May 13: Tweet tweet -- Updated
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
using a service called "twitter", shouldn't the individual little message thingies therefore be called "twits"?
>shouldn't the individual little message thingies therefore be called "twits"?
The users certainly are!
ha! that's great.
in reply to gary, though, I think the terminology holds up. Lots of bird tweets (m-w: a chirping note) combine to form twitter (m-w: to utter successive chirping noises). JK: are you anti-twitter? It seems like the sort of thing you'd be in to.
I think it's probably a good outlet for when I want to show people a cool site, but don't have much to say about it. I always debate whether or not its worth a whole blog post.
I think it's a little inane, but I dig the concept. One non-fundamental problem I have with it is that I doubt any of my friends are on it. A second problem I have is that there's no privacy controls. Lately I've been freaking out about having my data on other servers; in fact, I've been going back and deleting GMail threads I'm done with because I don't want that ish up (Note: I use a GMail account for commercial e-mail).
So if there was Twitter app you could install, host, and run from a personal server or Web host account and that could be locked w/ password protection, I'd probably be down. As it is, though, I'm not down. Still, it's a good concept although I get way tired of hearing about presence software/apps/computing (with Microsoft, not surprisingly, having the worst possible approach to the matter).
i started using this a couple of weeks ago but stopped and actually deleted my profile the other day. i didn't keep up with it. maybe i will start again.
Let me know if you do. As it is, I'm only following two people.
Add Comment
|
What I'm Doing (twitter)CategoriesArchivesQuicksearch |