Quit Yer B**ch’n and Dictat’n

Last week I attended my first Twitter conference, here in Seattle. Several times during the conference, I heard statements such as, “If you aren’t using Twitter to converse, then you aren’t using it right,” “automation castrates Twitter,” and the usual “you should follow back everyone who follows you.” I was a little surprised and irritated to continue hearing these black and white statements.

Later, on LinkedIn, I posted in several groups about my latest blog article. I had written about a tool I use that I find very helpful and thought others might find useful, too. I posted in the Discussion area of the groups, and kept it short.

The first comment I got was from someone indirectly complaining that I didn’t include a question with my LinkedIn post. Some back and forth discussion ensued, with other people weighing in, as well. The person who originated the comment thought that it was inappropriate to post without a question, because this was the Discussion area. To him, the point is to elicit a discussion and the content in LinkedIn should stand by itself. Any link to external content should be purely supplementary.

As I mentioned in the thread, though, my goal in using LinkedIn Discussions is different:

“I receive the digests from all the groups I’m in, and I scan them regularly for useful information. I only scan the discussions, as I get my news from other sources. I’m always looking for good, informative blog posts in the discussions lists, that my followers might be interested in.”

Hence:

“My goal in posting to discussions is to do the same for others: provide useful information that can aid them or that they might want to share with others.”

It’s this difference in goals that made us choose different methods of posting. Likewise, when the speaker at the #140tc conference said, “Automation castrates Twitter,” my first thought was “BS.” I get great information through the individuals tweeting on Twitter. I also get great information from automated feeds that tweet links and headlines. That’s a case where automation empowers Twitter.

What History Teaches Us

I have a background in usability and user experience. I’ve conducted and observed quite a few usability tests. If you’ve never observed people using your website or product, I highly recommend watching them (without commenting or interfering in any way).

One of the first things any usability person learns is that people frequently use products/sites in ways the designers never foresaw nor intended. Those uses are often novel, ingenious, and can lead to changes in product direction that can make the product even more profitable or open whole new markets.

Social networks are no different. There is no right or wrong way to use Twitter, LinkedIn, etc. Yes, there may be less common or acceptable ways. Luckily, the very structure of “social” networks ensures feedback and penalties that tend to limit less acceptable uses. It’s a shame, though, when people feel the need to make blanket statements about how you should and shouldn’t use a social network, a comment area, or other community features. It’s especially shameful when experts, speakers, and panel members lay down rules as though they are gospel. Doing so falsely implies to newcomers that there are right and wrong methods.

The earliest creators of the internet and HTML could never have envisioned the web we know today. Thank goodness they didn’t dictate rules that prohibited users and developers from trying new things, pushing the limits and seeing what works–or we might never have gotten to Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.

So I say, quit yer bitchin and dictat’n. Let’s show a little more tolerance, assume there is no right or wrong, and see just what exciting places we go to next!