Another dot in the blogosphere?

Posts Tagged ‘twitter

I agree with the tweeted thought above. Knowing how to use Twitter and being literate in the Twitterverse matter if you are to make it work for you.

But there is a difference between being literate and being fluent. The latter is a a leap ahead. It is the like the difference between being able to read, write, and speak a language, and being skilled at all three.

Being literate in Twitter could mean being aware of technological affordances of Twitter as they are and as they emerge, and being able to use them all. It could mean knowing who to follow and who not to.

Being fluent could mean embracing and taking advantage of nuance and subtlety. This could mean knowing who to unfollow, mute, or block, and sending messages with these actions. It could also mean knowing when a long thread is appropriate vs when to link to a blog post. It could mean knowing whether to reply or not.

It happened. Finally.

On one hand, I say good riddance to bad rubbish. On the other, too little too late because of all the damage he did with thumbs fueled with vile and bile.

Alfie Kohn had a more articulate response than mine.

My short and immediate response was: By so many of us all over world using these platforms uncritically, frequently, and unethically.

Uncritical because we do not bother to learn what the platforms do with what we share. Or if we do, we do not really care because of the dopamine hits from likes or the joy that armchair bullies and philosophers derive from faceless commentary.

Frequent because we grow uncritically reliant on feeding the machine that consumes us as we consume what we collectively produce.

Unethical because all this is sometimes done without context or care for a real person at the receiving end of a comment.

The fault is ours for being blind to our faults, deaf to those who point them out, and mute towards those who might make a difference. We are seeing this repeating with WhatsApp and with TraceTogether.

Tags: , ,

The critics on Twitter who claim that the platform is filled with anger and vitriol must hang out in bubbles very different from mine.

Mine is decidedly edu-Twitter. Here I get to read tweets that move me in different ways.

This tweet made me shake my head (SMH) and then shake with laughter.

Imagine the audacity to force people to learn about an LMS with every log in attempt! I bet that the administrator or techie who suggested and implemented that received a non-teaching award from the university.

The next tweet just made me SMH for how universities still use end-of-course student feedback for staff evaluations.

The last tweet I am highlighting makes me want to shake the sharer’s hand (even though she used an outdated reference to learning styles).

Twitter can get ugly, particularly if you reside in the socio-political or celebrity spaces. But these do not represent all of Twitter. There are other districts you can visit. Some are nice or pleasant enough to stay.

Greta Thunberg. Climate activist. Time’s Person of the Year 2019. Now also known as Sharon.

Why did she make such a trivial name change? The tweet below provides some context.

A contestant on Celebrity Mastermind was to name the Swedish climate activist whose book of speeches is called No One is Too Small To Make A Difference. She did not know the answer, but insisted on “Sharon” anyway.

Thunberg temporarily changed her name on Twitter to Sharon to go along with the gag. In doing this, she might add one more title to her growing list: Twitter Tutor.

Consider the simple but important lessons in changing her Twitter bio.

  1. Go with the flow.
  2. Turn the negative around to make it positive.
  3. Be snarky, funny, or snarkily funny.

The last one was evident when she responded to a Trump tweet in December last year. This CNET article provides information on both her responses.

For me, this is a reminder that we need to learn from our kids. They have much to teach us. We need to be quiet, still, and humble enough to say: Teach me, Sharon.

About a week ago I ignored (yet again) another small deluge of demands that I give my Twitter handle to someone else.

I ignored and blocked the noise because I have found those strategies to be effective against people who do not listen or read.

One such person declared that someone else deserved my Twitter handle because I had fewer followers than them.

I do not play that number game because I prevent people from following me by blocking them. I used to have to estimate how many until this week. I discovered that the latest version of the Twitter app shows my block count — it is over 33K.

I have blocked bots, spammers, and people who mistake me for someone else. I go on a blocking binge every month or so. This might seem like a foolish thing to do. But if I believe in curating my account as an educator, I need to practice what I preach.

I have been on Twitter since January 2007 and have the handle @ashley. Barely a week goes by without someone begging, asking, or demanding I give them that username.

The latest “request” was somewhat ironic given that I had just reflected on etiquette and its link to netiquette.

Instead of watching the video and reading the reflection about etiquette and netiquette (which are linked by the common thread of respect) a Twitter user and his/her fans demanded I give up my username.

I am not giving my handle away. I have had it since almost the beginning of Twitter. I am also not responding to the rudeness of the exchanges. Don’t take my word for it, see one user’s remarks:

My username, account, and stand are worth more than money.

It is about civility and empathy, which seems to be in short supply among some on Twitter. Perhaps they might start with some emotional intelligence.

I concur with the tweet above.

Many cannot take critique and criticism. Teachers seem to have thinner skin perhaps because they equate being nurturing with always having something positive to say.

I am not against being positive. I am against providing feedback masked by so much fluff that critical messaging gets lost.

Like most things in life, we ought to strive for balance. Right now it is tipped too far on “plaudits and platitudes” and we need a critical shift. This is not a call to be nasty; it is a call to be honest with ourselves.

The Washington Post’s most recent slogan is Democracy Dies in Darkness. I was surprised to learn it came before the Trump era.
 

 
After experiencing and leading hashtagged discussions on Twitter, I have my own: Community dies with neglect. The runner-up is: Event promoters abuse hashtags.

Some might say that online discussions have limited lifespans or that they go through phases. I say some die before their time and decay in plain sight. And that is tragic and ugly.

 
The Purge is a horror movie. This week it is also how the Twitterverse might describe the drop in most users’ followers.

According to this TNW article, the Twitter purge removed locked accounts. The accounts were locked because they were abandoned, hijacked, and/or exhibited spammy behaviour.

locked accounts aren’t bot accounts necessarily — at one point, they were created and operated by a real person. Accounts on Twitter are locked when they begin to display spammy behavior, especially if it’s in opposition to how the account usually behaves. That includes a sudden increase in tweets with multiple unsolicited mentions, a high number of accounts blocking the account, and/or tweets with misleading links.

Business entities and celebrities might be upset about follower losses in the six or seven-figure range. Even though I “lost” about 600 “followers”, I am not upset because I regularly block and cull followers.

Twitter did me a favour by removing a malignant burden I did not know I was carrying. In doing so, it did something good in the battle against those that use Twitter for harm.

Tags: ,

This tweet and the PEW article caught my eye — about two-thirds of tweeted links to popular websites are shared by Twitter bots instead of actual people.

According to the article, Twitter bots are “accounts that can post content or interact with other users in an automated way and without direct human input”.

If I automate the posting of one daily reflection from my blog to Twitter and schedule other education-relevant articles with Buffer, is my human behaviour bot-like?

Given the qualifier “without direct human input”, I think not. Then again, I only had to set up the WordPress to Twitter process once and the buffering is regulated by an online tool instead of me.

It is difficult to have clear-cut definitions. We are sometimes not one the other, but both. We are precursor cyborgs, like it or not.


http://edublogawards.com/files/2012/11/finalistlifetime-1lds82x.png
http://edublogawards.com/2010awards/best-elearning-corporate-education-edublog-2010/

Click to see all the nominees!

QR code


Get a mobile QR code app to figure out what this means!

My tweets

Archives

Usage policy

%d bloggers like this: