
Twitter: When the network is the thing - dtawfik1
http://www.eugenewei.com/blog/2015/9/1/when-the-network-is-mature
======
arm55
This claims that the network makes twitter, not the 140 character limit. Well,
it was that 140 character limit made the network in the first place.

The author describes reasons why the 140 character limit is a problem (e.g.
you can't have long conversations), in which they absolutely miss the point.
Twitter is not meant to solve all of your communication needs. The 140
character limit allows Twitter to be a reliable source of quick bits of
information - you can dive deeper if you want, but it's a great cursory
overview.

Tools don't have to solve every problem. They can (and probably should) solve
one specific problem really well. Twitter does that.

~~~
aikah
Twitter is a feed, like RSS and co, but centralized thus without the need to
maintain one's own blog.

So yes it is not meant to be used as a conversation tool. Its biggest problem
is in my opinion is curation. If I follow someone on twitter because he tweets
about Javascript or Web Security, I don't want to hear about the toys he
bought for his babies, his vacations or any activities unrelated to the
subject that made me follow that person. Twitter needs some kind of a channel
system, hashtags are a poor way to filter tweets. Too much noise.

That's basically why I stopped using it and went back to RSS. If common people
understood how RSS works, they would not need twitter.

~~~
nip
Shameless plug: you're pinpointing one of the reasons that made us start tree.

The gist of it: you follow people within categories so as to only get exposed
to content that matters to you (tightly integrated with a bookmarking side and
chrome extension).

We have conducted our closed-beta for 4 months now, only in Estonia, but we're
launching really soon.

If you want more informations, feel free to reach out (contact in my profile).

~~~
PopeOfNope
_you follow people within categories_

One small nit pick: this is exactly what he's saying he doesn't want. He wants
a way to be able to filter out content based on topic, not based on users.
Putting a user in a category doesn't magically filter their baby pictures out
of their discussion of algorithmic filters. Maybe automatic topic tagging?
Combine that with being able to put topics on an ignore list and you would
have my interest in a hurry.

~~~
nip
Following that user in "web development" instead of "everything" (a la
twitter) will solve his issue. You follow people within categories, you don't
associate people with categories.

I probably didn't phrase it correctly, I stand corrected.

When you share or save something on tree, you have to choose one of the 20
categories: tech, business, news&society, art&design, music, etc... In turn,
people will see that you shared in X or Y and can decide to follow you
exclusively in this X or Y category. Your feed is actually a multi-feed
(depending on how many categories you decided to follow people in, up to 20).

------
ClintEhrlich
I'm reminded of when Facebook first eliminated the formatting constraints on
status updates, so that users could simply enter text instead of adapting
their message to the "___ is __ing" convention. At the time, I'm sure there
was some Slate article decrying the move because it would make Facebook just
another website.

Personally, I tended to agree: it seemed like some of the quirky charm of
Facebook had been needlessly killed. But I was wrong. The communicative
potential of Facebook never would have ripened if status updates had remained
so constricted. The original novelty of the medium itself gave way to the
sustained novelty of diverse messages.

What does that mean for Twitter? I'm not sure.

Its ongoing success chastens me, because when I heard about it, the idea
sounded idiotic. Why use a protocol that imposed a 140 character limit? Well,
there is clearly some utility, given how many active users Twitter has. But it
is also obvious that many of those same users are frustrated by the
limitations of what they can express.

If I were running Twitter, I would take a middle path: Keep the 140 character
limit on "Tweets" but integrate a new type of public message without a
character limit. (Perhaps the 'subject line' of the new message class would be
a Tweet, which would expand into the full text when clicked.) This seems like
the best way to provide users an easier means of expressing themselves without
destroying Twitter as they know it.

