Twitter C/D

/*idk i think ppl who use it too much* just get used to existing features and are responding to the shock of change. i only started using twitter in in 2014 but recently found out ppl complained about the introduction of Quote Tweets (imagine having to #LRT or manual RT--LOL) and the blue lines(!), things I would never voluntarily give away

― flopson, Tuesday, April 4, 2017 12:47 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink/

or maybe people who use a product a lot actually understand it the best and would be a good resource, say, if you were a company that actually ever listened to anything your core userbase said?

No. they are the last ppl you want to cater to: they're already hooked and despite the tantrums they throw at every minuscule UI change, will stick with it forever, or go download tweetbot in a huff. also they are short-sighted creatures of habit, who often don't know what's good for them (as exampled by my aforementioned good twitter updates that core user nerds cried bloody murder about at the time of their introduction). plus examples abound of core users looking back and saying, hey u know what those changes were actually good. the main thing twitter should be doing ito UI changes is reducing the alienation and confusion felt by newcomers. i agree with your characterization of twitter as cold and trv kvlt internet tildes, and that it is not going to become the dominant social media (for one, it is just not very fun to follow friends on twitter; they're just never going to be as clever/good at twitter as, like, the good twitter accounts, but so far no social media has successfully bridged those two worlds except maybe ig imo) BUT they still need new ppl to join at a faster or equal rate to ppl who quit, so things like making reading threads you don't participate in easier (whether or not you think new replies succeed at this) are good goals

what did SwartyVillain do
― 龜, Wednesday, April 5, 2017 5:46 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

he's been posting as 'byyourlogic' for like a year, and still up, unless he was banned for a spell recently

twitter has the prob where they hate the core user base, but those people are content generators who attract the casuals that just show up to scan their faves a little from the website or official apps and may actually click on ads

things like making reading threads you don't participate in easier (whether or not you think new replies succeed at this) are good goals

― flopson, Thursday, April 6, 2017 9:31 AM (forty-four minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

point of fact: i haven't complained about every change, i thought the quote thing was great, and other changes have been good. specifically, i think the changes make reading threads much harder and much more confusing so i think it's actual counter to the goal. (i'm not saying by the way they should stop trying attract new users it's just often the things they do like - "oh hey there's all these abusive twitter eggs making people miserable -- maybe we should CHANGE THE EGG!" - are ineffective at best and detrimental at worst

they just do a lot of dumb stuff which frustrates me because i think twitter in general is the best/most interesting social network

like saying your user base it the "last people you should cater to" is really just misguided. every entertainment or online business is about striking a balance of attracting new customers and while maintaining the fundamental thing that's good about your service, sometimes that involves changes big or small, sometimes that means NOT fixing things that aren't broke, i'm saying that on balance twitter management isn't very good at making these judgments -- and that they have an uphill battle trying to monetize a social network that is naturally resistant to typical stuff like ads etc

hard to cater to core users/content creators though since virtually all of their bitching is cheap talk: they're not going to leave. whereas thousands of fickle new users walk in and out each day. presumably twitter have a team of data whizzes A/B testing each UI change to maximize retention of those noobs.

I do think giving power-users better tools to ward off abuse is super impt (morally but also to limit tail risk of a mass migration to something like mastodon) and their reluctance to prioritize it is embarrassing.

also I've accepted the cw that twitter cld be profitable if it scaled down its ambitions and expect it to eventually do so once vc $$$ dries up. the targeted ads are way better than their facebook equivalents imo

theyre a public company man

which is a similar tho really much worse bind than being beholden to vc $$$

i've noticed politics tweetstormers including a patreon or paypal link as the last tweet on each rant, and/or pinning a payment tweet on their feeds. seems like a pretty kludgy way for a medium to sustain its content creators. particularly when that medium is a laughingstock for failing to monetize its users. can't micropayments be built-in? twitter could even take a cut. i'd break adam khan off a little if it was as easy as fav'ing

its interesting youtube is the only social network that really works to get its super users money

sry obvs its public i just meant its valued + it spends like a big social media giant most know it's not gonna be, i always figured a slimmer less ambitious twitter could turn a profit. cld totally be wrong

the thing with twitters constant futzing around with its product is theres no discernible thread in what theyre doing, each change may be defensible on its own but like what are they up to on a more general strategic level, its not clear, this prob stems from the fact that they wld like to a. get more users and b. retain their current users, which are at cross purposes because their current users are hardcore feed junkies who have different preferences than the ordinary users they desire, theyre still chasing big growth even tho they are a mature company that should be weighing costs and revenue like mature adults, which if they did wld lead them to the conclusion that their product is fundamentally for power users, once they came to terms with this obvious truth then it wld not be hard to make a good sensible product, but of course wall street has a lot of growth priced into their stock and if they announced that they were going to be a normal company now shareholders wld replace their leadership with people who want to do growth, the best path toward an alignment of twitters business and product interests is prob to wait until the stock drops to a price in line with the company they actually are then take it private, at that point they cld prob cut their payroll by 3/4 and start being a good normal company for internet obsessives

otm

didn't u have some idea about a parallel twitter for noobs? i think that's a good idea

ha i just reread it, the diagnosis of the problem is sound imo the product prob wldnt work, most dont, might be worth a try tho, twitter is kinda unique in how its reach is so much bigger than its app, like u see tweets on tv all the time, there must be some way to —monetize— that lol http://joe-sch.kinja.com/i-fixed-twitter-totally-algorithmic-twitter-1631099310

last time i listened to npr it was just ppl reading tweets

sports center is like 90% tweets

I'm going to start putting payment links at the end of my longer ilx posts

you can pay out of appreciation, or check the box indicating you're paying me to post less

lol

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/327677-twitter-alleges-trump-administration-tried-to-unmask-critical-account

Jesus Christ

sry obvs its public i just meant its valued + it spends like a big social media giant most know it's not gonna be, i always figured a slimmer less ambitious twitter could turn a profit. cld totally be wrong

― flopson, Thursday, April 6, 2017 5:28 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah i remember this hedge fund dude pretty much saying that - http://brontecapital.blogspot.com.au/2016/10/some-comment-on-twitter-buyout-rumours.html

good link!

https://twitter.com/carterjwm/status/849813577770778624

i cannot believe how quickly this got to 1 milion retweets

i'll help him out down that last 1m stretch if he gets to 17m

I unfollowed someone recently and I'm still getting info about the dude liking all kinds of tweets... I feel lied to. how do I shot twitter?

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/brace-belden-pisspiggranddad-syria-isis.html

why was pisspiggranddad suspended?

aggressive bullying of that shortass nazi idiot in berkeley iirc

the pepes flagged him

#freepisspig

Based stickman or whatever? Sheesh
The alt right continues to win Twitter

the short dude who punched an anti-fascist woman in the face. think that's different than the one you mentioned

A guy who hits women sounds exactly like Twitter's preferred customer so that makes sense

tbf I think he thought there was going to be a melee and the only antifascist who was around his size to pair up against just happened to be a woman

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/berkeley-protest-video-of-woman-getting-punched-sparks-outrage/

So how many times does an unprofitable shit show of a company have to side with violent, misogynistic, racist bigots before the dirtbag left finds a better place to talk shit?

we all moved over to mastodon last week

pfft no one knows how to use mastodon

just lean into the bass

Down?

hacked?

i should have been suspicious when i had nothing new in my feed for a whole 20 minutes.

deleted twitter off my phone last week, recommended. now i check facebook, ig, and my lol emails every 5 min to compensate, but they're so much more boring that i don't get sucked in for as long. also I'm pretty sure it's mostly residual muscle memory/nervous tic as I can already feel the reflex slowing down

Down, looks like.

No problems here

Is better again.

the most recognizable progressive publication in the country doesn't give a shit if you die. love our robust american left pic.twitter.com/IY6zPO8b1m

— matt ◉ lubchansky (@Lubchansky) May 24, 2017

^ a good example of what i hate about twitter

they're not wrong, though, mother jones has shit editorial direction now

one of the editors is among maybe five people I have muted because I get pissed off when I see people retweet her

the actual post: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/05/health-care-expensive-deal-it

that is tbf a deeply awful post

why?

he's not saying 'deal with it' to individuals unable to pay their health care bills, as the tweet implies. he's saying, in the context of the california single payer plan's cost, that it shouldn't be a surprise that health care is expensive. that's just a mean, shitty misreading that takes advantage of the fact that people won't read past the headline. he even adds "If we're lucky, a good single-payer system would slow the growth of health care costs over the long term, but it's vanishingly unlikely to actually cut current costs."