I agree with a lot of points Mashable made here >>

Were ReTweets ever broken? I didn't think so.... RT @someone - very
sweet and simple (KISS - Keep it simple ...)

"The existence of Project Retweet — ie. formalized retweeting —
essentially implies that Twitter felt that current retweeting
practices need repairing. But were retweets ever really broken?"

- Since I felt that RT @someone was easy and simple (and easy to add
to my code) I didn't feel the need to even explore this new API and
add clutter to my code.

"the RT and @ symbol will be stripped from the tweet. What you’ll see
instead is the original tweet, from the original author,"

- I don't like that, I want to be able to add my own comments and give
credit (read as "a mention") to the one I follow too by RTing their
user name also so my followers can see who I find interesting to
follow. Plus this seems to be the preferred method users have adopted
(from my exp)... Additionally, I have a real problem with services
that modify my content/text on me. I didn't ask you to so leave it
alone. :(

"So let’s say that you follow me but don’t follow Mashable. Now when I
retweet Mashable, you’ll see the tweet from Mashable, not from me.
This could get a little hairy."

- I agree,  If I start seeing a bunch of stuff show up from from ppl I
don't follow, I don't think I will like that and be less inclined to
click any links too.

"You’ve already become accustomed to seeing tweets from the people you
follow, so a retweet from a trusted party actually means something."

- Yep!

I also like how it mentions that the Users created ReTweets, and now
with Twi***r trademarking Tweet™ this most likely will mean they will
claim ownership of ReTweet™ also, does this mean we will have to now
use RT™ @someone or RT® @someone :/

Long story short... I just keep thinking, If it ain't broken, don't
fix it ;) That's my $0.02 on it.

On Aug 15, 3:00 am, Paul Kinlan <paul.kin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> When I saw the original message stating that the retweet API I was about to
> say straight away that I despise the idea, but I thought I would refrain -
> give it some thought. I still despise the idea and I have to make it known
> the reasons why I think it is a very very bad idea and in the long term will
> negatively affect Twitter as a communications platform for the future.
>    1. You are embedding a user developed based meme into the Twitter
>    infrastructure - the popularity of RT itself may wane after some point.
>    Users are very fickle, they change their minds, take a stand and don't
>    listen to them - you know your platform and I am pretty sure you know that
>    this is a bit of a hack.  Let users use they system how they want, they 
> will
>    evolve how they use it, constraints via an API
>       1. Twitter already has the capability to do smarter things
>       that completely negate the need for this API if they just change
> the current
>       API a little
>    2. Not every app will use RT API (especially legacy ones) and not every
>    user will use it and as such Twitter and this list will get lots of
>    questions why certain RT's are accessible by the retweet API.  Again, RT's
>    are a user concept, and is very easy for them not use.
>    3. Whilst I use TweetDeck, I really dislike the amount of utility buttons
>    it has and the amount of options it has - introducing another API for
>    another function is tantamount to the same thing, you are asking us app
>    developers to include more options in our apps.  The great thing about a RT
>    is that I just hit reply and type RT at the front.
>    4. A big thing that people have requested is that quite often there is
>    not any room in the very limited 140 characters to add comment to a 
> retweet,
>    this doesn't seem to solve that problem.
>    5. Authority of a user based on a RT and credit to the originator is a
>    misnomer, no one actually needs it, very very few people care about - and
>    when they do care about not getting the credit for the original tweet you
>    have to ask why do they care? and why should we care? again it is still 
> very
>    easy to bypass.  If you have a problem with it, as per the Twitter TOS you
>    are the copyright holder of your content.
> My honest vote is not to pollute the Twitter API with a special RT
> capability, rather:
>    - Enhance Favorites and the favorites API, allow me to get a list of
>    everyone's favorites, allow me to see a list of people who favorited a
>    tweet.  If you look at the proposal for RT API it is doing something 
> similar
>    to this. The entire UX for Favorites makes a lot more sense than retweet -
>    infact you can go as far as saying if you like something favorite (star) 
> it,
>    if you really like your favorite - Forward (RT).
>       - Allow me to get a list of a users favorites (similar to the "Likes"
>       feed in FriendFeed) - this type of concept is so powerful, I can 
> discover
>       people who share very similar likes.  I can also do Best of Day
> very easily
>    - Enhance in_reply_to, allow me to see all tweets that reply to this
>    tweet in an object returned by the current api ( that is so I don't have to
>    keep re-querying the search API), further more allow me to request N levels
>    deep of replies to a given tweet (yes this is similar to threaded comments)
> So by enhancing Replies and favorites you can remove the need for special RT
> API because you can combine both parts of the API to get at the originator
> of a popular tweet, have notification and visual queues of popular tweets.
> thus keeping the twitter API simple.
> Paul - grumpy - Kinlanhttp://twitter.com/PaulKinlan

Reply via email to