Stowe Boyd, Editor

Search
« links for 2009-11-09 | Main | A First Look At Twitter Lists »
Monday
09Nov2009

Twitter's New Retweet

My initial reaction to the announcement that  Twitter was going to implement the retweet (RT) microsyntax as a basic function of the platform was shock (see Project Retweet: When Ultrastructure Becomes Infrastructure). Retweets are created in a variety of ways -- most importantly in a vague and imprecise way, with comments added -- that I thought that nearly any attempt to pin the semantics of retweeting down would fail.

I am among the folks fooling with the new implementation of RT, and it works as advertised. Which means that I don't think it adds much to the user experience. And it specifically does not allow me to add a comment to a tweet that I am retweeting, which is bad. Clicking the retweet never leads to a text experience with anything editable, so the richness of the RT experience is being drastically curtailed.

I guess there is some performance rationale for implementing RTs this way, since the initial tweet can't be altered, and 100 retweets to the same initial tweet don't create a hundred copies, but just a hundred pointers. This may be an implementation that is inherently better for tracking references, for example, but is also inherently worse with regard to communication between people.

I would like to see Twitter implement the RE microsyntax (see A Useful Bit Of Microsyntax: RE), as part of the RT overhaul. A RE -- as implemented currently in Tweetdeck -- is like a RT, but doesn't copy the text of the message. Instead, it has a pointer to the original message (in Tweetdeck this is encoded as a short URL), and then the remaining characters are available for making a comment:

RE http://bit.ly/892d6 I disagree with @gregarious about daylight savings time

Of course, within Twitter, the URL would not have to be exposed and could be part of an internal implementation. But the idea of a RE could be paired with the new retweet as a second tweet, associated with the retweeted message, and then displayed as a pair, like this:

gregarious I really like when the clocks change

about 2 hours ago from Twitter
Retweeted by you
    stoweboyd: I disagree with @gregarious about daylight savings time

Perhaps more interesting would be if a number of other folks retweeted @gregarious' post as well:


gregarious I really like when the clocks change

about 2 hours ago from Twitter
Retweeted by 3
    stoweboyd: I disagree with @gregarious about daylight savings time
    themaria: he sleeps all day anyway
    brianthatcher: I never come out in the light of day

I don't hold out much hope that Twitter will be stop, and to take ideas like these and incorporate into the current plans for retweet. They have gone a long way down a cul de sac, I fear, that will in the long run decrease the richness of our interactions on Twitter. Perhaps the howling from the user community when this is rolled out will get them to reconsider it.

My prediction is that people will revert to manually copying and pasting messages when they want to do something more than just a blind retweet. So we will have two contending sorts of RTs -- classic RT v new RT -- until the Twitter folks get around to implementing something like RE.

Reader Comments (7)

Including the URL will only work for those using Twitter's own web interface. Without mediation, it won't work for people using other web-based clients, such as http://dabr.co.uk

I wrote about a possible solution: http://pigsonthewing.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/twitter-canonical-urls-protocols/
November 9, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterAndy Mabbett
I know a lot of tweeters will disagree, but I like MT, which is modified tweet, giving credit to the tweeter of an original link but disagreeing or adding to their comment. just sayin.
November 9, 2009 | Unregistered Commentercyberdoyle
I never said that @gregarious sleeps all day, haha
November 9, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterMaria Ogneva
I like the gregarious version, that seems pretty cool :)
November 10, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterVicki Nicholls
I am so disappointed with this new format for RT. It's been so great to add a message to the RT. It does limit the communication. It becomes rather sterile.
November 10, 2009 | Unregistered Commentergrace wieber
This is exactly what I have in mind whenever I ask @twitter to add comments to the new RT feature.
November 10, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterDennis Jernberg
i'm a bit late to this post/comment thread (got here courtesy of @monkchips), but since the debate is still raging.....

i'm similarly frustrated by what the new rt lacks, and how it's restricting communication as part of the implementation

so have been mulling what i'd do, whilst respecting what's already been created (since i doubt they'll do an about-face and bin it altogether).

here's the result: http://twitter.com/chrsoz/status/6300781570 (containing a link through to a mock-up)

think the interesting thing here is that it would suddenly extend the new rt functionality into offering facebook/friendfeed-esque type comments, in the way that you've described above stowe (which would actually enhance twitter as a communication platform)

and 're' might actually come into it if somebody wants to rt a comment (so the comment would be the tweet, and at the end of the tweet would be the 're [tweeturl]'

anyway, hope that new rt is just v1. the blog post ev did explaining the new rt logic (http://bit.ly/7dgIsh) aludes to a future design that does accommodate comments, so here's hoping......

ps re ev's point about it being tricky to accommodate separate comments when it comes round to the text channel, i'd think about just sending the comment as a second sms (and clearly marked as such, following on from the first sms which would be the rt, which again would clearly be marked as such)
December 3, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterChris Osborne

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>