On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 5:09 PM, MarcD <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I was having a discussion on Twitter and how content tend to be more
> emotional ( or say: less filtered) than through regular messaging. In
> the case of the discussion, it was a good thing, allowing a project
> manager to flag issues on a project earlier than he would be able to
> otherwise. But beyond this, I am wondering:
> do you tweet emotions, or information, or both? If you tweet emotions,
> what the value for you? for your followers? Could the health of a
> group (as in "good chemistry") be measured by the volume of emitional
> tweets?
> I would think that the tighter the community, the more of these tweets
> you would see, but does anybody has any data on this?

I dislike tweets without information. Emotion-only messages are only
for people with whom you are pretty close on the daily basis, in my
mind, because these people know the context of the message and  its
relevance. I do send messages of that sort to friends and family, but
not where others can see, because I think it's disrespectful of
others. This confirms your "tight community" hypothesis, I guess?

On the other hand, emotion adds value to informational messages, even
in loose webs. I read a great post about it the other day on Less
Wrong: http://lesswrong.com/lw/3h/why_our_kind_cant_cooperate/ The
part about "rationality as dispassion" is most relevant to your
question about healthy groups.



-- 
Cheers,
MariaD

Make math your own, to make your own math.

http://www.naturalmath.com social math site
http://groups.google.com/group/naturalmath future math culture email group
http://www.phenixsolutions.com empowering our innovations

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"CooperationCommons" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/CooperationCommons?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to