
Conversations in 140 Characters or Less are not Exactly Meaningful - Tawheed
http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2009/12/conversations-in-140-character.php
======
mrshoe
The character limit is not the bottleneck. Twitter-like services aren't good
at conversation because of _the latency_. Everyone here has experienced
chat/IM. The reason you can have an actual conversation there is that it's
rapid-fire.

That's why we've focused on reducing the latency for ShopTalk. Even using HTTP
and comet, we've been able to give it a real interactive, rapid-fire feel.
Chat isn't as sexy as newer trends like microblogging, but it's far more
_useful_.

------
bhousel
On the contrary, I would argue that conversations of more than 140 characters
are not conversations at all. They're speeches, talks, blog posts, etc.

When you _converse_ with someone, you need to stop talking sometimes and
listen to what they have to say.

~~~
rimantas
_On the contrary, I would argue that conversations of more than 140 characters
are not conversations at all. They're speeches, talks, blog p_

You should have stopped there and waited for reply. Listening is important,
but maybe it is better to finish your thought when it makes sense, not on some
random limit?

~~~
bhousel
I easily could have made my comment shorter or split into two, were I
expecting it to be pushed out to many people via SMS.

~~~
rimantas
It does not make conversation any more natural. Not to mention, that I don't
remember when did I have a phone unable to accept a long text and send in
whatever number of SMSes needed.

------
Tawheed
Beyond latency, it's also about the conversation interface, and the engagement
model with the participants.

------
grumblecakes
This seems to be overlooking the potential for depth in brevity by utilizing
links, media, etc.

------
InclinedPlane
Newsflash: some forms of information exchange have limitations that prevent
them from being useful for every single possible aspect of communication.

You don't drive a Vespa across the Atlantic Ocean and you don't use a 747 to
go to the grocery store. Having an extended conversation on twitter is as
silly as trying to send attachments via phone or publishing a peer reviewed
research paper via lyrical poem. Recognize that all forms of communication
have their strengths, weaknesses, and limits, and know when you're abusing a
particular form of communication and stretching it beyond it's boundaries of
usefulness.

------
cammil
FEWER

~~~
gojomo
Not definitively. There are exceptions. For example, at...

<http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/less-versus-fewer.aspx>

...GrammarGirl notes that "it is customary to use the word less to describe
time, money, and distance". A limited character budget is a little like linear
distance (display length of a message; "140 characters _long_ ") and a little
like money (spending your allocated character count).

And, the masses have spoken:

["140 characters or less"] -> about 14,300,000 results

["140 characters or fewer"] -> about 448,000 results

------
pronoiac
You're not awesome because _you allow longer comments than Twitter._ Trying to
define yourself as such is _utterly moronic._

