I think the context has important role in technological issues and it needs to be explained.
Twitter is very useful when you need some quick answer, with no premises.
While a tweet with a post link is enough, one tweet is just buzz
Why I can't have conversations using Twitter
11–20 of 161 posts
Re: Why I can't have conversations using Twitter
#12[deleted]
Re: Why I can't have conversations using Twitter
#13TWTR is no good for conversations because there is no way to explain something new or controversial in 140 chars. Yes, this fits in a tweet
Re: Why I can't have conversations using Twitter
#14I think part of the problem is that Twitter is optimised for machine processing, more than it is for human conversation.
Re: Why I can't have conversations using Twitter
#15I think part of the problem is that Twitter is optimised for machine processing, more than it is for human conversation.
I think it was a beautiful "what if." What happens when we limit a message to 140 chars? The character of conversation changes - so do people's use patterns. The most wonderful thing about twitter is that you can't get lost down the rabbit hole of a three paragraph email. And there's pressure to reply quickly to stay part of the conversation.
It's a genius example of design thinking.
Re: Why I can't have conversations using Twitter
#16This is why I could never figure out why anyone could possibly want to do anything with Twitter... I keep hearing how it's great to keep up to date with whatever you're interested in - but I just can't see it.
It's great as a feed for links and for light entertainment. Commenting along to live TV (national or even global events) is good fun.
Re: Why I can't have conversations using Twitter
#17Yep. Incidentally this is the exact same reason why I can't have conversations by shouting out the window of my car as I speed past people on the street.
This a very good (and fun) analogy !
Re: Why I can't have conversations using Twitter
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
But what's Twitters advantage over good ol' RSS or ATOM for this use case?
It's much simpler to publish on Twitter than via RSS.
How exactly? In the time it takes you to register an account on twitter.com you could as well register an account on wordpress.com and publish via RSS. The main difference is that longer content is possible, that you could find even easier/faster/whatever alternatives because its federated and that your communications are not dependent on the policies of a single private company - which for non-us-citizens like me is operating under foreign law, a law I don't know as well as the local one.
Re: Why I can't have conversations using Twitter
#19TWTR is no good for conversations because there is no way to explain something new or controversial in 140 chars. Yes, this fits in a tweet
I am quite skeptical about twitter myself but I never understood this argument: What stops you from explaining your new or controversial argument in (n * 140) chars, or multiple tweets?
Re: Why I can't have conversations using Twitter
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe that small blogs and RSS/ATOM are a good answer here. I can't and don't want to follow high-volume streams, be it Twitter or "news" blogs. However, if you combine 20 interesting but low-volume blogs in your feed reader, you will always know when something interesting happened, without having to check all those sites by hand. (Of course I also have high-volume sites in my feed reader, but that's more for "ne…
But what's Twitters advantage over good ol' RSS or ATOM for this use case?
Non-techies understand it.