Comments on: New microsyntax for Twitter: three pointers and the slasher

By: Jay Bienvenu

Jay Bienvenu — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:37:58 +0000

For some time now I’ve had an idea for “bangtags” that would identify characteristics of linked content such as video or explicit content. I used the exclamation point rather than the hashmark for two reasons: to avoid confusion with coincidental nonstandardized hashtags, and to denote the fact that the tag alerts the reader to some characteristic of the linked content that might be problematic.

I thought about augmenting the slashtags with this proposal, and decided not to because the slash doesn’t denote caution like the bang does.

My basic proposal for bangtags is at my website link. What do you think about this idea?

By: A Guide to Writing Good on Twitter « Coffee Conversations

A Guide to Writing Good on Twitter « Coffee Conversations — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:06:40 +0000

[...] it to be extremely convenient. They have gained acceptance among a lot of users lately. They were introduced by Chris Messina, the same dude who suggested [...]

By: Logan

Logan — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 07:49:58 +0000

I vote that we make RT and /via the same thing. Having RT seems to break the syntax, unless we move it to the end: /rt. As it is, it seems like there are too many ways to give credit when I believe really only one is needed. I understand the differences between RT, via, OH, and by, but there just isn’t enough of a difference or enough of a benefit to justify the complexity. /via can technically mean any of these, and therefore seems the best suited to replace them all.

That said, I really like the /cc and /me concepts. Great stuff. Very useful.

By: Introducing Twitter-disclosure Slashtags

Introducing Twitter-disclosure Slashtags — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 23:35:11 +0000

[...] To make disclosure easy on Twitter, I’m proposing a set of Twitter-disclosure slashtags. [...]

By: Rivolutionary use of Slashtags, new microsyntax for Twitter

Rivolutionary use of Slashtags, new microsyntax for Twitter — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 16:54:52 +0000

[...] I read this amazing post from Chris Messina writing about slashtags, that I called the TwitterTags 2.0 so the new Twitter [...]

By: Chris Messina

Chris Messina — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 23:08:35 +0000

@Michael Kozakewich: I’ve been meaning to redesign this blog for a while.

I’ll make sure to separate the tweets from the local comments. Thanks for the suggestion.

By: Michael Kozakewich

Michael Kozakewich — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 21:46:04 +0000

(Chris, is it possible to move the ‘Post a Comment’ form above the bazillion twitter comments?)

Wayan, RT hasn’t gone anywhere. Twitter has added a “Retweet” link, which will do a hard retweet of someone’s tweet, but you can still “RT @so-and-so…” if you want. I’ve seen some of those RTs, lately.
I don’t think Twitter has ever touched RTs.

However, apps like Tweetie have historically added their own functionality to Twitter, such as an actual Retweet button, and they should now give people a choice to decide which ‘retweet’ they mean. TweetDeck, for example, asks users which one they mean, with the option of setting that to “do-this-and-don’t-ask-again.”
(i.e. It’s your fault for relying on those apps)

By: Wayan

Wayan — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:30:59 +0000

And RT is even less letters & better knowledge transfer than /via.

Bring Back the RT!

By: Michael Kozakewich

Michael Kozakewich — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 20:45:13 +0000

My concern, a few months ago, was that we should put quotes around RTs and then add whatever afterwards, or do some sort of annotation syntax before annotating with our own remarks. I think the problem is that there’s no real way to annotate in Twitter. We could cram what we can in the remaining space beside someone’s tweet (I say at the end, to avoid an out-of-context phrase preceding the tweet), or we could link to someone else’s RT in our tweet (if Twitter had its own url shortener for tweets, it would be easier), because RTing now seems to be similar to linking to others’ tweets.

At the moment, tweets have the link http://twitter.com/usernmae/status/##########
if it was http://s.twitter.com/?????????? or such, it would save us twenty characters. Even tweets.twitter.com would save.

Anyway, Twitter could have a function that allowed us to click ‘Retweet’, give us a whole 140 characters to type an annotation (“I really like this article, but feel that [blah blah issue] should be handled [blah blah matter].”) and then post a link to the RT with the annotation tweet.

Or something.

Things being as they are, at this moment, I still see a lot of “I don’t think so. RT @so-and-so I really would like @first-person to kiss a frog,” the beginning of which makes no sense until you realize it’s a RT and read the second half of the tweet.

I’m an advocate of something like the following, for now:

RT @so-and-so : “I really would like @first-person to kiss a frog” I don’t think so!

By: Jack Repenning

Jack Repenning — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:51:12 +0000

@Michael Kozakewich: while I’m sympathetic with your desire to simplify, I don’t see what you’re suggesting for the case of “forwarding with annotation.” The un-annotated RT was already widely discouraged before Twitter commandeered it for their “un-annotated and masquerading as someone else” feature (which perhaps ought better to be called “channelling”

Consider the real-life metaphore: at a party or in a pub, when you want to introduce two friends, you don’t grab them and mash them face to face, you add something: “This is Rick, we went to high-school together” or “Do you know Jenny? She’s VP of marketing and IBM” or “Frank here can put three pool balls in his mouth!”