[dpcan]

But enough people do. Time to get on the bandwagon.

[transition]

I view Facebook and Twitter as unnecessary playgounds for me. My objective is to limit my channels of communication so i don't have to micromanage all these unproductive services. I don't see why you'd want to limit your user base like this.

[byrneseyeview]

At what point did you stop applying that argument to sites that require an email address to sign up?

[transition]

I'm not sure I understand your question - and if I do it sounds like you're trying to frame a very poor argument.

[Shenglong]

He's saying Twitter and Facebook are becoming, for today, what email was 10 years ago. You may have seen email as "an unproductive service" back then, because why would you email when you could call and write letters?

Then sites started requiring emails to sign up - and you signed up anyway. Why wouldn't sites just let you register through snail mail? They're limiting their user base!

In all seriousness, Twitter and Facebook are trending, and you might as well adopt them. Not doing so would strike me as a bit of technological ignorance.

[groby_b]

Difference - all e-mail addresses follow the same standard. Twitter & FB are just two of many competing "social media" places.

[transition]

I should join Twitter and Facebook just because everyone else is? And if I don't I'm technologically ignorant?

[Shenglong]

Isn't... that the definition of "technologically ignorant"?