Twitter mentions: More important than you think
Posted by Don Packett under Rants , Web/Tech on January 31 2011 at 5:15 PMOkay, not really. But from what I recently witnessed on Twitter, some people really take those mentions to heart. For real real.
On Friday, two South African twitterers, Nash and GrahamRobert, were having a conversation about South African celebrities, which resulted in Nash basically saying that there is no such thing as a South African celeb, by way of tweeting this:
Now, my theory is that Nash included GrahamRobert in the tweet because he was part of the original conversation, but delivered it out of the conversation because it was a funny comment and he wanted all of his followers to read it, not just the ones who follow both of them. Makes sense. It was a nice gesture to include Graham. Nice, but not necessarily obligatory.
Then Cape Town’s favourite son, Shaun Oakes, saw Nash’s tweet, thought it was worthy of a retweet, and did so.
You may notice now, though, that Shaun removed Graham’s twitter handle from the tweet, as he felt Graham was included by association, but he really didn’t have any authority over it. It was Nash’s statement, so he should get the recognition. Only fair, right?
Well, Graham didn’t think so, and replied to Shaun with this tweet:
“meant” to be in the RT? Really? Did you have your name included in the credits when you watched Avatar as well? No. You were part of it. You enjoyed it. But you’re not owed anything for it.
Unfortunately for Shaun, the rapping on the knuckles made him feel bad, and he sent the tweet again, this time including Graham.
Now, if Shaun had included him in the first place, it would have again, just like Nash’s tweet, been a nice gesture to show that he was a part of the conversation. That’s fair, and no-one would have an issue with that.
What I think is very unfair, however, is Graham telling Shaun that he should be included in something that he really had no ownership of in the first place, just for one more mention on Twitter. To his credit, he did say thanks.
But in the end, dude, it’s Twitter, not the Academy Awards. If you have to ask people to include you in retweets, you’re not really doing well to begin with. But more importantly, no-one really cares.
February 1st, 2011 at 9:33 am
Great example, just a pity about the typo/grammatical error
February 1st, 2011 at 9:35 am
Such a turnoff. That convo was tongue in cheek, dude. Nash, Shaun and I were messing around.
February 1st, 2011 at 10:49 am
Ooo…that’s sad in an awkward way. Loved the Avatar example
I often wonder if social media is causing the de-evolution of behaviour…you know…being petty and childish when you were a kid and then having to grow up and deal with it like a man. Now people think that social media is “there’s”, owned by them and they can say/rant/do what they want like children again.
February 1st, 2011 at 11:18 am
GR – If that were the case, thank you for involuntarily becoming a case study / example for others.
February 1st, 2011 at 12:59 pm
pretty silly all of it and no one cares except @GrahamRobert!
February 1st, 2011 at 3:17 pm
What a load of absolute ignorant drivel.
Why you found it necessary to even write this is beyond me. This whole exercise is pointless. If you fail to grasp the dry humour of one’s tweets, you are obviously only capable of understanding slap-stick humour of the lowest, immature nature. Yes, GR came off looking cocky and arrogant. He was supposed to. It was part of the joke!
I agree with you though. It’s not the Academy Awards. It’s Twitter. That’s all. Don’t write essays about it. You’re wasting a good deal of your time.
Sometimes I wish some bloggers could only use Twitter. At least then their inadequacies would be limited to 140 characters.
February 1st, 2011 at 3:51 pm
Jason B: To start, if you read my reply in the comments to GR, I clearly stated that if it were meant to be a joke, this kind of behaviour (which does happen outside of the “dry humour” arena) should be pointed out, just in case anyone else thought it was okay. But to reply to your statements:
“ignorant drivel” – Ignorant to what? To read something as it is and comment on it, much like you did on this very blog post? Pot. Kettle. Hmmm…
“this whole exercise is pointless” – Please see first paragraph. If you struggle with numbers or instructions, it’s that first big body of text at the top of this particular comment.
“you are obviously only capable of understanding slap-stick humour” – Dude, really? You have no concept of what kind of humour I appreciate, that remark is almost as bad as a “Yo mama” line. While I appreciate all forms of humour, Graham’s tweet had no hint of humour at all. Read it again, slowly and carefully, and see if you still agree with your statement.
“GR came off looking cocky and arrogant” – No, he came off looking like he needed a free mention on Twitter. There was no cockiness or arrogance involved.
“Sometimes I wish bloggers could only use Twitter” – I do actually, follow me – @donpackett – and don’t forget to add me to all your retweets, everybody’s doing it!
February 1st, 2011 at 4:00 pm
The “Jason B” comment is obviously from @GrahamRobert
February 1st, 2011 at 4:03 pm
This is one of those situations where the person was being a knob, and then once called out on it claims it was “part of the joke”. I think the good old ” I meant to do that” defence is brilliant! <— That's sarcasm for anyone who has a hard judging a tone of a sentence, similarly to "dry humour"
Here is a classic example: Adriaan Bergh did a video and looked like a tool http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8WYsKGo59Q
and then did a "funny come back video" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuXOpptSm6E
Ruling covering your tracks only makes it worse
See for yourself
Pre-retort
I'm suppose to sound cocky and arrogant, that's the joke.
February 1st, 2011 at 4:58 pm
He should have to point out his humour? Why? It’s his tweet, his account. He can do what he wants. If people don’t get it they shouldn’t follow him. And I found the tweet to be very funny. Anyone who follows him knows what he was saying and what he meant by it. No one is that bored that they need a mention on Twitter, and if they were, I wouldn’t follow them. You’ve written this to ruffle feathers and yeah, well done, you did it. But it’s still pretty pointless. Next time, ignore it.
And while I absolutely salivate at the prospect of following you, I just can’t bring myself to click that button. Alas.
February 16th, 2011 at 7:24 pm
“gr” is a ranga homo
September 21st, 2011 at 12:02 pm
we are sold about the louisvuitton bag
March 10th, 2012 at 8:18 pm
It is not often which you locate article just like it. We’ll be sure you visit into see what’s changed. Thanks for using initiative to jot down that article.