Twitter References and an IM to Dr. Jack

Edited for continuity. Also, more praise for humanity in general. It wasn’t long ago that I was bashing Twitter for being really lame. I think this post can quickly explain why I was wrong.

Also, a shout out to my friend Carissa, who nobly attempted to get me into Twitter months before I did so. You were right, Carissa–and my admission will be on the archive.org and Google servers for all time. 😛

(9:07:34 PM) JC: but whereas Facebook is for talking to people you once knew (whether you’re both interested in talking to each other or not), Twitter is for doing your thing and organically finding people who share your humor/interests/politics
(9:08:31 PM) JC: I joke about trying to attain a “Mendelian ratio” between following:followers
(9:08:33 PM) JC: 1:3
(9:08:49 PM) JC: it’s never exact, but it seems to regularly work out that way: for every three people following me, I generally follow one.
(9:09:03 PM) JC: not as a rule or anything…it just seems to be the rate at which I reciprocate interest in the people who follow me
(9:09:42 PM) JC: so like 1/3 is easily a bot or a marketer using API to sniff keywords…
(9:09:48 PM) JC: 1/3 might be a company, a dull person, or a perfectly nice person I don’t care to follow…
(9:10:04 PM) JC: but at my rate of active interaction, the last third are–if my numbers are any kind of evidence–the cool people I never would have talked to if I wasn’t on Twitter.
(9:10:25 PM) JC: Now from a social standpoint, that’s a phenomenal success rate. Kinda restores your faith in humanity when you realize how many cool people you don’t know yet.

Yeah. Yeah, it kinda does.