Comments on: Connecting

By: uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 17:06:43 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by rshevlin: New blog post: Connecting http://bit.ly/djzHbd (thx for reading)…

By: Ron Shevlin

Ron Shevlin — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:10:17 +0000

Jim: Just as I find it hard to quantify the benefits, I’m not sure I could quantify the time spent. Once an hour or so, I’ll scan Tweetdeck to see if anybody I like to follow has tweeted something. Most times, I read it and get back to work. Occasionally, I’ll respond. And then there are those times when some thought that I deem tweetworthy will pop in my head and I’ll tweet it off. I can’t imagine that, all in, we’re talking anywhere near a couple of hours a week. It’s not the amount of time spent that’s the issue — it’s the ability of Twitter to disrupt my attention (or more accurately, me letting Twitter disrupt my attention).

By: Jim Bruene

Jim Bruene — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 01:40:33 +0000

Very cool to come in first, no matter what it means. Congrats.

Not being very engaged in Twitter, just a random broadcaster; what is the time commitment? I know you enjoy it (for the most part), so it’s part hobby, certainly not all work. And I know you use it to spice up your commute time. But is it a couple hours a week or more like 2 or 3x that?

By: William Azaroff

William Azaroff — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:07:08 +0000

Hey Ron. Considering that you protect your tweets (do you still do that?), this is remarkable. I would guess that there are few others on that list who do so.

I agree that it is about connecting, and being able to share information and then potentially call in favours with a much wider group of people. It’s about gaining access through sharing and connecting (maybe this is what they mean by engaging).

By: Doug Brockway

Doug Brockway — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:49:19 +0000

Well, I’d like to argue with your second paragraph, the one with one sentence. You’re not just “that” idiot. You are “an” idiot, perhaps “the” idiot.

But I digress.

If I recall correctly you ranked 30 or so in influence, #1 in engagement. That’s sort of like being a lead-off hitter in baseball who gets lots of hits but not a lot of RBI’s. OR, a less appealing analogy is hockey player with lots of shots on goal but fewer scores than the guys on the first line.

It seems to me that in your line of work the engagement factor indicates participation and should indicate monetization. Influence may not. Would your firm rather everyone read your stuff but did what, say, Forrester said, or the other way ’round?

But, its certainly confusing. Here’s my suggestion. Go pat yourself on the back and kick yourself in the pants