Many moons ago I remember discussing the need for online micropayments with some smart web guys. They saw it (along with better bandwidth) as the chasm that would make the difference for successful ecommerce to really explode into the mainstream. This was the mid nineties, so we didn’t really talk about user experience then but inside the micropayment discussion really sits the need for an efficient user experience. If your process of micropayments makes things easier for people, they’ll adopt it.

iTunes is a classic example of this in action. So too is the Snapper card. The later is an interesting example and one that would solve one of my nagging issues with charity street appeals.

The issue I have with street appeals is I never have any cash on me. On Daffodil Day last week I was able to pull together a measly $0.50 from my pocket that didn’t really warrant me being offered a flower to wear.

Of course I could have walked around the corner and got some money out from an ATM and given the collector some cash, but if I’m honest, I probably wouldn’t be donating $10 or $20 and to change that would have meant another trip to the dairy. All up the process was just too hard. So I didn’t give the charity anything more than a single coin.

Now if this micropayment experience between the collector and I could be simplified, that would help. Here’s where I think the Snapper card could help.

If Snapper were able to arm each collector with a simple scanning device I’d have a simple way of giving collectors a self-nominated amount like $2 or $3 with a quick swipe of my Snapper card. There it is. Payment process complete. No nonsense.

I’d also have an online record of my donations that could be recorded for tax purposes. Perhaps something that could be quickly loaded into Xero or MYOB if I’m a business.

If this were possible, I would use it. And I think others would too.

Earlier this week a prominent NZ blogger who’d bagged NBR’s paid subscription model announced that he’d subscribed. I only know this because he tweeted it. I mentioned this to a friend and he said, “Mike, rich folk will pay to hear about themselves”.  

Made me think.

The Peter Jackson produced District 9 film has been sitting on the side of the “trending topics” on Twitter for about a week now. As a movie marketing device that really must be about the best possible place to exist.

At the time of writing this post four trending topics are TV shows, two are movies, two are musicians, and the other two are random topics.  The Internet’s not killing existing film, music and television it’s providing a platform that rewards talent and brilliance in those mediums.

A friend just sent me a link to The Great NZ Songbook online. He mentioned “I imagine you won’t like the page load up!”.

He’s right, I didn’t, but I like this idea so I managed to survive it. I’ve already read two PR pieces on this books so I appear to be in its target audience!

The resulting site is very Salted Herring. It possesses buckets of a ‘typical NZ’ personality which aligns with this brand. Feels very Black Seeds to me??

I like the volume controls on the car radio for changing the songs. Ironically it was the first thing I looked for when the music blew out at me.

Even at home I want to have control of my computer.

Last night I read The Listener’s annual power list illustrating various Kiwis who hold considerable influence in society. Unlike previous years when they’ve simply had a list of the 50 most powerful people in the land, they chose to run a set of categories of prominent individuals under groupings like Politics and Maoridom.

I love this sort of filtering so whizzed through the people looking for the Internet or Technology category. Unfortunately no such category exists. In fact, of all the 50 odd people they profile, none of them are directly involved in the Internet. Good grief.

So, in no particular order, here’s my list of the top 5 Kiwi web gurus who I think hold considerable influence on New Zealanders.

1.    Sam Morgan – Even from the back room Sam still holds the cards underlying a number of new web ventures that infiltrate many Kiwis’ daily lives. His legacy, Trade me, is still the biggest site in NZ and when he speaks his friends at Fairfax will always print his word as gospel.

2.    Russell Brown – A notable blogger, his legion at PublicAddress creates undue influence across a wide range of cultural interest groups and topics. Russell’s wider work in TV and as a commentator also adds to his sway of influence. I like the irony that he used to be on Powerlist’s judges’ panel too!

3.    David Farrar – Despite not really liking KiwiBlog’s political leanings, David’s blogline popularity has lead to it becoming a first point for political journalists and ordinary Kiwis. That David starts each day at 4am by reading all the papers and blogs available may be the reason. If you doubt his influence, try googling “Electoral Finances Act” or “Helen Clark” or “John Key” and you’ll see KiwiBlog right up there on Page 1. You can’t underestimate the power of that feature.

4.   Bernard Hickey – Earlier this year Bernard joined David Chaston at interest.co.nz and quickly set about offering NZ media and the average punter a daily media commentary on what their data meant in the real world. Throw in a global credit crisis and this journo-turned-new media professional has become the go to guy for economic trend quotes. Throw in Bernhard’s blog on Stuff and we’re talking about a chap who has remarkable influence on Kiwi thinking.

5.    Richard MacManus – As the creator and editor of ReadWriteWeb I find it hard to leave Richard out of the top 5. I’m not entirely convinced his influence is directly connected to New Zealanders but I do respect the success of his commentary and progress of Web 2.0 and its following across the globe.

So there are five. It’s a starter for ten…

At Webstock this year Twitter was a memorable feature. Its popularity had really stepped up a gear from the first Webstock. However while most people at the conference were aware of Twitter this year, few had spent much time tweeting. The semi voyeuristic element made most of us reluctant to really start investing time or attention to it.

But like all things web 2.0, Twitter’s gradual rollout is really starting to gain momentum in my little bubble of bloggers and colleagues and I’m really starting to enjoy it.

I’m now getting useful tips and witty comments from a wide range of people – some of whom I only know by reputation - but who appear happy enough to share their lives with me. Or are they?

For some people there seems to be mixed strands of comments which makes me wonder what they’re trying to achieve with their tweets. Some folks are straight up promoting links to their blogs or websites. Others are just waffling. Now I’m ok with either angle but when you mix these up and get professional tweets interlaced with personal comments it seems a bit odd.

In more established social media environments I like the way LinkedIn has a clear professional demarcation vs Facebook which is largely mates sharing whatever.

Twitter still has to carve that balance. But if you’re thinking about using Twitter, here are some points to consider.

What are you trying to achieve? Are you posting tweets to build exposure of your brand or drive visits to your website/blog or simply chatting with your friends? It’s vital to get this worked out up front as it will help you determine your tweet content and other elements that make up your Twitter brand.

What’s your image? A shot of you? A caricature or a silly photo? A tiny logo? What you choose will matter when your face appears alongside dozens of others and people are looking for new tweetlines to follow.

What’s your handle? Your real name or your company brand or a mix? It is possible to mix this up with alt tags providing your personal name while your handle/nickname remains something else.

Who do you follow and who follows you? Again, your brand by association is a small but influential element.

Of course you can wing it if you like, but having thought about these points in advance won’t hurt.