Mark Carrigan asks whether this time to rethink academic twitter by separating out the knowledge exchange and academic community building functions. I think it's quaint that he thinks there's a thing such as 'academic twitter' (as though there is a Twitter voice of the millions of people in academia), and even more so if he thinks Twitter can be reformed or reorganized along some lines that aren't about paying of a multi-billion dollar acquisition debt. But more to the point, why would you separate those functions, when knowledge building just is the development of academic community (or more accurately, networks of interactions between academics and others). What I'm waiting for is for the other shoe to drop for those many people joining the fediverse - that shoe being that the same mechanisms used for social networks can also be used to support publication networks. It will occur to people eventually, and then someone from MIT will 'invent' it and someone from LSE will tell us it needs to be monetized.
Today: 0 Total: 83 [Direct link] [Share]
