Thanks David...that's a great compliment!

I would point at the date of my last blog post as an indication of how much I actually love to write, though!

Was just looking to see if anybody had posted this link yet. Not too worried about Tom's subpoena.

Thanks Ramesh! I look forward to seeing you there!

I would add "to build relationships." Commenting on a post is a way of engaging with individuals and strengthening relationships. It creates shared context for the future.

Hell of a piece, Russell. I think some of the folks at last night's AWE meeting were flirting around the edges of some of your call to action here, but it didn't quit connect. I am thrilled with the commentary and perspective you offer, and am frankly blown away by the obvious impact that your visit to SV brought to your thinking.

Thanks for your contribution, and welcome home!

I should also add that Georgia Tech Research Institute provided the incredible venue! Big thanks to Bill Cutts and Betsy Plattenburg. It wouldn't have been possible without your support!

Thanks for stopping by. Yes, Atlanta folks are very active in many
social networks which I suspect will help make ProductCamp a great
event.

The registration just went up this Friday, so I hope you'll stop by
http://productcampatlanta.eventbrite.com and sign up! Many
announcements and promotional efforts will kick into gear tomorrow, so
stay tuned!

Jason

------

Some may leave if advertising is introduced, but I suspect the number would be small if done correctly. As for throttling, that exists today. We are talking about managing traffic levels.

And while I agree that we as users provide twitter with value, I don't know that I classify it as a "fair" exchange. In business, the concept of "fair" includes a service provider being compensated for a service by its users. Twitter has shown to date that it derives no value, only cost from yours and my presence.

Yes, there should be an upside in all of this, but Twitter keeps giving it away.

Thanks for the comments Tom. It seems that I have fallen into one of my own pet peeve traps and allowed semantics to obscure my meaning, which might well underscore Olivier's earlier point (http://twitter.com/thebrandbuilder/statuses/11595...

The term "engage" clearly has multiple connotations, even when the dictionary definition stays consistent, and I should clarify that my rant above is specifically focused on the "rise above the noise" strategy that consists of "yelling" loud enough to be heard in these social networks.

Tactics such as the recent Facebook/Burger King stunt specifically come to mind, or the countless social media "coaches" and "strategists" who's key to winning in the social media world is based on a single "eyeballs" metric. This is the corrupted use of the term "engage" that I am railing against. And semantics be scuttled, I am a firm believer that every business worth its salt must allow customers to be the ones who "engage" us in the way that best fits them.

Our responsibility and key social media strategy (in my view) should be one of assistance to customers. For example, we use blogs and websites to provide easy access to answers, and to help customers make informed decisions. We watch the marketplace, which has become increasingly transparent to understand what our customers are saying about us, and about our industry.

But, if we use these media (and it is inevitable that many will) irresponsibly then they will suffer the same fate as email.

Just keep doing what you are doing Rich!

I'm doing a couple of things. My paying gig is in product management working with a variety of products ranging from web hosting and messaging to most recently public WiFi hot spots.

I'm also working on a social networking related startup over at Jumbis.com.