We’ve been thinking much about scrobbling. Melative will not, in the foreseeable future, be a scrobbling site, though given the API of the contextual microblog, it could very-well be used in such a fashion at the moment. This decision comes after pondering the nature of scrobbling, while simultaneously defining the stream as textual scrobbling. From here, scrobbling refers to quantity scrobbling, the type generally used on Last.fm and elsewhere.
So what is the problem with scrobbling on melative?
- Generally, while we may be competing with sites like Last.fm, development sees no advantage in competing with scrobbling. If you like listening to music, we advocate Last.fm, but if you like expressing how you feel about music, you may enjoy melative’s textual scrobbling. In short, scrobbling is thoroughly developed elsewhere and information resulting from scrobbling is available through APIs.
- Scrobbling is quantity based, and therefore must be assessed on the basis of popularity and favorites, rather than the focus of quality. The albums we experience most often, are generally not the ones we have the highest regard for. Melative is about assessing quality versus popularity, though popularity is addressable in similar ways.
- For music, scrobbling is quite fitting, but when we take into account the 15 other forms on melative, quantity loses meaning. Thinking about the experience of art, theatre, or events, expressing more than one encounter does not add value to a user’s experience profile; experiencing a work once is often sufficient.
And what of textual scrobbling, where lies the advantage?
Textual scrobbling is a matter of expression through actions and words. While experience may be implied, there is an accompanied assessment either through simple actions or reflective sentences within the textual scrobbling event. This is perhaps the major intent of the melative stream, though fully, it is intended to provide a consistent method for interacting with works of art and entertainment.
