The author contends that the Twitter hashtag '#carbontax' did not generate a real debate. She concludes with the truism that:

"If people on certain hashtags truly want
to be able to influence policy, they have
to start engaging with other Twitter users."

That this alleged debate on Twitter should even have been expected to influence policy illustrates what, in my opinion, is a misunderstanding as to the true nature of Twitter.

The author's premise is as to "Twitter [being] all about finding and communicating with people with similar ideals and opinions; about following who you like." Whilst it may be true that that end may be achieved to some extent on Twitter, I think that premise to be fundamentally flawed.

`

How about Twitter being 'all about' some interest group, or groups, unspecified, being able to find out what people at large are prepared to express a brief opinion upon, or pass on information about?

A potential world-wide 'intelligence' gathering tool?

`

What I am interested in is precisely how the author has been able to study the contents of the hashtag '#carbontax' timeline, given that Richard Stanton's article to which she seemingly referred, 'Twitter drives the national conversation in the theatrum mundi', ( http://onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=12533&page=0 ) was published as long ago as 30 August 2011.

Whilst I am reluctant to classify myself as being amongst the 'new cyber elite' to which Arjenne Plaizier refers in the fourth paragraph of her article, I would have to confess to not knowing how to get the best results out of participation on Twitter, as I recently attempted in relation to the improper forcing of the resignation of Ombudsman Allan Asher in breach of Parliamentary privilege and prerogative.

Look at what happened to the hashtag '#reinstateallanasher' on Twitter. See: http://twitpic.com/7u9sxy . Until recently, this hashtag timeline had quite a lot of relevant tweets, like, for example, this one of mine that I can still access: http://twitter.com/#!/ForrestGumpp/status/136546880443252736

Did you have better luck with the '#carbontax' timeline than I had with the '#reinstateallanasher' timeline, Arjenne?

@Forrest Gumpp

thanks a lot for your comment. And your right. Twitter is very much about "being able to find out what people at large are prepared to express a brief opinion upon, or pass on information about". The article is not about denying this point. It is about whether Twitter could serve (more) as an electronic debating platform.

I used the article of Richard Stanton as a starting point. Just wanted to do an analysis on whether there really was a debate going on on Twitter. For this I analysed about 350 tweets on the #carbontax. I categorised them as coming from an opponent, advocate or someone neutral in the debate. I also put each argument made into a category.

As mentioned in the article, the most significant finding was that there was no real debate between the two sides.

I just tried to access your link with the # you mentioned but could not get any tweets. Let me know if this would change, will definitely have a look!

And with respect to my remark about the "cyber elite"; I tried to make the point that people require certain skills in order to participate. In no way I was saying that, if you have these skills, you will definitely be successful ;-)!

Thanks again for your post,

Arjenne

Arjenne Plaisier says:

"The article ... is about whether Twitter could
serve (more) as an electronic debating platform. "

FWIW, I primarily use my Twitter timeline as an abstracts journal for things that might interest me, or for tweeting what I think may be of interest or use to other users. Provided participants can be consistently brief, and use the 'reply' feature, a conversation or debate of sorts can be had. I believe I can engage more effectively by using tweets containing links as pointers to more expansive but self-contained posts on fora such as OLO.

I am aware of applications such as 'Tweetlonger' that can enable one to overcome the 140 character limitation of Twitter, but this leaves such more extensive posting still within the Twitter platform, and thus vulnerable to the flakeyness, tweakiness, and/or 'censorability' of that platform. Tweets, and sometimes entire hashtag timeline contents, can go missing. Frequently one encounters limited availability of tweets in timelines, such as, for example, the limitation as to availability only as far back as 1:56 PM 11th December 2011 for both #carbontax 'top' tweets, and 'all' tweets. See: http://twitpic.com/7v8zfz , and; http://twitpic.com/7v90i1

The use of screen captures in conjunction with Twitpics and the like is necessitated by the (likely?) transience of content on the web in general, and Twitter in particular. Here is a self-explanatory example: http://t.co/5Yq3v7PS & surf the link.

Engagement with other Twitter users is but the first part of debate that might influence policy. An additional requirement, especially where the maintenance of pseudonymity is accepted as being a necessary part of the dialogue, is a bridge or go-between obliging the policy maker to have believable knowledge of the content of any debate. It would be good if there were identifiable go-betweens able to bridge this gap and confirm message delivery into policy-making orbits.

Bitte
En claire, en echelon, the info flows.
To US.
To all who really need to know.
Twitter

Source: http://twitter.com/#!/ForrestGumpp/status/133453023312752640

http://twitter.com/#!/ForrestGumpp/status/121172208524595200 A reply to a Vexnews question.

The more I look at the limitations to the accessing of Twitter hashtag timelines, the more the hashtag aspect of Twitter appears to be a one-way street.

I note that if one Twitter user is examining the tweets of another user, there seldom seems to be any limit as to how far back in that user's tweeting history one can look. Similarly, if one has once copied the URL of a particular tweet, and subsequently copies that address into the address bar of a browser, notwithstanding that it may be quite an old tweet it will still be accessible.

I asked Google the question 'Is there a Twitter hash tag index?', and this is part of the first page of results I got: http://twitpic.com/841s8g . The third web page listed was titled 'The Twitter Hash Tag: What is it and How Do You Use It?'. See: http://www.techforluddites.com/2009/02/the-twitter-hash-tag-what-is-it-and-how-do-you-use-it.html

In the eighth paragraph of the 'Tech for Luddites' article, under the heading 'Where do hash tags come from?', I found this:

"I think this question gets to the heart
of the confusion about these danged things,
because hash tags are NOT any kind of official
Twitter function. The company has not created
a list of topics that we can browse through
to see if there's one that interests us."

This appears to my digitally untutored mind to be a major oversight in the design of Twitter if it was ever the intention that it be a two-way street for information exchange. What is your view Arjenne? Or has the indexing of hashtags situation changed materially since the 'Tech for Luddites' article was published on 18 February 2009?

How can Twitter serve as an electronic debating platform with others' views only so transiently referable?

BTW, Arjenne, re the missing #reinstateallanasher hashtag, this screenshot shows the tag in use by another user on 5 November 2011. I have, since its disappearance, reactivated that tag with one tweet.

@Arjenne Plaizier and viewers whom it may concern,

A clarification.

In my post of Saturday, 7 January 2012 at 8:36:10 AM, I stated that I had re-activated the Twitter hashtag '#reinstateallanasher'. I had in fact done so, and as of perhaps a week or two ago its Twitter timeline contained just the single tweet with which I had re-activated that hashtag. Interestingly, when I did a Twitter search for it yesterday after my post to this OLO comments thread, that hashtag had again disappeared.

This is the link to the tweet with which I re-established the hashtag '#reinstateallanasher' on 18 December 2011: https://twitter.com/#!/ForrestGumpp/status/148191976674701313 . The tweet shows in the timeline of tweets by Twitter userID 'ForrestGumpp', from which I copied its URL. As can be seen, the tweet can still be accessed, just not in its hashtag timeline context. (Users will have to copy and paste because of the 'https' prefix not being recognised by OLO's software.)

This Twitpic taken on Saturday 17 December 2011 shows the results of a Twitter search that first revealed to me the disappearance of the first #reinstateallanasher timeline's contents: http://twitpic.com/7u9sxy . This link is to the URL of the actual tweet in my timeline that contains the Twitpic link: https://twitter.com/#!/ForrestGumpp/status/147867041263652864 . (I wonder whether there exists some physical separation between the Twitter, and Twitpic (an independent third-party application provider) databanks that may potentially be revealing, or frustrative, of any attempts to censor Twitpic-link-containing tweets by Twitter or any built-in hack thereto?)

Sadly, I did not take a screenshot of my re-establishment of the #reinstateallanasher hashtag showing the tweet to which I linked above appearing on its own as evidence of successfully having done so. Viewers will just have to take my word for it that it was, however briefly, re-established as a hashtag.

It makes one wonder, doesn't it, as to what might be so sensitive about a prospective reinstatement of the Commonwealth Ombudsman improperly pressured to resign in the face of a Parliament seemingly unwilling to uphold its own privileges and prerogatives, that a Twitter hashtag might have been twice censored?

@Arjenne Plaizier and viewers whom it may concern,

A further clarification.

In my first comment to this article on Sunday, 18 December 2011 at 9:53:47 AM, I posted a clickable link to one of the tweets I had made to the first, now missing, incarnation of the timeline of the Twitter hashtag '#reinstateallanasher'. That link now no longer works. You now get this: http://twitpic.com/84qenz

It seems the reason is that the Twitter site has, in the interim, changed from the former 'http' prefix to that of a secure site having the prefix 'https'. Manually amending the URL given in my post to https://twitter.com/#!/ForrestGumpp/status/136546880443252736 will give access to the subject tweet that was once part of the now missing first incarnation of the hashtag '#reinstateallanasher' timeline.

The downside of this for OLO users is that such secure site URLs are not recognised by the OLO software for conversion to a clickable link within the OLO post. Users have to manually copy and paste them into a browser address bar to access them, as already mentioned in my previous post.

Interfacing of the twitterverse being, perhaps unintendedly, made just that little bit more difficult?

`

Just to keep viewers up to date, courtesy of Twitter userID 'LaLegale' a third incarnation of the '#reinstateallanasher' hashtag has this evening been re-established. I have a screenshot of the tweet that did it. Curiously, the Twitpic site has just started yielding 404 notices, so I'll have to post a twitpic of it later after this little 'problem' has gone away. Viewers could, of course, in the mean time try using the #reinstateallanasher hashtag themselves if they have a Twitter account.

Twitpics of screenshots is just my way of trying to "keep the bastards honest". And I think I'll continue using Twitpic to do it rather than use Twitter's in-house 'pic.twitter' application, too, just in case Twitter is subject to censorship pressures or hacks.

Twitpic now accessible again! The screenshot in question: http://twitpic.com/84qwwv