A few observations:
Re: Stephen Abram video. For me, Stephen's 20 references to other applications was the most helpful part. (However, here's the 'more time needed' dilemma again. I hope to research such things as Beebo, Ning, Meebo etc. that he mentioned that were new to me. All the while I'm acutely aware that it took me 3 months to move from Thing 1 to Thing 2.) Ah, such strong opinions on the blog post re Lib 2.0! Maybe I'm the exception, but I think it's so much more critical to be concerned about topics such as content, curriculum, services, relationships etc. than spending time debating about the choice of a name. Who cares? Those of you my age may remember how much effort was put into the debate about what to call our school profession. Were we librarians or media specialists? A few years later when the debate resurfaced, "Were we media generalists or information specialists?" Now apparently a popular choice is 'teacher librarian.' Regardless of what we or others call us, shouldn't we continually challenge ourselves about improvement of services, access to, circulation and evaluation of information, love of reading etc. Those are the topics that matter most to me-not the validity of the name Lib 2.0. And finally the article The Ongoing Web Revolution: My 2 favorite parts were the Einstein graphic and Michael Wesch's video "Web 2.0...The Machine is Us/ing Us."