FWIW I think this sort of update would be much more valuable to me if it were less focused on “this is what people talked about on twitter”. Seems like you’re weighing notability primarily in terms of twitter followers and discussion, which seems like it won’t select very well for lastingly relevant content.
(My perspective here may be biased though because I’d already seen most of the twitter stuff you linked.)
I agree on the margin I fall into the trap of doing more of this than I should. I do curate my Twitter feed to try and make this a better form of reaction than it would otherwise be, but I should raise the bar for that relative to my other bars.
Always good to get reminders on this.
However, as you allude to, you’re in the spot where you’re already checking many of the same sources on Twitter, whereas one of the points of these posts for a lot of readers is so they don’t have to do that. I’d definitely do it radically differently if I thought most readers of mine were going to be checking Twitter a lot anyway.
However, as you allude to, you’re in the spot where you’re already checking many of the same sources on Twitter, whereas one of the points of these posts for a lot of readers is so they don’t have to do that. I’d definitely do it radically differently if I thought most readers of mine were going to be checking Twitter a lot anyway.
On the other hand, though, people who aren’t on twitter much probably feel much more lost/confused about the people involved here, and why they should care about their opinions.
FWIW I appreciate Zvi’s reporting on What Twitter Is Saying because I don’t want to look at twitter myself. Possibly I’m making the wrong choice here & would be curious to hear counterarguments, but that’s the choice I’ve made.
FWIW I think this sort of update would be much more valuable to me if it were less focused on “this is what people talked about on twitter”. Seems like you’re weighing notability primarily in terms of twitter followers and discussion, which seems like it won’t select very well for lastingly relevant content.
(My perspective here may be biased though because I’d already seen most of the twitter stuff you linked.)
I agree on the margin I fall into the trap of doing more of this than I should. I do curate my Twitter feed to try and make this a better form of reaction than it would otherwise be, but I should raise the bar for that relative to my other bars.
Always good to get reminders on this.
However, as you allude to, you’re in the spot where you’re already checking many of the same sources on Twitter, whereas one of the points of these posts for a lot of readers is so they don’t have to do that. I’d definitely do it radically differently if I thought most readers of mine were going to be checking Twitter a lot anyway.
On the other hand, though, people who aren’t on twitter much probably feel much more lost/confused about the people involved here, and why they should care about their opinions.
FWIW I appreciate Zvi’s reporting on What Twitter Is Saying because I don’t want to look at twitter myself. Possibly I’m making the wrong choice here & would be curious to hear counterarguments, but that’s the choice I’ve made.
I tentatively agree, but it also seems difficult to think of a better alternative.