• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Twitter, explain it to me

johnny karate said:
You make a very good point. However, people relate to the world, sate their curiousity about it, and process the information they glean from it in different ways. I prefer more passive methods in obtaining information. I'm sure the Twitter feeds you follow are very interesting, but I honestly have a hard time believing they offer any insight or knowledge not available in other venues. I could be wrong, but again, I think it just comes down to personal preference.



Agreed. Which is why I deleted my Facebook account and have no interest in Twitter. And believe me, there is no particular passion in my opinion of Twitter, or any other social networking site. It's not for me, and in the spirit of discussion, I am merely offering my two cents.

Which kind of brings it back to a point you made earlier. I deride Twitter, but am very active on this forum. Again, different strokes.



I maintain that in this sense, Twitter is somewhat redundant. I never find myself lacking in resources for my interests through more traditional methods, and I find the signal-to-noise ratio much more to my liking with those methods. And as far as "following friends" I've never understood the appeal of social netorking sites as a means of keeping in touch. I carry around a device in my pocket that allows me three different methods on instananeous communication. I don't see the need for another. If a friend of mine with whom I like to chat over a pint has something interesting to tell me, I prefer to be told face-to-face over a pint.
Click to expand...

Please notice that no one is assuming YOU have a character defect simply because you use different technology to communicate.
 
johnny karate said:
You make a very good point. However, people relate to the world, sate their curiousity about it, and process the information they glean from it in different ways. I prefer more passive methods in obtaining information. I'm sure the Twitter feeds you follow are very interesting, but I honestly have a hard time believing they offer any insight or knowledge not available in other venues. I could be wrong, but again, I think it just comes down to personal preference.
Click to expand...

Twitter is very passive, if you want it to be. It's like Google Reader - set up the people you want to follow, then let that tailored information wash over you at your leisure. Because tweets are short, they're summaries. If you want details, click the links. I don't really see your objection.

Sure, I could randomly hunt around for content I might find interesting (and I do do that too!), but it's also great when people whose opinions I respect link to an interesting article, or a fun event, or even tell a joke. I can't possibly imagine what you find objectionable about hearing interesting things from interesting people. Why are you here, for example? On these forums? Twitter is a much more passive form of knowledge acquisition than this forum is, and the signal-to-noise ratio is far, far higher than here, because you get to listen to people you want to listen to, and no-one else. I wouldn't follow but a fraction of the posters here on Twitter.


I maintain that in this sense, Twitter is somewhat redundant. I never find myself lacking in resources for my interests through more traditional methods, and I find the signal-to-noise ratio much more to my liking with those methods. And as far as "following friends" I've never understood the appeal of social netorking sites as a means of keeping in touch. I carry around a device in my pocket that allows me three different methods on instananeous communication. I don't see the need for another. If a friend of mine with whom I like to chat over a pint has something interesting to tell me, I prefer to be told face-to-face over a pint.
Click to expand...
Twitter's not for "keeping in touch". It's for sharing information. No-one is going to send you a personal text message or an email about that interesting news article they just read, but hey - if you're following them on Twitter, you'll get to see it. This is especially true if the person in question isn't a very close friend. Richard Wiseman is never going to text me about the psychology experiment you-tube video he just watched. But following him on Twitter means I get to see it. Peter Searfinowic is never going to call me up and tell me a little quippy, pithy one liner he just wrote, is he? But it's there, on my Twitter feed, a free little smile. Where's the downside?

If you expect people to go out of their way to text you personally, maybe you're the egotist here? ;)
 
Last edited:
DDWW said:
But I aways thought of "Texting" the same way. Seems like a backwards move from either just talking to a person, or waiting for the appropriate time to talk to a person.

But then again I am really old.

DD (or feel really old) WW
Click to expand...

The other day, I was in a packed pub watching US-England. A friend was with other folks in another pub. We texted back and forth, because there was no way on earth we could have heard each other on the phone.
 
RT @BadAstronomer: Someday I will fly United Airlines and no woes will ensue. Today, however, is not that day.
 
The only thing I dislike about Twitter is a number of friends who used to update their journals and blogs now only tweet. They usually auto-update said journals and blogs with their tweets at the end of the day but now instead of their usually interesting and witty posts I get a couple lines of "bowled 160 today" and "annoyed with [blank]" messages.

There's a reason Twitter is popular and I don't really have a problem with it. I just wish specific people I like would write more detailed accounts of the things they're now twittering again.
 
Like others have said it's what you make of it. I find I just have it running in the background along with a facebook feed. (I use Tweetdeck). The facebook feed is mostly crap from family and co-workers but the Tweet feed can be pretty good. Don't tweet much myself though.
 
volatile said:
Do you find your friends discussing things they think you'll find interesting with you ego-manaical?
Click to expand...

Well no, because they're my friends so there is the inherent understanding that we find each other interesting. That's why we're friends. Now, if a total stranger walked up to me to share something he thinks is interesting, I might find that to be a bit ego-maniacal.

volatile said:
I just wonder why you think the method of communication inherently turns information-sharing into egotism. I have no illusions that a majority of people care what I have to say, but I'm perfectly willing to post a "Hey, this is interesting" link in earshot of those who have made the active decision to listen.
Click to expand...

Entirely your prerogative. Personally, I find e-mail quite sufficient for such exchanges.

volatile said:
I just don't see why that's any more ego-manaical than blogging, posting a mailing list or even posting on this forum. In fact, I'd argue it's less ego-manaical than posting here. What's the difference? What makes posting lengthy posts on this forums to which you expect replies less "pay attention" than me posting short links to news articles which I hope people who have actively chosen to follow me will find as interesting as I did?
Click to expand...

Cleon said:
Kindly explain how that doesn't apply to forum posts, blogs, or any other online medium.
Click to expand...

Forums are typically geared towards specific interests for people to discuss specific topics. It's a meeting place for likeminded people to come together and exchange thoughts and ideas. Like what we're doing right now. I find that offers me a unique souce of information and intellectual stimulation. Twitter, while it can be used in a somewhat similar fashion, does not offer me anything unique, and so then becomes merely a platform for anyone and everyone to make public whatever thought they are currently having, and I don't find that to be terribly interesting most of the time.

Blogs tend to be a more long-form and detailed means of expression. And while they certainly have their share of inherent egotism, I think their execution can offset that. When you're reduced to 140 characters, there's not going to be much in the way of actually expresion. When stripped of its utility, and I would argue Twitter as very little, it becomes more about self-involvement than self-expression.
 
johnny karate said:
Well no, because they're my friends so there is the inherent understanding that we find each other interesting. That's why we're friends. Now, if a total stranger walked up to me to share something he thinks is interesting, I might find that to be a bit ego-maniacal.
Click to expand...

Why do you assume the stranger would be "walking up to you"? On Twitter, you choose who you want to listen to; you choose to listen to people who you find interesting, and only those people.

Forums are typically geared towards specific interests for people to discuss specific topics. It's a meeting place for likeminded people to come together and exchange thoughts and ideas.
Click to expand...
Exactly like Twitter - remember, you get to choose who you follow. Everyone whose tweets you see will be "like-minded" - and much more so than on a forum. I wouldn't follow Edge, or Radrook, or BeAChooser (or DarthRotor or Ziggurat for that matter) on Twitter!


Like what we're doing right now. I find that offers me a unique souce of information and intellectual stimulation. Twitter, while it can be used in a somewhat similar fashion, does not offer me anything unique, and so then becomes merely a platform for anyone and everyone to make public whatever thought they are currently having, and I don't find that to be
terribly interesting most of the time.
Click to expand...
It's not "public". It's at best semi-public. I don't know if you still hold some funamental misunderstanding about how twitter works, but I can't stress this enough - you don't listen to "anyone and everyone making public whatever thought they are currently having". You only see the tweets of the people you follow and the tweets those people re-tweet. In addition, if the people you follow are conversing with someone you don't follow, you won't even see those tweets.

If you follow interesting people, you will get interesting tweets.

Blogs tend to be a more long-form and detailed means of expression. And while they certainly have their share of inherent egotism, I think their execution can offset that. When you're reduced to 140 characters, there's not going to be much in the way of actually expresion. When stripped of its utility, and I would argue Twitter as very little, it becomes more about self-involvement than self-expression.
Click to expand...
Not at all. Many (most) tweets by people I follow are links to things, most of which I wouldn't have come across otherwise. Posts from blogs I didn't know about, or videos on YouTube, or songs. Or they're jokes, quips or aphorisms. Unlike here, which is often the same people arguing boisterously and nastily and counterproductively about the same old topics (and I've vastly reduced my time here because of that), Twitter is a constant stream of interesting, engaging content from people who I actively find interesting. And I hope the things I tweet - also often links to things - are interesting to the people who follow me.

I think you just don't understand how Twitter works, and imagine all people post about is what they had for breakfast. I'm sure there are thousands of users who do that (and only that), but they're not the ones I follow. I follow scientists, bloggers, activists, musicians, artists, academics, writers, journalists, polymaths, comedians and strippers, the vast majority of whom consistently tweet engaging, interesting, amusing, witty, fascinating, wonderful content. Again, I can't see your objection - which is really just a strawman, when it comes down to it.
 
Last edited:
And speaking of blogs - I love blogs too. But how do you discover interesting blogs in the "passive" way you claim to like?

I follow people on Twitter whose opinions I trust and whose tastes I share. Those people often post links to blogs I've never heard of - thus increasing the amount of interesting, engaging blogging in my life! I've discovered loads of new blogs via Twitter that are now regular features in my Google Reader feed.

How do you, passively, find out about all those great blogs you enjoy so much? To be honest, it seems to me that Twitter is right up your alley - you love passive communication, blogs, likeminded people to come together and exchange thoughts and ideas (with a high signal-to-noise ratio), and not listening to people you don't want to listen to... all things that basically define Twitter! There's much more consistently interesting content in my Twitter feed that I find outside the OP in most threads here.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom