Friday, September 18, 2009

to tweet or not to tweet?

At the end of a business dinner last night, our partner Nate Brochin starts in on the necessity of Twitter.

Nate's always right about this stuff. He hectored me into starting this blog years ago. But Twitter?

And he says you have to tweet four, five times a day to get anyone to follow you. And you have to get like a thousand followers for it to be worth anything.

It all just sounds so strange.

Why would anyone want to hear from me four or five times a day?

"Hey, just finished another cup of coffee and thinking about smoking a cigarette!"

"This book about the battle of Shiloh sure is interesting!"

"Boy, my cat is cute! Such a cute cat!"

But, like I say, Nate is always right about this stuff.

Strange, strange days...

Happy New Year tonight, have a safe weekend all.


Rosemoo said...

I'm against Twitter. But the facebook. It got me in its clutches. :D

steve k said...

Nate is right about most things. But not about this one. Twitter is a stopgap solution -- and a terrible one at that -- to a very present market need. Its more robust replacement is in the wings, maybe 4-6 months off. Twitter will become the Friendster of social update apps. Mark my words. Mark them!

Sassafras said...

So you've commented on the twitter trepidation, and now I'm curious about your similar feelings towards Mad Men...

John said...

I'm marking, Steve.

Mad Men just doesn't bite me. Watched it, thought it was fine, would never think about it again if it wasn't advertised every five minutes.

Just a random immunity, I guess.