Twitter - or squitter?

« A little piece of heaven | Simon's cat is... »

Twitter - or squitter?

by loiswakeman @ 10/07/2008 – 12:10:55

"Twitter forces textual concision" says Andrew Keen on the Indy's web site. That may be true of some people, but all the tweets I've been unfortunate enough to come across have been of the "I just squeezed a spot on the mirror" variety. I would propose an alternative summary "Twitter allows non-events to be publicised worldwide". Or perhaps I should devote more time to these concise and pertinent utterings to find the gold amongst the dross?

I would have made this point on the article itself - but no comments are solicited. So, 'Humbug' to you, Independent.
Options:
Tags:

9 Comments on Twitter - or squitter?

Hide subcomments

- SeasideMan ^Pro
- 10/07/2008 @ 13:21:44
Is the article saying, in a nutshell, that if you're writing about a load of dross, be brief? If so, I hope the article was brief!

Tom.
- - loiswakeman
  - http://lois.co.uk
  - 10/07/2008 @ 13:34:46
  Sadly, it went on at length!
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- MrFlighty
- 10/07/2008 @ 19:00:23
I read that! As for finding gold amongst the dross I wish you luck, and I'll be very surprised if you do find any!
Needless to say I'm not a twitterer! xx
- - loiswakeman
  - http://lois.co.uk
  - 11/07/2008 @ 09:51:21
  I am glad to hear it, though not surprised.
  
  Just 'visited' your allotment BTW - and it looks lovely. I only wish I had time to grow my own.
  - - MrFlighty
    - 11/07/2008 @ 14:52:53
    Thanks for visiting the plot! It really is having the time that makes all the difference. Some decent weather would help as well! xx
    - Reply to comment
    - Permalink
- Marjolein Katsma (Visitor)
- http://my.opera.com/JavaWoman/
- 14/07/2008 @ 21:58:00
I'm finding lots of gold on Twitter, which I use as a source of information about web standards, accessibility and web development (mainly). I also have an account on http://identi.ca/ for the same reason.

The latter is still relatively new but shows a lot of promise. And Twitter has already become so indispensable for me that I get really pissed when things go wrong - as they do a lot lately while they're sorting out their scaling problems. Still, I cannot miss it any more - it's very much a part of my work pattern now.

In case you want to see what I'm up to - I'm here:
http://twitter.com/marjoleink
http://identi.ca/marjoleink
- - loiswakeman
  - http://lois.co.uk
  - 15/07/2008 @ 08:00:52
  Hi there! I am relieved to find it is not as vacuous as I had so far found. I'm off now to see what you are doing...
  - - Marjolein Katsma (Visitor)
    - http://my.opera.com/JavaWoman/
    - 15/07/2008 @ 19:53:57
    Although it rarely happens, I just was in a bit of a "microblog" discussion - notice upon notice in indenti.ca, all limited to 140 characters, but real discussion none the less.
    
    I found it's true: "Twitter forces textual concision" - not just Twitter, though: any microblogging service that limits you to 140 characters per message or something similar. For more than 2.5 hours I found myself trying to squeeze my arguments and ripostes into 140 characters of less (sometimes resorting to ellipses to spread it out over two posts); I found myself constantly trying to find shorter ways of saying the same thing, or abbreviations, official or not, but at least comprehensible - just to get my point across. Excellent exercise for one whose native language is not English (and who doesn't know what her discussion partner's native language is, although English is likely).
    
    Try to keep up a serious discussion like that and see if it doesn't force textual concision - it certainly did for me, but my challenge in English usually is not expressing myself, but expressing myself concisely. Try it, then see if you agree or not!
    
    Even though the subject was not at all one I usually discuss online (let alone on identi.ca), I was enjoying the discussion as well as the exercise of expressing myself concisely without losing semantics even when using (or abusing) abbreviations.
    - - loiswakeman
      - http://lois.co.uk
      - 16/07/2008 @ 11:48:54
      It's very rare that a slightly unusual usage makes me remember English isn't your first language! But I can imagine the constraints of 140 chars must hone your skills further.
      
      As for trying it - my life is already too short for everything I want to do, so unless I have to for work, I think this innovation will probably pass me by.
      - Reply to comment
      - Permalink

Twitter - or squitter?

9 Comments on Twitter - or squitter?

Leave a comment (Login)