I agree with a lot of points Mashable made here >> http://mashable.com/2009/08/13/project-retweet-analysis/
Were ReTweets ever broken? I didn't think so.... RT @someone - very sweet and simple (KISS - Keep it simple ...) "The existence of Project Retweet — ie. formalized retweeting — essentially implies that Twitter felt that current retweeting practices need repairing. But were retweets ever really broken?" - Since I felt that RT @someone was easy and simple (and easy to add to my code) I didn't feel the need to even explore this new API and add clutter to my code. "the RT and @ symbol will be stripped from the tweet. What you’ll see instead is the original tweet, from the original author," - I don't like that, I want to be able to add my own comments and give credit (read as "a mention") to the one I follow too by RTing their user name also so my followers can see who I find interesting to follow. Plus this seems to be the preferred method users have adopted (from my exp)... Additionally, I have a real problem with services that modify my content/text on me. I didn't ask you to so leave it alone. :( "So let’s say that you follow me but don’t follow Mashable. Now when I retweet Mashable, you’ll see the tweet from Mashable, not from me. This could get a little hairy." - I agree, If I start seeing a bunch of stuff show up from from ppl I don't follow, I don't think I will like that and be less inclined to click any links too. "You’ve already become accustomed to seeing tweets from the people you follow, so a retweet from a trusted party actually means something." - Yep! I also like how it mentions that the Users created ReTweets, and now with Twi***r trademarking Tweet™ this most likely will mean they will claim ownership of ReTweet™ also, does this mean we will have to now use RT™ @someone or RT® @someone :/ Long story short... I just keep thinking, If it ain't broken, don't fix it ;) That's my $0.02 on it. On Aug 15, 3:00 am, Paul Kinlan <paul.kin...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Guys, > When I saw the original message stating that the retweet API I was about to > say straight away that I despise the idea, but I thought I would refrain - > give it some thought. I still despise the idea and I have to make it known > the reasons why I think it is a very very bad idea and in the long term will > negatively affect Twitter as a communications platform for the future. > > 1. You are embedding a user developed based meme into the Twitter > infrastructure - the popularity of RT itself may wane after some point. > Users are very fickle, they change their minds, take a stand and don't > listen to them - you know your platform and I am pretty sure you know that > this is a bit of a hack. Let users use they system how they want, they > will > evolve how they use it, constraints via an API > 1. Twitter already has the capability to do smarter things > that completely negate the need for this API if they just change > the current > API a little > 2. Not every app will use RT API (especially legacy ones) and not every > user will use it and as such Twitter and this list will get lots of > questions why certain RT's are accessible by the retweet API. Again, RT's > are a user concept, and is very easy for them not use. > 3. Whilst I use TweetDeck, I really dislike the amount of utility buttons > it has and the amount of options it has - introducing another API for > another function is tantamount to the same thing, you are asking us app > developers to include more options in our apps. The great thing about a RT > is that I just hit reply and type RT at the front. > 4. A big thing that people have requested is that quite often there is > not any room in the very limited 140 characters to add comment to a > retweet, > this doesn't seem to solve that problem. > 5. Authority of a user based on a RT and credit to the originator is a > misnomer, no one actually needs it, very very few people care about - and > when they do care about not getting the credit for the original tweet you > have to ask why do they care? and why should we care? again it is still > very > easy to bypass. If you have a problem with it, as per the Twitter TOS you > are the copyright holder of your content. > > My honest vote is not to pollute the Twitter API with a special RT > capability, rather: > > - Enhance Favorites and the favorites API, allow me to get a list of > everyone's favorites, allow me to see a list of people who favorited a > tweet. If you look at the proposal for RT API it is doing something > similar > to this. The entire UX for Favorites makes a lot more sense than retweet - > infact you can go as far as saying if you like something favorite (star) > it, > if you really like your favorite - Forward (RT). > - Allow me to get a list of a users favorites (similar to the "Likes" > feed in FriendFeed) - this type of concept is so powerful, I can > discover > people who share very similar likes. I can also do Best of Day > very easily > - Enhance in_reply_to, allow me to see all tweets that reply to this > tweet in an object returned by the current api ( that is so I don't have to > keep re-querying the search API), further more allow me to request N levels > deep of replies to a given tweet (yes this is similar to threaded comments) > > So by enhancing Replies and favorites you can remove the need for special RT > API because you can combine both parts of the API to get at the originator > of a popular tweet, have notification and visual queues of popular tweets. > thus keeping the twitter API simple. > > Paul - grumpy - Kinlanhttp://twitter.com/PaulKinlan
