+1 on this.
I think the ReTweet concept is more complex than the model in the
Retweet API described. While twitter has always been a keep it simple
service, I think you will find many users wont use this new
functionality if they can't use it the way they do currently (with
I think somehow a hybrid of simple rebroadcasting and commenting on
the rebroadcast would be powerful enhancement to the Twitter service.
Being able to track retweets is very cool, but being able to track
what people say about the content they are redistributing is where the
power of social communication lies, it drives the conversation forward
by engaging more users..
On Aug 13, 2009, at 7:13 PM, stk wrote:
I see two UI suggestions:
1) People may find it confusing to see the original author's name in
their list, as it's not expected. I think it's better to show the
name of the retweeter, rather than the original tweeter (although a
link to the original tweet, in the form of the author's name, would be
fine and expected).
2) A larger issue with the UI will be the ability to have an option to
do one of three things:
a) use the original tweeter's text in it's entirety.
b) not use the original tweeter's text and instead, use the
retweeter's comment - or -
c) a mix of (a) and (b)
Hope this helps.
On Aug 13, 2:31 pm, janole <s...@mobileways.de> wrote:
Will it be possible to "comment" on the retweeted tweet? If not,
people might just continue to use the current "RT ..." convention.
Retweeting can be a way of acknowledging a tweet or disapproving a
If you search for "RT" in search.twitter.com you'll see a lot of
@janole / mobileways.de / Gravity