“Users will be able to limit news from those annoying people who aren't so annoying that you don't necessarily want to take the ultimate step and “de-friend” them. “

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/technology/ne…

So where do I collect my cheque from, Mr Zuckerberg?

“Users will be able to limit news from those annoying people who aren't so annoying that you don't necessarily want to take the ultimate step and “de-friend” them. “

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/technology/ne…

So where do I collect my cheque from, Mr Zuckerberg?

How can we expect Twitter / mobile SN in general to take off (and no, it hasn't taken off – it's still utterly irrelevant to 99.99% of the popluation) unless there are ways to control the flow, to filter, to focus on relevant and timely info?

Ewan's frustration is a wakeup call that the half-arsed attempts to date – while popular with geeks with too much time on their hands – just won't wash with the great unwashed. Normal people don't get the same endless thrill from having their phone beep at them. If it's largely irrelevant, it will get switched off.

We as an industry need to fix this before we change the mobile SN gear.

/m

If Twitter gets a rap for being a vanity tool that is very hard to manage / a waste of time they will do themselves irreparable damage. And that would be a real shame.

As it goes mainstream something along the lines of what Mike42 suggests is surely/hopefully inevitable.

For people with Discretionary Attention Deficit (DAD) like Ew4n, Twitter is an attention Tragedy Of The Commons in progress. There is no tool except the blunt on-off.

All the Brits who were shit hot at skiing put themselves in the 'Medium' group while all the rubbish Americans who only skied once put themselves in the 'Medium' group.

Total mismatch.

I'm not sure anyone would use Twitter as you suggest Mike. Like the concept though.

Interestingly I have pretty much the same view as you when it comes to FriendFeed – I simply can't filter the noise from the relevance.

Then when you Follow someone, you can decide at what level you want to follow them. Or when you tweet, you decide the level of relevance.

You may not be interested about the snowboarding commute antics of TechnoKitten's friend, but you do want to hear about MoMo cancellations. You set TechnoKitten to 'Earthshattering' or 'Important' , she tweets her friend's antics as 'ho-hum' because they are not Earthshattering or Important. thus you never see the tweet about her slippery pals.

Until Twitter put something like this in place, you are stuffed. Maybe kick off an MIR online petition?

I don't think it's obsessive/compulsive to point out that I'm following people and sometimes, those people are sending tripe directly into my head. It's hugely, hugely annoying and I'd like a fix. Any ideas?

Why is the onus on me?

Whatever Stephen Fry says is perfectly fine. He's got an open-pass into my mind. And almost every single one of his Tweets is formatted as a single consumable package — as well as being part of an on-going commentary. Likewise with most of the people I follow.

Except when I keep getting snow updates fired into my head.

Give it time…it can't be hard, surely?

When it comes to #hashtags I find the most useful approach is to use http://search.twitter.com to combine the event #hashtag with keyword(s) relevant to you. Searching for #uksnow + winnersh / + waterloo / + south west trains helped me to decide not to go into London today.

tee he

why its not like theres a shortage of pixels?

But Twitter was useful (searched local stations, rather than #snow) and people had posted (from their mobiles by the look of it) that transport was closed. Handy.