research as reported by BusinessWeek): “Men aren’t rejecting magazines — but they’re drifting away from print.” Has this ever been done before: BusinessWeek doing a story based on Time Inc. research?

And what about the interview of Time Inc. CEO Ann Moore by Jon Fine?

Quote:

Women’s interest in reading did not fall this year….But “we continue to see you men distracted by other things,” she adds with a grin, as if I’m about to dash off to fire up a bunch of bottle rockets or spend hours, jaws clenched, blasting through HALO.

I’m very impressed with how much Ann can communicate to Jon with a grin!

Party pix: I was a slacker and didn’t take any photos last night, but Lena Basha did. She let me post hers on Flickr. You can see them here. If you know of other photos from last night, please add a link to them in a comment. Thanks.

Update: Aunt B’s post on the gathering should convince anyone to attend the next such meetup. (Or not.)