People who are on twitter.

[Flex]

http://i.imgur.com/vYcngFQ.jpg

I get the joke but in all honesty I use Twitter all the time and I really don't encounter this behavior much, if at all. Twitter is cool in that you can pretty well craft the kind of experience you want. I have a blast with it, easily my favorite form of online socializing these days.

Thus ends my defense of Twitter.

[Silent Majority]

http://i.imgur.com/vYcngFQ.jpg

I get the joke but in all honesty I use Twitter all the time and I really don't encounter this behavior much, if at all. Twitter is cool in that you can pretty well craft the kind of experience you want. I have a blast with it, easily my favorite form of online socializing these days.

Yeah, second. The main people who carry on like that are celebrities, who don't have to provide jack shit but their name. Mostly small scale, notable exceptions aside, following a famous person on twitter is its own punishment. If a nobody wants to try and behave in that manner, then I ain't following them. Definitely my favourite social media, too, I've connected with some diamond people who are so perfectly attuned to my interests that I find consistently interesting, funny stuff on there catered to me. The longer you're on, the more people you get that suit you down to the ground. That's almost the point of the game. Far more nuanced interaction than the Gen X stereotype would allow, too, for the few characters.

Of course, Flex is on there, so there's always a downside.

[Dr. Medulla]

You two shouldn't be allowed into comedy clubs, joke ruiners.

[biopunk]

Of course, Flex is on there, so there's always a downside.

Dude tweets about "bad tippers" and G.I. Joe.

Any man who dreams of jetpacks and tips well can't be all bad, can he?

[Silent Majority]

You two shouldn't be allowed into comedy clubs, joke ruiners.

"And the black box material would be too heavy for a plane to fly can I at least finish my drink?"

[Dr. Medulla]

You two shouldn't be allowed into comedy clubs, joke ruiners.

"And the black box material would be too heavy for a plane to fly can I at least finish my drink?"

Okay, kid, you can stay, but keep quiet and stay in the back. Mr. Cross said that he wants you dead.

[tepista]

OK, here's why I like you guys better than facebook: Someone just posted "30 photos of Maine that will make you want to move there"

If that were posted here I could say "i don't even need to click to tell you there aren't any black people in those pictures"

Too many people on FB would make a huge deal out of that.

[Dr. Medulla]

OK, here's why I like you guys better than facebook: Someone just posted "30 photos of Maine that will make you want to move there"

If that were posted here I could say "i don't even need to click to tell you there aren't any black people in those pictures"

Too many people on FB would make a huge deal out of that.

IMCT: Post-Racial Soft Racism … Because Combat Rock is a War Crime.™

[Marky Dread]

OK, here's why I like you guys better than facebook: Someone just posted "30 photos of Maine that will make you want to move there"

If that were posted here I could say "i don't even need to click to tell you there aren't any black people in those pictures"

Too many people on FB would make a huge deal out of that.

IMCT: Post-Racial Soft Racism … Because Combat Rock is a War Crime.™

...why they didn't hire in a black horn section on the CR sessions is beyond me.

[biopunk]

OK, here's why I like you guys better than facebook: Someone just posted "30 photos of Maine that will make you want to move there"

If that were posted here I could say "i don't even need to click to tell you there aren't any black people in those pictures"

Too many people on FB would make a huge deal out of that.

IMCT: Post-Racial Soft Racism … Because Combat Rock is a War Crime.™

...why they didn't hire in a black horn section on the CR sessions is beyond me.

<jazz hands>♫ ♩ ...No black man born with a living soul would be working on that let-down... ♩ ♫ </jazz hands>

[Cadillac Jack]

OK, here's why I like you guys better than facebook: Someone just posted "30 photos of Maine that will make you want to move there"

If that were posted here I could say "i don't even need to click to tell you there aren't any black people in those pictures"

Too many people on FB would make a huge deal out of that.

Laughed really hard at that.

[Dr. Medulla]

Question for the Twitter participants: Would you say that it's a useful venue for argument—that is, between people of distinctly differing views—or is it more about reinforcing community for the likeminded? I was casually thinking the other day about the online spats when some celebrity (seems it's almost comedians) gets angry about some of his/her fans disagreeing with a statement he/she made, which leads to people being banned and the loyal fans going after the dissenters. I was curious whether it's because there's an unspoken code or ethos that it's not a forum for disagreement. If you're following someone and they agree to let you follow them (if requires both sides consenting, no?), it's basically poor form to dissent like that. It's undoubtedly heightened because of the celebrity's ego and the value our culture places on celebrity (i.e., celebrity affords an expected measure of deference), but does the same thing happen amongst non-celebrity relationships? How much actual disagreement goes on and how often does it lead to banning or unfollowing? (I'm also thinking of the little Facebook dramas I've heard about (sorry, my knowledge on all this is limited to secondhand anecdotes), where people are unfriended over disagreements.)

I'm not slamming the Twitter environment as necessarily an echo chamber or promoting tribalism or whatever, tho I think that's a legitimate possibility. If you're following only people who you agree with, is it all that different than the Fox News effect, you know? Rather, I'm kinda curious whether that opportunity to connect up with likeminded people is a reflection of larger social insecurities and even other splintering (political, economic, social) that goes on. That is, if we're going to be divvied up anyway by larger socio-economic forces, why not pursue it to find similar types of people and make lemonade? Potentially decent for some kind of community, but possibly encouraging insularity?

TL;DR: Is Twitter only about agreement?

[Flex]

I think probably it trends towards tribalism (is there a form of social communication that doesn't?) but for myself I follow a pretty wide swath of folks who I agree and disagree with to varying amounts. I actually think the medium can allow for a really nice, refined media stream that is more diverse than a lot of places. I pick lots of folks to follow that I disagree with, but the micro nature of Twitter means I can really pick and choose at a granular level who I like. So I don't just have to slog through everyone at, say, The American Conservative or Vox or whatever, but I can pick which commentators seem to be the most engaging to me and just follow them. I've had some good engagements with folks like Brendan Michael Dougherty, Adam Serwer, etc. over points of disagreement that I thought were interesting and productive.

I don't think Twitter is a great place for lengthy, nuanced discussion regardless of context (which isn't the same thing as saying it can't be a good place for smart discussion, it just necessarily takes a different form). That can be part of the problem when dealing with contentious issues between people with very different worldviews.

[Dr. Medulla]

I think probably it trends towards tribalism (is there a form of social communication that doesn't?)

Very true, of course, tho I'm thinking more about the whole nature of choosing to follow/accept a follower/unfollow/ban versus, I dunno, co-existing in an office environment, where the odds are that there's likely going to be greater diversity.

but for myself I follow a pretty wide swath of folks who I agree and disagree with to varying amounts. I actually think the medium can allow for a really nice, refined media stream that is more diverse than a lot of places. I pick lots of folks to follow that I disagree with, but the micro nature of Twitter means I can really pick and choose at a granular level who I like. So I don't just have to slog through everyone at, say, The American Conservative or Vox or whatever, but I can pick which commentators seem to be the most engaging to me and just follow them. I've had some good engagements with folks like Brendan Michael Dougherty, Adam Serwer, etc. over points of disagreement that I thought were interesting and productive.

So your experience is that disagreement isn't impaired? Okay, that's the main thing I was curious about. Would you lean towards the snits and spats with celebrities being about ego, then, rather than the nature of the environment?

I don't think Twitter is a great place for lengthy, nuanced discussion regardless of context (which isn't the same thing as saying it can't be a good place for smart discussion, it just necessarily takes a different form). That can be part of the problem when dealing with contentious issues between people with very different worldviews.

Yeah, that's the other thing that's obvious—the real estate limitation means that communication is sound bite-ish. There's value in concision, but the restrictions seem like a massive straightjacket to anything more in-depth.

[Flex]

Very true, of course, tho I'm thinking more about the whole nature of choosing to follow/accept a follower/unfollow/ban versus, I dunno, co-existing in an office environment, where the odds are that there's likely going to be greater diversity.

In my office experience, if we disagree substantively on major Issues of the Day, we all just tend not to discuss said issues. I'm not sure there's a lot of great debate happening in those kinds of environments. Which is to say, in the "real world" you may encounter more diversity but I think you also have more social conventions which restrict discussion.

So your experience is that disagreement isn't impaired? Okay, that's the main thing I was curious about. Would you lean towards the snits and spats with celebrities being about ego, then, rather than the nature of the environment?

I'd probably lean that way (with the obvious caveat that these are all just general trends, obviously on a platform with so many users there's going to be just as many personalities and ways of engagement). It's one of the reasons I tend not to follow very many real celebrities.

Yeah, that's the other thing that's obvious—the real estate limitation means that communication is sound bite-ish. There's value in concision, but the restrictions seem like a massive straightjacket to anything more in-depth.

I tend to think of it as more conversational than sound bite-ish per se. I mean, the idea is you toss some stuff out there and have folks respond to it sort of organically. It can often end up being pretty sound bite-y, but I think people who are just tossing of sound bites without any interest in having it be part of a discussion are missing out on a pretty huge value of the medium.