Ed, Yes, we should talk abour Search. But, I disagree when you say we should not talk about the other stuff.
It is very frustrating when developers essentially stand up as one man and tell Twitter, "bad idea, don't do it." And they go ahead and do it anyway. You know, it's not like we are their primary customers and consumers of the API. It would be extremely alarming and troubling if they ignored those guys. On Apr 5, 9:08 pm, "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <zn...@comcast.net> wrote: > On 04/05/2010 09:47 AM, Dewald Pretorius wrote: > > > +1 ^ 10. Very well said, Ed. You're getting an enthusiastic standing > > ovation and one-man Mexican wave from me. > > I think as a community, we're letting a golden opportunity for > discussion about Twitter Search pass us by while we "vent" and "rant" > about the inconveniences and about "roles" and "titles". I'm not by any > means an expert on search in the large, although I do spend a fair > amount of time trying to keep up with the natural language processing > and computational linear algebra technologies that power search. > > But I think the discussion we *should* be having is not about the > mechanics of the API, the logistics of API versioning, "developer best > practices" or roles withing the community. I don't even think it should > be about business models, although that's certain a part of it. I think > the discussion we should be having is about Twitter Search itself - how > it should work to meet the needs of the two classes of users I call > "seekers" and "sellers". I posted a call for this discussion on my blog > a while back, but haven't had many takers. So here it is again: > > http://borasky-research.net/2010/03/19/seeker-or-seller-what-do-you-t... > > If there's enough interest, maybe we can put together an "unconference" > session on this at Chirp. > > -- > M. Edward (Ed) Borasky > borasky-research.net/m-edward-ed-borasky > > "A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems." ~ Paul Erdős -- To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
