Email after Twitter
This in response to topic #81 on Chris Brogan's blog post today. Some stream-of-consciousness, Twitter-like, rough-cut gems on how the Twitter experience might lead to a new email.
<=140 chars and no spam has really taught us something.
there is life without unsolicited messages
pithiness rules
My friend Jill never reads beyond the first line, anyway
one to one message vs. blog post. what's the diff?
expectation of immediate response
interruptability, we live interrupt-driven lives. Didn't used to be that way.
multi-processing by interrupt - the modern way.
leads to abuse of the interrupt
leads to abuse of the channel
leads to abuse of the commons
the first-contact problem - is it really a problem?
spammers will abuse and try to exploit every open first-contact channel and eventually ruin it.
it happened with uunet news and it's happening with email.
are pure white-lists (ala RSS) the only answer? That's how twitter works.
can we survive without the ability to send a message to someone who doesn't already know us?
on twitter that's restricted to a "friend-request". No content, just canned message.
it's all very web 2.0. you can't "push" your message anymore.
everything's RSS, it's pull-only. People find out through friends and FOFs.
in a pure whitelist system, you are very careful about what you send because you don't want to be un-friended
you see? it's not just the properties of the channel, it's how people use and react to them
do you miss out on people you'd otherwise know? maybe, but are they worth knowing anyway?
Is anyone who has to contact you without prior introduction EVER worth talking to?
How did it work before email?
People didn't get interrupted.
They worked on things they thought important until they decided to switch.
You couldn't interrupt them with the expectation that you'd get immediate service.
How did contractors work before cell phones, which allow you interrupt them?
Big question: is instantaneous interrupt-communication really more productive?
could we build ships in 90 days like they did in WW2? I doubt it. That takes concentration.
How did anyone work before telephones? What about the answering machine?
In addtion to asynchronous telephone communication, it also provided spam (ie, telemarketer) screening.
should all telephone service be billed like cell service so telemarketers can be blocked?
At bottom, is there any value to unsolicited communication?
Can you live and thrive with only info you actively seek?
Is advertising or unsolicited communication worth anything?
would newspaper ads or TV commercials be sufficient?
new soc-net messaging is white-list only. No spam, people LOVE it.
no, douche-bag, adding me doesn't mean I'll add you. Fuck off.
are people are realizing, in the web 2.0 world, you don't need advertising? it's unnecessary?
people listen to their friends, not to unsolicited advertisers.
spam taught us that. that's why soc-nets don't allow it, and why people love them.
conclusion: a new email that was white-list only would probably be successful.
<=140 chars and no spam has really taught us something.
there is life without unsolicited messages
pithiness rules
My friend Jill never reads beyond the first line, anyway
one to one message vs. blog post. what's the diff?
expectation of immediate response
interruptability, we live interrupt-driven lives. Didn't used to be that way.
multi-processing by interrupt - the modern way.
leads to abuse of the interrupt
leads to abuse of the channel
leads to abuse of the commons
the first-contact problem - is it really a problem?
spammers will abuse and try to exploit every open first-contact channel and eventually ruin it.
it happened with uunet news and it's happening with email.
are pure white-lists (ala RSS) the only answer? That's how twitter works.
can we survive without the ability to send a message to someone who doesn't already know us?
on twitter that's restricted to a "friend-request". No content, just canned message.
it's all very web 2.0. you can't "push" your message anymore.
everything's RSS, it's pull-only. People find out through friends and FOFs.
in a pure whitelist system, you are very careful about what you send because you don't want to be un-friended
you see? it's not just the properties of the channel, it's how people use and react to them
do you miss out on people you'd otherwise know? maybe, but are they worth knowing anyway?
Is anyone who has to contact you without prior introduction EVER worth talking to?
How did it work before email?
People didn't get interrupted.
They worked on things they thought important until they decided to switch.
You couldn't interrupt them with the expectation that you'd get immediate service.
How did contractors work before cell phones, which allow you interrupt them?
Big question: is instantaneous interrupt-communication really more productive?
could we build ships in 90 days like they did in WW2? I doubt it. That takes concentration.
How did anyone work before telephones? What about the answering machine?
In addtion to asynchronous telephone communication, it also provided spam (ie, telemarketer) screening.
should all telephone service be billed like cell service so telemarketers can be blocked?
At bottom, is there any value to unsolicited communication?
Can you live and thrive with only info you actively seek?
Is advertising or unsolicited communication worth anything?
would newspaper ads or TV commercials be sufficient?
new soc-net messaging is white-list only. No spam, people LOVE it.
no, douche-bag, adding me doesn't mean I'll add you. Fuck off.
are people are realizing, in the web 2.0 world, you don't need advertising? it's unnecessary?
people listen to their friends, not to unsolicited advertisers.
spam taught us that. that's why soc-nets don't allow it, and why people love them.
conclusion: a new email that was white-list only would probably be successful.
posted by Joe C at 5:56 PM
Rss Feed
2 Comments:
The decline began with Marconi. Even telegraphs were ok. Twitter: very turn of the century == 1900
Love it Joe. Husband has been going nuts since taking over a department that spent their time responding to every email with comments on it, and then sent the whole mess back to everybody that could possibly have a glimmer of an interest.
Months ago I suggested twitter as a way to nip some email in the bud but with twitter's current challenges I can't push it like I'd like.
Post a Comment
<< Home