Read on Twitter
Okay @twitter, I was talking with @caseyblair and we figured out an actually good change we could make to this service:
Categorized feeds. Every Twitter account starts with a couple of default categories and can add more. You can follow one or all a person& #39;s categories.
Categorized feeds. Every Twitter account starts with a couple of default categories and can add more. You can follow one or all a person& #39;s categories.
Categories are specific to a person, unlike hashtags. Nothing forces people to use them, but they would be so helpful.
This arises from the observation that a central problem with social media is the way it collapses our social contexts. It& #39;s all or nothing.
This arises from the observation that a central problem with social media is the way it collapses our social contexts. It& #39;s all or nothing.
In a pre-SM world, I can have someone that I hang out with at parties, but don& #39;t hear about their politics or their job. Twitter (and FB) make this impossible.
Please don& #39;t confuse this with an "X shouldn& #39;t get political!" Argument. People absolutely should.
Please don& #39;t confuse this with an "X shouldn& #39;t get political!" Argument. People absolutely should.
When you& #39;re moved to get political on main, do it! But you should have the OPTION of not doing it. Or not spamming the feed you make jokes in with your lecture on tort reform, or WHATEVER.
It might even help solve some of the damage social media has done to the world, which I think stems from the conflation of our social circle and our media diet.
In the AIM/blog days, I had my friends who I BSed with, and bloggers I followed for their opinions. Now I can follow both types of people, but I get a feed of my bloggers PLUS EVERYONE ELSE& #39;S.
And there& #39;s no other option. If I want to exchange cat pictures, I need to read your takes on tax policy.
Anyway, can we please have this? Technically it would be very simple. Use some new character to denote category, ¢ seems lonely. Build it in by default. Give us a dinner party mode where we can have witty banter and not fascinating lectures on slug mating IF WE WANT.
FAQ:
Q: How would it actually work?
A: Create an account: you& #39;d automatically get two categories created for you, ¢general and ¢random. (Like on Slack!) Just to demonstrate the feature exists.
Q: How would it actually work?
A: Create an account: you& #39;d automatically get two categories created for you, ¢general and ¢random. (Like on Slack!) Just to demonstrate the feature exists.
Follow someone: default is to follow all categories. A dropdown lets you uncheck some of them. There& #39;s also a special one, ¢new, which determines if you automatically follow new categories.
Tweet: You get a cloud under your tweet that lets you pick any number of your categories, or add a new one. If you create a new one, anyone subscribed to ¢new follows it by default. Replies are always in the categories of their parents.
Read: Same as always, except you get only tweets including at least one category you follow.
Q: Wouldn& #39;t this be easy to abuse? Put tons of categories on everything, put everything in ¢general, etc?
A: Sure. But you have the same options you do now -- unfollow, mute, block. The point is if someone gives you this to use, you can.
A: Sure. But you have the same options you do now -- unfollow, mute, block. The point is if someone gives you this to use, you can.
Q: It seems like only a tiny minority of accounts would want or need this.
A: Probably! But they would be some of the MOST-FOLLOWED accounts, I think. In particular, any corporate brand that wanted to distinguish between types of info (say, updates on service outages).
A: Probably! But they would be some of the MOST-FOLLOWED accounts, I think. In particular, any corporate brand that wanted to distinguish between types of info (say, updates on service outages).
