4 ms·

You have 16K followers, you're not a normal person. > Is there any media in which a random person can shout content out into the void and expect immediate upta

by Touche 11y ago

You have 16K followers, you're not a normal person. > Is there any media in which a random person can shout content out into the void and expect immediate uptake? Not into the void, no. But that's not how other social media platforms work, only Twitter.

tptacek 11y ago
I have that many followers because I'm noisy, have been on Twitter for a long time, and very occasionally post original content to Twitter before I post them elsewhere. Patrick has more followers than I do; how'd he get there? Blog posts and Bingo Card Creator. It's true that if you're LeBron James everyone will pay attention to you instantly, and if you're a random programmer it will take an investment of time and energy to get anyone to pay attention to you at all, but that doesn't seem like a flaw in the platform so much as a description of how the world works.
- Touche 11y ago
  It's a flaw in the respect that if Twitter wants people to use it, it shouldn't take the amount of effort you've put into it to be noticed. I mean, I feel like I've put a lot of effort into it and I only have 600 followers. Think about it like this. How long does a typical tweet live "above the fold" (where the user doesn't have to scroll down to see it)? It varies of course depending on how many people you follow and how frequently those people tweet. But on average the stream moves pretty fast, right? Let's say, for the sake of discussion, it lasts 10 seconds. I'd be willing to bet the average is much lower than that, but whatever. You, tptacek, tweet something and you have 16,000 people who MIGHT see that within that 10 second window. The typical person with 50 followers or less needs one of their 50 followers to be looking at Twitter within that 10 second window... or their Tweet will never even be read by anyone, let alone commented on. Don't you at least see how that leads to a negative-feedback loop that makes people not want to use the platform?
  - tptacek 11y ago
    Well, right there you're missing an insight into how to use Twitter effectively. If you're trying to communicate something important, where you want uptake, you need to broadcast it repeatedly; the trick then is to find ways to do that without annoying your followers too much. Most of my Twitter posts are hoping for serendipity; like at best, someone generating a funny reply to me. But if I want to set the date/location for the next ChiSec post, I'll post multiple times per day.
    - Touche 11y ago
      Right, using Twitter is a lot of work. This is the complaint; it shouldn't be :)
      - prawn 11y ago
        I agree with all your points. Maybe Thomas' "repeat yourself" suggestion makes Twitter more like 24-hour news. If you don't have the interest or resources to run your own brand channel, just follow as you watch TV? If you do, go for it.
- ProAm 11y ago
  > that doesn't seem like a flaw in the platform so much as a description of how the world works I think that is the flaw and issue that troubles Twitter most today. You shouldn't need to 'prime the pump' per se with activity because one day in the future you may want to use it for real. Especially a social media pump where one accident, typo, bad joke may ruin your life (I admit this is a reach, but certainly possible). This flaw make it mainly useless for the common man. It is how the world works, but it makes Twitter almost useless for 99% of it's users.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    So how should Twitter work so that it doesn't have this problem?
    - ProAm 11y ago
      That's the billion dollar answer that Twitter is looking for as we speak. A way to tune your incoming stream and to get your posts in front of eyes that matter is the answer, but how I have no clue. I don't know if Twitter tunes their stream like Facebook does their timeline, but something along the lines of that may help (without subscribing to specific hashtags). I honestly don't know if its the 'right' answer for Twitter's survivability. I've always felt Twitter was a more evolved advertising medium, and they should pursue building out that product. It's in essence a 30 second commercial, in between interesting content for the user, and is why I view it as best used by celebrities.
- smacktoward 11y ago
  > Patrick has more followers than I do; how'd he get there? Blog posts and Bingo Card Creator. In other words, because he too is Internet Famous.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

by Touche 11y ago

tptacek 11y ago

I have that many followers because I'm noisy, have been on Twitter for a long time, and very occasionally post original content to Twitter before I post them elsewhere. Patrick has more followers than I do; how'd he get there? Blog posts and Bingo Card Creator. It's true that if you're LeBron James everyone will pay attention to you instantly, and if you're a random programmer it will take an investment of time and energy to get anyone to pay attention to you at all, but that doesn't seem like a flaw in the platform so much as a description of how the world works.

Touche 11y ago
It's a flaw in the respect that if Twitter wants people to use it, it shouldn't take the amount of effort you've put into it to be noticed. I mean, I feel like I've put a lot of effort into it and I only have 600 followers. Think about it like this. How long does a typical tweet live "above the fold" (where the user doesn't have to scroll down to see it)? It varies of course depending on how many people you follow and how frequently those people tweet. But on average the stream moves pretty fast, right? Let's say, for the sake of discussion, it lasts 10 seconds. I'd be willing to bet the average is much lower than that, but whatever. You, tptacek, tweet something and you have 16,000 people who MIGHT see that within that 10 second window. The typical person with 50 followers or less needs one of their 50 followers to be looking at Twitter within that 10 second window... or their Tweet will never even be read by anyone, let alone commented on. Don't you at least see how that leads to a negative-feedback loop that makes people not want to use the platform?
- tptacek 11y ago
  Well, right there you're missing an insight into how to use Twitter effectively. If you're trying to communicate something important, where you want uptake, you need to broadcast it repeatedly; the trick then is to find ways to do that without annoying your followers too much. Most of my Twitter posts are hoping for serendipity; like at best, someone generating a funny reply to me. But if I want to set the date/location for the next ChiSec post, I'll post multiple times per day.
  - Touche 11y ago
    Right, using Twitter is a lot of work. This is the complaint; it shouldn't be :)
    - prawn 11y ago
      I agree with all your points. Maybe Thomas' "repeat yourself" suggestion makes Twitter more like 24-hour news. If you don't have the interest or resources to run your own brand channel, just follow as you watch TV? If you do, go for it.
ProAm 11y ago
> that doesn't seem like a flaw in the platform so much as a description of how the world works I think that is the flaw and issue that troubles Twitter most today. You shouldn't need to 'prime the pump' per se with activity because one day in the future you may want to use it for real. Especially a social media pump where one accident, typo, bad joke may ruin your life (I admit this is a reach, but certainly possible). This flaw make it mainly useless for the common man. It is how the world works, but it makes Twitter almost useless for 99% of it's users.
- tptacek 11y ago
  So how should Twitter work so that it doesn't have this problem?
  - ProAm 11y ago
    That's the billion dollar answer that Twitter is looking for as we speak. A way to tune your incoming stream and to get your posts in front of eyes that matter is the answer, but how I have no clue. I don't know if Twitter tunes their stream like Facebook does their timeline, but something along the lines of that may help (without subscribing to specific hashtags). I honestly don't know if its the 'right' answer for Twitter's survivability. I've always felt Twitter was a more evolved advertising medium, and they should pursue building out that product. It's in essence a 30 second commercial, in between interesting content for the user, and is why I view it as best used by celebrities.
smacktoward 11y ago
> Patrick has more followers than I do; how'd he get there? Blog posts and Bingo Card Creator. In other words, because he too is Internet Famous.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]