What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Give a Genuine Gibson Guitar for $99 (Price, Not a Typo) view!
bestbuy.com - World-class starter guitar--sweet sound, killer craftsmanship and yeah, you read that price right.
33 Comments
- Narrwald, on 05/17/2009, -9/+29Can we stage a revolt to that ends Twitter?
- NuclearBlast, on 05/17/2009, -1/+13"#fixrepliesgate"
Please don't do this. I don't care if it is ironic or whatever, but adding -gate after any scandal is overused, and frankly, stupid. - PolarBearFire, on 05/17/2009, -0/+9Ask yourself, are these real revolts or just temper tantrums?
- netneutrality, on 05/17/2009, -0/+8User-driven websites strive to attract dedicated followers, who get extremely attached to the sites and communities they've befriended. The users feel like they own their own profiles like physical property, so naturally even small changes can cause indignation. It doesn't help that websites can change so suddenly. It's like walking out your door and discovering your car was been switched for a different model overnight. Even if it's an improvement, unannounced and undebatable changes are met with rejection.
Huger communities also foster more resentment because it's hard to get a response through the site's contact email addresses, and users' voices are simply lost unless they shout up a storm.
Like it says in this article, fast responses and open dialogue can quell revolts because it lets users know they are being listened to. - Korvar, on 05/17/2009, -1/+7It's necessary for some people's self esteem to be seen bashing something that's new and apparently popular. Thus, they show how iconoclastic they are. It happens a lot with new social technologies, like blogs and now Twitter. I suspect it happened with books, when they first appeared.
- Orsenfelt, on 05/17/2009, -0/+5If I understood it correctly... Twitter had an option you could turn on that would allow you to see both sides of a @reply conversation.
So if a person you follow was @replying someone you don't follow and that person then replied back, you could see both 'tweets' and follow the entire conversation. By default Twitter would only you show the @replies made by the people you follow.
It was an option buried in the settings that you could turn on if you wanted to see whole conversations, find new people to follow etc..
Twitter decided this opt-in setting was too confusing for the mass market and removed it entirely. - megaton, on 05/17/2009, -0/+5Can someone explain what this Twitter "revolt" was even about?
The author thoughtfully traverses the timeline leading up to the "revolt" without actually revealing the scenario that caused it. - yerdaddy, on 05/17/2009, -2/+6Don't do stupid ***** that rips people off or gets in their faces. That's how you avoid a revolt.
- inactive, on 05/17/2009, -1/+4I think its already happened, more than half of new twitter users don't continue to use it after a month.
Eventually, after 50 years of Social Networking sites surging in popularity, only to have people lose interest in it after a few years, people may opt to just go outside. - SquareWheel, on 05/17/2009, -1/+4People like to bitch, and Twitter is stupid.
- toconnor, on 05/17/2009, -0/+3Agreed. This is only distracting me from getting upset about real issues like swine flu and whether Miss California took nude pictures or not.
- inactive, on 05/17/2009, -0/+3Yeah, take note, Twitter. These people really showed their "power" with this online "protest". Better not make them angry or they'll stop using your unprofitable website (actually they won't because they're addicted, so do whatever the hell you want).
- shadowspawn, on 05/17/2009, -0/+2Digg never had a revolt. Nope, never.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Youngin's, I swear. - inactive, on 05/18/2009, -0/+2GROAN
- inactive, on 05/17/2009, -0/+2Yeah, I beat you to it. :p
- megaton, on 05/17/2009, -0/+2Interesting.
I wonder if the decision had more to do with exponential growth, though. A setting like that could cause the system to grow at an unsustainable rate, as it introduces the concept of micro-followers.
It's one thing to have A follow B, and B follow A and C. But for A to follow B, and follow C if C responds to B, where A = all of B's followers that have the setting turned on... that is quite a complex relationship to break down while rendering the twitter feed for anyone who resides in the subset of A.
Would definitely exceed all the computing power on the planet if enough people turned it on, so I can understand why they may want to curb it... - inactive, on 05/17/2009, -0/+2*pulls out virtual guitar*
C'mon, Digg! Sing along if you know the song!
"Ohhhh nine, eff nine..." - Korvar, on 05/17/2009, -0/+2What's particularly fascinating is that the "revolt" came about despite the fact that about 3% of Twitter users had opted into the feature that was removed...
- Bobski, on 05/17/2009, -0/+2A better title to this would be:
Why Dumb Asses Collide: A Study In Selfish Group Think - Gibletoid, on 05/17/2009, -0/+1The power of Twits
- wallclimber, on 05/17/2009, -1/+2"Why Social Media Revolts Take Place"
..............................................................
Because it's revolting? : ) - FearlessFreep, on 05/17/2009, -0/+1The second
- inactive, on 05/17/2009, -0/+1The day I start caring about social media revolts is the day I castrate myself.
You should be ashamed of yourself OP. Go outside. - inactive, on 05/17/2009, -0/+1Agreed. When most of the world uses the word "revolt", it's usually about a situation involving machine guns.
- Senturion, on 05/17/2009, -0/+1It never ceases to amaze me how companies who made their name in social media through promoting collaboration, openness, crowdsourcing and community involvement forget those ideals when it comes to decisions like this.
No one is saying these companies don't have the right to run their business however they want, but a modicum of consultation and openness would be wise prior to making changes to services people have well gotten used to. - TheAirLoom, on 05/17/2009, -0/+1RT @someloser Somebody stole my lollypop! #lollypoptheft
- Jareth86, on 05/18/2009, -0/+1You could start by closing your twitter account :p
http://twitter.com/Narrwald - Jacob815, on 05/17/2009, -0/+1This is ridiculous! Is this going to be considered this generations Vietnam protests? Who cares if your favorite website changes a bit, its the internet, there are much better things to get upset about.
- LockeNCole, on 05/17/2009, -0/+1Agreed. If you don't like how things are run on a website, leave the freakin' website. Don't bitch and moan about how it's destroyed your life.
- cityrat59, on 05/18/2009, -0/+0Well, for me a lot of the essence of the "good digital conversation" gets lost since they have done this chnge.
- Gotar, on 05/17/2009, -0/+0Twits or GTFO
- maqikelefant, on 05/18/2009, -0/+0***** TWITTER!
- inactive, on 05/17/2009, -4/+3What do you care if Twitter continues or not? Are you being held somewhere, being forced to Tweet by gunpoint? Should we send help?
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is