💾 Archived View for gem.acdw.net › html › 2020-07-22-Microblogging-HOO captured on 2024-08-25 at 02:14:04.
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-12-03)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
<!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <meta charset="utf-8"> <title>2020-07-22-Microblogging-HOO</title> <link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="/default.css"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1"> </head> <body> <h1>2020-07-22-Microblogging-HOO</h1> <h1>Microblogging -- HOO </h1> <p> <p>Let's throw my hat in the ring on this microblogging thing! <ul> <li><a href="gemini://tanelorn.city/~bouncepaw/gemlog/re-microblogging-why.gemini">RE: bouncepaw </a> <li><a href="gemini://hannuhartikainen.fi/twinlog/2020-07-18_microblogging-why.gemini">RE: Hannu (twinlog) </a> </ul> <p> <p>I use Mastodon for microblogging, mirrored at Twitter using some free thing. See for yourself: <ul> <li><a href="https://writing.exchange/@acdw">mastodon </a> <li><a href="https://twitter.com/caseofducks">twitter </a> </ul> <p>While I agree with Hannu that microblogging isn't particularly *good* for anything, I don't think it really has to be -- and I like bouncepaw's points about the interactivity and finality aspects of microblogging. <p> <p>That being said, I've also considered something along the lines of some article I read, which of course I can't now find, about automatically deleting tweets older than 2 years. The argument there was that Twitter (and all microblogging) is *ephemeral* and tied intimately to context, so deleting old tweets only makes sense -- after a while, context fades and tweets become only useful as bad-faith character attacks, as we've seen many times online. Hell, even though I get a lot of enjoyment out of r/TrumpCriticizesTrump, that's basically the entire point of that subreddit. <p> <p>So I think microblogging has its uses, though they are limited by the medium. Twitter et al. is good for public, quick discussion -- it's easier to use than IRC and more "normal" people (aka, non-techies) are on there. It's also a good news channel for headlines (though that has its own problems, but those plague the news industry as a whole and Twitter is just a symptom of that) and for direct interaction between celebrities and fans, again on a casual level. I don't think microblogging is good for sustained or serious discourse, even though a lot of people try to use it that way. There are multiple forms and formats for talking; I think it's good to use the right one for the message you're trying to convey. <p> <p>On that last point, a final thought: sometimes an idea might start as a tweet and morph into a blog post, or a magazine article, or even a book. I think that's happened plenty of times in the past, even before Twitter. Ideas don't reveal their full breadth until they're examined and interrogated. </body> </html>