Twitter: I don't get it.

[mckitterick]

Do you? If so, what am I not getting? Mostly, I find "tweets" irritating and lacking in anything I'd want to read. Despite the cute name.

Chris

Comments

[mckitterick.livejournal.com]

This is why I'm immediately turned off when I see an LJ full of tweets, because I've come to expect them to be high noise:signal.

I find it odd that people who make otherwise interesting blog posts feel the need to tweet.

[gsemones.livejournal.com]

I think the key here is simply the value of the tweet: noise vs signal. I got on twitter a little while back because a number of my techy peers were on there. They tweet about techy interesting things. On the other hand, some of the writerly twitter folks just post the inane. I stop following someone whose noise is high, or just plain too much volume.

I see the value in alerting folks to blog updates (though other things like RSS feeds do that too), asking questions of all your followers, and sharing cool tidbits that don't warrant a full blog post.

On one occasion a peer tweeted about a blog post they found interesting, and that blog gave me some of the ammunition I needed for an article I'll have published soon. However, there is a lot of sand wrapped around the few nuggets out there in twitter-land.

[mckitterick.livejournal.com]

You know, I could see using Twitter as a portable blog tool for something short and sweet that I want to share. That fits the way I like to communicate.