<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Conference Twitting</title>
	<atom:link href="http://webcoherence.org/experiments/draft-conference-twitting-still-being-edited/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://webcoherence.org/experiments/draft-conference-twitting-still-being-edited/</link>
	<description>Experiments with Coherence on the Web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 22:25:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: G.Chomic</title>
		<link>http://webcoherence.org/experiments/draft-conference-twitting-still-being-edited/comment-page-1/#comment-23</link>
		<dc:creator>G.Chomic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 16:23:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://webcoherence.org/?p=390#comment-23</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m on a fence.  I twitter.  I found value out of tweeting at Communia, both direct (seeing what other people saw was important and how they viewed it) and indirect (social connectedness backchannel.)  I fully comprehend the fact that the backchannel has become a oft-useful reality - if not necessarily always for the speakers - this is why I link to some of the other discussions on the subject above.

But I did find it much easier to force myself to listen to the more boring speakers in the afternoon.  Even though by that point I desperately needed coffee.  And as you may have noted on Ian&#039;s post on twitter-clatter - there was indeed even someone playing solitare (later a jigsaw puzzle.)  We do distract ourselves, twitter or no.  An effect of technology as a whole, not one aspect of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m on a fence.  I twitter.  I found value out of tweeting at Communia, both direct (seeing what other people saw was important and how they viewed it) and indirect (social connectedness backchannel.)  I fully comprehend the fact that the backchannel has become a oft-useful reality &#8211; if not necessarily always for the speakers &#8211; this is why I link to some of the other discussions on the subject above.</p>
<p>But I did find it much easier to force myself to listen to the more boring speakers in the afternoon.  Even though by that point I desperately needed coffee.  And as you may have noted on Ian&#8217;s post on twitter-clatter &#8211; there was indeed even someone playing solitare (later a jigsaw puzzle.)  We do distract ourselves, twitter or no.  An effect of technology as a whole, not one aspect of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stevenfeldman</title>
		<link>http://webcoherence.org/experiments/draft-conference-twitting-still-being-edited/comment-page-1/#comment-21</link>
		<dc:creator>stevenfeldman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 08:57:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://webcoherence.org/?p=390#comment-21</guid>
		<description>I was one of the twitterers at #communia. When the speakers were good the tweeters were microblogging and sharing observations with their own followers as well as the community using the hashtag. But some of the speakers were, to be generous, not very relevant or interesting and they were the subject of some barbed comments. 

Did the tweeting distract me? No I don&#039;t think so, I always get distracted when the speaker is boring. I saw several people surfing to unrelated sites, booking hotels, restaurants etc. Even a critical tweet stream seems more relevant.

Overall 20g tweets for #communia leaves a real time record of people&#039;s observations and comments that may be of value to someone. Who knows?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was one of the twitterers at #communia. When the speakers were good the tweeters were microblogging and sharing observations with their own followers as well as the community using the hashtag. But some of the speakers were, to be generous, not very relevant or interesting and they were the subject of some barbed comments. </p>
<p>Did the tweeting distract me? No I don&#8217;t think so, I always get distracted when the speaker is boring. I saw several people surfing to unrelated sites, booking hotels, restaurants etc. Even a critical tweet stream seems more relevant.</p>
<p>Overall 20g tweets for #communia leaves a real time record of people&#8217;s observations and comments that may be of value to someone. Who knows?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: H</title>
		<link>http://webcoherence.org/experiments/draft-conference-twitting-still-being-edited/comment-page-1/#comment-14</link>
		<dc:creator>H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2009 16:50:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://webcoherence.org/?p=390#comment-14</guid>
		<description>Things are changing rapidly. I thought people get angry when they get distracted. But now I can see the reverse happening - People love getting distracted. Some statistics to support it - 206 Twitter updates by 11 people in less than 15 hours on #communia. This directly translates to  206 distractions - all self invited. And this count of 206 is only with the hashtag #communia, I am sure there were other Twitter updates from Twitter users sitting in the conference without the hashtag. Interestingly, this does not include the attempts these users made to read updates on their twitter homepage. So whats the exact count of these distractions like? One thousand? or even more? Now I can see a perfect reason why people need Yoga classes to increase concentration at work!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Things are changing rapidly. I thought people get angry when they get distracted. But now I can see the reverse happening &#8211; People love getting distracted. Some statistics to support it &#8211; 206 Twitter updates by 11 people in less than 15 hours on #communia. This directly translates to  206 distractions &#8211; all self invited. And this count of 206 is only with the hashtag #communia, I am sure there were other Twitter updates from Twitter users sitting in the conference without the hashtag. Interestingly, this does not include the attempts these users made to read updates on their twitter homepage. So whats the exact count of these distractions like? One thousand? or even more? Now I can see a perfect reason why people need Yoga classes to increase concentration at work!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

