Posted in:
Twitter Filters Out Some Noise
In what it is describing as a “small settings update” Twitter has altered the flow of blurts such that we no longer see public replies to people that we’re not following — those @doofus Well, not on your nellie! messages that simply cluttered up your flow. I am mightily pleased. (Others, not so much.) My position is that there are plenty of ways of learning about interesting folks to follow, and sometimes the irrelevant noise from some of the chattier folk I once followed made the whole exercise a painful process. Now I might actually consider going back to invite them into my stream again. Eavesdropping on other peoples’ conversations was never really one of the things that amused me.
You always had the option not to see those replies. It was an option; you didn’t have to eavesdrop. But you’re pleased that those of us who opted to use twitter that way have had our option of choice removed?
I understand your reasons for not wanting to see all replies but even though it’s my preference for my use I wouldn’t be pleased if twitter forced you to eavesdrop.
After over 2 years I’ve quit twitter today because this change – for me – removes the core of twitter, the defining attraction of the service.
Eolai, I’ve only just learned now that this was an option. Had I known — had it been easier to learn that — I would have flipped that switch long ago. In which case, options are always better than not: if you wanted to read @replies while I could avoid them, you should have been able to. No reason to remove an option, I agree. Now it’s unclear why Twitter did this. Would they be trying to cut down on traffic load somehow?
Possibly, but it’s not what they’re saying. @ev blogged a year ago that he wanted to remove teh options and make it like they have today – and the feedback on that post was to not remove it.
I imagine it’s linked in with other plans they’re going to roll out but maybe the massive followings of celebs is a factor. Some of those made every tweet a reply – presumably to make a fan’s day as well as to tweet but obviously that means 99.9+ % of people will now see those replies. That’s a lot less traffic.
For me I followed conversations without following all of the time all of the parties to those conversations. It’s as if twitter was just taken away from me.
Simon, what you viewed as “eavesdropping” was for many of us the essence of Twitter–the “cocktail party effect.” If you don’t want public conversation, Twitter isn’t for you. Suddenly half of the conversation I enjoyed on Twitter is gone, and I don’t have the option of turning it back on.
I too miss the option, even though I personally had it turned off. Removing functionality to improve a service seems counter intuitive.
Would this cause me to leave the Twitter service? No.
For me it removes part of the conversation. If I am having a conversation with someone, and then a third person starts talking to that person on that same thread of conversation, I will not see any of it unless my friend remembers to purposely include me in.
Also, I will often talk to someone specifically when I mean for everyone to see the conversation. We already have tools like private DM (direct message), email, or instant message for less visible conversations.
Personally I had it turned off, but I would much prefer a hush setting like this for individual users than an either/or for myself or a policy decision by the company. I’ve missed a few reply tweets from my mom because she can’t get my screenname right, but I was really tired of hearing one of my friends making dinner plans with her roommate every night.
To paraphrase that beer ad, “those who like it, like it a lot.” But for me, Jim’s “cocktail party” is an overcrowded restaurant. Still, if, as I’ve been told, you could turn it off with a “hush setting,” to use Courtney’s term, I’d be fine with that.
Seems Twitter is catching a lot of flack and they’ve responded on their blog this way:
Good gravy: Twitter has now reversed itself and re-instituted a version of its earlier policy regarding public @ replies. I won’t venture to sort out the new rules: I’ll just point you to this article and wish you all the best:
It turns out they weren’t being up front with users as to the reason. It was a technical, scalability issue rather than a policy change. Since they turned it off they can’t turn the choice back on, so have a temporary workaround until they can put something else in place. And the whole thing is confusing.
Moral of the story: PR people are important for explaining changes and mitigating fall-out from errors. Twitter tries to do without PR folk, and get themselves periodically into hot water like this with their users.