Write your views, don't pretend you're a nine year old writing to your dad.
See: http://www.quora.com/Why-did-Twitter-suspend-UberTwitter/ans...
What I meant by "dumbed down" wasn't that you were trying to make it easier for people to understand, just that you were dumbing it down for that comic effect.
More and more people are writing blog posts in that style, and I just happen to find it annoying.
edit: Thanks for linking to the Quora version of your thoughts, now those I 100% agree with (as a UberTwitter user).
Actually I'd love to know more about how twitter replaces much of email for you - I don't like having so much of my communication public, and I have a hard time reaching out to someone so publicly. Twitter has never felt natural to me.
Amazing how someone can use short emaciated 140-letter shoutings as a replacement for something as deep as email.
It's why I'm a big proponent of these guys http://three.sentenc.es/
Why was your post more than 3 sentences?
Perhaps, the message is more important than the style?
I agree with you entirely Mark that they can handle something like this better, but I think that a company like Twitter that is still figuring out the best way to monetize has a right to enforce their trademarks to reel in other people trying to make money off of their product.
Then again, at a $4-10bn valuation, they probably can afford to not cut off things that make their users happy.
That isn't in question.
My argument: - today they affected millions of users - they should have first issued a public statement to major media outlets that service would be cut unless UberMedia fixed problems in 72 hours. Users would then have a chance to migrate if they wanted - I also think it's bad policy to cut off 3rd-party developers. Even mildly competitive ones. My view: let the ecosystem innovate on their dime. Then you either buy them or tax them.
My reaction today was as a user of UberTwitter who felt caught in the crossfire. And as such it felt like Goliath attacking David.
What does this mean?
democratic: level playing field. ie, "one vote per person" - you have as much influence as you have, nobody's granted a super-tweeter account that can @ everyone at once simply by being, say, Bill Gates. It's a stretch, but I've seen it used this way before for Internet things.
Shutting down competition or dissension is decidedly undemocratic.
@msuster your post is a misinformed and contrary to what I'm certain you would counsel as an investor.
My premise holds: - issue a public warning to UberMedia & its users and allow 72 hours - if not resolved take action then - don't issue an advertisement for your mobile product the exact same day you block a large mobile client. It is in poor taste and this is evidenced by the majority of the Tweetstream that trashed Twitter on this issue
I'm all for fair & hard competition. But if I were an investor this is what I would have counseled. And if Twitter or its investors know something I don't (which I concede is possible) I would suggest that they have a marketing offensive to make more information available.
It's an experienced set of investors and entrepreneurs, but they seem to be making rookie mistakes, over and over again (first with scaling the tech+business and now with the way the API/ecosystem, which was instrumental to their success, is being handled). Have you seen this before? What the hell is up at Twitter HQ?
If I were Twitter in this case then at worst I would issue a public statement of why they don't support UberTwitter's moves and I would encourage users to migrate over 72 hours if they saw fit.
Then at least the user community would be more on Twitter's side. What they did today is block us from using their product on our mobile devices. I'm not sure that's sound policy.
Oh, how times have changed. I share this sentiment.
There is nothing wrong with how the mail was written. I was expecting a discussion about Twitters approach with UberTwitter (which I think is frightening). Not nitpicking at the way/method Mark had decided to express his views.
