One-Tweet Wonders

theodp writes "TIME has seen-the-future-and-it-is-Twitter. Slate, on the other hand, is more fascinated with the phenomenon of orphaned tweets, the messages left by people who sign up for Twitter, post once, then never return (not unlike one-blog-post wonders). While some orphan tweets betray skepticism about microblogging ('I don't get it... what's the point of this thing?'), other one-and-done Twitterers demonstrate keen enthusiasm before disappearing ('I'm here!'), and some tweets hint that tragedy has cut a promising Twittering-life short ('it hurts to breathe. should I go to the hospital?'). Slate notes that studies of Twitter accounts by Harvard and Nielsen suggest the service has been better at signing up users than keeping them, including the one-tweet wonders."

Comments

Long term?

[pHus10n]

I just don't see this lasting more than another year --- and I think I'm being generous. I honestly can't understand why anyone is fascinated with reading
It might be different if the messages were more directed, or useful. But sending messages so "my fans" (subscribers) can read them is just.... /shrug.

Re:Long term?

[pHus10n]

I post to slashdot because, by the nature of how the site is designed, it encourages people to stop by and debate a topic with multiple peope. The only restrictions I'm aware of are a) staying on topic, and b) be somewhat mature in your ramblings. Twitter is designed for people to sign up as a listener of a person's short messages (tweets). Those short messages make it more difficult to convey a thorough message. Also, it's a very one-way discussion.

I don't know why, but after previewing my message above, part of it was cut off. My major complain with Twitter is the way it encourages a "celebrity" thought process from those tweeting. It's a lot like those blogs that people put up on the net, and abandon after one or two posts --- I'm sorry, but the majority of people out there posting their thoughts are not as interesting as they think they are. Including me.

Otherwise, I'd probably get paid to put my thoughts out there.

Re:If you don't read TFA

[cptdondo]

Makes you wonder how many of these are some sort of throwaway code.

getting ready for cannes == set the date
Printing latest briefing == getting the drugs
Folding shirts == meet at designated spot

and so on.... Seems that twitter would be a great way to use one-time pads and code phrases.....

Twitter

[kenp2002]

Twitter (n):

1: A service design to indulge the sense of self importance by posting information that history will care little for.

2: A web site and infrastructure for passing small messages out to an open ended communication channel in which people what are extremely bored and track the likewise boring activities of others.

3: A simple text exchange in which creative people and some regular expressions can generate a swarm-like information network to gauge personal activity. For instance:

"by following a demographic of X a researcher can key in on how people feel about Y topic."

"An automatic event scheduler system can be generated by people tweeting possible event dates in which subscribers through a script can vector in and select an event date in which all or a certain threshold of particpants can agree to."

4: A method by which information is exchanged into a open ended channel. See Broadcast SMS 2.0

Name reservation?

[KlaymenDK]

One possible reason for people to have unused accounts is simple to reserve the name. That is to say, to ensure that nobody can go around tweeting "in their name".

Re:Social Stuff

[$1uck]

And here you are posting in community forum. How very social of you.

I don't understand the hate...

[$1uck]

Really its a tool. Something like a cross between IM, a mailing list and a personal RSS feed. It has its own niche. If its not useful to you, don't use it. I can only presume all the hate comes from its sudden popularity and the rather stupid name (both of which bring to mind obnoxious teenage fads). Oh well I would think people would be smarter than just hating on a tool b/c of two superficial reasons.

Not News

[Chris_Jefferson]

This existed pre-internet. How many bought a diary and wrote one entry? Went out for a run, swim or to the gym once? Read a few pages of War and Peace? Only went to one foreign language lesson? Only bothered with a couple of piano/guitar/trumpet lessons?

While twitter has many problems, the fact that the majority of people tend to play with a new thing and then stop isn't new, or news.

Re:Either you are, or you aren't

[albedoa]

Some people need a forum to sound off to the world. Others, like me, are indifferent.

He said, on a forum.

Re:Twitter's not completely useless

[Just Some Guy]

This is also an example of no compelling reason to use twitter for this. Email or text would both work in this situation.

How so? Say 100 people wanted to get the live scores without waiting for the web page to update. The OP could've created a special-purpose mailing list, walked everyone through signing up, and then deleted it afterward. With texting, I suppose he could've stored all their numbers and texted each one every time someone won a match.

Honestly the only difference I see between twitter and email/text is a lack of security. The information originator cannot control who has access to the feed.

Well, openness and the fact that email and text are one-to-one channels while Twitter (and Facebook) are one-to-many. But other than the access model and the difference between direct communication and broadcasting, yes, they're very much alike.