<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>banannie - Latest Comments in Twitter-fame is fleeting</title><link>http://banannie.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://banannie.disqus.com/twitter_fame_is_fleeting/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2007 10:11:59 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Twitter-fame is fleeting</title><link>http://banannie.com/blog/2007/05/14/twitter-fame-is-fleeting/#comment-6043144</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi new commenters Radioactive Jam and Anjali. Thanks for coming by!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Neil, that's exactly how I got started, following "web celebs" during SXSW. What hooked me was when they started adding me back. Plus for me, the "one liner" format works well, I don't obsess over it like I do with my blog :).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Dossy, TJG, I thought Kelly did a great job, she didn't take it all too seriously like most reporters  do.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lisa, BGM, I may drag you in yet, you know, if your lives slow down enough :). LP has joined up!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Annie</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2007 10:11:59 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter-fame is fleeting</title><link>http://banannie.com/blog/2007/05/14/twitter-fame-is-fleeting/#comment-6043143</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Telling people about twitter always gets one of two reactions:  1) eyes glaze over in 3 seconds  2) eww that sounds gross, twitter, who thought of that name?  or 3) what weirdos would use THAT? there's nothing exciting about it.  However, I still love it.  Given those 3 responses, i think an article trying to explain twitter is just not going to get much airtime in a print newspaper.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;i'm from jersey (moved out to los angeles 2 years ago) and am excited to find your blog from the article :&amp;gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Anjali</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2007 23:36:26 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter-fame is fleeting</title><link>http://banannie.com/blog/2007/05/14/twitter-fame-is-fleeting/#comment-6043137</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I read the article through your link (though once upon a time the Star-Ledger was my daily paper).  I understand Twitter better through the article, but I can't say it really appeals to me.  Probably because I've been through too many gizmos that have sucked time out of my day that I should have spent doing something else.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;All that said, I figured you'd have hundreds of it through it!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Bluegrass Mama</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 21:11:36 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter-fame is fleeting</title><link>http://banannie.com/blog/2007/05/14/twitter-fame-is-fleeting/#comment-6043141</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I like Twitter and Jaiku as a way to follow web celebs and as an announcement medium for online events.&lt;br&gt;Twittering a Ustream event is an excellent use of the technology.&lt;br&gt;I also recommend Twittervision as an introduction to the phenomenon&lt;br&gt;..Neil&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Neil</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 18:18:03 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter-fame is fleeting</title><link>http://banannie.com/blog/2007/05/14/twitter-fame-is-fleeting/#comment-6043140</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I liked the article....still not sure I'm sold on Twitter tho!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Lisa Cahoy</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 17:56:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter-fame is fleeting</title><link>http://banannie.com/blog/2007/05/14/twitter-fame-is-fleeting/#comment-6043142</link><description>&lt;p&gt;While I'm disappointed that I didn't see any new visitors from the article, I'm honestly not surprised.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Still, it was a good article--I don't think we were misrepresented or quoted out of context and Kelly did a good job of not hating on Twitter like so many other MSM journalists.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dossy Shiobara</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 16:09:31 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter-fame is fleeting</title><link>http://banannie.com/blog/2007/05/14/twitter-fame-is-fleeting/#comment-6043139</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Amusing myself via Twittervision, saw your tweet about a new blog post.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;And what is this "newspaper" of which you write?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Radioactive Jam</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 11:12:29 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter-fame is fleeting</title><link>http://banannie.com/blog/2007/05/14/twitter-fame-is-fleeting/#comment-6043138</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I feel the same way - I mean, my tweet was there with Obama and John Edwards!  But not one new follower from it.  And you and dossy were really prominently featured - I wonder what his feedback is.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I do think people just dont "get" twitter because its so hard to explain and it just doesnt make sense until you use it.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">True Jersey Girl</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 11:06:00 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>