-
Website
http://www.louisgray.com/live/ -
Original page
http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/04/you-have-entered-no-retweeting-zone.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
It's almost just as effective as a "like" on FriendFeed, and I often use the two similarly (and my likes go out to Twitter rather than me just retweeting it). It's the way I share good content that I think is deserving for others to read, without having to re-blog each one. IMO Retweets are powerful, and give you the opportunity to help, and highlight other users on Twitter whose content you like. You can't do that quite as effectively through a blog post (unless you Tweet your blog post, but even then you're taking the credit, rather than giving it all to them)
see the effect. I've found people enjoy retweets more than they hate them.
Twitter's own flawed nature encourages disorganized noise, so most people
are used to that.
Also, if someone (or I) ask for RT's, it's usually to get the word spread faster about some time-specific event, or something relevant to a whole group of people (eg "registration is now open for SxSW, please RT") which we're all helping to tell our community about.
Twitter is all about sharing the love, I think. Retweeting is part of the currency that makes content viral, that makes word of mouth happen, that makes community grow.
I also realize that from your point of view it doesn't make sense to RT since you're squarely in the 1% category of content creators... But many of us want to be editors (for want of a better term) who separate the wheat from the chaff for our more niche audiences...
I've no issue with your argument against people begging for retweets, but I see no problem at all with unsolicited retweets.
By retweeting you're disseminating a link or tweet that you found useful and worthwhile to a wider audience - i.e. your own followers. You're also (in the case of most retweets) acknowleding the original source and giving them credit. You're highlighting good work quickly and directly. Certainly you could also follow up with a blog post to do the same in more detail, but why not do both.
I've found so much good content via Twitter, and I'd guess that at least half of it comes from retweets. That's content I wouldn't otherwise have found - the person who originally sent the tweet wasn't someone I followed, I didn't otherwise know of their blog or the post. Now those people have another reader for their blog, and perhaps I've highlighted their work in my own blog or other forums. None of which would happen without a retweet.
It's far from lazy unless you're just copy and pasting without reading the original article, and never doing anything other than retweeting. If retweeting genuinely solid content is part of your daily contribution on twitter, as well as your comments and status, then you're providing a good service to everyone.
To be honest, I don't think Twitter is particularly conversational in any case. Twitter is instant and brief. Conversation occurs in blogs, forums and the likes of Friendfeed. Twitter can act as a catalyst to conversation - indeed it has done here by addressing retweets! - but it's not a great forum for conversation itself.
At other times, I'm retweeting because I like the quote from a person, and/or I want that person tobe recognized for the profound or beautiful thing they said (with no link).
There's definitely an argument for removing the RT chain from a tweet, i.e. "RT @xyz, RT @abc, RT@def blah blah" because then you're just taking up space by giving credit to multiple retweeters, but the article context and the original poster I think should be included in a tweet. If you have space for additional comment at that point then cool.
These services are only as good as you trust them yourself to provide metrics. I trust Twitalyzer to measure me up, because it breaks down the results of my tweets more than the tweets themselves. Twanalyst is a toy compared to it.
Louis, here's what Twitalyzer has to say about you. Much more interesting (and useful) don't you think?
But, frankly, any service that claims that Gray's influence is only 6.4% and his generosity is 0.0% should be called into question...
Of all the ones that give influence metrics based on Twitter, though, I've found Twitalyzer to do the best job. Not saying that it does good, just better than the others.
I retweet and Like things I find useful, funny, or just wonderful to see. I try to be conversational, but not overly so (I err on this sometimes). I appreciate people retweeting my links and info as well. Constant begging for RTs is obnoxious (I know one tweep who puts Pls RT on almost every tweet).
If I have a statement or link that is important to my followers I ask them to RT it. I did this during the worm episode.
It's unfortunate, that like the followfriday, retweeting has become a contest. "Who is at the top of the retweetis or retweetradar"
Somewhere there is a happy middle ground.
But no amount of statistical, numerical analysis is going to tell whether you're a good Twitter citizen. The reaction of your followers and others to your tweets will tell you this.
Hopefully people will remember the words of Mark Twain: There are 3 kinds of lies in this world Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,...
Besides, not everyone blogs, Louis, and Twitter offers a great way to recommend other work.
Say everyone ssuddenly stopped tweeting about Louisgray.com - would you still be against retweeting?
Like this comment, I've got the option to put it out there on Twitter, but who cares about my retweet habits? Well, someone might but I don't care to share it. I think that's the question, "Do I have any urge to share this with the people who follow me?"
I think Twanalysis is hilarious, but they say my tweeting is "is already tip-top! No improvements needed": http://twanalyst.com/status.php?search=ReginaWa... , so, um of course I'm digging them ;)
It sounds nice to give someone credit for pointing you to a resource and it's probably a useful metric if it was reliable at all, but it's kinda like citing the library as a source in addition to the book you got the information from. I file this need to give an individual credit via RT right along with people who feel they have to reciprocate everything.
Are you sharing things because you felt the information was good, or are you just trying to leverage someone else's content for your own benefit?
Another instance was the recent passing of a blogger's daughter Maddie. I felt that it would be in bad taste to post anything original since I did not know the family. Since they were trying to raise funds for the March of Dimes, re-tweeting donation requests was my way of spreading the word. Their goal was $3000 and last I saw exceeded $33,000. #maddie
At any rate, I'd agree that asking for retweets is crass. Grumping about others doing it? I suppose it's about on par with people complaining about those who only seem to post links.
I don't want to contribute to the noise pollution on twitter and want to make every tweet count. Yes, this means not sharing something that would be NEW to those few that don't subscribe to those popular blogs but so be it. I think overall it's a good move to make.
However, I will still share stories and posts to the less popular and more obscure blogs like this one, no offense, Louis! I mean in relationship to the general public and most of my followers.
I will also share pieces from other lesser known resources... hopefully sharing valuable information that MOST, not all, people would never have found otherwise or not until the big blogs catch wind of it. I enjoy breaking news and info before the larger slower outfits do.
Thanks for the food for thought. Like you said, there's no one right way to do this stuff but it doesn't hurt to share our ideas on possible methods that might contribute more to the community rather than merely serve ourselves better.
Pai
So I don't really see it as lazy.. I see it as curation..