The Value Of Twitter As Compared To Google
from the it's-growing dept
I recognize that it's becoming fashionable among many to bash Twitter, but for those who have learned how to use Twitter well (as opposed to many who use it poorly), the value of it is quite impressive. I now spend a lot more time using Twitter to find news than I do my feed reader -- and that's amazing to me. However, I think Mark Cuban actually has made the strongest point, noting that in many ways, Twitter is becoming more useful than Google. This isn't to say that Twitter is "killing" Google (x killing y stories are lame), but that many people are finding information via Twitter now, where they used to find it via Google.Cuban gives an example of trying to buy a car, where there may be a lot of value in being able to message a guru on the type of car he wants to buy via Twitter (or, better yet, finding a few of them). I know I've found Twitter to be useful in this manner. A few months ago, I was looking for a new backpack for my computer -- and I had very specific requirements (such as the ability to carry both a laptop and a netbook at times comfortably). It was quite difficult to come up with a Google query that made sense for such a thing, but I could ask it easily in 140 characters and plenty of people could easily understand it, and then provide thoughts and recommendations. It comes back to two points:
- Having real humans respond to a query works well for more specific queries that simply aren't well automated.
- Perhaps much more importantly, real people can better offer recommendations or explanations than an automated query on Google, which simply seeks to find data or answers.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: answers, automation, community, explanations, recommendations, value
Companies: google, twitter
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yeah.. We had that back in the day of the BBS. There is nothing new or unique about that. You have always been able to have conversations and ask questions online. Being limited to 140 chars. is seriously bad. You can't put any details in your post. I see absolutely nothing special about twitter.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
Whereas in Twitter's case, this form of communication only exists as a matter of consquence, there are web sites built from the ground up for this sort of thing (i.e. Yahoo! Answers).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The most important question is
[ link to this | view in thread ]
How I Use Twitter
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If anything, sending out ANY question to people on Twitter is going to result in maybe 1 or 2 actual suggestions and 50 dumb comments.
I recently was in the same situation, and you know what I did? I actually phyically WENT to 2 or 3 stores in the area and LOOKED at the laptop cases. Touching and feeling and examining the bags in person was really the only way to make sure I was getting the item that suited my needs.
We don't have to look to technology to get ALL our answers, you know.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Twitter is dead
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
Forums are more specialized, also. You would get better answers.
If a random new person joins Twitter.. Posts a question.. What happens? .. Reminds me of "If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it.. Does it make any noise?"
Just because a lot of people haven't heard of IRC or a BBS doesn't mean that Twitter is a new way of using the Internet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I keeping hearing about Twitter
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Really? How hard is to use advanced search?
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?hl=en
Or you could fine tune the results using Show options the top left corner? Or you could use Timeline or Wonder Wheel?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Vark.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
At least they warn you. You don't like it, don't sign up (or simply skip that step I suppose). Also, yahoo or google or hotmail or wherever you already store your information already has it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
That assumes, incorrectly, that the conversation can't go beyond Twitter. It does. Quite often. Twitter works well because that character limit keeps the *opening* of conversations short, so if they're not valuable, it's easy to move on. But if you want to expand, you can.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Yeah.. We had that back in the day of the BBS. There is nothing new or unique about that. You have always been able to have conversations and ask questions online.
Right, and before email you could write letters. And before the telephone, you could send a telegraph.
If you don't understand the difference from one to the other, you'll never understand the benefits the new thing allows.
Twitter is quite different from BBS's in a number of ways, starting with the number of folks using it, but more importantly in the ambient nature of it. With a BBC you needed to dial in and spend time directly there. The great thing about Twitter is how it's just an ongoing *push* information flow that you can dip in and out of as it goes. It's much more useful than any BBS I was ever on, by at least an order of magnitude. We're talking completely different concepts.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
It was massively different. I got about 15 different recommendations, with clear explanations for why a certain bag was better, based on MY specific criteria. The issue was that I had a lot of criteria -- not just "best for 14" notebook.
If anything, sending out ANY question to people on Twitter is going to result in maybe 1 or 2 actual suggestions and 50 dumb comments.
Uh, it didn't. I got 15 really interesting, thorough and useful recommendations and no dumb ones. Perhaps you have dumb people following you. You might want to try blocking them.
I recently was in the same situation, and you know what I did? I actually phyically WENT to 2 or 3 stores in the area and LOOKED at the laptop cases. Touching and feeling and examining the bags in person was really the only way to make sure I was getting the item that suited my needs.
Fair enough. I saved a hell of a lot of time on you, then, because I got detailed recommendations from a variety of different people on info that specifically met my needs, and was then able to go in and buy a bag quickly with confidence knowing that it met my needs and would last.
I'm not sure why you insist my experience didn't happen or that it happened differently. I know that I saved a lot of time and money this way. Why do you insist I didn't?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I keeping hearing about Twitter
You do realize that you don't NEED to follow any celebrities. The fact that they have accounts is quite meaningless to how you use the service.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Vark.com
Actually... interesting example. Because I did the exact same query on Aardvark as well as Twitter as a test. Aardvark got me ONE suggestion, and it wasn't a very good one. Twitter got me a much more detailed response.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
You are misinformed. Twitter allows you to put in your email info if you want to have it find others in your contact list that are on Twitter, but you don't have to. I never did that. It's the same feature found on pretty much any social network to make it easier to find your friends, IF YOU WANT. So, no royal beat down necessary.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
It takes a little playing around with to get used to. You need to find good people to follow... but it also helps to get a good client, like Tweetdeck or Seesmic desktop, and set up some good search terms.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Do you have any examples? Thanks BTW.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The difference between information, knowledge and experience
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I don't think you saved much time at all unless you're not counting the time you needed to invest to get enough people following you where you were likely to get 15 recommendations on laptop bags.
I don't really have any problem with Twitter though. The subscription model makes it fundamentally different than irc or forums where you need to "opt out" people to get rid of the noise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Not at all. That's a fixed cost (which cost me little, if anything), which now enables me to ask as many questions as I want, amortizing any "cost" (which was minimal) over a large time. So, I can say, certainly, that I saved tremendous amounts of time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
What are you interested in?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
technical forums and google
and i have to say, twitter vs. google, i'd go with google in a heartbeat. if you can't find solutions in a boolean search, you're probably not searching correctly. as for natural language search problems, look at commentary on slashdot, arstechnica, torrentfreak or even here. when someone asks a question, rarely ever is there _ACTUALLY_ an answer -- most of it is just jokes and reactionary rhetoric. mike/carl and the guys at ars talk about law all the time here, and most of the time, the author has no clue what they're talking about.
half of your readers probably don't understand the difference between natural language and boolean search. and people talk about tnc syntax (used in formal law/news databases) and they have no idea how it's so much more accurate than both current NL searching and boolean.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
To use your forum example- Mike wants a specialized laptop backpack. Steps followed:
1. Hit Google for a few of the best forums for backpacks.
2. Browse them to determine which will be the best for his needs, and doesn't have an offensive color scheme/design.
3. Read through page after page of idiots flaming each other over some backpack related drama or another.
4. Unable to find a close enough question that answers what he is looking for, he decides to post a question. This requires registering on the forum, giving out personal data, and jumping through whatever email/Captcha BS is initiated by the forum.
5. Finally gets to post his question.
6. Has to log in to the forum manually for two days waiting for an answer, and the first four posts on his thread are from a guy who thinks he needs a waterproof pack for snorkeling, a guy telling that guy to "GTFO backpack n00b", a link to a website selling backpacks in Euros only, and a would-be Moderator who suggests that Mike should have read the FAQ before posting and his question has been answered many times before, with a link to the FAQ, but not to any of the threads that supposedly answered the question.
7. Finally gets a suggestion from someone with a decent post-count about a bag that will work.
8. Immediately another user posts how that bag would be a terrible choice and questions the sexual orientation of the first poster.
9. Thread devolves into name calling, inside jokes, and pointless rants, and Mike notices the number of Viagra spam emails coming in has risen dramatically because the douche running the site sold his info.
Or, he could just ask on Twitter if anyone knows of a good backpack that would handle x, y, and z for less than $xxx on Twitter and continue his daily routine, receiving several good suggestions along the way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: technical forums and google
Second, one reason that you don't see a lot of questions answered in blog comments is that people rarely come back and re-read the comments after they post on them. The ones that do most often are the trolls. Most people make their comments and then move on to the next post.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Is this the best argument against twitter that you can come up with? Just label everyone on there a lame nerd? Wow, what excellent logic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
'A lot of criteria' in 140 characters? Hmmmm...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Hmm. That's missing the point. Google may be a vast sea of information, but calling Twitter a pool is missing the point. I'm not searching Twitter. Twitter is different in that it plugs into the brains of many people, and allows me to request their expertise
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: technical forums and google
As for linux elitism, I have yet to find a microsoft forum that's as in depth as debian's ml or the gentoo forums/wiki. As one of the most obnoxious modern OSs, installing gentoo sets a bar such that joining the community merely requires a decent amount of technical knowledge. It's not like here on techdirt where people talk about law and econmics usually without having a clue of what they're talking about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
According to your example, anyone can open an account, post a question and have it answered by the mind meld that is Twitter.
Won't the only people to really see the question be your followers? How do you get followers? Posting a lot of good stuff? That seems to take a of time as well.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Previous examples don't count. Current examples don't count because you have to login to a forum. All the effort you have to invest in twitter doesn't matter.
If a new person joins twitter to attempt any of this he will get absolutely nothing.
The same concept can be accomplished with an AIM/ICQ/YAHOO/etc.. away or mass message. Or a mass txt message.
Plus Mike automatically assumes that he will be met with hostility or bad information on a forum. .... Do you really think that can't happen on twitter? Do you really think that no one outside of the USA joins twitter? Do you think there are only jolly helpers on twitter? Most forums will send you emails when you get a reply. The email usually has the response in it. You don't have to keep going to the forum waiting. Mike also think that forums take days to get a reply. I've gotten responses in SECONDS.
Plus if you happen to be on a forum for cars and want to ask about backpacks.. They almost always have an off-topic forum. You can ask there. That is no different than posting a question with twitter to a bunch of people not specialized in backpacks.
On a forum you will hit a much larger base of people than the likely amount of people you have following you. Plus they can actually say more than 140 chars.
If you are in love with twitter. Fine. But, don't try and say that it is unrivaled and infallible.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I don't think anyone is claiming any such thing. Then again, I don't use it so I don't know. I tried it once (after seeing this) and I don't understand it. It just seemed to be a service designed to tell you what people are doing. Maybe I'm wrong, I didn't spend much more than a few minutes using it. I'm sure it does have its advantages and disadvantages, and so do forums, and so do blogs, and so does almost everything else that people use. It probably wouldn't be used by so many people if it had no advantages over other services.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Did I say that? No.
The same concept can be accomplished with an AIM/ICQ/YAHOO/etc.. away or mass message. Or a mass txt message.
Not quite. Using any of those is intrusive to folks on the receiving end. The nice thing about Twitter is that it is ambient and unintrusive.
Plus Mike automatically assumes that he will be met with hostility or bad information on a forum. ....
I said no such thing. Now you're just making up stuff.
Do you really think that no one outside of the USA joins twitter? Do you think there are only jolly helpers on twitter?
I said no such thing. You're still making stuff up.
Mike also think that forums take days to get a reply. I've gotten responses in SECONDS.
I said no such thing.
Plus if you happen to be on a forum for cars and want to ask about backpacks.. They almost always have an off-topic forum. You can ask there. That is no different than posting a question with twitter to a bunch of people not specialized in backpacks.
You seem to have totally missed the point. But, fair enough. You like your forums. But forums depend on people being active readers of those forums. The reason Twitter works differently is the ambient nature of it being always on in the background for so many people.
But, don't try and say that it is unrivaled and infallible.
I never said it was infallible.
Dislike Twitter if you like, but do not make up lies about what I said.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
Won't the only people to really see the question be your followers? How do you get followers? Posting a lot of good stuff? That seems to take a of time as well.
Yes, it's true that you need to have followers, but most people have friends. I'm sorry if you don't, but most people I know have a pretty good group of friends and it's quite easy to add them to Twitter.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Excellent Article!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Learn to read.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
1) You build a network of people that you are interested in following. If they Are interested in you, they will follow you. This gives a person to person relationship based on mutual interests. As none of us are 1 dimensional, you, those following you, and your followers might know things outside of a topic based forum.
2) Topic based forums are great if you have a long term interest in the topic. Twitter doesn't replace that. Nor does it replace google or RSS, as some have asserted. At least Twitter is not a replacement for me. Twitter is additive. Often asking odd questions from people is more relevant than Google and I don't have to go seek out a topic specific forum. For example, many people that follow me travel far more than I do. Asking them travel questions like "what laptop bag that can fit two laptops comfortably" will likely get me a qualified response than spending hours searching Google.
3) I have often received answers to questions from people outside my followers and I don't mean spam or solicitations. In fact, with careful follow building, I have yet to be subjected to any spam. So that is useful.
4) Speed, some forums are active and you can get replies immediately. Some forums are not as active and you can wait days to get a reply, if at all. Twitter tends to be faster, but not always.
5) One of the powers of twitter over IM is that your network is wider than your contact list. IM is great for certain tasks, but finding new people is not one of them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
umm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: umm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
I'm not saying that forums are bad. I'm just saying that for many topics Twitter just works better. I don't have to go find the relevant forum or sign up. I just type a question into a box that's already open on my desktop, and I get back answers from people that I *trust*. That's not the case in a forum.
By that I mean that you cannot search for preexisting information between other Twitter members that are not in your list.
http://search.twitter.com/ ?
Using Twitter for what you are advocating is a bit like designing a custom tool made specifically for cleaning floors, when a broom is already nearby and can be used for cleaning cobwebs,etc. It gets the job done, but requires a large investment of time for THAT particular application. So it's not a very good general purpose tool. Most people need a general purpose tool, as they do not have the time or energy to build the needed support base of contacts to answer a one time question. Oh, btw, Google crawls across several forums daily.
I disagree. I've put very little time into developing a community of folks on Twitter. But the ability to get trustworthy info is much greater than I've ever found on forums.
To me, the folks arguing that forums are somehow a better source of info are missing the point. Techdirt gets nearly 1/10th of our traffic from Twitter these days. We get less than 1% of traffic from forums. Mark Cuban was pointing out that he gets more traffic from Twitter than from Google.
The point is, for all the talk about forums, more people are using Twitter and using it regularly.
Those arguing that forums do everything that Twitter can do are like folks arguing that AltaVista does search, so why do we need Google. The experience is significantly better.
Hate all you want, but it's Twitter that's getting the traffic and the usage.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
And for something like a bag, seeing it in person is the ONLY way to know if it really suits your needs. I'm glad I spent half a day on a weekend "searching" in actual stores.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Problem with Twitter
The problem I see with your points about using Twitter to query for information, Mike, is that as more people use Twitter and follow a lot of other people, your own query easily gets "lost in the fray". I've asked plenty of questions and received no answer at all, even though I have followers, many of whom I know in real life. My "friendship" with them didn't seem to make any difference.
I suspect a large part of the reason for this is that they follow so many other people they probably never even SAW my question.
This, to me, is a sort of "negative network-effect" where as the network connections increase, the value of the network begins to DECREASE. I think Twitter would actually be a much more valuable service if rather than following "people" you followed "concepts" or even "tags". This would not only filter out the obnoxious things like when people start tweeting about play-by-plays on sporting events, but would also allow you to meet new people with common interests to yours, and would expose you to information that you wouldn't otherwise have seen at all.
You CAN accomplish this to some extent with Twitter by aggregating the RSS feed for a search, or using the new "saved searches" feature, such as: https://twitter.com/#search?q=%23grails
However, overall, Twitter DOES tend to lean toward what some here are calling "ego masturbation" because people focus on "how many followers they can get" and "pushing out my message", "driving traffic to my site", etc. I feel that this is a large part of why Twitter is perceived by many as shallow and pointless.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
"To me, the folks arguing that forums are somehow a better source of info are missing the point. Techdirt gets nearly 1/10th of our traffic from Twitter these days. We get less than 1% of traffic from forums. Mark Cuban was pointing out that he gets more traffic from Twitter than from Google."
I'm afraid you are missing my point. Considering that the content on Techdirt is less technical and more nebulous in regards to specific answers to questions that you are advocating for Twitter's use, I would have to say that it makes sense that ALOT less traffic comes from forums. What else would you expect to find on site that states its "group blog uses a proven economic framework to analyze and offer insight into news stories about changes in government policy, technology and legal issues that affect companies’ ability to innovate and grow." That doesn't sound like a nuts & bolts kind of statement. The fact of the matter is that Twitter is not intended for this kind of use, nor is it marketed as such, so why pass it off as such? It's a great idea, and one that will certainly stay around for quite some time, as it is well past gaining critical mass of use. Perhaps it will evolve into doing what you are arguing for, and that's certainly a cool idea. At present, it's just not there yet. Don't let the cute little bird deceive you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The Value Of Twitter As Compared To Google
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: The Value Of Twitter As Compared To Google
I'm not sure why everyone is hating on Twitter so much. The fact is that it worked for me and it works quite well for an increasing number of people.
Figuring out the exact Google query that works right (and, remember the 2 laptops was only part of what I was looking for) isn't that easy. And looking at the forum, it's nearly 2 years old, and the results aren't nearly as useful as what I got from Twitter.
So, sure, you can stick with Google.
I'll just have the better backpack.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RE:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I don't dislike Twitter...
I've read examples, both business and personal, which Twitter was beneficial, but nothing stands out enough to entice me to become a "follower".
I'm sure as hell not popular enough to gain followers.
Someone remarked how Twitter can be similar to an RSS feed, and that's exactly how I see it.
I have three RSS feeds and they serve me quite well. And given this number of feeds, there's no sense in signing up for a Twitter account.
I will have to say the internet has opened up an entire world of idiotic conversations than any communication system before it. Twitter certainly shows this (based on web items I've read, such as the Kutcher v. CNN race).
It's here to stay until something better comes along. The best feature I've read about Twitter so far is its 140 character limit. Definitely keeps "conversations" to a minimum.
To the poster who said Google's getting worse, I completely agree. It's pretty damn sad when the advanced search has to be used because the results often fill the first 20 pages with links of stores trying to sell you the search topic.
I've been hitting Wikipedia much more often than Google. While some of the information is questionable, the "basics" are plenty good enough for me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Persistence and confidence
Many times, there's no need to ask... the question has been answered before.
Where Twitter probably excels is its accessibility, timeliness and interactivity. But for difficult topics, the asynchronous nature of Yahoo! Answers is preferable.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "What Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online"?
However, I have yet to come up with a question that I can't find an answer for within a minute or two on Google. I don't have to wait for someone knowledgeable to stumble across my question. Instead, I look for the knowledgeable answer that someone, somewhere has already written. I enter two or three words in the box, look at the results for a couple minutes (or less), and I have my answer. So, Google wins for me, hands down, when it comes to facilitating the flow of information.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Twitter more effective than Google
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Twitter Spam
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Well Of Course
Well, of course, if I were in your position (owner of TechDirt, guy behind the Insight Community, make a lot of speeches at the Free! summit, need i go on?) I assume that I would meet a lot of smart people and become friends with these people.
Now, the laptop bag example is a pretty easy question for my hypothetical friends, but something more deep requires people I know who have more knowledge to answer/discuss a question.
But these hypothetical people would probably have blogs of their own or post their ideas on a forum, who would discuss things in length, not 140 characters or less. If not, a simple email / IM would suffice if you really need to talk (i don't see these things as "obtrusive" if they actually are your friends/acquaintances)
I don't use twitter, and check facebook
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Well Of Course
Basically, if this works for you, go for it.
I don't see this as the next big thing, or even really being a minor competitor to Google at all..
but we will see.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
I think that's 130, and pretty wordy without any abbreviations, so yes, no problem. Unless "a lot of criteria" means 20 or something.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Looking for Project Management Software
I currently have around 10 followers - all of whom are personal friends that have no idea about said software.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Looking for Project Management Software
First of all, I never said that Google was useless. It's amazingly useful for all kinds of searches. What I said was that Twitter is useful for searching for different kinds of information. A search on "project management software" is one that obviously makes perfect sense on Google.
But as for Twitter, why not search out some folks who are experts in PM software, and start following them. From there you'll learn some interesting things, and can easily chat with them directly if you have some questions.
Don't blame Twitter just because you don't know how to use it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]