[munk-a]

No?

I'm not clear on what the real point of this question is - twitter is a terrible platform to use for actual communication. Their sorting by "relevance" can cause recent messages to get lost in the shuffle and randomly mess with your visibility. It may be you're considering twitter as a business in which to coordinate product sales, but I'll assume it's for customer relations management, many companies that have a twitter account for CS stuff also offer email, messanger (of some sort) and phone if you have an issue you need to resolve due to the fact that platform just isn't well suited for business - the network effect of it is surprisingly low (a _lot_ of people aren't on or don't regularly use twitter), it is semi-public which may violate your business concerns and... you're handing the keys to your reputation to the third party that has acted poorly in the past.

If you check out youtubers talking about youtubers (I have no specific example on hand) they tend to complain endlessly about how the trending algorithms can drive thousands of potential viewers toward or away from their channel for no particular reason - there the network effect is strong enough that they don't have an option though, if your business is streaming a show then YouTube offers a much richer starting viewer base.

I guess my assumption is, if your business doesn't force you to use a particular social media platform exclusively then... use some other communication method per preference?

I'm really just confused by the question though - these things are not the same and twitter is simply not as important as the place your money lives (and I think pretty much everyone would agree? Maybe I'm getting too old)

[anigbrowl]

You may dislike Twitter (I do) but it is a large thing that exists and appears to provide sufficient value to people that dismissing it as 'silliness' just sounds empty-headed and naive.

[gotocake]

Instead of attacking the person who is making a fairly lengthy and supportable argument, and basing your stance on the notion of some nebulous value “people” find, maybe you could respond in kind? I have to say that I find myself in the camp of Twitter being silly, except when it’s being destructive. Instead of being dismissed as “empty-headed” I’d prefer some value proposition justifying the previous comparison to a phone number.

Twitter seems to be a rage factory and amplifier, a shitty blogging format, and very occasionally a way to twist the arm of recalcitrant customer service.

[kingaillas]

Twitter is a Rorschach test - all those things you criticize Twitter for seeming to be (rage factory, shitty blog, etc.)? That would be entirely the fault of the users in those specific circumstances.

The value proposition for me is receiving targeted news/information disseminated in a convenient format. As a concrete example, I'm crewing/pacing at a 100 mile trail run in two weeks, and I'm subscribed to that event's twitter feed. It's the Umstead 100 in case you are curious (@Umstead100). During the event, it will tweet out news and updates of interest to participants, volunteers, and others.

Yes, they could probably text everyone, or continuously update the website, or send emails - but Twitter is perfect for this situation and others like it: content/updates produces and consumed on mobile devices, sending frequent short updates with relevant info, etc.

Twitter has its abuses, but so does everything. Next time you're ready to shit all over Twitter, just remember that what you are likely ACTUALLY raging about is their userbase, i.e. the public.

[lmm]

> The value proposition for me is receiving targeted news/information disseminated in a convenient format. As a concrete example, I'm crewing/pacing at a 100 mile trail run in two weeks, and I'm subscribed to that event's twitter feed. It's the Umstead 100 in case you are curious (@Umstead100). During the event, it will tweet out news and updates of interest to participants, volunteers, and others.

> Yes, they could probably text everyone, or continuously update the website, or send emails - but Twitter is perfect for this situation and others like it: content/updates produces and consumed on mobile devices, sending frequent short updates with relevant info, etc.

Twitter is a poor choice for cases where you want to specifically subscribe to something, because it's deliberately designed as a global popularity contest/rage generator. A Facebook group, Discord, heck even Tumblr or Medium would be a better choice for that kind of use than Twitter.

> Twitter has its abuses, but so does everything. Next time you're ready to shit all over Twitter, just remember that what you are likely ACTUALLY raging about is their userbase, i.e. the public.

No, Twitter has a series of deliberate design decisions that result in worse interactions than any other platform. The limited message size strips away nuance and reasoned discussion, in favour of zingers and outrage. Their algorithmic feed shows the most "engaging" tweets while suppressing the follow-up discussion, so you'll see a controversial tweet without seeing the existing replies or subsequent retraction. The rage storms aren't just people being people, they're people being nudged into behaving a particular way by Twitter's optimized-for-engagement UI. There's a reason other platforms don't have these problems.

[identity-haver]

I've heard that even if you flip the "algorithmic timeline" switch off, you still don't see a linear feed of everyone you're following. It's still filtered and manipulated, just closer to linear.

Speaking of design decisions, here's a bit [1] about how the "quote tweet" encourages the behavior of "dunking", a usage I have only ever heard in regards to Twitter. Basically, if anyone with a Twitter account says something you think is stupid, you quote tweet them and "dunk" on them about how stupid it is and they are. Then everybody piles in and retweets the "dunk", perhaps adding their own riposte. And the original poster is only a click away in the quote, so you can then go to their profile and find other things to dunk on, send mean DMs, etc.

[1] https://slate.com/technology/2017/12/dunking-is-delicious-an...

[anigbrowl]

the "quote tweet" encourages the behavior of "dunking"

Quoting people to negate or mock their argument has been around since Usenet - well, much longer in literary terms but I'm citing Usenet as an example of a system that's almost real-time and where it can be a spontaneous emotionally driven decision. It may not be called 'dunking' on every platform but the phenomenon is universal.

[beaconstudios]

at the same time, the medium is the message. Twitter encourages this bad behaviour, not because of intent but because it's highly geared towards hot takes and doesn't provide the character space for the level of nuance required to take a serious look at real life. So people condense what could be a complex question into a strong statement, even better if it's provocative because as provocation draws eyeballs.

[coldtea]

Lots of things (a) exist, and (b) appear to provide sufficient value to people, and yet are either totally superficial or deleterious.

(a) and (b) are some of the lowest of bars. Even ISIS passes those, along with tons of other things (deep fried Mars bars, for one).

The parent made a qualitative argument and/or value judgement. Mere existence doesn't negate it, arguments why his values are bad, or shouldn't be taken into account, might.

[libraryatnight]

Lots of things people value are suppliers of silliness. Humans put a lot of stock into silliness.

[nl]

I'm really just confused by the question though - these things are not the same and twitter is simply not as important as the place your money lives (and I think pretty much everyone would agree?..

I disagree pretty strongly.

Twitter is much more important than the bank I keep my money in.

Banking in fungible. Twitter gives me access.

I've arranged meetings with the partners of the biggest VC fund in Australia sorely via Twitter. I've had in depth discussions of the details of ML models with their authors via Twitter.

Generally speaking I'm much more relaxed about a 2 day delay in my banking than a 2 day delay in Twitter.

Maybe I'm getting too old

I'm 43, so I doubt it's that.

[duckqlz]

"Twitter is much more important than then bank I keep my money in" Wow, I will gladly trade you my twitter handle for your credit card number ;D

"Banking in fungible." You cannot instantly replace a bank account, transfer credit, or make changes without the help of the bank itself yet twitter can instantly be replaced by many forms of communication (SMS, Email, IRC, Talking, etc).

"I'm much more relaxed about a 2 day delay in my banking than a 2 day delay in Twitter." So if your car is on empty and you stop to buy gas only to find that your checking and credit accounts (from the bank) have a 2 day delay, you would find that acceptable!?

[nl]

"Banking in fungible." You cannot instantly replace a bank account, transfer credit, or make changes without the help of the bank itself yet twitter can instantly be replaced by many forms of communication (SMS, Email, IRC, Talking, etc).

The network and the way communication happens on those is not the same.

So if your car is on empty and you stop to buy gas only to find that your checking and credit accounts (from the bank) have a 2 day delay, you would find that acceptable!?

Please don't misquote me. The Generally speaking part is important here. Generally speaking, I don't let my car get to a situation where I'm on empty (I think I've been in that situation once in the last 20 years). And if the worst happened, it would suck but I'd ring a friend and it would be inconvenient but that's all.

OTOH, I've had multiple meetings in the last year where my only communication has been by Twitter and we've been arranging where to meet in the minutes before via it.