In article <4a4f6ef5.9030...@gmail.com>, JC Dill
<jcdill.li...@gmail.com> writes
What I'm trying to anticipate is the objection to *also* posting to
Twitter, which might be raised on the grounds that it's too
"unofficial", or "unsupported" or something like that.
Anyone who makes that argument is just showing how little they know
about Twitter.
So that's 98% of the population then...
It would be like complaining you shouldn't use email because "not
everyone has email".
But email has become respectable, although I still see "people who know
better" starting speeches with 'of course, ten years ago none of us used
email, but now....' which shows they are very late adopters themselves.
You control where we post.
Just email the right address and we'll do the right thing.
Post Everywhere? p...@posterous.com as usual
Twitter? twit...@posterous.com
Flickr? fli...@posterous.com
Facebook? faceb...@posterous.com
Tumblr? tum...@posterous.com
Any other blog? b...@posterous.com
Posterous only? poster...@posterous.com
Combine them! flickr+twit...@posterous.com
It's this richness which confuses the ordinary person.
That's a lot like saying Perl is too complicated for the ordinary
person so never use Perl. :-)
You are confusing the tool with the platform.
How are they to know which bit of the scattergun approach is the
right one to use? Or whether "posting everywhere" has some hidden
disadvantage.
You can configure it and use it however YOU want.
Again, that's about the platform called posterous. How can I explain to
the School Board that posterous has enough credibility to be used. I
don't think it has. All they ever hear about other Web2.0 like Facebook
and Bebo is how dangerous they are for kids. But I'm beginning to think
that finally maybe Twitter has the right profile for this application.
--
Roland Perry
