One of things that fascinates me about Twitter is how different folks use it & how they think of their presence here in relationship to their day job. Some use it exclusively to promote work; some are more personal & holistic.
Others, I've found, have a hard time adjusting to the egalitarian nature of the medium & seem to expect users to relate to them as people around them in real life do.
For example, if you're accustomed to audiences listening to you b/c of your position, as pastor & professor might, I can imagine it might be hard to shift to a medium where you have to earn the right to be heard. (Regardless if by celebrity, talent, or expertise.)
Those who do it best, IME, are those who understand the limits of their irl roles as well as their own humanity. They are people who are deeply self-aware, humble, & understand their authority to speak (& be heard!) comes from a source outside themselves.
I'm thinking about this irt the new option to limit replies & who we believe deserves our attention & time here. Obviously this is a pretty crazy place & there are lots of reasons to limit replies, but...
I'm also thinking of the generosity & humble engagement of folks like @ksprior (to name just one person) who understand the nature of public conversation better than most.
Also, for someone like me whose primary irl audience isn't captive (read: my husband & kids), the opportunity to build conversation partners & learn from others over the years has been good & life-giving.
All that to say
1) Twitter gets a bad rap, but I believe it's possible to cultivate healthy conversation here if you're committed to it.
2) Twitter isn't real life so the dynamics here will be different than in professional roles. For some that's hard; for others, it's freeing.
1) Twitter gets a bad rap, but I believe it's possible to cultivate healthy conversation here if you're committed to it.
2) Twitter isn't real life so the dynamics here will be different than in professional roles. For some that's hard; for others, it's freeing.
