On October 25th, 1998, during my senior year at UC Berkeley, I started my first job in Silicon Valley, as an eCommerce Analyst for Internet Valley, a small startup focused on search engine optimization, technology trends and eCommerce. Today marks the tenth anniversary of that first day, making me one of those people who can sit around the table and claim a decade's worth of experience. Though my role has changed quite a bit from the first time I sat down for work in Burlingame, California, growing to take on traditional outbound marketing roles, including public relations and demand generation, the initial journey is worth commemorating.

As my senior year at Berkeley commenced, I knew I would need an off-campus job to help pay for rent and books, having left my position with the school newspaper, where I was Online Editor and a news reporter.

Not entirely sure what I wanted to do, I drafted two versions of my resume - one to be a journalist, and the other, to be a Webmaster. The journalist piece I sent to places like the Mercury News and MacWeek, and the one for being a Webmaster went just about anywhere I thought made sense, provided it was close enough to Berkeley, and offered flexibility that let me finish out my coursework and get the dual degree in Mass Communications and Political Science.

It being 1998, it was no surprise the Webmaster position found the most traction. That Internet Valley took a chance on me, an unproven kid at the age of 21, without a formal degree, helped lay the groundwork for my making a home in Silicon Valley and starting on a track toward a career that later encompassed Marketing. To give you an idea of how things have changed just in the last ten years, here's an excerpt from a note home to my dad, titled, "First day of work":

The company has ordered a Micron PC for me at work, and while it is a Windows 98/NT machine, it has some strong specs, such as: PentiumII 400 MHz processor, 64 MB RAM, 6.4GB of hard disk space, a 32x CD-ROM, and built-in Zip Drive.

That's right. In 1998, 6.4 GB of space and 64 MB of RAM was considered "strong specs".

I had interviewed at Internet Valley on October 13th of 1998, somehow getting from Berkeley to Burlingame without a car, using a combination of public transportation and my own two feet. And interestingly, my initial impressions of the Internet Valley site, and its methodology, provided some interesting hints for the way the future Web would be consumed.

From a previous e-mail, after 2 a.m. on October 14th of 1998:

(My boss) said that when he organized the site, he had done it with the intent of separating from print media, instead focusing on users who do not "read" documents, but "scroll" them. The typical Web site containing basic text was not to be found. The site instead contains words in a variety of colors, font sizes and heavy use of the bold tag. Some might call it ugly. ... He laughed about how he had dropped half of his age in a week if the letters were to be believed. But when scrolling down the site, a user can have their attention caught by the unorthodox methods, and will stop to read. Otherwise the words highlighted will give an idea of what the topic was being covered.

While the site itself was tough to digest, it brings to mind the way many of us consume news now, through a "river of noise", or scanning RSS rather than reading in full.

The stay at Internet Valley was not all that long, as the seed investor would have preferred revenue more quickly, but I managed to stay on with their sister company, 3Cube, reporting to the team's new vice president of Marketing.

Working at 3Cube during the dotcom boom, and eventually, through the bust, set the stage for how I approached business. Whether in operations, engineering or marketing, the team worked late, and was focused on doing what at times seemed to be super-human work, as we could ask a pair of coders to do what had taken a team of dozens at a competitor more time. And at age 22, I was responsible for running the Web site, and much of the copy, including FAQ's for these new products, even as I found myself sitting at the table with people who had been in the software industry since the time I was born.

As a young employee at both companies, and where I work now, I often found myself intimidated by my colleagues' experience and history. When they could talk in decades, I could merely talk in months, or maybe a year or two. With time, this has changed, of course, as I took on more responsibilities, including direct reports, gained experience, and have found myself at a place where many employees are younger than myself.

After the dotcom bust, I worked through the 2001-03 recession, and came out the other end with more knowledge on how to operate when times were lean. It looks like we may have that opportunity again, with the global markets being tossed to and fro. But even as we see our day to day challenges, or try and hit milestones that lie directly ahead, I can do so knowing that, after ten years of trying to make a difference, it's me who has a decade's experience in the Valley, the first of what should be a handful. I can't even imagine trying to work outside of the Valley. It's all I know, and all I want to know. Here's to thirty more years.

By Rob Diana of Regular Geek (Twitter/FriendFeed)

Some days, there is a minimal amount of news and discussion. Yesterday was one of those days. Today, however, is different. In the morning, I read my feeds and had two interesting posts that will spark much discussion today.

First, Mark 'Rizzn' Hopkins has quit FriendFeed. I am disappointed, but he puts it concisely, "Unfortunately, I just don't think I can take it anymore." In Mark's case, it was a political discussion that went awry that broke the camel's back. He lists the usual problems with any internet discussion, people not doing any fact checking and just spewing opinions, people insulting your intelligence and people calling you a racist. Disappointingly, the internet is full of people with different opinions and many discussions end in this manner. He does summarize his feelings nicely though:

As I said before, it's not a blanket indictment of everyone on there, but of the community spirit on the system. Almost everyone I know uses FriendFeed, and that includes my best friends. Somehow, though, when all my friends (and their friends, and their friends) get together in a conversation, something goes horribly awry.

The second blog post came from Louis Gray where he talked about his dilemma of being a Mormon, a Democrat, a friend of gay people and how to vote on California's Proposition 8. Prop 8 is a highly divisive issue because it is about eliminating the rights of same-sex couples to marry. Louis' dilemma stems from the idea that "Politics and religion make tough bedfellows. (No pun intended)." As a Democrat, he should obviously be against Prop 8, but as a Mormon he should obviously be supporting Prop 8. So, what do you do? This dilemma is true of any liberal-minded person who is also religious, because most religions are against same-sex marriages. The problem really comes down to something Louis mentions:

In theory, politics should be based on one's studying of the issues, and reaching a conclusion through a combination of facts. Religion, while often largely fact-based, also asks you to make decisions based on faith in things not fully understood and unseen, while trusting leadership who give guidance said to be of divine source.

Of course, Louis is already wondering what kind of response this will draw on FriendFeed. So, what do these posts have in common? Politics and religion. What is the common bond between these two topics? Belief systems. As much as people want to believe Louis' assertion, politics is based on studying the issues and reaching a conclusion based on facts, most people base their politics on their religious beliefs. These types of topics are very volatile because disagreement becomes an attack on "everything we believe".

The Importance of Filters

I have talked previously about the importance of filters when using an application like FriendFeed. Filters are mostly talked about in how to find information in the flood of noise. However, filters can also be used to avoid things you do not want to listen to. Anyone who follows me on FriendFeed can find that I rarely take part in conversations about politics or religion. There is a very good reason for this. Look at any of the political discussions lately on FriendFeed. You will find that the conversations may start as intelligent but eventually degrade into name calling. This is not always true, but it happens often enough. When belief systems are involved, I tend to avoid the conversation because I want to enjoy my experience, not argue.

This is the main reason I am disappointed with Mark Hopkins' decision to leave FriendFeed. His disgust with some of the conversations is his own making. Not because of his political views, but because he partakes in the political discussion. I value the benefits of FriendFeed too highly to allow the political discussions to bother me. I hide most political items because I am not on FriendFeed for that purpose. I may find some interesting political article to read, but I not discussing things there. The main reason is because I do not want to leave FriendFeed.

With services like FriendFeed and Twitter, you really do need some method of filtering. One of the obvious methods is a FriendFeed list. For Twitter, you can use software like TweetDeck to group users. The difference is that using application filters can improve your experience. That is why they exist. The other part of the filter equation is you. You may need to filter yourself. What I mean is that if you really like something, there may be compromises that need to be made. In Mark's case, maybe this means not getting involved in as many political discussions. If you do not like what Louis said in his recent post, then just hide the post.

The most important ingredient in the filters is you. If you do not like what is being said, you do not have to listen.

Read more by Rob Diana at RegularGeek.com.

Though I typically limit the amount of politics or religious discussion here, California's Proposition 8 has garnered the attention of many people across the social networks I participate. It's seen elite tech companies pledge their opposition, and quite visibly, the church I belong to has asked its members to support the initiative.

Prop 8 is the perfect storm of a debate, one that touches on everything from civil rights to equality, morality, faith, and idealism, with people sitting on the fence being very rare indeed. I wanted to see if it's possible to take such a volatile topic and have an intelligent discourse, although it's easier to slip into finger-pointing and name-calling. Positive discussions have already taken place a few times on FriendFeed, but most blogging and tweeting has taken one extreme side or another, without those talking trying to find why we have differences of opinion.

Yesterday, Apple pledged their opposition to the initiative, and offered to fund its defeat. This came weeks after Google similarly voiced opposition, at a time when the current polls show the state's voters to be divided. (See: FiveThirtyEight.com: Prop 8 a Toss-Up) Combined with accusations on both sides of shady behavior, ranging from blackmail letters to signs being stolen and, in a local case, an SUV labeled "bigots live here" being placed in front of a Pro Prop 8 home, it's a case of a divisive issue pushing people further apart.

Politics and religion make tough bedfellows. (No pun intended)

In theory, politics should be based on one's studying of the issues, and reaching a conclusion through a combination of facts. Religion, while often largely fact-based, also asks you to make decisions based on faith in things not fully understood and unseen, while trusting leadership who give guidance said to be of divine source.

Looking inwardly, there are multiple factors in play. On a personal level, many of my closest friends are gay, a pair of them being good friends who I've known for 15 years, each of whom came out in college after we had sparred over girls in high school. Some of them are in long-term relationships with their partners, which, were they straight, would be marriages by now. Also, two weeks ago, our family attended a same sex marriage between my mother's life-long best friend and her partner of 19 years in what was a beautiful ceremony in Berkeley. On a political level, I am a Democrat through and through. I share an almost complete affinity with the party's platform. On a religious level, I am Mormon, and know the church's teachings have brought a lot of clarity to the way I operate my life, and offer good guidance on how to have successful family, personal and business relationships.

That my political and personal leanings are in assumed conflict with the church's support for the initiative is extremely trying. Assuming I were to ever seek public office as a Democrat (should I ever want to), my public support for Prop 8 could be used against me. But also, public opposition for Prop 8 as an active church member would have me associating with groups that run contrary to the church, which I would like to avoid.

The LDS church considers itself apolitical. It doesn't tell its members how to vote, and doesn't endorse candidates (See their letter this year). But they have seen the Prop 8 battle as a moral issue, in the same way that Prop 8's opponents see it as a civil rights issue. They have asked members to support the initiative with their time and money, although the church itself is not funding the campaign directly. As a member, every time the church becomes entangled in politics, it makes me uncomfortable, and at times I find myself having to explain "their position" rather than "my position", which can often make me seem significantly more conservative than I am. But, again, as with many parts of religion, as was discussed last Sunday in our weekly sermon (for lack of a better word), as mortals, we know we don't have all the facts. I don't understand how two men or two women being married would ever negatively impact my family, and if I were running the Yes on 8 campaign, I certainly wouldn't be focusing on the children and school angle, as I don't think it's the schools' role to teach marriage to kids anyway. Teachers are busy enough as it is.

As a political observer, I see that Californian voters have a history of choosing exclusion over inclusion. Proposition 8 came to bear only after the existing Proposition 22, which mandated marriage as being between opposite genders, was overturned by judges' rule. That proposition, which was on the ballot in 2000, passed with a 61.4% to 38.6% margin. Similarly, back in 1994, Proposition 187, a ballot initiative aimed to deny illegal immigrants health care and school attendance, passed with 58.8% of the vote. When it comes to pitting a majority against a minority in this state, the wedge issues always seem to find a backer, and I think, despite the high profile opposition, Prop 8 will likely see the same fate, bringing an end to the same-gender marriages that are happening now, and bringing very personal sadness to those thousands of couples in the state who thought the doors had finally opened up.

It certainly would be a lot easier if the ballot initiative didn't exist, but you can't exactly put the cat back in the bag once it has escaped. The resulting back and forth discourse has stirred up a lot of emotion and distrust of people from different parties, different religions, and belief systems. That the LDS church has been a vocal supporter of Prop 8 and has encouraged members to stir up support themselves has made the topic one that is coming up at fellow members' homes as we talk about our own thoughts and wrestle with having to choose to honor those commitments where we promised to support the church leaders, unequivocally, rather than choosing those topics we like a la carte. I've had conversations about Prop 8 with my parents, with my wife, and at friendly gatherings. It's become a can't avoid topic. For some, usually those raised out of state, the request to push forward is easier. For others, usually those of us who have spent a lot of time in the Bay Area and have close gay friends, the interpersonal conflict is very real.

As Mormons, we believe strongly in what we call "free agency". We have the option to choose between what's seen as right and wrong. Nobody can force us to act in accordance with commandments given by God, or to follow, to the letter, the requests from our church leaders. For those of us who have to make this choice, by supporting Prop 8, we risk telling our gay friends and left-leaning peers that we've voted to take away something from them that is beautiful and wonderful, and for reasons we may not fully ever know until our Earthly lives are finished.

Can public endorsements from Apple and Google, two of the most respected tech names on the planet, be enough to overcome one's religious beliefs? I think it's absolutely important that both institutions show support for their gay employees, and that they, as companies, are doing the right thing. If I were running those companies, it's what I would do.

I don't have a crystal ball saying what's going to happen come November. Given California's history, and the public polls showing a dead heat, I would bet Prop 8 is going to pass. As I told a close gay friend earlier this summer, the community always gets "so close" to having full marriage rights, only for something to come and take it away. It seems at times inevitable that they may never have the identical privilege, thanks to a majority's opposition. But for those who are calling the opposing side bigoted and full of hate, it's far from that simple. I just wish we knew, with clarity, the right thing to do.

What are your thoughts? Is it possible to take something so volatile and find common ground when the positions seem so entrenched and opposed?

By Mona Nomura of Pixel Bits (FriendFeed/Twitter)


Even if I've had past issues with Gmail, I am still a huge Gmail junkie and advocate. I'm always on the hunt for any uselful tips, tricks, HOW-TOs for a better user experience.

I've listed 8 Gmail related articles compiled from the "Goodies Room" on FriendFeed. Even if you're a seasoned Gmail user, every article is filled with Gmail goodness and perhaps like me, you may learn something new. Enjoy!

1. "13 Gmail Extensions for Firefox 3"
2. "5 Gmail Labs Features Everyone Should Try"
3. "Tip: Read Your Mail Without Touching Your Mouse"
4. "Check if Your Gmail is Hacked with Activity Monitor"
5. "Import Your Hotmail Messages into Gmail"
6. "How to Make Your Gmail Contacts as Stand-alone"
7. "Three Solid Gmail Productivity Tips"
8. "Gmail Advanced IMAP Controls"

And as most of you know, Gmail now has auto-reply, dubbed "canned responses."

Do you have any tricks or tips I might have missed? If so, do share!

Read more by Mona Nomura at Pixel Bits