We have discussed establishing a more formal relationship with developer representatives to help bring outside perspective and balance to our larger platform decisions. We are still a few quarters away from where we envisioned this model being viable.
If Peter and others could come up with a plan, a team, and the ability to organize an opinion, we would listen to more formal representation from the community. If anything, it would allow us to explore what a hybrid corporate / representative decision making process might look like. Interested, Doug On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 10:47 PM, ferodynamics<duch...@solve360.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 16, 4:34 pm, Peter Denton <petermden...@gmail.com> wrote: >> There is a lot of ambiguity up in the air, about api devs (third party) and >> the future of the api and twitter. Apps are a huge growth vehicle and a very >> significant piece of the future, getting the Twitter medium a global >> behavior. > > You could call it the Association of Communications App Developers, or > something like that. Sign me up. > > I just joined the group here but Peter has a good point. Even if you > didn't read the leaked documents, Twitter could be sold tomorrow. Get > real, this happens all the time: big company buys cool website and all > promises are out the window. > > Worst case scenario: Yahoo buys Twitter and now you need a Yahoo > account to use it ;-) I doubt Yahoo could afford Twitter, but you > know what I mean. > > Regardless, I heard Laconica (open source microblogging) is working on > a name registration system, so these 140-character messages can find > new paths The clients could then update open networks with one extra > line of code, then bypass the Twitter API entirely, if they had to. > > I don't care what Tweetdeck does (noobs catch on eventually) and with > so much prior art there's nothing to stop it. Put down your Wii > remote kids, that's the endgame here. Get some perspective. >
