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
"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."
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
> 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
> 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
> 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
> 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)
> 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
> 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