[penprog]

People use twitter for announcements and then for comments on those announcements. Very few people have actual conversations. When a conversation does happen, it's usually the root poster agreeing (or disagreeing) with the person that tweeted at them. I don't see anyone going to twitter with the initial intent of conversing with someone. Nobody goes onto their computer and says "Hey I'm gonna go message this person on twitter so we can have a conversation"

Twitter isn't a conversation platform

[jacquesm]

Tell that to my mobile phone provider, who no longer accepts email as a viable support request path, but insists on me starting up a conversation with them on twitter or facebook (I don't have facebook, so that leaves twitter), requiring private information (so I have to 'follow' them first, and they have to 'follow' me in return), is one D away from exposing private info and in general totally unsuitable for the purpose.

[penprog]

So because your mobile phone provider is incompetent twitter is a bad platform?

Who is your provider btw? That sort of bad acting should be named and shamed (on a platform like twitter perhaps?)

[jacquesm]

It was merely meant as an illustration of why some people hold 'conversations' on twitter. The provider is Vodafone.

[tweakerbee]

One simple solution: send them an old school registered letter. They'll have to read it, or at least sign for it. In that letter you can let them know how displeased you are, and announce that you will a) continue to send registered letters and b) will change telco as soon as you can.

[scrollaway]

Not so much a solution or even a workaround, more of a way to take a stand.

[pbreit]

You're just flat out wrong. That's why there's a tab dedicated to replies. Twitter conversations can be incredibly interesting and benefit all participants by being public. Twitter's setup hugely encourages @ing people in your tweets.

[taude]

Except conversations are badly broken. So many people don't hit the actual reply, so conversations get cut off, often restarted, and thus become fragmented, which makes them hard to follow and participate in. Sometimes it works. Often it doesn't. I think this is what the OP was talking about.

[RBerenguel]

But this is not a problem of the platform, but of how users are using the platform. I rarely have conversations on twitter (i.e. most are just a couple of replies long at most) but I occasionally have a 20+ post. If you hit proper reply, it works. If you don't, it doesn't (or does really badly), but this is a user fault, not a platform fault.

[noamyoungerm]

If users have difficulty properly using the platform, the platform is at fault. An arbitrarily naive user should never have to fight the platform to do what he wants.

[RBerenguel]

I don't think I agree. If we view twitter as a tool, an arbitrarily naive user can chop his hand with an axe.

[nimaMehanian]

Very accurate analogy.

[taude]

Also consider when there's say four people tagged in a conversation, and then someone needs the extra characters to make their point and they remove one of the names, then that person loses the context too.

Also, conversations look different when you're looking at them from one of your lists, or if the people you are following are different than the people I follow.

So many clunky issues that you need to be on top of for it to make sense, and this is what's lost on the general person.

[hoggle]

I guess it depends on which Twitter client one uses, I've never had a cut-off conversation with Echofon.

[pbreit]

Vast, vast majority use twitter.com or the Twitter mobile apps.

[onewaystreet]

This is one of the many examples of Twitter not knowing what Twitter is. Twitter is a product that was a success in spite of the efforts of its founders.

[kalleboo]

> I don't see anyone going to twitter with the initial intent of conversing with someone.

They're you're either blind or not looking very hard.

Twitter is a conversation platform. A shitty one perhaps, but one nontheless.

[stormbrew]

Conversation (yes, often about announcements) is the main thing I use twitter for. To me twitter, at its best, is basically a giant irc channel with some filtering features.

Now you've seen one. I think you're confusing emergent with wrong, tbh.

[throwawayaway]

totally agree. at least you can have someone moderate channels on irc though.