With communication like that, we can together figure out ways to give the users what they want in a manner that does not put undue strain on your system.
Pissing developers off is NOT the right way to do it. Dewald On Oct 13, 10:58 pm, Dewald Pretorius <[email protected]> wrote: > Chad, > > Perhaps it will behoove the "powers that be" to actually speak to some > of us developers to discover the ways people are using Twitter. When > decisions are made from the isolation of the glass bubble of the > Twitter Head Office, without really knowing what the USERS want, stuff > like this ensues. > > Dewald > > On Oct 13, 10:28 pm, Chad Etzel <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Believe it or not, I've been reading every post on this thread with > > great intent. I have been proxying major points to "powers that be" > > and started an internal discussion on the topic at hand. The resulting > > decisions and policies that may be made/enforced from these > > discussions is, how do you say, "above my pay grade." > > > We do listen to these threads as long as the discussion remains > > constructive, which this one has. > > > -Chad > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Dewald Pretorius <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The only Twitter participation we've had thus far on this unfortunate > > > matter was Chad aging 10 years in 10 seconds over the idea that > > > someone can write a desktop or browser script that scrapes the login > > > page and then do whatever the hell it pleases (you know, like posting > > > something awful like recurring tweets). > > > > The sad thing is this. Selected people at Twitter are very familiar > > > with my level of cooperation with them. Believe it or not, there are > > > people in Twitter who actually view me as "one of the good guys". > > > > With my users having a recurring tweet feature available to them, and > > > with the cooperation of Twitter and suitable information from Twitter, > > > I could have contained the matter programmatically. > > > > But, with what essentially amounts as a flat-out rejection of my offer > > > to cooperate and change my system to prevent duplicate tweets, they > > > have now sent all those users off somewhere else, into the loving arms > > > of people who couldn't give a shit about working with Twitter, and > > > have in essence unleashed recurring tweet hell on themselves. > > > > The demand for recurring tweets has not suddenly magically > > > disappeared. Let me repeat that. Hopefully someone in Twitter will > > > take notice. The demand for recurring tweets has not suddenly > > > magically disappeared. > > > > Dewald > > > > On Oct 13, 9:22 pm, JDG <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> I dunno. It'd be nice. I personally like rearranging deck chairs like > > >> this. > > >> It was civil and, hopefully, productive. > > > >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 17:39, Dewald Pretorius <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > I often wonder whether our non-API musings here on these forums have > > >> > any effect on anything, or are we just amusing ourselves by > > >> > rearranging deck chairs? > > > >> > Dewald > > > >> > On Oct 13, 8:03 pm, Justyn <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > If duplicate tweets are the concern, then why are RT's on their way > > >> > > to > > >> > > being a feature? > > > >> > > Abuse is the concern. Not duplicate content, right? > > > >> > > So a local restaurant can't setup a tweet to go out on Wednesdays to > > >> > > remind their followers of 1/2 off appetizers? There's no ill intent > > >> > > here, and they have businesses to run. Doesn't twitter want > > >> > > businesses > > >> > > to foster it's platform? There's valid uses for recurring content > > >> > > within reason. It's not realistic to ask users to come up with 52 > > >> > > unique headlines, hunt down the associated link and fire up the > > >> > > laptop > > >> > > prior to happy to hour every Wednesday at 6:00 in order to get a > > >> > > message out to people who opted to follow them. > > > >> > > What's the happy-medium here? > > > >> > > On Oct 13, 4:00 pm, JDG <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > > They already do that ... in SOME cases. Pharmacies are required (or > > >> > maybe > > >> > > > simply strongly encouraged) to sell OTC meds like Sudafed behind > > >> > > > the > > >> > counter > > >> > > > because some people use that to make crystal meth. The government > > >> > requires a > > >> > > > waiting period on guns because some people use guns to murder > > >> > > > people. > > > >> > > > Rightly or wrongly -- and I seriously believe you did this with no > > >> > abusive > > >> > > > intent -- you provided a tool that made it very easy for users to > > >> > > > post > > >> > > > duplicate tweets. They didn't shut you down. They gave you a stern > > >> > warning. > > > >> > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 14:39, Dewald Pretorius <[email protected]> > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > Now there is an excellent analogy, which begs the question, > > >> > > > > "Where is > > >> > > > > the user's responsibility in this?" > > > >> > > > > I have very clearly warned my users, every time they enter a > > >> > > > > tweet, > > >> > > > > that they must adhere to the Twitter Rules, with hyperlinks to > > >> > > > > those > > >> > > > > rules. That was not good enough. > > > >> > > > > So, with your analogy in mind, should the authorities pull over > > >> > > > > speeders, or should they shut down manufacturers that make > > >> > > > > vehicles > > >> > > > > that can exceed the speed limit? Or, in a different analogy, > > >> > > > > should > > >> > > > > the government shut down Home Depot because they sell chain saws > > >> > > > > and > > >> > > > > box cutters, and some people use chain saws and box cutters to > > >> > > > > murder > > >> > > > > other human beings? > > > >> > > > > Dewald > > > >> > > > > On Oct 13, 5:31 pm, JDG <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > > > Yes, and should be treated as such. I personally detest all > > >> > > > > > those > > >> > stupid > > >> > > > > > twitter-based games. Point is, with Twitter's userbase, some > > >> > > > > > get > > >> > through > > >> > > > > the > > >> > > > > > cracks. Don't like it, report it. This is like complaining that > > >> > cops only > > >> > > > > > pull over SOME speeders. Yeah, some are going to get through > > >> > > > > > the > > >> > cracks. > > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > Internets. Serious business. > > > >> -- > > >> Internets. Serious business.
