Said differently, social proof affords some people exceptional agenda setting power. They become cultural Schelling points. Social network architectures tend to render such dynamics concrete -- and, very often, pathologically sclerotic.https://twitter.com/generativist/status/1173988670669377536 …
-
-
In the past, I've tried to come up with examples of people that I would *need* massive followers for functional reasons. Celebrities/Fans? Okay. But let's not pretend that's a social relationship. Politicians/Constituents? Same thing -- and worse, you *DO* want them mediated.
Show this thread -
Activists/Activists? Yes. But, I think celebrity activists may degrade activist itself so...(when I read
@zeynep's Twitter and Tear Gas I got that sense)Show this thread -
Assuming you buy my argument, why is this a thing on twitter? Why don't they create a ceiling if they are interested in "health metrics?" My guess? By the almighty powerlaw, guess who generates most of the engagements?
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I did a lot of scribbling about these things over the summer (mostly too half-baked to share w/ anyone else). This one quote from Hit Makers (which I read years ago) kind of catalyzed it all for me: "A one-to-one-thousand conversation is not a conversation. It is a presentation")pic.twitter.com/9VcEN0k2Is
-
Mara. I desperately want to work with you if only for access to your notes.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I need to learn your secrets, my follower game is pretty light relative to what I need professionally

-
Here's my recipe: - ADD -
#phdlife time demands - Moving to a place where I have no community - Continuing to do remote work - 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.