I don't twitter

Mar 26, 2009 17:13

Can anybody explain to me the allure of Twitter?  It's not even a synthesis of personal ideas and thoughts, but quick bleats of short mindless broadcasts. The former I would be interested in, the latter simply leaves me baffled.

twitter

Leave a comment

Comments 8

kiri_l March 26 2009, 22:40:03 UTC
I wish I could. upwards of 99% of it is pointless (although Stephen Fry's twitters are interesting, coherent, and often funny) Obviously I have an account but In almost a year I've only had 7 updates. I forget to turn it on, then I get annoyed and won't turn it on. ok.. let me try again. I think I'm to the point that if I want to chat to someone I know how so.. mostly I don't get it.

well that was a long way to go to say nothing. (sorry)

Reply


ravenevermore March 26 2009, 23:14:55 UTC
Twitter is like Marmite. Posts in a blog require time and usually either a fairly good web enabled phone or a computer. Twitter is fast and instant, and can be updated on everything from a cellphone upwards. I have the client on my Blackberry, my laptop, and my work PC. It's a stream of conscious, it's a 'what I'm doing now', it's a 'check out this news item/link/picture I took'. Its a fast and short form of blogging, social networking and, on some levels a chatroom. On its own it doesn't make much sense (in the summary pages you see pop up on LJ, for example), but as a cohesive unit it does, especially if you follow breadcrumb trails and find threads people have been part of. I Dig Twitter, I've found out some interesting stuff from Twitter, and I'd miss having it's news-ticker like feed scroll past me on a daily basis at work.

And yes, as said, Stephen Frys Twitter is possibly the best reason for the entire systems existence.

Reply

alryssa March 26 2009, 23:40:35 UTC
*points up* What Ash said. Stephen Fry and Wil Wheaton are entertaining as hell, and I follow a few news anchors and the official Barack Obama feed. I don't log in every day, though, but it has less of the attention requirement that IM does.

In short, it's socialising for people like me with short attention spans :P

Reply

drake57 March 27 2009, 02:33:13 UTC
Obama twitters?, great another thing for the Republicans to be all pissy about and complain about.

Reply

alryssa March 29 2009, 02:29:35 UTC
Not personally. It's an official WH feed. ;)

Reply


scarfman March 26 2009, 23:38:03 UTC

I'm with you.

Reply


trinalin March 26 2009, 23:51:20 UTC
Different strokes for different folks. Where I'd see the appeal most is if you were at an event and wanted to "live blog" the event. For example, Michael Lee's tweets about his first caucus (IIRC) were entertaining and informative.

I don't have any issues with the folks in my friends list posting tweets. Some I read, some I don't. For now, I likely won't be getting a twitter account. Who knows what I'll think later. (Well, later it'll be something new that will annoy the twitter people...)

Reply


drake57 March 27 2009, 02:31:03 UTC
Twitter is for the ADD crowd, i guess they need the attention.

Someone described it as listening to half of a phone conversation.

You know twitter is doomed as a fad because the "media" has latched onto it.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up