This post arose from a series of Tweets and Diet Messages on Azerbaijan Mobile Phone Numbers with Luis Pablos , when I started doing some tests with my Posteous, FriendFeed, etc. (I got double and triple publications of the same post. Quite a record!). He was giving me clues about how the posts were coming out, indications of how to correct it, etc. A few days later we “de-virtualized” in the Eats & Twitts of the past 09/15/09, in Madrid. Commenting on the mess that was organized, we agreed that it would be best to write a collaborative post to try to clarify things. So here you have the result. To read Luis’s post, click here .The network is increasingly filled with 2.0 tools that allow users to create a profile and / or publish their content, as well as establish contacts. Said services, in order not to lose in advance the battle against the colossi of web 2.0 (facebook, twitter, youtube, etc.), are considered as tools that provide added value and / or are complemented by the great ones.There are several basic ways to interact with other networks :confusion3
PUSH services : You publish on a site and the content spreads through different networks, depending on the configuration of the user profile. Examples: Ping.fm, PosterousPULL services : Friendfeed, feevy, twitter application for facebook, threadsy, …Embedded services : Slideshare, scribd, youtube, flickr, .. They function as ad hoc networks, with the particularities of any social network: profile, contacts, content, rankings, and with the possibility of exporting the content to other media such as blogs or other networks social.Auxiliary services: Small services that in themselves have little use or relevance but that make their fortuneby adhering to a 2.0 shark. providing functionalities that it lacks. Examples: twitpic, yfrog, twtpollServices added and promotion : content – based communities: Twine, weblogs, stumbleupon, delicious …Blogs .New services are constantly appearing, and social media addicts try them all in search of the perfect tool that satisfies their desire for participation and communication, usually combining several services that meet the expectations of publication and reaching contacts.This circumstance gives rise to situations such as:The use of the Twitter application for Facebook, transfers the user’s tweets as status on Facebook, with different philosophies and contacts, creating confusion among Facebook users who have a different user profile than Twitter.
The use of combined push tools produces strange effects, such as publishing a post in Posterous generates a tweet with the link, in parallel, another entry in Friendfeed that in turn generates another tweet to the same content. A similar case occurs with Utoi who replicates content on De Phone Number and Friendfeed.
Trying a bookmark (or Amazon book) integration service with Twitter leads, in an oversight, to sending 50 tweets with bookmarks and saturating the timeline.It must be remembered that each social network develops selfishly, exploiting its autopost options, and that it must be the user who identifies them and makes a dissemination map of the publication to keep track of where each thing will appear and who will be the who will see each post and if we are addressing the appropriate audiences in each case, and in the appropriate jargon.I think this oversupply brings us a lot of new functionality, but also confusion. We believe that instead of using all of them, we should choose those that best meet our objective of Internet presence (we are the first to apply this to ourselves). Not by posting on more sites you improve your presence.More quality instead of quantity.Another issue we should consider is user duplication . Doesn’t it happen to you that you have a high percentage of contacts that you find on social networks, Twitter, Posterous, FriendFeed, etc.? It is true that in each one we find some users who are not in the rest, but really, what does this duplication give us? Is it worth it for those new users we find?