The twitter champs had a number of compelling points:
- Twitter is a pull technology - the reader chooses which tweets to follow. Email is a push technology - the writer chooses who gets the email
- Hashtags allowed users to search for and to follow conversations
- 140 characters kept the waffle to a minimum
- Twitter is an emergent technology and its full potential is still unknown - we "need to live in the stream" to discover its potential
- RT (re-tweets) spread the message virally
- "Email is connecting with the people you used to know, Twitter is connecting with the people you would like to know"
- It is too hard to know what to follow - that is what hashtags are for
- Twitter is only used for inane conversations: what I had for breakfast type tweets - twitter is used for much more. Criticising the entire system becauses some uses are inane is like criticising PCs because some people play games on them.
Post-war analysis revealed the need to formalise some hashtags for the University. During the war I proposed #UCanberra but, in hindsight, #UCan will be better as it uses fewer of the 140 characters. Searching reveals that #UCan is not being used at present (#UC has been taken by the University of California). #UCan can also be appended for sub-units of the University. For example #UCanBG could be used by the Faculty of Business and Government.
The tweety of Versailles has left peace - for now.