In article <f832a12a-0aed-4a01-955d-e24dca618...@americafree.tv>,
Marshall Eubanks <t...@americafree.tv> writes
That's a great idea, use some lame Web 2.0 trend to communicate with
actual real life customers. </sarcasm>
I would assume they figured it was better than just remaining silent.
I'm about to recommend to an organisation that it [a twitter account]
is better than posting news of an outage on their low- volume website,
which will get swamped when too many people poll it for news.
What if the outage takes out their website too ?
The website is hosted elsewhere, however the entire message can be
delivered in one Tweet, so there's no need to confirm by looking at a
website.
I don't think that their website was up, and I would guess that they
didn't have email either. That is a bad situation to be in.
They don't plan to respond to email in real time.
Note, BTW, that twitter itself is subject to frequent planned and
unplanned outages.
The question being, how often will they co-incide with the events I'm
trying to track?
fwiw, I've been using twitter for about three months now, and have never
encountered either kind of outage.
--
Roland Perry
