My own self

You, you... twit! So, who are the other two?

Are you by any chance on Facebook as well?

The other two? Well, I might have understated, I know at least Lothair and RoadKill pop by here from time to time, as does Terje. Maybe Tyblazitar and Morridini still reads here occasionally too, I'm unsure. Probably one or two others whose feelings I'm hurting by not remembering them at the moment. Don't think any of those guys knew about my twitter-account being active despite the impression this page's feed gives. I'm doing this mostly because Olaf just realised I had a twitter-account a couple of weeks ago, and thus vice versa, which is silly as he'd probably have known for half a year already if I'd mentioned it here.

And of course not. Facebook is a ridiculous thing only suitable for overly needy teenagers and thirty-somethings who've been working 24-7 for ten years and miss part-taking in social interactions. Oh, and people involved in organisational work, I suppose. Twitter is just like having a weblog, only for SMS-sized posts, making it a lot less time-demanding to use. And that helps a lot with finding the will and energy to actually post. There's no other real difference between this page and my twitter-account - it even goes both ways; this is what I list as "home page" when I comment on other weblogs, and the twitter-account is what's shown as the sender when I comment on other tweets.

Have you actually tried Facebook, or is this your impression from various media coverage and comparisons to MySpace? 'Cause I had pretty much the same impression myself, but upon actually starting to use it, I have found it a quite useful tool. It's like having everyone you know on the same forum, and it makes keeping in touch and planning things much easier.

Yes, I have been converted! I love Big Facebook!

I've not tried Facebook, I've just listened to media coverage, and surfed some Facebook-pages on my own accord to check it out.

Not really interested in Twitter feeds. As I see it, posting in this blog format may take a little more effort, but the quality you get from the few posts posted makes it superior. Basically this is the closest to "stream of conciousness" I'm willing to go.

Also, this explains how when I look you up on facebook all I get is a couple of fan groups for some guy with a slightly misspelled name that apparently kicks a ball around...

Oh, I completely agree. Having a weblog is far superior to having a twitter-account. The thing is, I haven't posted less here at all since I got it - it's been the same amount. At least this way, I can write a short comment on things I don't find the time or will to Do Properly. But of course that'd be the preferred thing, if I had the time and energy. Don't, though. For instance, I saw "Tin Man" almost a week ago, and I'm SURE I want to do a proper review of it, and I still haven't started.

"And of course not. Facebook is a ridiculous thing only suitable for overly needy teenagers and thirty-somethings who've been working 24-7 for ten years and miss part-taking in social interactions."

Take the average of the two, and you've got me: A slightly needy twenty-something who works 6-5 and sometimes misses social interactions but then remembers what they're like.

Generally, though, I'd say the pro of having a larger audience is outweighed by the con of none of them being much interested in reading my stuff and commenting on it. I'd take your blog over facebook any day due to the much better signal to noise ratio, but let's see how this twitter thing goes. I've actually been paying occasional attention to Brandon Sanderson's tweets, so I added him as a followee as well.

Morridini writes: Still stop by now and then. So it's twitter now. I tried Facebook, didn't like it, I have considered blogging, but I never felt I would be able to fill it up with enough talk (people who know me on forums know I am always short and precise, unless I am listing number of Star Wars books...), maybe twitter would be something for me?

"I've actually been paying occasional attention to Brandon Sanderson's tweets, so I added him as a followee as well."

See? Fun for the whole family, no? Celebrity-following can be fun. Neil Gaiman's is pretty good, though he twitters a LOT. Also fun, for me at least, is that I follow a lot of news-services - New York Times, BBC News, Time News and CNN - 'cause I know that otherwise I'm just not going to seek out the news myself more than a couple of times a month. This time, they pop up on the right of my screen while I'm browsing or working on the computer, and every now and then they catch my interest enough that I'll even click a link and read more than the headline.

Morridini: Yays for the continued interest, then! As for twitter being something for you, it's basically mass-SMS'ing. You write an SMS-length message, and Everyone can see it, and all those who follow you will see it (assuming they don't follow so many that your messages drown away). If that sounds like fun, you could try it.

Re: celeb twits (err, you know what I mean), is it considered bad form to reply to them once in a blue moon? Like everyone should know that these people are Famous and as a rule don't have time for what you have to say (since they already got 500 other people saying the same thing, one assumes, and most of those replies were better written than yours). I find this entire concept somewhat intimidating.

Not that I think anyone would suddenly find themselves best buddies with their favourite author through Twitter, and I'd probably need something amazingly relevant and interesting to say as well as a great deal of luck to actually get a reply. Not that I'm fishing for one, but I tend to assume, it being an interactive medium at all, that silence means I'm Bothersome.

Or maybe I'm just paranoid as usual.

"Re: celeb twits (err, you know what I mean), is it considered bad form to reply to them once in a blue moon? "

No idea. I haven't dared to respond to anything except maybe one or two times when they've clearly asked for answers. But it seems many other people are far less withdrawn, and they as a rule don't seem to mind. Remember, if you're bothersome, they can block you. If they haven't blocked you nor ranted about your horribleness, they probably didn't mind and just don't have time to respond to everybody.

My horribleness isn't rantworthy? Those bastards!

On a more serious note, that's what I figured. Good to have it confirmed though.

You're on twitter? How on Earth could I have missed this?

On a more serious note though, Facebook is kind of retarded. It's like twitter, only drained of all the fun with added heaps of responsibility. The only thing that's kind of nice about it is that you can keep somewhat up to date on people you don't mind being up to date on, but aren't close enough to actually keep in contact with.

In other words, you're saying its gorram perfect for stalkers?

Yes! Very lazy stalkers, but stalkers none the less, I gues.

I can see them selling that.

"Facebook - for the stalker inside of you who just can't be bothered to put on the long raincoat and dark sunglasses every evening"

Only, you know, more lithe and pithy.