With all the social networks out there, it's easy to consider auto-posting from one network to another. It saves time and pushes your message out to a wider audience.

However, this is not always the best tactic because it reduces the uniqueness of each social network, and decreases the trust your followers have in you. If your message is being generated by a machine, and not you personally, or when technology starts doing the work for you - the entire concept of being "social" has been defeated.

To help keep your social networking profile as clean, legitimate, and friendly as possible, here are some tactics that you may want to avoid:

• Blogging software that auto-tweets new blog posts
• Auto-DM's
• Scheduled tweets
• Apps like Ping.fm or Facebook's BlogIt app
• Any third-party app that auto-posts to another social network

In all of these cases above, a machine (the system, technology - whatever you want to call it) is updating the social network for you. This should be a red flag telling you one of these things:

1. You have joined too many social networks and have passed the threshold of being able to manage each one on it's own.
2. You are not interested in using social networks for their main intent (meeting and interacting with people), but rather to mass-distribute your message in a one-sided manner.

It's best to always say it rather than spray it (pushing your message out to as many networks as possible).

Related

• Why I stopped auto-posting to Twitter
• Scheduled tweets: the Good, the Bad, the Ugly
• Ping.fm - another social spamming utility
• Facebook "Blog It" app cheapens content
• API connections and cross-network auto posting

Feedback

If there ever was a checklist of how to properly make use of your corporate Twitter account, it could follow these guidelines:

Don't @ reply everyone mentioning your product and service

Yeah, we know you can use Twitter Search to track keywords being mentioned by any public Twitter user. You're not surprising anyone when you drop them a line immediately after they mention your company or service name.

They're certainly not thinking, "Wow, this company must be following me and just noticed I mentioned their product! I would love to do business with them!"

Actually, random Twitter user - that company is not following you, and they could probably not care any less about you, personally. Companies that immediately follow up with your tweet that mentions their product or service are only looking for "the quick sale." They're just trying to reel you in.

Companies should only @ reply the person if the case warrants it, ie: the tweet asks a specific question about the company or service. However, companies should not send a meaningless @ reply just because someone tweets:

"Thinking of trying [service name]. Anyone use it before?"

It's especially annoying to potential new users when companies immediately reply to open-ended questions like the one above, with a quick, one-line sales pitch as a response.

Please. When someone asks a question like that, they are looking for third-party opinions from other users of your product or service. They want it from users, not the company itself. Of course the company is going to say, "It's the greatest product ever!"

Don't follow everyone mentioning your product or service

To take this even further, don't dare start following every single person that mentions your product or service. An @ reply is one thing. Following them takes it to a whole new level of annoyance for the potential customer.

Again, it's wise to exercise restraint/tact when deciding whether to follow the person who just mentioned your product or service. Make sure the person's tweet warrants you following them.

Most Twitter users want to follow people, not corporations. So as long as your Twitter stream is more "human" than it is corporate, you can get away with following more people.

Get to know those you follow

It's important to establish a level of communication with each of those you follow. Twitter is best used as a personal communication platform, rather than a place to preach your message.

Every once in a while, send someone a direct message about something that pertains to them. Perhaps you know this user likes pickles (assuming you own a sandwich shop), and you'd like the user to know that this weekend only, "extra pickles will be on every sandwich!" Maybe even toss in a discount coupon for them.

Treat them like your neighbor, not like someone you're trying to get a sale from. Be warm and caring, not pretentious and indifferent.

Be careful when handling complaints

Twitter is littered with complaints. In fact, I'd bet over half of an average Twitter users' tweets are complaints, or rants. They may even be directed at your product or service.

Take each complaint with a grain of salt. Twitter is, at best, a spur-of-the-moment utility where opinions change from hour to hour. It's difficult to judge the validity of a random tweet that talks down your product or service.

Don't try to massage every complaint into a positive. Sometimes no response is better than trying to persuade an angry customer that your service "is really good!"

Let people vent - that's what Twitter is all about. Who knows - tomorrow they may be praising your service!

Be human!

The best advice for anyone using Twitter is to just be themselves. It's OK to tweet that you just ate an excellent dinner. Give some personality to your tweets, and don't just echo dry, corporate sentiments. You'll end up sounding like a robot.

Feedback

Interesting NYT article about how text-messaging works:

Once one understands that a text message travels wirelessly as a stowaway within a control channel, one sees the carriers' pricing plans in an entirely new light. ... Customers with unlimited plans, like diners bringing a healthy appetite to an all-you-can-eat cafeteria, might think they're getting the best out of the arrangement. But the carriers, unlike the cafeteria owners, can provide unlimited quantities of "food" at virtually no cost to themselves - so long as it is served in bite-sized portions.

So unlike an buffet which will eventually run out of food, mobile carriers will never run out of the space required to transmit text messages:

But text messages are not just tiny; they are also free riders, tucked into what's called a control channel, space reserved for operation of the wireless network. ... That's why a message is so limited in length: it must not exceed the length of the message used for internal communication between tower and handset to set up a call. The channel uses space whether or not a text message is inserted.

So although that $20/month unlimited SMS plan you are on may seem like the best deal, it's truthfully a better deal for mobile carriers since they are not absorbing higher costs due to your need for unlimited text messages. It seems whether you use 100 or 10,000 text messages, your mobile carrier's costs remain the same.

However, from a consumers point of view, this is all irrelevant because mobile carriers are the only ones that own the ability to utilize text messages, so they can, essentially, charge what they please. It's not comforting to know that they could be price fixing, but there's no other option.

The only hope is the cost that mobile carriers charge per text message, and for unlimited packages, will decrease when more articles like the one mentioned here start to shine the light on how cheap text messaging actually is.

Feedback

I hate vague status updates! You know, those social network users who haven't updated in a long time, and finally chime in something like this:

Jen can't believe it's happening.

... or:

Jen hopes it works this time around.

What are you talking about!? It kills me because I want to know what is happening but the update is so vague, it's impossible to decipher.

Perhaps I'm more "frank" when I update my status. I tend to just say exactly what's on my mind - no deciphering needed. Some of my followers like this approach; others can't stand it. For example, it's not uncommon for me to say something like this:

Eating potato chips.

You can't get more dry than that. Yet I don't feel I need to sugar-coat my updates. What you see is what you get. I'm not hiding behind any "online persona." I don't feel the need to over-glorify my updates with fancy verbiage or self-inflating ego.

But that's just me. Everyone is different.

Feedback

Most social network users will claim, from time to time, that their use of these services helps keep them more involved, inspired, and "in the know." Yet, it's quite hard to get any real work done with constant notifications and alerts coming in. It may seem easy (and even effective!) to juggle social networking with real work (your day job, perhaps), but what you're really doing is limiting your ability to truly focus on something - to completely absorb yourself in a task. For it is in that "zone" where you find true enlightenment.

For that reason, no one should deny the ability to completely turn off social network alerts for certain periods of time - either by temporarily specifying that you don't want alerts sent to you, or by simply avoiding your mobile device or related websites.

Those who haven't tried it are truly missing out on something special. As much as I can relate to always wanting to connect with people, I also force myself to refrain from it during certain parts of my day. This may not come easy to those first attempting it, but with practice, it gets better.

Typically I'll try to shut off all notifications during work hours - 9 AM to 5 PM. Also, I try to do the same at night - I'll shut off notifications and put my phone away approximately an hour before bed. This gives me time to completely unwind and let my thoughts "sort themselves out." I can only handle so much stimulus on a given day before my brain goes on overload.

Ignorance is bliss

The true pleasure of turning off notifications is simply not knowing what's going on. Many would say, "Isn't knowing better than not knowing?" It's kind of a backwards way of thinking, but a lot of times, not knowing is better than knowing. Ignorance is bliss.

The anticipation is the worst

With notifications turned on, the failure to focus deeply on something else results from not only from the incoming updates themselves, but from the anticipation of updates coming in. You end up waiting for that next update to chime in, and that in itself is a distraction.

There's nothing worse than having notifications on, and nothing coming in. You start to wonder, "Is everyone OK? Perhaps something is wrong. Why is no one updating? Where did [insert favorite social network user] go? Are they asleep? Are they just busy?"

This kind of thinking is ridiculously distracting and a complete waste of energy.

Mind games

Having notifications off prohibits your mind from settling on such nonsense. Since your mind knows notifications are off, it can't possibly expect incoming updates. Since it can't expect updates, it chooses to focus on other things. Sure, it may cause a bit of longing to occur, because you may start to miss the updates, and knowing what everyone is doing, but that's a better feeling than anticipation.

Think of it this way: absence makes the heart grow fonder.

Unfortunately, we have to play such mind games with ourselves in order to keep our lives balanced.

Feedback

Twitter has introduced itself as a great way to meet like-minded people. But not every follower is a legitimate new "friend." Many Twitter accounts are pure content spam - unsolicited junk that doesn't belong in your Twitter stream.

You'll want to avoid following Twitter users that contain these words as their username or within their bio:

• marketing
• savvy
• innovator
• PR
• coach
• career
• money
• success

Also, watch out for these additional warning signs:

• A URL in the bio field (There is already a URL field)
• No bio or location listed
• Very few updates
• Following thousands, yet is only followed by a hundred or less
• Using default Twitter avatar
• Updates that always contain a link

If any of these characteristics match that person that just followed you, it might be wise to block them. They're not going to care - they're only looking to push their messages out to as large an audience as possible as a quick way to drive site-clicks.

Feedback

I recently stopped using Twitter to auto-post updates from other networks. I've talked before about cross-network auto-posting and how it can be hazardous to your overall content message, as well as your followers trust in your social networking intent.

My reasoning is simple: I figure people only have a limited capacity to absorb all the social network content out there. The least I can do is make sure my updates are not cross-network bacn, but letigimate straight-from-my-mouth content. The less clutter my followers have to absorb, the more people get to know me, and not my content.

So what if I'm checking in with Brightkite, or listening to a song on Blip. Are auto-posts from these networks truly valuable to my Twitter followers, many of whom use Twitter to network and meet like-minded people?

Sure, it's valuable, but only sometimes. Hence, "Twitter bacn" is a perfect label because, much like email bacn, the content is not necessarily spam, but still often a waste of time.

Is it your intention for your followers to get to know you, or your content? If it's the latter, you're probably satisfied with mass spamming your social networks with the same content using tools like Ping.fm or Facebook's BlogIt app. You may also already use tools like FriendFeed which aggregates everyones content, but not the actual person behind the content.

In this manner, all social networks are the same to you. They're just another platform to spit out your content, to anyone and no one.

This is hardly an innovative or human-centric way to utilize social networks, which have become more about bacn, than actual social relations.

Perhaps it's just me, but I see this trend eventually reaching a boiling point. Something has to change.

Feedback

I've been strongly considering purchasing a "netbook," which for those who don't know, is simply a stripped-down notebook computer with bare minimum hardware and software, and is used solely for getting on the web.

Social networking, blogging, and web browsing are becoming our typical "computer" habits - so much that investing in an expensive laptop with pricey software is not worth it for most.

Netbooks are small, lightweight, and typically very cheap.

Overgrown iPhone?

It's made me wonder if a netbook is simply an overgrown iPhone. I can already do most social networking, blogging, and web browsing right on my iPhone - which fits in the palm of my hand, and costs about the same as a netbook (with a monthly wireless contract).

The difference, of course, is a netbook has a much larger screen than an iPhone, as well as a full keyboard. The iPhone has a QWERTY keypad, but I wouldn't consider that a "full keyboard."

The question is... what tasks can I do on a netbook that I can't on the iPhone? Well, for starters, I could probably get things done faster since I wouldn't be typing with my thumbs. I could also load software that wouldn't make sense on an iPhone, such as FTP clients or image-editing applications.

But once I start talking about local software, I might as well just use my standard laptop.

The netbook craze has me caught in the middle of my iPhone and standard laptop. Is it worth the investment? Will I use it?

Feedback

Cubs fans need therapy. Not because they are Cubs fans, but because after last season's horrific meltdown, it is difficult to come to terms with what happened. I'm still in shock three months later, and will continue to be in shock well into the start of the 2009 season.

This "shock" is bad for fans because all trust has been lost. I realize the entire 2008 season was not just a waste, but it's going to be extremely difficult to place any trust or hope in the 2009 Cubs (and beyond). This loss of trust is unhealthy.

Life gives us challenges, and most hardships result in a new understanding for the way things are, as well as enlightenment and wisdom for coming to that understanding.

What new understanding do fans have from the Cubs miserably blowing the last two season's playoff appearances? What enlightenment or wisdom is there to come of this? How do Cubs fans come to terms with this traumatic letdown?

The 2007 performance was painful to witness, but nothing near as gut-wrenching as the most recent 2008 collapse. The cards were lined up perfectly and completely fell over. You can't have a more well-defined regular season that the 2008 Cubs had, and then go and waste it all in one week's playoff performance.

So, if the 2008 regular season was so perfectly leading up to something greater in the playoffs, how can we ever trust that any future regular season performance will not let us down once again? Even if the Cubs come out in 2009 and coast along in first place the entire season, that doesn't mean anything to Cubs fans anymore. Why get excited when they've constantly let fans down, year after year?

It's like the boy who cried wolf as a joke, but when he really needed help, no one answered his cry. If the Cubs play well in 2009, who's going to trust it?

Absence is inexcusable

It's not the fact that the Cubs merely exited the playoffs the past two seasons. It's that they did so without competition. To say they "didn't show up" is an understatement. And this is exactly why therapy is needed.

If, for example, the Cubs won a few playoff games (or heck - perhaps an entire playoff series!) the past two seasons, things would be different. Therapy would not be needed. Because then, Cubs fans could console themselves knowing that the Cubs played their asses off, and just ended up on the losing side.

A loss, putting forth all the effort possible, is fair, natural, and acceptable. But a loss without effort - absence - is inexcusable.

These past two seasons have been inexcusable.

There's an old saying that goes something like this:

Beat me once, shame on you. Beat me twice, shame on me.

Cubs fans put their hope and trust in the Cubs, even after 2007's lack of effort. Then in 2008 it happened again.

It's time to stop pointing the finger at the Cubs, and instead point it at yourself.

Feedback

TextMarks recently announced new pricing rules which are effective beginning January 2009.

What was once an entirely free service (although with ads in SMS messages), is now moving towards the monthly subscription model.

Existing users that currently have a "short" keyword (three or four characters) must now pay a monthly fee in order to retain that keyword. However, TextMarks is providing some appreciation to existing customers by discounting the monthly fee for short keywords from $25 to $10.

This is still little consolation for users of short keywords that do not make any money from their TextMarks application, and are now forced to pay monthly just for the privilege of using a short keyword.

Ads are still included in that $10/month plan for existing users. There are ad-free options available based on usage.

So this means TextMarks has two models for income:

1. Short or reserved keywords
2. Ad-free service

If you currently use a short keyword, your options are the following:

1. Change the short keyword to a longer one
2. Absorb the $10/month (non-ad-free) fee

Change the short keyword to a longer one

This is certainly the quickest way to avoid any of these new fees. However, if your application is well-used and recognized already, users may have a hard time adjusting to the new keyword. Asking them to type one or two more characters is not a big deal - it's the lost branding that matters.

"At Me" App currently uses a short keyword: atme. I could ask everyone to use a new keyword, such as atmee, but then users may forget, causing initial frustration.

Absorb the monthly fee

This is the other option which would not cause any disruption for users.

In the case of "At Me" App, I am not generating any income from this service; it's more of a fun application that I created in my spare time. So having to now pay a monthly fee just to continue using the service as is, seems hard for me to swallow. I'm stuck now deciding if "At Me" App is worth a monthly fee out of my own pocket, or just letting it go.

I could look for another service that is similar to TextMarks, but I'm not sure if it's worth:

1. Adjusting my application's backend to cater to the new service
2. Having existing users direct SMS to a different short code

Combine all that effort and it may as well be worth the $10/month to do nothing.

In the end...

I understand TextMarks has to make money like any other business, so I'm not angry about this announcement. It's just a shame that I'll probably no longer be able to support the "fun" applications I've been creating with it, which in turn gives TextMarks exposure. I've also been involved in blogging about the service, so if I end up not being able to afford it, I would blog less about it, and therefore TextMarks would lose some of the free publicity it had going.

Feedback