When I describe it, I say

"PublicSquare is a collaborative publishing platform."

But of course that is a bit jargony. It's kinda basecamp meets blogger. Most blogtools don't do what small publications need, becuase they don't support workflow, scheduling, maintence of many staff memebers and even more contributors.

But CMS's are confusing huge messy monsters. I'm a bit nerveous to compare PS to them. I've tried Mambo, and jamba, and many others -- I used drupal for quite awhile-- and PublicSquare is just way more lightweight, easier to use, easier to get started. I htink it's because it's designed for one problem,a nd unlike the others I mentioned, it's really not made to be used for everything. It's not a blogging platform, nor is it for a giant corporation to run its intranet on. Not to say you couldn't, but we're trying to avoid the whole built-for-everybody-so-nobody-is-happy problem.

It's designed for
• Small teams
• Overworked
• understaffed
• underpaid
• Large numbers of authors/contributors
• passionate
• made up mostly of the audience
• Edited content
• advertiser or classified suported

Okay, let me walk you thorugh a couple of the core concepts....

Core idea seems to be that contributors and editors to any collective publication can start up a real working relationship - instead of just creating an ever-vaster pile of comments, which they then all but drown in. Keyword: collective, intelligent moderation.

*Name:


*Email Address:


URL:


Remember me?

Comments:



posting can be slow; please wait a few seconds before hitting the button again.

mail entry to a friend