Comments on: Mashable fails it hard; Twitter is not THAT important.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:04:30 +0000

LMAO. You are so correct.

$/ SET HIPPY_MODE ON

Twitter is the new Blog!!! Corporations must Tweet or face bankruptcy!!

$/ SET HIPPY_MODE OFF

Cheers,
dave

By: Jake

Jake — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:51:29 +0000

Extra services are for chumps.

I have no quarrel with your ideas for branding and brand marketing on Twitter, but the site honestly has been hailed as the next image of Jesus on a taco. Let's give the coverage a rest.

By: Jon

Jon — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:53:34 +0000

Nice work Jake, as always studiously keeping the Web 2.0 hippies in check. Somebody has to knock some sense into them sometimes.

By: Lon S. Cohen

Lon S. Cohen — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 18:14:48 +0000

Found you blog post through Technorati. I liked the dissection of my Mashable post. While I still believe in the power of Twitter as a form of communication and that will find it very difficult to monetize because sometimes the most simplest of ideas prove to be extremely complex to derive profit from, you have some great points. Of course you did just take the parts of the article that talked about Twitter itself and not the rest where I was really trying to make a case for brands on the service. it was still a good counterpoint. Selling value added services is actually a good idea to help make Twitter monetized, though the “to chumps” part wasn’t really something I’d have though to say. Does that mean you don’t or never used any of the services the phone company used to sell us? Call-waiting, etc. when they first came out? Now, of course I have a flat fee for all those services through VOIP but at first they were exciting add-ons that many people thought valuable and worthy.

Really did enjoy this post!

Lon