[twitter-dev] Re: ok to reserver a few dozen usernames for a business idea?

2009-03-21 Thread lucy

Alex and Doug,

I appreciate your replies. We'll go with option 2 for now.

Thanks.

On Mar 18, 2:25 pm, Doug Williams d...@twitter.com wrote:
 Lucy,
 You should only create accounts for users that you are actively using.
 Please do not create accounts to squat on them. A strong indication
 that an account should not exist account is a noticeable lack of
 followers.

 From your description, I would suggest you concentrate on Option 2 and
 focus your efforts on a single username for the game. Only after it
 becomes clear that your users would benefit from independentnames
 would Option 1 make sense.

 Thanks,
 Doug WilliamsTwitterAPI Supporthttp://twitter.com/dougw

 On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 12:32 PM, lucy a.downy.h...@gmail.com wrote:

  A friend and I want to start a legitimate business involving atwitter
  app. We're not sure what the best practice is regarding reserving
 twitterusernames. We don't want to do anything slimey or abusive, but
  we also don't want to shoot ourselves in the foot by being warm and
  fuzzy instead of playing the marketing/convenience game.

  Essentially, the question is: if we plan to make a bunch of related
  apps, is it ok toreserve50 usernames? Say our company is called Foo,
  and we want to release FooBar, FooQux and FooMoo, etc.

  option 1:

  Is it ok toreserveeach sub-app that users can interact via:
   @FooBar sekret command
  and so that they only get updates about FooBar if that's what
  interests them?

  option 2:

  Dev-wise, it's pretty similar for users to have to interact via:
   @Foo Bar sekret command
  where Foo is our only reserved username. Users won't be able to
  specifically follow the sub-app that interests them, but we could work
  that out internally and only direct message relevant users.

  The sub-apps are definitely apps in their own rights, rather than
  categories. My friend and I are pretty serious about developing this
  suite, and while some of the usernames won't get used (presumably we
  can delete those accounts once that becomes clear), most of them will
  be. We want to ensure our Foo brand doesn't run into problems. It
  still feels greedy.

  Is option 1 a standard thing to do? Will our accounts be taken from
  us? Will we be banned?

  Thanks!


[twitter-dev] Re: ok to reserver a few dozen usernames for a business idea?

2009-03-18 Thread Alex Payne

If you create a bunch of accounts in a short period of time, it's
likely that our support staff will ban those accounts. Please let them
know ahead of time: supp...@twitter.com.

On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 09:32, lucy a.downy.h...@gmail.com wrote:

 A friend and I want to start a legitimate business involving a twitter
 app. We're not sure what the best practice is regarding reserving
 twitter usernames. We don't want to do anything slimey or abusive, but
 we also don't want to shoot ourselves in the foot by being warm and
 fuzzy instead of playing the marketing/convenience game.

 Essentially, the question is: if we plan to make a bunch of related
 apps, is it ok to reserve 50 usernames? Say our company is called Foo,
 and we want to release FooBar, FooQux and FooMoo, etc.

 option 1:

 Is it ok to reserve each sub-app that users can interact via:
  @FooBar sekret command
 and so that they only get updates about FooBar if that's what
 interests them?

 option 2:

 Dev-wise, it's pretty similar for users to have to interact via:
  @Foo Bar sekret command
 where Foo is our only reserved username. Users won't be able to
 specifically follow the sub-app that interests them, but we could work
 that out internally and only direct message relevant users.

 The sub-apps are definitely apps in their own rights, rather than
 categories. My friend and I are pretty serious about developing this
 suite, and while some of the usernames won't get used (presumably we
 can delete those accounts once that becomes clear), most of them will
 be. We want to ensure our Foo brand doesn't run into problems. It
 still feels greedy.

 Is option 1 a standard thing to do? Will our accounts be taken from
 us? Will we be banned?

 Thanks!




-- 
Alex Payne - API Lead, Twitter, Inc.
http://twitter.com/al3x


[twitter-dev] Re: ok to reserver a few dozen usernames for a business idea?

2009-03-18 Thread Doug Williams

Lucy,
You should only create accounts for users that you are actively using.
Please do not create accounts to squat on them. A strong indication
that an account should not exist account is a noticeable lack of
followers.

From your description, I would suggest you concentrate on Option 2 and
focus your efforts on a single username for the game. Only after it
becomes clear that your users would benefit from independent names
would Option 1 make sense.

Thanks,
Doug Williams
Twitter API Support
http://twitter.com/dougw



On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 12:32 PM, lucy a.downy.h...@gmail.com wrote:

 A friend and I want to start a legitimate business involving a twitter
 app. We're not sure what the best practice is regarding reserving
 twitter usernames. We don't want to do anything slimey or abusive, but
 we also don't want to shoot ourselves in the foot by being warm and
 fuzzy instead of playing the marketing/convenience game.

 Essentially, the question is: if we plan to make a bunch of related
 apps, is it ok to reserve 50 usernames? Say our company is called Foo,
 and we want to release FooBar, FooQux and FooMoo, etc.

 option 1:

 Is it ok to reserve each sub-app that users can interact via:
  @FooBar sekret command
 and so that they only get updates about FooBar if that's what
 interests them?

 option 2:

 Dev-wise, it's pretty similar for users to have to interact via:
  @Foo Bar sekret command
 where Foo is our only reserved username. Users won't be able to
 specifically follow the sub-app that interests them, but we could work
 that out internally and only direct message relevant users.

 The sub-apps are definitely apps in their own rights, rather than
 categories. My friend and I are pretty serious about developing this
 suite, and while some of the usernames won't get used (presumably we
 can delete those accounts once that becomes clear), most of them will
 be. We want to ensure our Foo brand doesn't run into problems. It
 still feels greedy.

 Is option 1 a standard thing to do? Will our accounts be taken from
 us? Will we be banned?

 Thanks!