If millions of people insist on using your product as a conversation platform, it is a conversation platform, no matter what you intended it to be.
A thing is what it is.
It's only "obviously ok" if (a AND b), where:
(a) "millions of people use it that way"
(b) it's productive and beneficial when used that way.
The (a) is only enough to show that Twitter serves a need people have for certain coversational structure (short messages). Doesn't prove that it's the best tool imaginable tool for the purpose or thats it's the pinnacle where evolution in such networks stops.
Actually, this very thread started with a FA saying that it's not (b).
Edit to add: also, I didn't try to "prove that it's the best tool imaginable tool for the purpose or thats it's the pinnacle where evolution in such networks stops." I just said it's ok.
People are not always the best to judge what benefits them. Case in point: everything from Bush, to heroin addicts, to fast food, to Justin Bieber.
A thing is what it is.
Ah, but that depends on what your definition "\"is\" is" is.
I hope this makes you feel better!
And that depends on what your definition of "\\" is.
Twitter isn't a conversation platform
Who is your provider btw? That sort of bad acting should be named and shamed (on a platform like twitter perhaps?)
Now you've seen one. I think you're confusing emergent with wrong, tbh.
Also, conversations look different when you're looking at them from one of your lists, or if the people you are following are different than the people I follow.
So many clunky issues that you need to be on top of for it to make sense, and this is what's lost on the general person.
They're you're either blind or not looking very hard.
Twitter is a conversation platform. A shitty one perhaps, but one nontheless.