4 ms·
Yeah, and I'm saying this was a mistake. People continue to use it thinking it gives them the most reach, because most people don't understand networks. I'm sur
by friend_and_foe 3y ago
Yeah, and I'm saying this was a mistake. People continue to use it thinking it gives them the most reach, because most people don't understand networks. I'm sure some like it locked down, but most people still think it's a place to publish because they don't really understand the magnitude of the change. It's not a small change; it is a fundamental change in the game dynamics of the platform. For now people can't tell that their audience is restricted. They're used to not knowing who saw it except for their feedback from other accounts. It still looks the same from their perspective. The apparent impact will be delayed, but it will happen. First, twitter links in the news will become screenshots, then they'll become quotes, then engagement outside will evaporate and people will begin feeling the need to publish blogs and the like. It's already beginning to happen. Twitter is much less useful if it's walled off.
- pmontra 3y agoThen something else will emerge (even something that already exists) and people using it will have more reach. Once the people of Twitter realize that, they will transfer to the new platform.
- VIPMaster 3y agoI completely agree that the change was an overall negative one that has resulted in Twitter being much less useful, and my point is that it's up to users to decide how to engage with the platform given these changes. For me, Twitter went from being an app that I checked and refreshed several times a day to one where I maybe open it once a month. I'm disappointed in the new direction but I updated my usage patterns accordingly. Your point about other users potentially not understanding the change is well-taken, and some of the other comments in this thread prove it (like a city's police department communicating exclusively via Twitter), but trying to make an open platform out of one that's fundamentally not (anymore, at least) seems like the wrong way to solve the problem.