I believe Waves are private unless you make them public but anyone on your wave can add people. I don't know if there is a way to limit who can add. Of course that is similar to email as when you are emailing a group, anyone can add another participant. Or delete a participant. Several waves I've participated in have had someone accidently delete portions. I'm looking now and it doesn't look like there is a way to remove participants from a wave even if you started the wave. You can search public waves with "with:public" in the inbox search area. You will find hundreds or thousands to join. Does someone want to start a Google Wave listserv list? Some folks are dropping from this list and I think it's because of the heavy Wave discussion. Peter On Dec 3, 2009, at 5:05 PM, Karoline Dehnhard wrote: > Here is an example of a very basic test of a wave embedded into a > web page with a join wave button at the bottom: http://startupgrinder.com/wave > > I may have found the answer to my question about privacy - unless > you add [log in to unmask] as a participant, your waves remain > private (within your group). I have not tried it though so I can't > verify this info. > > Karoline > > Kristofer Layon wrote: >> I think you both have valid points. It's a very interesting tool >> from an experimental point of view; practically, it is still >> relatively useless. It may morph into something more compelling, >> though, over time. >> >> To me, it's kind of a large and unwieldy Swiss Army knife of a >> tool. Other things are more simple and more reliable. Combining >> too much in one package results not only in the general buggyness >> of it, but then it also just becomes overwhelming to implement in >> daily life. >> >> But the application aspect does have weight. Twitter is another >> example more like email, that is more of a standard than just a >> proprietary channel (though it still is that, obviously). But the >> range of desktop tools has liberated Twitter to reside on my >> desktop and phone, but in the background just like email. I can >> choose to read often, or choose to read less often, yet keep them >> on all the time. So they're omnipresent yet function well >> asynchronously. >> >> I haven't tried anything like this with Wave yet, but I can't >> imagine logging into Wave and just leaving it on all day in a >> browser window in case something interesting happens. It seems >> like it requires immediate attention and very intentional >> engagement for it to do its intended purpose. Though I could be >> wrong and maybe if I didn't find so much practical utility in >> Twitter, Wave might seem more appealing. But Wave seems more like >> an online presentation or meeting (or -- gasp -- a live webinar); >> Twitter is more just a casual watercooler conversation (though with >> more people). >> >> And maybe these tools appeal to various people differently, >> depending on their personality types? >> >> So anyway, see you on Twitter instead. =) >> >> >> >> On Dec 3, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Zachary Johnson wrote: >> >>> Huh, you sure are giving Google a lot of credit! Nothing wrong >>> with that I suppose. >>> >>> Me... I'm skeptical. Email revolutionized communication and >>> became a standard way for people to interact on the internet, but >>> there's a thousand different email applications, both desktop and >>> web based. There's even the divide between plain text and HTML >>> emails. >>> >>> The web browser may be a better example of a revolutionary >>> communications platform that (despite the variety of choices >>> available and the differences between them) comes close to >>> presenting a "standard interface through which the majority of >>> people interact" with the internet. >>> >>> Wave *may* just prove to be the standard protocol for a >>> revolutionized internet communication (still skeptical) but I just >>> don't see everybody interacting with the internet through some >>> sort of Google-made Wave Browser. Google has at least been smart >>> enough to open up the protocol, which may make a future where >>> there are several competing Wave browsers on the market just like >>> web browsers now. Perhaps you weren't suggesting anything more >>> than that, Patrick. >>> >>> If Wave proves to be nothing more than another web application >>> that you interact with in your web browser, then I don't really >>> see it being *the* ubiquitous feature of post-Web 2.0. I think >>> it'll just be one of many things we use. Well... if we use it at >>> all. Not all of Google's inventions are successful. And so far, >>> the few times where I thought to myself "Ooh! I could use a Wave >>> for this!" I've been really disappointed with the User Experience. >>> >>> Ok, I'll give Google some credit, too: They must be doing >>> something right if we're even having this conversation. >>> >>> Zach >>> >>> >>> Patrick Haggerty wrote: >>>> Right now, I think Wave is more a toy than a full tool. Part of >>>> that is its feature set isn't complete and part is that we're all >>>> treating it like a toy. What I think Wave is ultimately going to >>>> become is a unified interface for Web 2.0. If they manage to >>>> integrate the service into social networks and blogs and forums >>>> and so on, we'll have one interface for the majority of online >>>> contribution and collaboration. Sure it's advertised as the next >>>> iteration of email, but I think its greater contribution will be >>>> to standardize the interface through which the majority of people >>>> interact with the web. >>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Peter Fleck <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask] >>>> >> wrote: >>>> Google Wave has been fairly successful in organizing the Other >>>> Future of News (OFON) conference. Julio Ojeda-Zapata provides >>>> some >>>> details at the Pi Press site. >>>> http://blogs.twincities.com/yourtechweblog/2009/12/local-media-writer-harnesses-google-wave-for-planning.html >>>> ====================== >>>> Peter Fleck >>>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >>>> 612-424-5107 >>>> -- >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- >>>> Patrick Haggerty >>>> Office of Information Technology >>>> University of Minnesota Email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask] >>>> > >>>> Phone: 612-626-5807 >>> >>> -- >>> ______________________________ >>> Zachary Johnson * Web Manager >>> Student Unions & Activities >>> (612) 624 - 7270 >>> http://www.sua.umn.edu/ > > > -- > Karoline Dehnhard > Web Designer > 272 Appleby Hall > University of Minnesota > (612)625-2906 ====================== Peter Fleck [log in to unmask] 612-424-5107