Condivisione di buoni prodotti della Rete.
Le nuove tribù promuovono nuove infrastrutture di accesso alla Rete. L'innovazione la promuovono i Cittadini; siamo noi quelli che stiamo aspettando.
Yesterday, Twitter made what it termed a “small settings update” to their system. Specifically, they’ve updated the Notices section in your Settings (on Twitter.com) so that you now no longer have any control over the replies you see on the network.
Previously, there were three settings available to users:
- all @ replies
- @ replies to the people I’m following
- no @ replies
Here’s another great tool that utilizes the power of Twitter. It’s called iListMicro and it offers a powerful semantic search engine for marketplace content on Twitter. iList allows users to search Twitter market data and their engine will match users with the goods that are most relevant using special algorithms that learn from each user’s behavior. iList Micro’s search engine will even show related content from searches others have done in the past.
Users can add context to listings by using iList Micro’s hashtags. For example, if a user wanted to sell something via twitter, all they’d have to do is use the hashtag #ihave. And if a user wants something from someone else, they’d simply use #iwant. This would be all that’s need for iList Micro robots to find your tweet. To increase the possibility of people finding your listing, the iList Micro search engine also supports other hashtags that are listed on the iList site.
Sounds like such a powerful tool and only increases the power of Twitter. For more info, visit www.micro.ilist.com.
No TweetBacks yet. (http://tinyurl.com/qtxop8+from:+@twittstop">Be the first to Tweet this post)
So, Twitter have changed the way you can view @messages and people are in uproar.
Basically, the change means that if someone you follow replies to someone you DON’T follow, then you won’t see that message in your Twitter stream.
Well I say “Yay!”
But people are complaining, arms are raised, and uproar is being tweeted, retweeted and re-retweeted. Hashtags galore are being deployed, and people are complaining that ‘Twitter are taking away our choice’.
Well, I just don’t get the fuss.
Why would you want to see half a conversation? Why would you want your Twitter stream clogged up with “@whoever LOL” when you don’t even follow @whoever?
As I see it, if you follow both parts of the conversation, then you still see the @ messages, but if you only follow one part of the conversation, you won’t.
Maybe I don’t care because I’ve had my settings set to this mode from the beginning - I really don’t want to have to read half of a conversation and then look thought the person I don’t follow to see what is being talked about.
Yesterday afternoon Twitter made a fundamental change to the options available to users by eliminating the option to receive messages from our friends sent publicly to people we are not following. We called it a disaster that would seriously disrupt serendipitous discovery of interesting friends of our friends.
tweetmeme_url = 'http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/is_this_why_twitter_changed_its_replies_policy.php';
tweetmeme_source = 'rww';
Twitter has offered two explanations for the change. First, that very few users were choosing to receive these kinds of messages anyway and that it was confusing. Then, this morning, the company put up a blog post saying simply that "there were serious technical reasons why that setting had to go or be entirely rebuilt--it wouldn't have lasted long even if we thought it was the best thing ever." So what's the story? Here's our best guess.
Tribbles — the adorable balls of fluff brought aboard the starship Enterprise during an early episode of the original “Star Trek” — seemed innocuous enough at first. But it quickly became clear the cuddly pets were a menacing nuisance as they reproduced too rapidly to manage.
The trouble that Captain James T. Kirk and his crew had with those pesky Tribbles isn’t unlike the situation Twitter is facing as the popularity of the microblogging site soars. Enthusiastic celebrities and curious newcomers — Twitters, as a famous rookie, Oprah Winfrey, called them — are flocking to the platform in droves. In April, the site drew 17 million United States visitors, an 83 percent leap in traffic from March, according to data from comScore.
Twitter is officially getting dumbed down.
For the second time in less than two months, Twitter has changed
its @reply system, this time by removing an option that has existed for many months in an effort to appease confused newcomers.
The basic premise behind the @reply system is that it allows you to create a semi-public conversation with another Twitter user. To prevent you from having to listen in to conversations you might not care about, the default setting has long been to only show these @replies if you were following both people in the conversation. And that’s the choice most people stuck with.
Given his penchant for blogging, it's surprising to find out that Kanye West thinks Twitter is a waste of time. He even sounded off Tuesday (on his blog, of course), saying the company should put the kibosh on those impersonating the rapper.
"This spaz comes courtesy of losers making fake Kanye West Twitter accounts," he wrote before launching into an all-caps, stream-of-consciousness tantrum.
"I don't have a f---ing Twitter," he continued. "Why would I use Twitter??? I only blog 5 percent of what I'm up to in the first place. I'm actually slow delivering content because I'm too busy being creative most of the time and if I'm not and I'm just laying on a beach I wouldn't tell the world. Everything that Twitter offers I need less of."
The rant keeps going: "The people at Twitter know I don't have a f---ing Twitter so for them to allow someone to pose as me and accumulate over a million names is irresponsible and deceitful to their faithful users."
In a blog post, Twitter co-founder Biz Stone has acknowledged that the company left quite a few users rather miffed when it opted to stop displaying @-replies (conversational "tweets" directed to another Twitter user) in members' feeds, if they didn't already follow the recipient of the reply.
"Folks loved this feature because it allowed them to discover new people and participate serendipitously in various conversations," Stone wrote. "The problem with the setting was that it didn't scale, and even if we rebuilt it, the feature was blunt. It was confusing and caused a sense of inconsistency. We felt we could do much better."
Codes of conduct and ethics are nothing new in newsrooms, but revising those rules with sites like Twitter and Facebook in mind is distinctly Web 2.0. That's just what Dow Jones (NYSE: NWS) has done; writers at the WSJ, Newswires and MarketWatch all received a new list of rules for "professional conduct" spelling out how they should (and shouldn't) be using social and business networking sites.
E&P has the full text of the memo; one of the main rules is that writers should check in with an editor before "friending" contacts that could wind up being confidential sources. Writers are also instructed not to "recruit friends or family to promote or defend your work;" the e-mail concludes by reminding them that "business and pleasure should not be mixed on services like Twitter."
The revised code of conduct also includes details about offline friendships, freelance work and public speaking arrangements, but the inclusion of Twitter and Facebook "etiquette" is just one more example of how social media has reshaped the business of reporting news.
Whoa, Feedback!
We're getting a ton of extremely useful feedback about yesterday's update to Settings. The engineering team reminded me that there were serious technical reasons why that setting had to go or be entirely rebuilt—it wouldn't have lasted long even if we thought it was the best thing ever. Nevertheless, it's amazing to wake up and see all the tweets about this change.