131–140 of 369 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then make it an opt-in. Companies should use the more "opt-in" method. Bundle it under "experimental" or "advanced features" in an easy to use page with a very clear explanation of what each feature does.
But what if most people like it? I have to say I think it makes a lot of sense. If a high number of people I follow like something, you might want to show it to me too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Might be an unpopular opinion, but I actually really like this feature. I'm usually not able to get to everything, so it's great to know when something important or interesting got tweeted and I know to check it out. That notification was actually what slowly made me an active Twitter user, because they kept surfacing me interesting content and giving me a reason to come back and it became a gateway for me to discove…
Then make it an opt-in. Companies should use the more "opt-in" method. Bundle it under "experimental" or "advanced features" in an easy to use page with a very clear explanation of what each feature does.
I think opt-out makes sense though, for users who don't a feature.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"User engagement" is a euphemism for "eyes on screen for as long as possible" and is a good metric for selling ads (the best one really). It's not a very good metric for measuring actual usefulness to users at all though. We need a business model for social media where incentives for companies and their users actually line up.
Nonprofit? A service that does what you likely desire would cost in the eight digits a year to provide for the whole world.
"nonprofit" is not code for "zero revenue"
> He suggested that the service works best as an “interest-based network,” where you log in and see content relevant to your interests, no matter who posted it Yeah, no thanks. Has anybody ever been happy with Twitter's attempts to force content from non-followed users into the feed? A couple of times a year they'll opt everybody back into whatever crappy experiment they're running ("hey, we'll put some posts to your…
Dorsey to me has it half right. Twitter should just follow with what we typically do in real life: "follow" people, but masked by interests we trust those people about. I want to read about politics from the political analysts I follow, but don't care about their cooking adventures on the weekend. I want to read about tech from the software folks I follow, but don't want to hear about their politics. I sure as heck d…
> He suggested that the service works best as an “interest-based network,” where you log in and see content relevant to your interests, no matter who posted it Yeah, no thanks. Has anybody ever been happy with Twitter's attempts to force content from non-followed users into the feed? A couple of times a year they'll opt everybody back into whatever crappy experiment they're running ("hey, we'll put some posts to your…
What I really dislike is the spam in the notifications section. If someone likes my tweet, replies to it or retweets it, that's relevant. I don't however want to see a notification for something Tweeter deems interesting under other people you follow liked/retweed this as a notification.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then make it an opt-in. Companies should use the more "opt-in" method. Bundle it under "experimental" or "advanced features" in an easy to use page with a very clear explanation of what each feature does.
That's kind of the point though - I had no idea this feature existed until they started pushing it to me. I think it's too much to expect users to opt-in to things. How would I have known to opt-in to this? Yet I am now much happier because they improved the UX for me. I think opt-out makes sense though, for users who don't a feature.