RE: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
Dewald, it's because you have amateurs running the zoo that are learning as they go. Honestly my opinion is that it's Twitters rights to change the rules as they go - it's their network and their right to do so, but it's also my right as an investor in application development to not invest any more time or money on Twitter until they bring in a management layer that has experience I building ecosystems and knows how to encourage sustainable development. Can you imagine if salesforce pulled a stunt like this? Cheers, Dean -Original Message- From: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com [mailto:twitter-development- t...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Dewald Pretorius Sent: Monday, 24 May 2010 9:27 PM To: Twitter Development Talk Subject: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING Liz, You are 100% correct in summarizing the problem. Not only were those businesses built with the full knowledge of Twitter, Twitter even had specific rules governing sponsored tweets (had to be clearly marked as sponsored, etc.). I'm really baffled by this decision of Twitter, because I don't understand how they expect to have integrity and trust with developers while doing this type of stuff. Right now we are all being pointed to Annotations as the holy grail of new development. But how do we know that they won't yet again change a rule in the future that will kill businesses that were built on top of Annotations? On May 24, 3:56 pm, Liz nwjersey...@gmail.com wrote: Peter, I think the problem is that business have been created, received funding and developed over the past year, with the full knowledge of Twitter, and this just undercuts destroys them. I think people can understand the rationale (and the desire for Twitter to eliminate competition) but this is a policy decision that should have been made over a year ago. Twitter should have included this in an earlier terms of service instead of giving an implicit okay to services like Sponsored Tweets which has turned into a successful company. It also seems disingenuous that the blog post says that a guiding principle of Twitter is that We don't seek to control what users tweet. And users own their own tweets. and allow adult-oriented content and photos but for some reason, users can't Tweet ads. That sounds like control of content to me. Liz
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
Hello Everyone, We recently updated our Advertising FAQ to answer many of the questions that you may have. http://bit.ly/twitter-ad-faq Taylor On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Liz nwjersey...@gmail.com wrote: I hope some answers are forthcoming, James. Twitter doesn't seem very talkative.
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
If you have specific questions about the policy, we have an email address you can send them to: twitter_...@twitter.com I unfortunately don't have answers for you beyond what's presented in the FAQ and the Terms of Service. Taylor On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Dewald Pretorius dpr...@gmail.com wrote: Taylor, Read this part of that FAQ: Paid Tweets injected into any timeline on a service that leverages the Twitter API (other than Promoted Tweets). This applies to any Twitter stream, whether user based, search based, or other. Do you realize how confusing that is? 1) Does it mean I can publish a paid tweet via the API? (I know I can, but someone who just reads the FAQ won't be able to figure that out.) 2) Does it mean I can inject tweets into any displayed timeline, as long as they are not paid tweets? If so, it means I can insert entries that look exactly like tweets, except they did not come from Twitter and they contain my affiliate link. You guys really need to sit down and read all these things through the eyes of people who are not privy to your internal discussions, decisions, and understanding of the matter. And then write your TOS and FAQs so that everyone can understand them. On May 26, 1:20 pm, Taylor Singletary taylorsinglet...@twitter.com wrote: Hello Everyone, We recently updated our Advertising FAQ to answer many of the questions that you may have.http://bit.ly/twitter-ad-faq Taylor On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Liz nwjersey...@gmail.com wrote: I hope some answers are forthcoming, James. Twitter doesn't seem very talkative.
RE: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
Taylor - any reason why you aren't posting the direct url for the twitter page? Seem suspect you don't want to be nailed down in a google cache on the specifics? Regards, Dean Collins Cognation Inc d...@cognation.net +1-212-203-4357 New York +61-2-9016-5642 (Sydney in-dial). +44-20-3129-6001 (London in-dial). -Original Message- From: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com [mailto:twitter-development- t...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Taylor Singletary Sent: Wednesday, 26 May 2010 6:21 PM To: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING Hello Everyone, We recently updated our Advertising FAQ to answer many of the questions that you may have. http://bit.ly/twitter-ad-faq Taylor On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Liz nwjersey...@gmail.com wrote: I hope some answers are forthcoming, James. Twitter doesn't seem very talkative.
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
Dewald: I'll make that recommendation; I agree that relevant information should be grouped together as much as possible. Dean: The link to the support center FAQ on this topic is very clumsy and long; there are still a number of email clients out there that don't handle long links very well, besides the convenience of having a single URL that I can memorize easily when pointing it out to folks. For those concerned about URL shortening, you can access that FAQ at http://support.twitter.com/groups/35-business/topics/127-frequently-asked-questions/articles/142161-advertisers#20100525 Taylor Singletary Developer Advocate, Twitter http://twitter.com/episod On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Dewald Pretorius dpr...@gmail.com wrote: Taylor, Perhaps you should ask someone to add the http://bit.ly/twitter-ad-faq link as a further reading reference into the 2. Advertising Around Twitter Content section of the API TOS. Stuff is very fragmented at the moment, and you have to accidentally discover pages on separate domains just to get the full picture. The same goes for further reading on other sections of the API TOS as well. On May 26, 1:20 pm, Taylor Singletary taylorsinglet...@twitter.com wrote: Hello Everyone, We recently updated our Advertising FAQ to answer many of the questions that you may have.http://bit.ly/twitter-ad-faq Taylor On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Liz nwjersey...@gmail.com wrote: I hope some answers are forthcoming, James. Twitter doesn't seem very talkative.
RE: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
I stopped development on my Twitter appa year after realizing that the twitter API was not yet stable enough to allow an individual developer to create a stable product. I continue to follow the exchange between developers and Twitter as much for entertainment as to keep track. Twitter understands the eco-system that is evolving no better than the rest of us but it still wants to control and direct the evolution. Each bit of control it exerts trims off branches of evolution that do not support the main stem. By cutting off branches twitter is possibly denying the evolution of future success. Original Message Subject: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISINGFrom: Eric Woodward e...@nambu.comDate: Mon, May 24, 2010 1:34 pmTo: Twitter Development Talktwitter-development-talk@googlegroups.comAt this point I am not why anyone that cares enough to be in thisgroup is surprised. It is clear that Twitter is going to take*everything* for themselves. I don't understand why anyone wouldcontinue to develop on Twitter's platform as anything more than ahobby. First it was us (Twitter clients) and now it is the adplatforms' turn. Next it will be somebody else.Lots of us enjoy developing for its own sake, and that is what Twitteris now: a feature you add to something else, or a hobby activity. Timewe all just faced up to it.--ejwEric WoodwardEmail: e...@nambu.com
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
So, Tweetie for Mac, which shows an ad at the top of my friends timeline ... will no longer be allowed to do so? http://i.imgur.com/pazT3.png Is this another misinterpretation of the policy, too? On 5/25/10 1:28 AM, Ryan Sarver wrote: It *does prohibit* an application from calling out to a service to find an ad to serve to Liz that will get inserted into the timeline she is viewing. The language is somewhat nuanced but it sounds like we might need to make the policy more explicit as a number of people are misinterpreting it. -- Dossy Shiobara | do...@panoptic.com | http://dossy.org/ Panoptic Computer Network | http://panoptic.com/ He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on. (p. 70)
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 4:16 AM, mycro...@lifewithindustry.com wrote: I stopped development on my Twitter app a year after realizing that the twitter API was not yet stable enough to allow an individual developer to create a stable product. I continue to follow the exchange between developers and Twitter as much for entertainment as to keep track. Twitter understands the eco-system that is evolving no better than the rest of us but it still wants to control and direct the evolution. Each bit of control it exerts trims off branches of evolution that do not support the main stem. By cutting off branches twitter is possibly denying the evolution of future success. My experience and thoughts exactly, also. Nick
RE: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
Hey! How are you doing? We read your post on “Twitter Development Talk” ‘Google Group’. You are right that, developing a twitter app individually is a very hard work. Or, in crux, it’s really impossible. But, please don’t give up. If you still like to create the twitter app or want to help in the development work, then you have the option to join us! We, Steel Sendras Group, is an organization providing various non-profit for-profit services worldwide. And, recently, we want to develop a really cool, efficient, smart, reliable twitter app along with other softwares. So, you can come on board. We are a community of people working together to make the web a better place. If you think it’s a spam, then please feel free to contact us. Cheers.. Steel Sendras Group Follow us on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/SteelSendras From: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com [mailto:twitter-development-t...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of mycro...@lifewithindustry.com Sent: Tuesday, 25 May, 2010 4:46 pm To: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING I stopped development on my Twitter app a year after realizing that the twitter API was not yet stable enough to allow an individual developer to create a stable product. I continue to follow the exchange between developers and Twitter as much for entertainment as to keep track. Twitter understands the eco-system that is evolving no better than the rest of us but it still wants to control and direct the evolution. Each bit of control it exerts trims off branches of evolution that do not support the main stem. By cutting off branches twitter is possibly denying the evolution of future success. Original Message Subject: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING From: Eric Woodward e...@nambu.com Date: Mon, May 24, 2010 1:34 pm To: Twitter Development Talk twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com At this point I am not why anyone that cares enough to be in this group is surprised. It is clear that Twitter is going to take *everything* for themselves. I don't understand why anyone would continue to develop on Twitter's platform as anything more than a hobby. First it was us (Twitter clients) and now it is the ad platforms' turn. Next it will be somebody else. Lots of us enjoy developing for its own sake, and that is what Twitter is now: a feature you add to something else, or a hobby activity. Time we all just faced up to it. --ejw Eric Woodward Email: e...@nambu.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2895 - Release Date: 05/25/10 11:56:00
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
I want to voice support of this decision. I build third party apps that are 100% about consuming, purposing, and displaying tweet streams. If different clients inevitably begin selling tweet injections, I really don't want to deal with those on my end. The tweet stream should remain a pure data entity. Dick has already said apps can opt out of displaying tweets, but if other apps are injecting, I lose control of that, and it will wreck the integrity of my app. Trust is ensuring that tweets coming to me through streams, are, to the best of twitter's ability, not spam. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Duane Roelands duane.roela...@gmail.comwrote: The way this reads, you can't even have a WordPress blog that puts ads near a Twitter stream. Please correct me if I'm misinterpreting this. You're misinterpreting it. There's not a problem if you're displaying a Twitter feed on a page and there are ads -near- it. What is now forbidden is the injection of ads into the stream itself.
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
Does this mean that any tweet that promotes any event or item that is not free (Such as, Tickets to the 2011 National Finals Rodeo go on sale tomorrow.) violates the TOS?
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Liz nwjersey...@gmail.com wrote: And users own their own tweets. and allow adult-oriented content and photos but for some reason, users can't Tweet ads. That sounds like control of content to me. Amen
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
As I interpret it they don't want clients to inject ads in the stream at the display end. Not at the posting end. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:56 PM, Lil Peck lilp...@gmail.com wrote: Does this mean that any tweet that promotes any event or item that is not free (Such as, Tickets to the 2011 National Finals Rodeo go on sale tomorrow.) violates the TOS? -- Harshad RJ http://hrj.wikidot.com
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
I want to make sure this part is clear -- this policy change isn't meant to say that we are going to start policing if the content of something a user tweets is an ad or not. The policy change affects 3rd party services that were putting ads in the middle of a timeline. So if Liz is paid by Reebok to tweet about how much she loves their new shoes, we are not going to be policing that any more than we were on Friday. This policy also *does not prohibit* services like Ad.ly that help facilitate those relationships or even help her post the ads to her timeline on her behalf. It *does prohibit* an application from calling out to a service to find an ad to serve to Liz that will get inserted into the timeline she is viewing. The language is somewhat nuanced but it sounds like we might need to make the policy more explicit as a number of people are misinterpreting it. Let me know if you have more questions. Ryan On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Dewald Pretorius dpr...@gmail.com wrote: Liz, You are 100% correct in summarizing the problem. Not only were those businesses built with the full knowledge of Twitter, Twitter even had specific rules governing sponsored tweets (had to be clearly marked as sponsored, etc.). I'm really baffled by this decision of Twitter, because I don't understand how they expect to have integrity and trust with developers while doing this type of stuff. Right now we are all being pointed to Annotations as the holy grail of new development. But how do we know that they won't yet again change a rule in the future that will kill businesses that were built on top of Annotations? On May 24, 3:56 pm, Liz nwjersey...@gmail.com wrote: Peter, I think the problem is that business have been created, received funding and developed over the past year, with the full knowledge of Twitter, and this just undercuts destroys them. I think people can understand the rationale (and the desire for Twitter to eliminate competition) but this is a policy decision that should have been made over a year ago. Twitter should have included this in an earlier terms of service instead of giving an implicit okay to services like Sponsored Tweets which has turned into a successful company. It also seems disingenuous that the blog post says that a guiding principle of Twitter is that We don't seek to control what users tweet. And users own their own tweets. and allow adult-oriented content and photos but for some reason, users can't Tweet ads. That sounds like control of content to me. Liz
Re: [twitter-dev] Re: TWITTER BANS 3rd PARTY ADVERTISING
Quoting Ryan Sarver rsar...@twitter.com: I want to make sure this part is clear -- this policy change isn't meant to say that we are going to start policing if the content of something a user tweets is an ad or not. The policy change affects 3rd party services that were putting ads in the middle of a timeline. So if Liz is paid by Reebok to tweet about how much she loves their new shoes, we are not going to be policing that any more than we were on Friday. This policy also *does not prohibit* services like Ad.ly that help facilitate those relationships or even help her post the ads to her timeline on her behalf. It *does prohibit* an application from calling out to a service to find an ad to serve to Liz that will get inserted into the timeline she is viewing. The language is somewhat nuanced but it sounds like we might need to make the policy more explicit as a number of people are misinterpreting it. Let me know if you have more questions. Ryan Ryan, you could do the whole world a *huge* favor and post this (and the other similar post) as a comment to Mashable's extracts of today's discussion here. http://mashable.com/2010/05/24/twitter-third-party-ad-networks/ On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Dewald Pretorius dpr...@gmail.com wrote: Liz, You are 100% correct in summarizing the problem. Not only were those businesses built with the full knowledge of Twitter, Twitter even had specific rules governing sponsored tweets (had to be clearly marked as sponsored, etc.). I'm really baffled by this decision of Twitter, because I don't understand how they expect to have integrity and trust with developers while doing this type of stuff. Right now we are all being pointed to Annotations as the holy grail of new development. But how do we know that they won't yet again change a rule in the future that will kill businesses that were built on top of Annotations? On May 24, 3:56 pm, Liz nwjersey...@gmail.com wrote: Peter, I think the problem is that business have been created, received funding and developed over the past year, with the full knowledge of Twitter, and this just undercuts destroys them. I think people can understand the rationale (and the desire for Twitter to eliminate competition) but this is a policy decision that should have been made over a year ago. Twitter should have included this in an earlier terms of service instead of giving an implicit okay to services like Sponsored Tweets which has turned into a successful company. It also seems disingenuous that the blog post says that a guiding principle of Twitter is that We don't seek to control what users tweet. And users own their own tweets. and allow adult-oriented content and photos but for some reason, users can't Tweet ads. That sounds like control of content to me. Liz
